91–100 of 328 posts
Far too many people out there are looking to make a buck on someone else's hard work than their own.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really wrong. You can very well assume that it's worthless. If you do, chances are you will not do your research on things like early exercise and 83(b) filing (whether, for example, you work at a company that even allows things like that). Then, in the very small chance that your equity is actually worth something, you will be kicking yourself really hard because if you'd only prepared, you could've been pay…
That all sounds like a fancy way of saying "playing the lottery".
I think it's mostly supply and demand, timing and where you live. But those are the factors we rarely talk about. Instead, people complain they are not compensated enough relative to the importance of their work, their intelligence, the hours put in, their title or the length of their education or the risk they take. If people were paid according to the importance of their jobs, I would argue that plumbers, sewage wo…
I think it's mostly supply and demand, timing and where you live. But those are the factors we rarely talk about. Instead, people complain they are not compensated enough relative to the importance of their work, their intelligence, the hours put in, their title or the length of their education or the risk they take. If people were paid according to the importance of their jobs, I would argue that plumbers, sewage wo…
Most physicists I know are searching for stuff that already exists, whereas most programmers I know are actually building new stuff.
I think it's mostly supply and demand, timing and where you live. But those are the factors we rarely talk about. Instead, people complain they are not compensated enough relative to the importance of their work, their intelligence, the hours put in, their title or the length of their education or the risk they take. If people were paid according to the importance of their jobs, I would argue that plumbers, sewage wo…
> If it were about intelligence, most physicists I know are underpaid and programmers are generally compensated fairly. Most physicists I know are searching for stuff that already exists, whereas most programmers I know are actually building new stuff.
I think it's mostly supply and demand, timing and where you live. But those are the factors we rarely talk about. Instead, people complain they are not compensated enough relative to the importance of their work, their intelligence, the hours put in, their title or the length of their education or the risk they take. If people were paid according to the importance of their jobs, I would argue that plumbers, sewage wo…
But most programmers are basically plumbers (for data as opposed to water/sewage) :)
Finance is evil. Day trading, investment banking, venture capital; they don't produce anything for society, they just sit at the intersection of various people, companies and industries and they capture big chunks of the money that flows between them - They rely on information asymmetry and market manipulation to do so; but 'information asymmetry' is just a euphemism for 'deception'. Even startups which are doing wel…
Finance isn't evil; day trading, investment banking, venture capital are all sharing information with the world and trying to move money to places where its more valuable. There is a case to be made about "negative externalities"[1] but talking about the whole of finance as unnecessary is throwing out the baby with the bath water. [1] costs that aren't borne by the producer
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rather than loudly proclaiming your ignorance about casions and options, you should introspect. I know several people who successfully negotiated better terms. Demanding "adequate" salary and valueing options at "zero" are two seperate tasks. You assume latter (options not valued at 0) implies former (salary not adequate) its a statement about your risk averse world view, not a statememt of fact. As far as meekness,…
> I know several people... And for every person you know there are dozens of stories about people who didn't even come close to recouping their salary differential. And those are just the "successful" startups that had some sort of exit. So the risk is (obviously) real. > its a statement about your risk averse world view, not a statememt of fact. No, it's a (true) statistical statement that you're misrepresenting as…
Which is exactly the scenario the article is warning about: share dilution, refinancing, and all those other strange terms, often rendering the employees' options worthless over time (but not the VC's of course)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Thats like saying programming is fancy way of saying "banging fingers on keyboard". perhaps you were referring to the 'infinite monkey theorem' ? i would rather believe programming to be nothing like that.
test driven development seems to encourage that. Bang away until it turns green.