Working at a startup is overrated, both financially and emotionally

Putting this in a separate comment from my JP one:

> Christian theologians for centuries consistently modified their belief structure to reflect reality as their understanding of reality improved.

That is also laundering the history of religious persecution. Christian theologians embrace scientific consensus hundreds of years after the scientific community does, persecuting, ostracizing, torturing (mentally and physically) thousands of people until then.

> Religion is not without it's faults, but that is true of any principle around which people organize.

That depends on the principle doesn't it.

For example if you take "humanism", then the principle is that human beings are the most important thing that matters, every human being has value, and maximizing humanity's long term happiness and liberty is the key to a successful society.

On the other hand if you take theology, then generally, the religions that the vast majority of the world follows are based around 2 key concepts:

1) An omniscient deity whose wishes and directives must be obeyed implicitly

2) An after life that is offered as a reward to the righteous followers.

#1 introduces an inherent power structure. Once you accept that some entities are "greater" than the other, it inherently follows to apply the same to the "kingdom of men". Every power imbalance throughout history from Lords to Kings to Slave Masters was justified based on a delegation of hierarchical authority deemed justifiable from religion.

This continues to this day amongst Conservatives whose original purpose was to maintain aristocratic power structures after the dissolution of monarchies, and now perpetuate historical inequalities under the guise of individualistic authority (i.e. no imposition on generational wealth and power imbalances through taxes or any other socialist policies)

#2 incentivizes obedience and behaviour. It also creates INFINITELY permanent stakes (a 50-100 year lifetime vs an infinity of reward or an infinity of punishment) which incentivizes the desire to convert others to the cause. After all if you believed that your beliefs would bring you SALVATION would you not need to/want to spread this message to others? Logically, yes. But what happens if those do not believe the message or worse force you to question YOUR OWN conviction and faith?

Well it turns out the problem with a faith-based belief system is it doesn't hold up well to logical scrutiny and humans aren't great at being flexible in these situation. You can either collapse and give up or lash out at the person who is making a mockery of your beliefs. Hence, the Inquisition, and every "dark" part of Religion throughout history, that is not actually a part of it, but the complete whole. It's not an aberration, it's the default status quo. It's not a bug, it's a feature.

> This “be relaxed and chill to make a good film” idea is delusional

I studied film. I directed films and I was on more films sets than I wish I would have been. While this is certainly uncommon (especially in low budget productions), it is definitly not delusional. Quite the opposite, as I already argued.

Thanks for the very interesting comment, and discussion generally!

My understanding, from what YC has been seeing from its Work at a Startup initiative of the last few years (sort of a hiring pool made available to YC startups as a whole) is that there is a population of really good engineers who just don't want to work at a FAANG. That seems to contradict what you're saying to some extent. I mean, I can relate to this a little, because I would find it really hard to drag my ass back to a big company. I never worked for a big tech co, but I did have a stint in the software wing of a big company. Would I squeeze myself back into that sclerosis for 2x my current compensation? Probably not. Would I do it for 10x? Well...at some multiple, one considers anything. But we're talking closer to 2x than 10x in the startup/FAANG dichotomy at present.

The question is how big this population—let's call them "A-team engineers whom externalities tilt to startups rather than FAANG"—really is. Unfortunately, that's not going to be very easy to examine objectively. From everything I've learned moderating HN, it's obvious to me how such a discussion would go: FAANG people will say "they can't be that good or they'd be at a FAANG" and startup people will say "I could totally do that, I just don't want to".

I worked at a startup about 10 years ago, and it was probably the most bureaucratic place I’ve ever worked. I was the 3rd employee, but my stock was negligible - incidentally the company wasn’t very transparent about this; When the offer was made they said, we’ll give you 5000 shares which sounded like a decent amount. I asked how many shares were issued and the guy replied just 7 million, but the important thing is how much each share will be worth (still 0). This is in London where this is probably quite common.

The sad thing was it was one of the most interesting places and domains I’ve worked, and if the company launched while I was there, it probably would have been acquired (like all our competitors). The founder was quite innovative but think was scared to launch and had a new idea/approach to market every few months. Eventually I lost faith, and being expected to work late every evening knowing my options were tiny killed all motivation.

As the author said, I calculated the expected value, decided it’s no longer worth it and left. The moment that changed my outlook was when they decided not to approve my leave (I had already booked and didn’t expect any issues since I had mentioned it in conversation a few months before). If I had stayed, I would haven’t enjoyed all the travelling and experiences I’ve had, earning more and working less.

The company is still going, and probably a long way off from having any exit. A few months after I left, some incompetent recruiter tried to hire me for my previous role at a £30k increase in salary.

Having said that, I would definitely join an early stage startup again, if the work was interesting, but would expect at least 1% and decent salary next time.

The original complaint was about paying taxes when you are granted options, which is not a thing.

The fact that one would receive significantly less salary compensation vs FAANG has nothing to do with taxes or startups really, it's just plain and bad decision making. If one is going to get a salary cut, one should make a rough analysis valuing the options/stocks adjusted for the few scenarios and compare.

Plus, 95%+ of Engineers (senior or not) don't get into FAANG, so the generalization is not appropriate.

In practice, most people assume the value the equity and options to zero, and always assume it is cherry on top. If you value the stock at zero and get a massive pay cut, then it's just a bad decision.

No need to throw the baby out with the bath water.