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

The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

wesdesilvestro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 325 posts

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#271

Post by Dayshine »

whimsicalism wrote: post #194
lcc wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to argue against what Google has accomplished in the last 20 years. But in my Bay Area social circle, working at Stripe is considered more prestigious. These days Google is big, boring, bureaucratic, and maybe a little evil. Stripe is successful, growing, pays at least comparably well and has way more potential financial upside. They're also known to have a high hiring bar and a great dev culture. I've hear…

I've always perceived working in finance/payment infrastructure as more "evil" than ad-tech. Is that not the general perception?

Finance infrastructure isn't evil, trading infrastructure is evil.

I seriously think many people view their bank's software team as evil! Incompetent maybe, but not evil.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#272

Post by dan-robertson »

OJFord wrote: post #266
srtjstjsj wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the same thing

No it isn't, maybe python is clearer: not think(many({ knowswhattheywant(p) for p in people })) != think(many({ not knowswhattheywant(p) for p in people }))

This just isn’t how the semantics of the English language work

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#273

Post by mettamage »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #267
8note wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically, hasn't monetary success gone to people who inherited the wealth? Monarchs and aristocrats and the like

Most wealthy families actually lose their wealth within two generations.

I seriously the generalizability of your claim. I used to think the same way, until I saw articles like this about Florence (Italy): https://qz.com/694340/the-richest-families-in-florence-in-14...

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#274

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

zug_zug wrote: post #137
jyu wrote: post #125

Curious why he would need to move to a more prestigious position? Most people realize by their 30s that prestige is a sucker's game; it's a way of inducing people to do things that aren't much fun and they wouldn't really want to do on their own, by lauding them with accolades from people they don't really care about. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11833832

To double down on this -- I think there was an era 10 years ago, when working for google or facebook actually impressed the average person. Now (that it's privacy killing adtech) it's vaguely slimy, maybe not as slimy as being a lawyer, but I don't see it impressing people other than recruiters. Which is probably a good thing, honestly.

In general, many people (not in tech) still find it prestigious.

Since 2016, that has taken a hit because the news media bang the drum of how terrible these companies are.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#275

Post by read_if_gay_ »

mettamage wrote: post #273
read_if_gay_ wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most wealthy families actually lose their wealth within two generations.

I seriously the generalizability of your claim. I used to think the same way, until I saw articles like this about Florence (Italy): https://qz.com/694340/the-richest-families-in-florence-in-14...

It’s true there are outliers, and especially so at the very top, but the general trend is pretty strong. 80% of American millionaires are first-generation. Pointing at the 0.0001% says very little.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#276

Post by Dayshine »

Dayshine wrote: post #271
whimsicalism wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always perceived working in finance/payment infrastructure as more "evil" than ad-tech. Is that not the general perception?

Finance infrastructure isn't evil, trading infrastructure is evil. I seriously think many people view their bank's software team as evil! Incompetent maybe, but not evil.

Edit: I seriously don't think many people...

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#277

Post by f9ad2451 »

rhizome wrote: post #201
Tinyyy wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From someone working at Jane Street, Apple definitely does not make 10x per employee what Jane Street does.

These numbers are easy to find, but sure, let's break out our calculators. By recent generic numbers, Jane street does $171MM revenues across 900 employees. Apple has $274B revenues across 137,000 heads. $190,000 vs. $2,000,000. Netflix is even higher: $2.4MM. What numbers do you have?

Your Jane Street numbers are not even close. They're required to report this stuff in the UK, which shows revenues of $229MM (see https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...). And that's just the UK revenue - most of the business is in the US. I would estimate closer to $1MM/head.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#278

Post by burntoutfire »

ryandrake wrote: post #211
thrav wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is a popular saying, but couldn’t be further from the truth for the most successful people. Generally, they begin with an end in mind. It’s a lot easier to get where you’re going if you know where that is. Or, as the Cheshire Cat says to Alice, “Which way should I go?” “Where do you want to go?” “I don’t much care.” “Then it doesn’t really matter.” (Abridged)

Yea, I'm a big believer in setting goals, and then taking the "most likely" path to get there. My career decision method (disclaimer: it might not work for you) boils down to this: 1. Estimate $X: how much $$$ investment do I need in order for my family to live off interest for Y years so I never work again? For me right now, $X is 5M and Y is 40 years. 2. What do I need to do right now in order to get closer to $X?…

> Retire and do whatever I really want to do with my life.

Do you know what that is? I suspect most people don't, especially after spending 20+ years in various jobs.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#279

Post by burntoutfire »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #275
mettamage wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously the generalizability of your claim. I used to think the same way, until I saw articles like this about Florence (Italy): https://qz.com/694340/the-richest-families-in-florence-in-14...

It’s true there are outliers, and especially so at the very top, but the general trend is pretty strong. 80% of American millionaires are first-generation. Pointing at the 0.0001% says very little.

Perhaps the problem is the cutoff? A million dollars is not "wealth", not anymore. It's just 2-3 houses in a big city or half a house in SV.

Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting

#280

Post by klmadfejno »

I work at McKinsey, straight out of a master program. I find this article obtuse. Does McKinsey feel prestigious to me? Sure. That has nothing to do with James McKinsey inventing managerial accounting (in fact, internally, James McKinsey is rarely mentioned in discussions of company history). It's because as a 20-something guy I can have discussions with fortune 100 CEOs about what I think they need to do. I think that's pretty cool. A smaller boutique firm probably wouldn't allow that. It's not a huge deal at the end of the day though. Prestige is a loaded word that sounds snobby. If there's any reason to seek prestige, its because having a prestigious experience tends to qualify you for more lucrative opportunities down the line via automatic respect and helpful connections.

Reasons why I think I made a good choice:

* Comp was pretty good. Consulting isn't like ridiculous $200k+ salaries for new grads like FAANG, but its more than I need.

* Growth is very fast. In most companies, you need someone above you to leave or a new need to open up to get promoted. Consulting, as well as rapidly growing companies, don't have this. You can advance as quickly as you are capable. I don't know if that holds for finance (I think not?), but it probably holds for a decent while for big tech.

* The company has a vested interest in you doing well long term. When one wants to leave, they get a few weeks of paid time to do no work and find a new job, often with the help and support of senior colleagues with good connections. That is a wonderful benefit. If I want to leave, I have far more options available to me than if I had worked at most other orgs.

* I don't do any work I perceive to be unethical, and am encouraged to decline serving clients I don't want to serve without needing to justify it or fill out a form.

I'm happy with my job. I really don't need people applying values judgments over why I would have made these choices. Job culture, especially in America IMO, is generally unhealthy. If you can legit say you're happy with your job and it pays your bills, just stop the dialogue there, you've won, that's great; pay no heed to those competing possible pasts that may have been better.

Post reply on HN