Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exclude Amazon? What?
Big size, low barrier to entry (especially at SDE-1 level) Source: work at Amazon
I'm also an SDE1 at Amazon and find this extremely insulting, what the hell man
The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
291–300 of 325 posts
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
The sentences have different meanings.
"I don't think a lot of people know what they want." -> I believe it is a rare trait in a person to know what they want.
"I think a lot of people don't know what they want." -> I believe it is a common trait for a person not to know what they want.
These things are not mutually exclusive nor mutually inclusive.
Lots of similar sounding statements are subtly different like this in English. "I am not happy" and "I am unhappy" have slightly different meanings as well.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
I felt that way about my own life. Still so sometimes. Though far, far less than I used to, and feeling noticeably less anxiety about it previously. A Relevant bit of reading, I think, I hope: https://fs.blog/2014/05/hunter-s-thompson-to-hume-logan/
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)
> Yeah, this is a popular saying, but couldn’t be further from the truth for the most successful people.
Sergey and Larry tried to sell Google for 1 million dollars, and failed. Zuck thought Facebook would never be profitable. The idea that "successful people" have plan all along is fiction.
They might have a vision and are pursuing said vision, but things rarely turn out anywhere near the way they are intended.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
In central Europe, public universities that are free for all are the norm, sometimes even for foreigners (other EU citizens are not even considered foreigners). For-profit schools are often of questionable quality, serving those who couldn't pass the bar of the easiest of the free public schools, or are unable to make the minimal commitment to pass them, but still want the diploma. It doesn't help that these for-prof…
Harvard is private, yes, but it's not for-profit . Those schools are likewise considered low-quality in the states. Harvard is a non-public non-profit, and is cheaper than the comparable public university for 90% of Americans after aid.
This needs a hard disclaimer, as in the USA "non-profit" is simply a term used to define a tax bracket. The spirit of the term is grossly violated when Red Cross can be in any category with Harvard or the like--schools that expressly serve the rich (and allow the poor).
In no meaningful way can a school who charges $100k+ for tuition--which is required in addition to "endowments" and other such huge checks they receive to help pay their wealthy administrators--be considered an actual non-profit organization. It is a tax ruse.
To put it even simpler: if the wealth of my parents is a metric for how much they'll charge me to attend, clearly "profit" is important, and specifically scarcity, a prime driver of profit in capitalist society. It sounds like the definition of "non-profit" in EU is different than here in the USA.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have had absolutely no issue with this, personally. I have gotten multiple FAANG offers and have turned them down every time, and I still don't have any on my resume. What's the rush? They're always hiring -- niche, smaller, lesser-known, earlier-stage companies are not.
> What's the rush? FIRE is one reason. External validation is one reason. Life after school nonclarity is one reason (this ticks a box). Even if you have ideas to start a new company or venture, there is the brand value(e.g you will see many article like "Ex-FAANG employee quit their XXX,XXX 6-figure job to pursue Y) Lots of PR value there. Many new startups literally use the fact that their current employees previou…
I have yet to meet a funded startup (YC or otherwise) that wouldn’t match the cash component of salary to within $20k of a FAANG salary+RSU schedule, so long as you have said offer in hand when negotiating (and thus, the equity becomes much more of potential bonus than lottery ticket you depend on ). Maybe pre-seed-stage startups pay much less, but I really haven’t run into any issues around feeling like I’m missing out on significant salary benefits, so FIRE seems to still hold.
External validation and PR — eh. My own experience differs, in tech and outside of tech. Personally, way back when, I turned down multiple Ivies to attend a small liberal arts college relatively few have heard about and have absolutely no regrets — people who have actually affected my life have heard of it, and I think it’s gotten me to where I am much faster and easier than going the conventional route.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#296I don't think a lot of people know what they want. There is just as much guessing as to which job to take as employers have choosing who to hire. Taking the most prestigious or most compensation is the safest bet, given that you don't really know what you want to do other than 'I like coding and interesting problems'. Partly I think that Harvard students have been adapted to seek prestige (else they probably wouldn't…
> it isn't so much a drive for prestige, but just a lack of other goals
Couldn't agree more. "Prestige" and the insecurity of people who seek it is the root of why people run the rat race. It is of course a race because we're pushing all our might in an effort to win.
Now I'm not against competitiveness, but if were talking 40+ hour weeks of 30+ years of grinding for this abstract concept of prestige, then it's pointless, and those people accruing checkboxes on their resume are running like lemmings off a cliff. It doesn't help that the chimp mind is wired to feel the pain of low status in the pecking order. But, living life to avoid that pain, through decades of work is just throwing your life away, the only life one gets to live, 90 mph off the cliff. This is why working too much is one of the biggest regrets of people on their deathbeds.
The people working for prestige, titles, paychecks, and status attainment without a larger idea of accomplishing something either for themselves or for the world really don't do anything, accrue far more security than needed, and waste away their time(decades of it) in insecurity, without actually doing anything, except maybe move forward the company agenda (talk about lack of identity, what was the definition of "cog in the wheel"?). No wonder they regret not living their life at 80. Because they haven't.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's something that I have been a bit confused on too. People talk about how hard it is and the "prestige", but there are 20k+ other engineers who did the same thing (at your company alone!). It's really not all that impressive.
The relevant metric would be the ratio of how many got the position to how many wanted it.
Not really - that would inflate how impressive it is, because the bottom, say, 80% of the talent pool applies to avg 100 companies whereas the top 20% applies to avg 5 companies, so the number of talented applicants to a given company is very small. Just because you hire top 1% of people who apply to your company doesn't mean you hire top 1% of devs (even if your company is getting the best average applicants).
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#298Earlier 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?…
> to live off interest for Y years
You don’t have to live off interest to retire. 4% withdrawal is good enough [1]. You might be lot closer to retirement than you think.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
>'I like coding and interesting problems' From what I understand, after all the hullabaloos in interviewing, most programmers at these companies are assigned menial, boring maintenance code tasks all day.
Google has a ton of interesting work, but the worst engineers at Google don't get to do it and you are unlikely to get such a position as a new grad. But as long as you do good work you can easily switch to an interesting team after a year. And since the first year as a new grad you mostly learn the ropes how to design services, write tests, write readable code, deploy to production etc, so most things are interestin…
This is not entirely true. Google doesn’t have enough interesting work for even its “better” engineers. Amount of hoops you have to jump to do any good work is enormous and it takes toll unless you’re in a really good org. It’s a good place to work but you’ll be lot less starry-eyed about Google once you cross your L5 promotion.
Also it’s entirely possible to land in a good team as a new-grad. Be a little picky during team selection.
Re: The Prestige Trap: finance, big tech, and consulting
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
Harvard is private, yes, but it's not for-profit . Those schools are likewise considered low-quality in the states. Harvard is a non-public non-profit, and is cheaper than the comparable public university for 90% of Americans after aid.
This needs a hard disclaimer, as in the USA "non-profit" is simply a term used to define a tax bracket. The spirit of the term is grossly violated when Red Cross can be in any category with Harvard or the like--schools that expressly serve the rich (and allow the poor). In no meaningful way can a school who charges $100k+ for tuition--which is required in addition to "endowments" and other such huge checks they recei…
> the USA "non-profit" is simply a term used to define a tax bracket
This understates the importance of the distinction - non-profits don't have shareholders, don't return profit to owners, etc. They are very different.
That does not mean that you can't create a non-profit for any terrible goal. You could form a non-profit for directing funds to Nazi organizations globally. But a non-profit is not aiming to make money for some owners and in an educational context, that is important.
> if the wealth of my parents is a metric for how much they'll charge me to attend, clearly "profit" is important, and specifically scarcity
This is facile. Is medicaid for-profit? If your family makes too much, you will be booted off and have to pay for your own healthcare.
Indeed, any means-tested governmental program falls under your definition of operated for "profit" which is nonsense when those programs are redistributive (although perhaps not redistributive enough).