Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 632 posts

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#331

Post by bitcrusher »

frakkingcylons wrote: post #165
ryandrake wrote: post #7

> Often times there are hard barriers preventing people from starting a company. In these cases my best advice is to move to a tech hub (preferably the Bay Area) and work for a tech company until you can save the money I had to laugh there. Moving to the Bay Area will reduce your ability to save money, not increase it. I was probably saving 40-50% of my salary when I worked in Nowhereville, Florida. With the housing…

Saying it's impossible to save is misleading and it's laughable how often this myth about the Bay Area is perpetuated on HN. Unlike a lot of places in the US, the Bay Area has all of the following: * a meaningful degree of racial diversity (makes a big difference if you're not white) * comprehensive public transit (yeah, yeah BART and MUNI suck, but where I've lived in the US previously, they didn't even exist) * an…

It's not impossible nor is it misleading. I think, frankly, that what you're saying is misleading.

You're able to do that because you're obviously "unattached" or "young"... You live in an apartment with a roommate. That's probably fine when you're single/dating. It's not super appealing when you're a person with a spouse and kid(s)... Also, as one progresses in age, there is a desire to stop having 'roommates' and perhaps even consider owning something.

The cost goes up considerably within those parameters.

It's "easy" to save 40% of your income if you live like a college sophomore in a dorm. It's not when you have other responsibilities.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#332

Post by dragonwriter »

gbarc888 wrote: post #284
Akujin wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the same background as you. Crimea, not Moscow. Americans will never understand. Our parents stood in breadlines. We are making six figures in America. It's not about wealth. It's about a culture that respects hard work, education, and opportunity.

Same background here. China, not Moscow or Crimea I worry about the next generation. They say that wealth skips every other generation, because if a child grows up in a well-to-do family, they will not value hard work as much.

> They say that wealth skips every other generation

Strangely, in all the empirical studies of socioeconomic status and its relations to family and environment, I've ever seen one detect that effect.

I suspect that the popular saying really just reflects that parents and children have high contact and lots of friction, and grandparents and grandchildren less so, and nothing about the reality of wealth or hard work.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#333

Post by zip1234 »

shimon wrote: post #151
krat0sprakhar wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For someone who recently graduated and quite clueless about financial planning, do you have some resources to get started?

Start with Scott Adams' financial checklist: https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/scott-adams-financial-advice/ Note the item about hiring a fee-based financial advisor. I hired one starting a few years ago even though I am pretty good at this stuff, but I think they're especially helpful for newbies to establish good expectations and habits.

I'm not sure it is clear what fee-based means in the article. There are some that get a commission based on the products that they sell. In other words, the mutual fund that they use they might get a cut of. A fee-only adviser is one who takes a certain percentage each year. This is the kind that you want as it is in their best interest to grow your account and they won't move your money unnecessarily just to generate commission. The ones that get commission based on products are making money in hidden ways, but they are making money. Much better to have it up front and out in the open.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#335

Post by thesash »

nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

This is actually a pretty good reason to move from group 3 to group 1. If your goal is to be part of group 3, but are unable to find an organization with a healthy culture, then there may be an opportunity to build your own.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#336

Post by rconti »

ryandrake wrote: post #7

> Often times there are hard barriers preventing people from starting a company. In these cases my best advice is to move to a tech hub (preferably the Bay Area) and work for a tech company until you can save the money I had to laugh there. Moving to the Bay Area will reduce your ability to save money, not increase it. I was probably saving 40-50% of my salary when I worked in Nowhereville, Florida. With the housing…

People who can save can save anywhere. People who will overspend will overspend anywhere.

This doesn't mean move to the Bay Area to be a janitor. Some jobs will absolutely make it difficult to afford the cost of living.

But with good discipline, I'd argue it's typically easier to save (in absolute dollar terms) in a high-COL place than a low one.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#337

Post by TuringNYC »

gxs wrote: post #266
TuringNYC wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> live with roommates and pay What if you are married with children? Not sure about you, but I would definitely not feel comfortable having roommates in my 1.5BR. With me + wife + 5yo son + 2yo daughter, how would the logistics even work? -- where would the roommates sleep? In the kitchen? In the kids' bedroom? In our bedroom with my wife and me?

That is admittedly a tougher situation - my comment was geared towards someone making 100k as this post's theme has been "technical workers". Your situation is definitely tough and would probably mean having to live way out of the bay area and commute to work. I mainly reacted to OP saying it wasn't possible. How can you say that when people commute from Vallejo into the city everyday wasting 3 hours a day so that th…

Let me give you a different perspective on this -- yes, it is possible. Heck, even living on 10k is possible -- you could put up a tent and live in that. You could live in a camp ground. One could even forage for wild berries for sustenance. Almost anything is possible if one is to split hairs...

Except it isn't what most tech workers expected. The vast majority of tech workers I know have sacrificed a lot and work very hard. Many paid top dollar to go to top schools. They spent their entire 20s working nights and weekends to learn as much as they could. I spent college studying red black trees instead of going to frat parties. I still spend parts of my weekend just keeping up with technology. So me and my friends find it difficult to swallow that despite all this, we struggle to have even a sliver of what our parents enjoyed almost as an American right. Yes, it is better than what people have in Africa or Detroit, but it isnt what many people expected. Yes, it is better than what baristas get, but it isnt what people expected.

As for me, I've lived in NYC most of my life and there are few building restrictions. So while it is expensive, it isnt as absurd as the bay area. I also yearn to build things, but spent much of my career trying to squeeze more $ out of trading algos...mostly because it supported a better lifestyle.

Obviously low interest rates, tax policies, and poor land usage is to blame for a lot in the bay area. But whatever the reasons, step back and consider a world where people with Top-5 university degrees in computer science and illustrious careers are told to keep random strangers as roommates with their 2yo and 5yo children...

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#338

Post by jv22222 »

nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

> the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take

Hmm.

Personally, I have tried to take all three paths. I find it creates the largest amount of potential.

Employee Hat: Develop stuff for the day job.

Founder Hat: Bootstrap by night and learn what it's like to be an owner.

Executive Hat: Work up the ladder by wearing the employee hat and bring what you learn as an owner/bootstrapper back to the day job.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#339

Post by f2f »

unabst wrote: post #326
nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

> the one that actually creates value No. We all create value. Businesses, when running smoothly, are like a well oiled machine. Nothing is redundant. Garbage is collected. Businesses is cutthroat industries cannot afford to be redundant. I always wondered why all cars had 4 wheels. Turns out, the 3 wheeled car is horrible (see Top Gear), a 5 wheeled car is pointless, and a 2 wheeled car is a motorcycle. But when you…

There are/were six-wheeled cars that got shut out because of market forces unrelated to how well they ran in competition. Google Tyrrell's Formula 1 Six Wheeler

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#340

Post by rockostrich »

ddustin wrote: post #297
sidlls wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't binary: value is created by all parties involved. It's just, in my opinion, that if we normalize the value created to be 1 for the product team, then engineering's value is less than 1, and sales and marketing is (more often) greater than or equal to 1, most of the time. Exceptions exist. But they're not normal, by definition.

An engineer's value can be exponential and can even go well beyond their own lifespan. Sales and marketing impact is immediate and falls off over time while engineering's impact is slow and can speed up over time.

Right, at a start-up the value of product, sales, and marketing is huge compared to that of engineering. Most engineers can create an MVP that will deliver the promises of the other 3.

The problem is trying to scale that product once marketing and sales do their job. I think the value of each of these 4 changes depending on the company size and tend to normalize to 1 as the company scales to the size of Google, Amazon, FB, etc.

Post reply on HN