171–180 of 264 posts
I find it interesting how split the HN comments on this story are. Half seem to think this guy is an entitled low performer chasing high compensation, and the other half relate to him and feel that he was treated unfairly by Snap. I’m not sure what that means.
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.
Because when asked nicely to design accessible buildings very little was done, it required legislation that seems counterintuitive at first, however, if you design for all from the outset, then this is a non-issue. The internet needs to learn this too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 futur…
"Marko Tupper" is a pseudonym, per the Medium user's profile.
I applied to Snap a few months ago and was insta-rejected which was the first time (and only) that has ever happened to me. I was interning at a FAANG for the third time, going into my senior year at a top school with a good GPA, and looking for a full time job. Not sure which requirement I didn't meet.
It's probably because they were bleeding money at that moment and weren't hiring anyone outside super unicorn seniors, but they didn't want to update their job descriptions
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
I purposely didn't put that in - I was trying to convey the righteous outrage that would be felt. The point is you think about this up front. The reason you would require the functioning facility to be closed is to make it clear to the business and all others there are consequences for this incompetence and lack of care.
Also, the example is absurd because urinals wouldn’t satisfy all restroom needs. Men don’t defecate in the urinal. It’s even in the name.
> ...the workload we had mostly kept us working separately on our own tasks with little room for interaction. It wasn’t uncommon, for the first part of my time at Snap, to get up in the morning, drive to the office, go through the work-day in the same room as two other people but rarely speaking to each other, and then drive home... Sadly, I find this to be all too common in the industry. It’s super isolating and dep…
This actually sounds like a near-perfect setup to me. Get it, program, get out. If I want to socialize, I'll do it outside of work.
I'd also reckon a typical remote team probably has more of the routine social interaction some other comments here describe as personally beneficial than this arrangement.
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.
The guy was perfectly willing to stay for the long-haul.
> weeks of remote work without formal agreement
Taking people at their word is "entitled"?
> a quick cash out over adding value to the company
The guy was faithfully performing all the duties assigned to him. Is he drinking the company kool-aid and devoting his life to his company? Thankfully no. Your employer is not your family, nor is it a cult.
Is the author naive? Maybe. Opinionated? Definitely but with good reason - the director was later fired, how often does that happen. Entitled? I see nothing of the sort.
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.
> equity without commitment The guy was perfectly willing to stay for the long-haul. > weeks of remote work without formal agreement Taking people at their word is "entitled"? > a quick cash out over adding value to the company The guy was faithfully performing all the duties assigned to him. Is he drinking the company kool-aid and devoting his life to his company? Thankfully no. Your employer is not your family, nor…
If this is the intention of any of my candidates coming in and they call this "real commitment" to work for my company they would not pass the phone interview. Seriously?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We make buildings accessible because it's the right thing to do, and because society has decided that excluding people (who are already greatly disadvantaged) is wrong. Is it the right solution though? Does it make sense to spend 1% of GDP on something that helps 0.5% of the population (I'm making up numbers here)? Is this really the most cost effective solution? Wouldn't it make more sense to e.g. give disabled pe…
Does it make sense to spend 1% of GDP on something that helps 0.5% of the population (I'm making up numbers here)? Some not made up numbers for you: Roughly 15-20% of people self-identify as handicapped. At least one study suggests that up to 60% of the population has some degree of impairment and would benefit from more accessible design in the world generally. This fits with my observations. Most people who are onl…
https://web.archive.org/web/20090423084630/http://www.micros...
> In the United States, 60% (101.4 million) of working-age adults who range from 18 to 64 years old are likely or very likely to benefit from the use of accessible technology due to difficulties and impairments that may impact computer use.
I love these as a new mgr - new guy shows up, I know nothing of their unique ‘foundational promise’, I have no idea if they can contribute or work well with team, I put some effort in to get them going, then they start sending long (they are always WAY too long) emails about being special cased over 20 people who I’ve known longer and have worked harder for me. I check with HR and a hard pass. I’m not considered humane for failing to give someone I’m paying lots of money to lots of remote work time. And I know what remote work time is like when an employee is visiting family - even though they are “working“ it takes them hours to respond to slack.
I don’t mean to be harsh, but if you look at compensation rates - your manager does get to call the shots at least a little in return for money they are throwing at you.
And yes, if a top performer keeping you is pretty high up on list. 20 reports is too many though - def not a great sign in my book.