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

Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

insights.dice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 448 posts

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#141

Post by ghaff »

vonmoltke wrote: post #114
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so. In some states, engineer is a protected term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineer#United_State... edit I may have been mistaken and the word engineer itself may be non-protected, but the term software engineer specifically is protected in Florida: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Displ...

No, "Engineer" (as a proper noun) is protected as a synonym for "professional engineer" (common noun phrase). The common noun "engineer" is not protected in any States.

Texas at least would appear to be different or at least the licensing board would like you to think so. "The terms "engineer" or "professional engineer" can only be used by persons who are currently licensed." [1]

That said, in my experience all manner of technical professionals (and even not so professionals) in Texas do routinely call themselves engineers whether they're supposed to or not.

[1] https://www.engineers.texas.gov/lic.htm

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#142

Post by drdebug »

omgwtfbyobbq wrote: post #129
drdebug wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They lead in several areas such as video quality measurement (VMAF https://github.com/Netflix/vmaf ), robustness (Chaos Monkey https://netflix.github.io/chaosmonkey/ ), video compression optimization ( https://netflixtechblog.com/optimized-shot-based-encodes-for... ) and probably more.

I feel like they might be going a bit overboard with video compression optimization. As an example, Star Trek Voyager in HD looks significantly worse than OTA 480i. On the plus side, it looks good in 4k.

I agree, their quality is sometimes questionable but to be fair OTA has preallocated/fixed bandwidth, while netflix on the other hand likely gains from optimizing for lower bitrates.

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#143

Post by cbanek »

dktoao wrote: post #122
cbanek wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I'm a 100x developer or anything, but I think people underestimate the compounding interest of being a 5x-10x developer. If you architect things just right today, that can save you a lot of time tomorrow. Spending time testing today can save weeks of bug time later, which can be spent to create something useful, compounding on itself. If we say green field is 10x, and someone is doing good things, I thi…

Yes, but I don't think it compounds forever. There is a natural thermodynamic limit somewhere. In practice if your company has a 1x code-base you are working for a decent company. If your company has a 5x code-base, you are working for a world class company. EDIT: On the other hand, there is no limit in the other direction and that is where companies end up in big time trouble with a 0.01x codebase.

It's true, it doesn't compound forever, I think because eventually it is finished, and you don't want to add things to it. I think knowing when something is finished as opposed to adding yet another tool on a swiss-army knife is also an important skill. Otherwise you end up with a swiss-army ball of mud.

I'm also going to go out on a limb and say there's such a thing as a negative codebase. For example, let's say I have to work in a codebase for a particular political reason, and I can't rewrite something. But if that takes me 100x the time it would to do it correctly, then really the codebase is actually a net negative. One example of this is places that use an in-house framework for something (when there isn't a good alternative), but then a good open source alternative comes around. Of course you don't want to rewrite things all the time either, so I do agree there is a limit, but really I think that comes down to the code doing exactly what it should in the least complex way possible (with no bugs). Once you get there, there's nowhere to go?

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#144

Post by jcadam »

I interviewed at Netflix several years ago. It was a fairly standard SV interview. That is - whiteboard questions on basic data structures and algorithms (I'm 40 and I still absolutely suck at those).

Failed of course :) But they put me up in a really nice hotel, so there's that. In the years since, I've definitely lost all interest in working in SV (the fact that I've failed every single interview I've had with SV companies admittedly might have something to do with it). Ah well, at my age it's time to accept that the window has closed on some things :)

I'll give Netflix this - I left the interview knowing I'd failed. I was told this, to my face, before being shown the door (The interviewer wasn't mean about it). I'll take that over being told "We'll let you know" and waiting weeks before getting a generic rejection email from HR (or even better, being ghosted).

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#145

Post by subsubzero »

kilbuz wrote: post #70
tolbish wrote: post #13

I never understood why Netflix frequently gets mentioned in the same context as Apple, Google, and Amazon. I think I hear more about it than Microsoft on here. Can anyone explain this to me? Surely they aren't the only newish company that tries to employ smart people by paying well.

When Cramer coined the FAANG acronym, Netflix was included. That group of companies was grouped together by investors due to their performance and marked dominance at the time, which has by and large continued. In addition to their stock price, these companies also pay very well. In fact, if you are lucky to get an offer from Netflix, their aim is to pay you and keep you at "top of personal market". That is, they do…

I think that is really a myth(highest pay). I know that bytedance pays more than netflix(stock + cash), also hedge funds, citadel and DE Shaw pay way more than netflix does. 500k-700k all cash, I just chatted with their recruiters the past month and this is what they saying comp packages for senior+ engineers go for.

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#146

Post by d23 »

pjmorris wrote: post #120
d23 wrote: post #34

> Eventually, Rick snapped. Once he departed the company, the team of supposedly “mediocre” engineers redid his work to make it more elegant and efficient: “We didn’t have any mad geniuses building everything from scratch. But our productivity was never higher.” A silly strawman. I'd firmly put someone like this in the bucket of "not that effective."

"If a programmer is indispensable, get rid of him as quickly as possible." - Weinberg, Gerald. The Psychology of Computer Programming.

That's a great quote. I'll have to check that book out. Is it worth the read? I think about the psychology involved and our brains as part of the system far more often than I ever see it discussed.

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#147

Post by ticmasta »

cbanek wrote: post #104
dktoao wrote: post #77

I think 100x is hyperbol however you slice it, run away from anyone who tells you they are a 100x developer. 10x may be achievable... but I argue that it is at least partly due to the prevailing code-base. Every competent developer is a 10x developer on a green field project just like every competent developer is a 0.1x developer on a messy legacy spaghetti-code disaster of a project (Making the differential 100x I g…

I don't think I'm a 100x developer or anything, but I think people underestimate the compounding interest of being a 5x-10x developer. If you architect things just right today, that can save you a lot of time tomorrow. Spending time testing today can save weeks of bug time later, which can be spent to create something useful, compounding on itself. If we say green field is 10x, and someone is doing good things, I thi…

There's a big difference between making obvious mistakes that make everything worse and making the "right" decision for a future consideration. Beyond first-hand experience (i.e. making the mistake and then recognizing it in a future, similar decision) I'd say even the best "architects" have about a 20% success rate when moving into uncharted territory. Planning for tomorrow at a strategic level is hard.

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#148

Post by trident1000 »

jcadam wrote: post #144

I interviewed at Netflix several years ago. It was a fairly standard SV interview. That is - whiteboard questions on basic data structures and algorithms (I'm 40 and I still absolutely suck at those). Failed of course :) But they put me up in a really nice hotel, so there's that. In the years since, I've definitely lost all interest in working in SV (the fact that I've failed every single interview I've had with SV c…

Honestly I respect that and prefer that as well; just tell me up front so I can move on and not waste any more time. I come from a wall street background and did break through eventually, but they just leave you hanging with no follow up. And the recruiters treat candidates like dates they are ghosting, its really not an acceptable way to treat a human being after they put days even weeks into preparing and coming in.

Why do they do this? Because there is absolutely no downside to leaving you hanging and then they have backup plans to fill the spot. Its also just emails and coordination that pays them no dividends, so they don't care. You're dead to them.

The worst is when companies post a position they never intend to even fill just to collect resumes and see their options.

The whole thing is very reminiscent of the dating scene which is not very professional.

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#149

Post by dktoao »

lojack wrote: post #140
dktoao wrote: post #77

I think 100x is hyperbol however you slice it, run away from anyone who tells you they are a 100x developer. 10x may be achievable... but I argue that it is at least partly due to the prevailing code-base. Every competent developer is a 10x developer on a green field project just like every competent developer is a 0.1x developer on a messy legacy spaghetti-code disaster of a project (Making the differential 100x I g…

> Good developers are the ones that create code that resists the slide from a 10x code-base to a 0.1x code-base. 10x is 100 times bigger than 0.1x FWIW. > but I argue that it is at least partly due to the prevailing code-base. Its almost exclusively because of the prevailing code-base. We can't forget that the prevailing code base was built by developers of varying skills. You can have "100x" developers build it or y…

Obviously it wasn't "Rick" in the flesh (I think). But more a "Rick" class programmer. :) Sorry to anyone who's real name is Rick.

Re: Netflix CEO explains why he pays technologists huge salaries

#150

Post by ffggvv »

legohead wrote: post #137
ffggvv wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

amazon is actually known for paying low salaries...

No they're not, at least here in California. Maybe you're thinking of warehouse jobs. Several people from my work have come over from Amazon, and we constantly interview people who either take Amazon over us (citing more $), or are trying to get away from Amazon but they end up getting a big counter offer from Amazon and staying with them.

i guess it depends on perspective. i’ve had multiple offers from them for a swe role and it was drastically under my other offers. among fang they pay the lowest

if honestly be making less than half my current total comp if i’d accepted any of them

Post reply on HN