Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix • Hacker News Board

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#211

Post by Angostura » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:16 PM UTC

cptskippy wrote: post #64

paulgb wrote: post #3

> never underestimate the amount of money the FAANGs have to poach your talent. I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's a loaded word with negative connotations, but what it really means here is "offer someone a better situation than you offered them". Employees have agency, they aren't wild elephants who need your "protection" from "predators" who just want to pay them more.

> I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's intentional language used by employers because it has preconceived notions and they succinctly communicate a story that benefits the employer. When you hear poached, you think illegal and victims. It makes you think that the employer has been wronged in some way and that the employee was both participatory in something illegal or at least underhanded and at the s…

I've ben poached, in the past. It was nice. It simply suggests the employee is a scarce, valuable resource, actively sought out.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#212

Post by jefftk » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:16 PM UTC

ISL wrote: post #194

nhumrich wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The correlary is that McDonalds could offer free burgers for a year, they have enough money to handle the cost. They could do it just so that other business cant stay affloat. This doesn't mean that the market price of a McDonalds burger is $0

It does if McDonalds decides that it wishes to dump burgers. The ask price would fall to $0. The market will correct very quickly, as competitors will immediately head over to McDonalds to purchase $\infty$ burgers at $0, killing MCD dead in seconds. The moment McDonalds applies a purchase limit (Free burgers! Limit 5 per customer), the burgers have non-zero cost, as they require a person's time in order to purchase.…

> If McDonalds does have enough capital to buy long-term customers and kill off competition with free burgers, perhaps they should consider it.

I'm pretty sure they should not consider it, because it is generally illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#213

Post by notJim » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:16 PM UTC

logicslave wrote: post #184

Schiendelman wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I may offer advice: Never tell yourself no. Go give it a shot, even if you don't prepare at all. You lose nothing.

You'll never pass if you dont prepare, this is bad advice

If you spend so much time preparing that you never interview, you'll never pass either.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#214

Post by khalilravanna » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:16 PM UTC

hinkley wrote: post #70

thelean12 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like people try to tell themselves this, but money is BY FAR the most important factor. And FAANGs pay a ton. Maybe this can be true if you're going from like $250k to $270k from FAANG to FAANG. But most of the time we're talking about something like $180k to $250k when getting poached to a FAANG. It would take a huge amount of perks or otherwise to make that gap worth it. (Of course this isn't true for everyo…

I know a guy who passed on Apple because they weren't offering anywhere near that. Are a lot of people really seeing this kind of money?

Yes: https://www.levels.fyi/

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#215

Post by oblio » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:17 PM UTC

pastacacioepepe wrote: post #152

chrisco255 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"taken advantage of" Uh, no. There's no such thing as perfect information in the marketplace. And besides, money is only one vector for a job. There's many other factors that go into deciding who to work for and where to work. Work-life balance, perks, location, team or mission, family responsibilities, etc. You actually can have win-win relationships. They exist.

> There's no such thing as perfect information in the marketplace And why not? Are you saying that a market of free and voluntary exchange where every part has access to equal information cannot exist? An exchange where a part is better informed than the other and thus gains profit, is the exact definition of "taking advantage". Wait, isn't that how all exchanges work in the capitalist's workplace?

> And why not? Are you saying that a market of free and voluntary exchange where every part has access to equal information cannot exist?

Outside of very limited circumstances, how could it? Only for the simplest of products can you really grok them as well as the people making them.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#216

Post by ghaff » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

Supermancho wrote: post #50

ninkendo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Webster’s dictionary describes language as it is used, it doesn’t prescribe definitions. Citing a dictionary means nothing in a debate of whether we ought to use a word in a certain context.

> Webster’s dictionary describes language as it is used, it doesn’t prescribe definitions American English is a high context language. The GP was illustrating the current parlance, which Webster is lacking.

Poaching has always had a certain connotation that you snatched/stole/etc. someone from another employer. Of course, we use "steal" in other contexts where it's perfectly legal/by the rules: steal second base, this thing I bought was a steal, etc. So there's a long history of using this language in English for things that aren't actually illegal or underhanded.

That said, I understand why people object to it and it may be one of those terms it's better to avoid even if it's used playfully.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#217

Post by Cederfjard » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #141

Bootvis wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the same way as offering products below costs would be to drive out competition and become a monopolist. I'm not sure I think this is bad but I believe this is the argument.

Equating the two creates a perception that employees shouldn't be paid as much as they're worth. An employee being paid $500k/year is probably producing even more value to their employer than that, and if anything, the goal should be to close the gap between value and compensation, not widen it.

I think the point is that very wealthy companies can temporarily pay employees more than the value they provide, and willingly eat that cost until the competition has been stifled, at which point they can lower compensation again.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#218

Post by jefftk » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

codegeek wrote: post #168

sjburt wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really fail to see the distinction. If someone is willing to pay 600k for something, then the value of that thing on the market is 600k. That is what a market is.

I would argue that FAANGs have the ability to overpay in many cases and still acquire talent which skews market wages. A FAANG can possibly pay 200K to an average developer who would otherwise may be make 120K in a regular company. So now the developer thinks they are worth 200K everywhere.

What makes you think they are overpaying? If they offered less the employee would go to a competitor, and the company gets more value from the employee than they do from $200K/y.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#219

Post by SNosTrAnDbLe » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

cptskippy wrote: post #64

paulgb wrote: post #3

> never underestimate the amount of money the FAANGs have to poach your talent. I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's a loaded word with negative connotations, but what it really means here is "offer someone a better situation than you offered them". Employees have agency, they aren't wild elephants who need your "protection" from "predators" who just want to pay them more.

> I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's intentional language used by employers because it has preconceived notions and they succinctly communicate a story that benefits the employer. When you hear poached, you think illegal and victims. It makes you think that the employer has been wronged in some way and that the employee was both participatory in something illegal or at least underhanded and at the s…

On the same note, what is the difference between a company being acquired by Netflix vs the employee being poached by Netflix. Why is the first one a positive and the second one a negative.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#220

Post by three_seagrass » Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 6:18 PM UTC

JPKab wrote: post #86

paulgb wrote: post #3

> never underestimate the amount of money the FAANGs have to poach your talent. I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's a loaded word with negative connotations, but what it really means here is "offer someone a better situation than you offered them". Employees have agency, they aren't wild elephants who need your "protection" from "predators" who just want to pay them more.

The thing that hits me is the "$500k+/year in the valley". Is this really a thing? Am I a giant dumbass for staying in Colorado? Even factoring in my stock grants, I'm nowhere close to that number.

Yes. Also true in NYC if you don't want to come to SV.