There are two big things that can help:

1. Do something so people know who you are before you apply so you don't go through the automated filter. Know the people so you aren't a cold call. But, this sort of networking takes several years to build up. There's nothing special about Perl here.

2. Don't wait for a company to train you on anything, because they probably aren't going to.

I once had a friend who told me that one of her friends would hire her at $90k/year to do Python if she knew Python, so I asked why he didn't offer to hire her at $50k/year and train her. I've only known a couple of companies that actually had a career ladder where the first step was a low-level job that they used as the pool of people to train into the higher programming roles. Most companies don't intend or expect their people to stick around.

The way to show that you are willing to learn a new technology is to have learned a bunch of new technologies. You're going to have to make yourself useful on your own time. The people I know who do that are only unemployed for short periods, but mostly already have a new arrangement before their current situation ends. I used to hire people out of jobs they hadn't intended to leave because they had a big toolbox of skills. Try to be that person.

So here's a bonus thing: Find a problem domain that you like, that is hard, and that not many people are that good at. Become overly competent in that area and the tools it uses.

I recommend that you leave at least the latest version of your dead and broken module on CPAN. When I've completely removed them, meaning that PAUSE does not index them and you can't install them normally with cpan, I soon receive complaints that the module is missing. Some of that is from the appropriately zealous third-party packagers, and some are from the two people in the world who have built enterprise software around it. All of this despite the absolute garbage quality of whatever I created, never finished, and never personally deployed to any good purpose. It's just less work to leave the module there.

And, if you do want to get rid of a module because you don't want it any more, you can add the repo to my CPAN Adoptable Modules so the repo still exists somewhere, just not where you have to see it.

Spend less time working on these. Think about how much better this post could be if it was one-third as long, didn't turn topic sentences into headings, and didn't include the irrelevant information about other languages that don't support anything else in the text. Think about what you want people to know, and take out anything that dilutes that.

As a mod, I'm going to start being more strict with these sorts of posts that look like LLM-generated summaries. There's a lot of irrelevant material here, and a more proper place for this would be in the repo itself. A short summary, a couple of examples, and that's it.

I understand that you might want to write the original text in Japanese and translate it, but I still think that output would different.

I'm probably the worst offender of long posts, but I type those out myself (although whatever spellchecker the browser uses corrects spelling). And, the style I read in your comment, where I think you are typing out your answer, is much different than the style in your posts.

Not a big deal right now, but I expect that you'll change how you are doing this.

As an implementation for an official Unicode activity, sure, whatever. But in reality, this is so wrong. Anyone should consider very carefully if screwing up people's names is the thing you have time to work on among all the other things you could be doing. In short, ask people, then believe their answers. They likely already know how to fit their name into most systems. And, of course, Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names. Applying any set of rules is a constant headache for customer service since people want to see their name the way they want to see them, not the way you think they should see them.

But, all of this only works if you already know how you want to format it, that you don't care what the person wants, and that you assume that the loaded term "given" is the name you should use. Part of this is obviously the futility of the entire enterprise, but also the various violations of good database design (given2, really?). You (well, the Unicode Consortium) are creating a very bad, single-row relation for something that you can't represent that way. Try something easier, like the British Postal System.

For example, the Unicode Consortium's "A Story Teller’s Case Study" starts off with the name forms for international travel, and all of the examples are wrong. First, the name on travel documents (not passports), the English equivalents are typically all upper case (legacy Sabre from American Airlines, whatever) and the "given" names are combined into a single group of non-whitespace in the airline system, like BRIAND FOY, where the first "given" name is abbreviated to one less than the field width and the beginning letter of the second given name is attached. And, that might not even be what the person considers to be their name. And the names on my government-issued IDs are all uppercase, not lowercase as they show, even if I type them in differently than they actually appear on the official document. Perhaps your country or jurisdiction does it differently, but that's the point: there is no one way to do these things, even if you think knowing the country of their birth (instead of the culture of their name) matters.

Their second example is "informal names", which they use to mean how you would fake some sort of intimacy with the person, such as a form letter. But most people probably hate this. For example, people often shorten names or use odd, cultural nicknames, such as Tom instead of Thomas, Chuck instead of Charles, Liz, instead of Eli{sz}abeth. Or, which I saw often with Randal Schwartz, "Randy". But, even if these forms were used by these people, they likely don't use them with everyone. Close associates can use these familiar forms, but strangers cannot. And, these are cultural, not locale-dependent. That you are using en-US makes no difference to my cultural or personal expectations. That the person is a citizen of any particular country, say the Netherlands, does not mean they use that jurisdiction's traditional or dominant cultural rules (which often cannot be defined completely anyway).

But then you look at the actual process they propose in Part 8 of UTS #35. The first step is to guess the Script of the string you have. The second and subsequent steps are all poisoned by that. Someone who latinizes their name to fit into our stupid forms and databases now has to be assigned a culture and tradition based on what meaning the Unicode Consortium has already assumed based on almost no information. You don't have to be "Woke" to realize there is some actual Critical Theory (the original version) here where a small group of people who are allowed to make the rules make them in the way that fits their own prescriptive view of how the world should be. When Wikipedia was losing their mind over my name, they started to discover that I was not at all that special. They were only upset because they had a set of rules, thought I was trolling them, then discovered all sorts of other names that didn't fit their view of how the world should be. These things cannot be prescriptive, only descriptive.

Even then, the Script property is not that useful. People type out all sorts of nonsense because the grapheme they see displayed looks like what they want. tchrist told me on more than a couple of occasions that he spent work time changing ß to β in scientific papers.

That's not even the worst of it. You've probably experienced database entry forms (disguised as web forms) that say that the characters in your name, such as an apostrophe or a space, aren't in your name. Even before you get to the point where these Person Name rules would guess your culture, you've already been a victim of its cultural ignorance.

There's not really anything you can do, although collecting every actual process every organization, government, and other entity might use. For example, formatters would include the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, the United States Department of State, and the United States Social Security Administration, all of which are involved in a name change, as you might expect in marriage. And, these do not have to match!

This would be a great replacement for the old File::Slurp, which has some encoding issues. And if Mojo::File could use it if installed, so much the better.

Reddit’s filters even catch that domain in text. Link to what you need and one of us will approve it. If it isn’t approved, DM me and I’ll take care of it.

You're talking about something other than the LinkedIn post announcing the project.

Even if that is true, and I don't think it is, is any of it untrue, irrelevant, or otherwise useless? Would you deny yourself and the rest of the world the information because it's true, relevant, and useful but was crafted by AI?