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

My Time at Snap

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 264 posts

Re: My Time at Snap

#131

Post by michaelt »

mellosouls wrote: post #70
curiousgal wrote: post #19

Tangent. How is it logical to deprive people from access to a booth just because people in a wheelchair can't access it? That's like banning computer screens because blind people can't see them.

Let's say the place had no toilets, so they build some and you go in and it's just stand up men's urinals. So you politely point out this won't work for you, they're breaking the law and frankly, making you feel very excluded, and they're like: "Meh, women . We'll get around to it. But yeah we'll put some signs up in the meantime. You can use the ones in the building down the street. Thanks for pointing that out..."…

I think everyone would agree the women's bathroom should be built, yes.

What's confusing is why you'd close the men's bathroom until the women's bathroom was built?

Re: My Time at Snap

#132

Post by eps »

dagw wrote: post #127
astura wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone is arguing against that sort of team/co-worker interaction.

Several people in this thread clearly are. "Work colleagues suck", "I want 0 colleagues" etc. Some people apparently do want literally zero human interaction in their work.

Few will argue against having work-related interaction. That's fully expected.

It's the socializing part that's not everyone's cup o' tea.

Re: My Time at Snap

#133

Post by fhbdukfrh »

eequah9L wrote: post #129
300bps wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. And his “Low Performer” review and denying the remote work request are obvious attempts to manage him out the door which worked.

Denying remote work is a common policy even in cases when nobody wants to manipulate you anywhere. It's really not hard to imagine that a gentlemant's agreement is not upheld when said gentleman is not around to push your agenda anymore.

The only thing harder than working remote is managing a remote. It requires the combination of a super disciplined high performer and counter intuitive communication strategies, both of which are rare and hard to pull off.

Re: My Time at Snap

#134

Post by purple-again »

300bps wrote: post #111
thiscatis wrote: post #100

On the one hand I recognise a lot of the teams and work issues this developer had. But reading between the lines it seems like this dev wanted it all, equity without commitment, weeks of remote work without formal agreement, a quick cash out over adding value to the company...Seems very entitled to me. It looks very one-sided as well. Everything had to come from the company and its management, nothing from his side.

I agree. And his “Low Performer” review and denying the remote work request are obvious attempts to manage him out the door which worked.

This is 100% what I was reading between the lines and it become more and more clear as the article went on. This WAS a low performer that the company was trying to manage out the door.

Re: My Time at Snap

#135

Post by Touche »

There are many types of "John"s out there. I worked for a John who was a highly accomplished engineer. It doesn't make it any better to have someone constantly micromanage you knowing that they are technical, it only makes it worse because you have to think to yourself "he might be right". But the thing about micromanagement is that it doesn't matter if the micromanager is right or not, it simply kills employee motivation to know that any energy and thought they put into their work is likely to be overruled based on a whim.

Re: My Time at Snap

#136

Post by fhbdukfrh »

oarsinsync wrote: post #37
kgwgk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The philosopher Diogenes was sitting on a curbstone, eating bread and lentils for his supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king. Said Aristippus, "If you would learn to be subservient to the king, you would not have to live on lentils." Said Diogenes, "Learn to live on lentils, and you will not have to cultivate the king."

The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand is largely based around this topic as well. Giving up who you really are can be a very high price to pay just to be able to receive some (more) money.

People are both complex and can change though. Maybe we should give up our worst aspects as we grow and learn. Figure out your core essence and protect it; identify the accidental and be open to alternatives.

I know that as my experience has accumulated i care about a few things more and all things a lot less. O also better understand life is a spectrum of many different perspectives, versus the black or white zealot i was in my younger days...

Re: My Time at Snap

#137

Post by craigkerstiens »

paxys wrote: post #47

We have all worked for a "John" in the industry. The big systematic problem is that after being fired from Snap (probably after already collecting massive paychecks and a hefty chunk of equity), he will go to another big tech company and impress them with his resume and bullshitting skills. They will hire him and deal with his antics for a few years, while he ruins more people's careers, then he will move on. Rinse a…

25/year used to be the norm, but is less so these days.

Now more and more are moving towards a heavier backloaded vesting schedule. Schedules that are 10/20/30/40 or 15/25/25/35 are more and more common at big tech co.

It can make sense as well, if it takes you a certain period of time to ramp up, once you've ramped up you contribute more value and they want to retain you more there. Yes it is a mechanism to lock you in, but it's not wrong to see why the employer would want to do it. Though yes, you can also get stuck in crap work because they know they can get away with it. Then it's up to you how much you want to deal with that.

Re: My Time at Snap

#138

Post by sethammons »

astura wrote: post #118
sanderdlm wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may sound like it but I can assure you that it's not. Humans are social animals and when you have to spend 8 hours a day, 5 days a week in a setting with little to no peer interaction, it'll start to wear on you. The first month is awesome. Complete freedom & autonomy, then the depression starts kicking in.

You're wrong. I did this for over five years (I was working as the only dev on a project, PM gave me 100% autonomy), it's just fine. Work is for work, not hanging out. I would have liked to work on a team for that project, but not because I needed to socialize. Humans are social, but I socialize outside of work. Very early in my career I was working with other young engineers and I wanted work to be a social place to…

> Humans are social, but I socialize outside of work.

I see this sentiment a lot and I don't get it. You are spending more time with your coworkers than anyone else. I'm not saying you should find your best friend in the office, but enjoying your time with coworkers seems like a good thing. Maybe the definitions of socializing are different. I'm not talking about after hours drinks or philosophically debating for hours. I'm thinking chit chat, jokes, having shared strife reaching a common goal, feeling better for having worked with them, and generally enjoying the 1/3 of a day you spend with them. Professional and friendly. It also so happens that the majority of people I work with I would likely make time to see outside of work from time to time. Non-work socializing is different and more fulfilling, but you have much less time to squeeze that in outside of weekends, which are also squeezed for time when you have a family.

Re: My Time at Snap

#139

Post by gherkinnn »

DoubleGlazing wrote: post #94

"The problem with John was not just that he was misinformed, but that he was misinformed and highly motivated." Oh yes! This rings so true with me. One of my biggest bug-bears in IT are the leaders who have the gift of the gab and know how to BS their way through life. They have that personality that allows them to talk about any subject and people will listen assuming that they now what they are talking about. If th…

> One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent -- he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.

Perfectly describes our friend John.

The rest of the quote is quite interesting too:

https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Kurt_von_Hammerstein-Equord

Re: My Time at Snap

#140

Post by elbrian »

somishere wrote: post #130

Wow, nothing like a massive whinge to start the day! Don't take a lot of pleasure in saying it, but am highly suspicious of the author's role in all this. While there's no doubt John plagued our friend's life (as are Johns' wont); how said friend played everything else, the relationship handling, the motivation (!) ... culminating in this ego-driven, embittered rant. I mean, the situation definitely sucks. But my big…

I'm just amazed that developers have the confidence to lambaste former employers in such a public, toxic and hostile manner.

If I was hiring for a developer position and Google'd Marko Tupper's name, I wouldn't even agree to meet with him based on this article alone. Why would I want someone so ego and drama-driven on my team?

I won't even leave negative reviews on Yelp or Google Maps out of fear of reprisal or future employers finding them.

Post reply on HN