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

How to succeed at Meta

teamblind.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 211 posts

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#191

Post by mehwoot »

Ancalagon wrote: post #158
mrandish wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is how large companies operate once they surpass the innovation phase I heard someone smart (maybe Naval Ravikant) say on a podcast that this becomes prevalent in orgs which have two or more layers of management between real customer-facing work and business ownership (CEO, co-founder, CTO, etc). Having worked in several startups as well as F500 FAANG-ish valley tech companies, I agree. When a manager reports…

I don’t understand. Literally every company I’ve ever worked for, successful startup included, had at least an engineering manager reporting to a director reporting to a VP reporting to a senior VP reporting to a CTO. Is this not a normal or good way of doing things?

I work for a company of ~200 total employees with ~30 in engineering and the org chart for an engineer goes Individual Contributor -> Manager -> VP Engineering -> CEO. 4 total layers, 2 of managers.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#192

Post by ButterBiscuits »

qwerpy wrote: post #184
ButterBiscuits wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's nothing wrong in working at a FAANG for the money Sure, if you believe that making more money is the only thing that matters in this world. If you take this logic to its extreme you can justify anything if it makes you rich. You're simultaneously criticizing a system while defending your participation in it. There are lots of things wrong with working at a FAANG for the money. If you don't like how Amazon t…

Total comp and work life balance are all I care about for my job. I put in my 40 hours so that I have money to pay the bills, support my family, and have some fun hobbies. The only reason I wouldn’t work for FB is the poor work life balance. At the end of the day my family loves me and they have a comfortable, happy life, so I’m fine with internet commenters calling me a shitty person because of my employer.

You're making a similar argument rich people make to defend their wealth: they earned it, they're comfortable, and they don't care what other people think. Not caring about anyone besides your immediate circle is the problem, so you bragging about it just means we'll never agree.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#193

Post by SentientAtom »

y-c-o-m-b wrote: post #29

This person is getting a lot of snarky responses, but all of this is relatively true at Amazon also and it was true when I was at Intel 10 years ago. This is how large companies operate once they surpass the innovation phase, so it should be no surprise to anyone that's actually worked in a FAANG and doesn't pound down the kool-aid. Interesting how there's comments on this person being concerned solely with "TC" as i…

Worked at AMZ as EAM admin, this describes their metric fixation. You spent more time chasing metrics than actually performing work, it was exhausting. Metrics for everything too, many of which would require intervention in the relational database by other team members several states away that didn't reply to emails or wouldn't prioritize your requests.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#194

Post by SentientAtom »

jlarocco wrote: post #21

Hate to burst the ego bubble, but hitting metrics is what you were hired to do.

You are hired to fulfil a job role based on your experience. Metrics are just a tool that tries to highlight your effectiveness for corpos too large to have oversight in the actual productivity of the workforce.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#195

Post by SentientAtom »

proc0 wrote: post #130

While this may be true, it's also the problem with large software companies. This is why often they create products that don't meet user expectations despite a large effort. This is prioritizing appearance over substance, something that is common for business minded people like sales or managers, and is no surprise large companies are taken over by this mentality. In my opinion roles have to reflect their area of exp…

But everyone looked so damned productive in the analytics captures we ran with KPIs, milestones, and reports! Too bad it is a forest for the trees situation where everything granular is lost and no one is making sure the "spirit" of the roles are being fulfilled. Just becomes a group effort to play the numbers instead of accomplishing the actual goals of the project.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#196

Post by oreally »

davewritescode wrote: post #8
randshift wrote: post #3

Blind is such a toxic place... I always come off shocked at how awful people are on there. Only focused on "TC", and nothing else.

Blind self selects for people who want to brag about how much they're paid and people who think they're underpaid who want to validate those assumptions. It leads to a toxic community. There's so much more to work than compensation and this post proves it. Being on a good team is 100x more important than what you're paid. Good teams elevate engineers and give you a better career path in your future. I make SL level c…

It's the inner and dirtiest aspects of the software engineer ego. It's amazing how scummy and holier than thou people really are in private.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#197

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

analyst74 wrote: post #97
yodsanklai wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I thought we were past the employer loyalty era and more accepting of the harsh reality that everything is profit-driven these days I think this is my biggest disappointment working for a big tech company. I don't feel I'm "part of the family" at all. Very high turnover, people come and go, some are fired, burn out, or move to another job. I'd love to feel I'm part of something, but it's not the case. Plus most pro…

If you feel like a family working for a company, but does not have significant ownership stake, you're being conned.

I wouldn’t say like a family but small teams and companies tend to generate a feeling of being part of an actual social group which is genuine. It’s more about knowing who you are working with and having the feeling you are going in the same direction in a way which is not ephemeral. Large companies tend to feel more disconnected unless you work for a small team.

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#198

Post by danieljacksonno »

Ancalagon wrote: post #158
mrandish wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is how large companies operate once they surpass the innovation phase I heard someone smart (maybe Naval Ravikant) say on a podcast that this becomes prevalent in orgs which have two or more layers of management between real customer-facing work and business ownership (CEO, co-founder, CTO, etc). Having worked in several startups as well as F500 FAANG-ish valley tech companies, I agree. When a manager reports…

I don’t understand. Literally every company I’ve ever worked for, successful startup included, had at least an engineering manager reporting to a director reporting to a VP reporting to a senior VP reporting to a CTO. Is this not a normal or good way of doing things?

I think the difference is not in the amount of layers between an IC and the top - but the amount of layers between the customers and users and the top. As long as c-level still keeps on touch with reality outside the org and doesn't depend on truth being filtered through four layers you might have a chance

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#199

Post by trasz »

ryandrake wrote: post #171
DesiLurker wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

btw its not 30% its close to 50% if you count waking hours. I have never understood this single minded drive for Moar money. I mean I get upto a point but after that it sort of becomes a game in itself. OTOH you have basically extinguished your own 'signal' for resources that may have some dubious utility in future.

To me it’s about gaining back time at the end, when I may be unable to work. Every additional $N/yr translates into one less year I need to work before I can retire. Even once all your needs are met, it still makes sense to further optimize TC because you save it and that translates into earlier retirement. I have a sign above my monitor that reads “The Goal Is To Not Have To Work”

So you got a shit job to shield yourself from a shit job in the future?

Are you aware of other options, such as non-shit jobs?

Re: How to succeed at Meta

#200

Post by Fendii »

robswc wrote: post #167
Fendii wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds stupid to you but I really have ethics. I will not work for a company like Facebook. And I don't throw Facebook in the same bucket as companies like Google, Microsoft. And sure Amazon and apple are more evil than the others but they are also so far away from Facebook.

What makes FB exceptionally bad? Jw. For me, TikTok even though they probably don't hire SDEs like FB and there's prob enough people to fill those roles anyways. I truly think its an awful invention. It's bad for the same reason I feel most social media is bad... just turned all up to 10. You thought people doom scrolling mindless posts in 2014 was bad? Here, have 10 second bits of unscrubbable nonsense for 5 hours a…

TikTok is also shit. But TikTok is not faang.

Anyway fb purposefully pushed people to addiction.

Did not take any actions against spreading missinformation

And for the people needing to check illegal stuff like snuff or pedo stuff, they are not good to them either.

Everything fb does is for making more money out of screentime and addiction.

Post reply on HN