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

Downsides to working at a tech giant

blog.garrytan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 583 posts

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#461

Post by momokoko »

keithwhor wrote: post #90

The pessimism in this thread really bothers me. I’ve read anecdotes on entrepreneurship being on the decline, but it pains me to read so many negative takes on startups. We’re actively training our young people to avoid taking risks, and it’s going to fuck us — especially if some of those young people have the ambition be early employees at, say, a startup that takes on climate change in a big way. Look — the fact th…

This is very insightful. Thank you.

One insight you may not be considering is that the profile of a CS graduate has changed significantly. A tech job is now full of prestige and social status. Even more so if that tech job is at a big brand name.

A much larger portion of young people are going into tech purely for the income and the prestige. And the preferences in this thread at the end of 2019 reflects that shift. Your average person going into tech in 2019 is very different than your average person going into tech in 2005 or even 2010.

The people who think like you still exist. Just that a much larger group has poured in and made them less obvious.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#462

Post by akhilcacharya »

desert_boi wrote: post #452
akhilcacharya wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm? I went to an unranked state university myself - I'd love to experience even a fraction of the respect these folks get.

It is not sarcasm. Stanford does indeed have the most alumni who founded unicorns. But Harvard, UC, and MIT round things out nicely, for American schools at least. https://www.theatlas.com/charts/HJSgAUdPx

That's...effectively the same idea.

I'd argue that all meritocracy has completely failed people like me so I can't take that seriously at all.

I'd also argue for a replacement, but I guess I'm not credentialed enough to propose one.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#463

Post by freeone3000 »

milofeynman wrote: post #325
cosmodisk wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit sad how the rest of the world don't put such reward for dev jobs.Even here, in London,I'd need to be a quant to pull such a salary.

The rest of the US does not pull such salaries. That's pretty exclusive Silicon Valley / Seattle.

Dude, $135k base in Montreal. Pay is localized but not that localized.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#464

Post by akhilcacharya »

garry wrote: post #375
akhilcacharya wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's just my experience, YMMV. The vast majority of people like that aren't (and don't) getting into Stanford, period, because impressive-to-admissions-committee folks are usually children of other impressive people (not always, usually). I don't think it's possible to interpret this as anything but "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps".

I guess I was one of those middle class scholarship kids. There were lots of them around and they were my friends. The private school kids honestly tended to keep to themselves. It's a part of my Stanford experience I found most jarring.

I know several "middle class" kids who went to Stanford. All of their parents were professors (or at least PhDs). The rest had parents who were doctors.

So, maybe things are different now.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#465

Post by vjktyu »

Many comments here about skethcy startups and for good reasons. But isn't the solution obvious? Allow software developers to work for multiple companies at a time: 10-20, whatever. Just like investors diversify the risks by investing into many, often competing, startups, employees could also work for many companies.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#467

Post by juped »

sdrinf wrote: post #185
novok wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason why is the math changed. The gap between startup and tech giant is much larger now than it was in 2010. Also, unless you have insider access and join a very risky angel stage company, the likelihood of getting a good package that makes sense is low, very low. Also public companies have shown to get +3x gains, which can make the math even worse. Example from personal experience that is very lucky in startup…

I agree with all of the points raised, and share the same experiences. But this one: > I might as well become a founder and start my own at that point Great! So, how would you recruit your first 10 employees?

Why do you think you need employees?

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#468

Post by vjktyu »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #443
sneak wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surprisingly, these sorts of people are both not that rare and relatively straightforward to connect with. A year of low level engineer’s salary is, relatively speaking, not a lot of money in our industry/society, regardless of what that figure ultimately works out to as an integer.

There are 607 billionaires in the US out of 320 million people. You need to meet over half a million people to average one person with Peter Thiel's level of wealth.

My personal controversial opinion is that life doesn't work like that half million people math. In reality, one either can meet a billionaire with very little effort, or won't meet one regardless of effort. Another controversial opinion: that ability to get the desired results with little effort is something that needs to be earned, it's not a casino.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#469

Post by ieatpies »

TuringNYC wrote: post #350
austenallred wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and FB were paying less when they were founded than most startups I see today, adjusted for inflation. The difference is that now Google and FB pay way more . More than startups could ever dream of competing with. Everyone I know at FB or Google is making $225k+, with the average/median being around $300k/yr. Absolutely no way new startups can play ball with those salaries, and FB/GOOG certainly weren’t paying…

>> Google and FB were paying less when they were founded than most startups I see today, adjusted for inflation. You'd have to adjust quite a bit for inflation. The average rent has skyrocketed 300% since the time Google was a pre-IPO company. I would not mind a "low" Google 2004 salary if I could somehow also lock down a Mountain View 2004 mortgage. Also, tuition and student loans have risen. So while im at it, i'd…

Pretty sure house prices in Mountain View would've been way higher in 2004 if everyone knew where they'd be in 15 years.

Re: Downsides to working at a tech giant

#470

Post by dd36 »

jorblumesea wrote: post #360
munk-a wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a really good argument as why graduated corporate taxes really need to be increased in the US. I'd be curious how productive you felt at each position and if you think the FAANG job is more difficult and stressful. I'd like to think that no matter which of these paths we chose - the more stressful and risky life or the more secure and corporate FAANG one - we'd all have a chance to live a decent life.…

I really think the issue is that many startups don't offer alternative compensation and don't play to their strengths. You can be compensated in other ways, but often I've found much of the work at startups can be no more interesting than their Big N counterparts. Your career growth might also be similar. In theory, for startups, you sacrifice pay for other facets. The reality is quite different. The work might be si…

I’m intrigued by your idea of alternative compensation. Care to expand?

Are you thinking like bonuses for growth? Deferred bonuses?

Post reply on HN