I'm not qualified to discern the quality of most of this post, but its tone disturbed me, and I agree that I find most of the ad hominem stuff really distasteful.
On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
11–20 of 187 posts
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#12"you know what’s even more rare? A guy who can write excellent code in several disparate languages, manage multiple different server installs, administrate databases, and configure office firewalls." Is that really so hard to find? I might be selling myself short... (I actually thought I'm worth less on the marketplace by being a "generalist")
Most tech companies have an entire engineering department with sub-divisions in order to get each of these roles done.
If you can fulfill four jobs by yourself, then you should be getting paid for four jobs. In Seattle terms, that should be north of 200k annual.
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#13I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. It's not exploitation; it's a trade, and Penny Arcade have listed out their terms. Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want. The author mixes two messages: (1) the merits of the offer, and (2) the ethics of the offer. The author may be right about (1)…
>I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role.
Given what the requirements and the drawbacks are, that's just marginally better than not being clear.
To give an extreme example to make this clear, I'm not going to be lauded by putting up an ad like: "I'm a old-style racist, and want a black person to serve as my personal assistant. No salary given. Must do as told".
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#14I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. It's not exploitation; it's a trade, and Penny Arcade have listed out their terms. Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want. The author mixes two messages: (1) the merits of the offer, and (2) the ethics of the offer. The author may be right about (1)…
You can take precisely the same position about walmart; Their jobs are shitty, but they're an offer, and working it is up to you. Whether this validates walmart or damns PA is up to you. Personally, I take the former opinion, though I'm saddened that walmart is able to continue to exist despite their bad proposition. Many people see their options as "Work for walmart" or "starve", and in many cases, they're right (Or…
Right, that's kind of a difference between the WalMart offer and the Penny Arcade offer. Anybody who gets the job at Penny Arcade has many other good options.
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#15I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. It's not exploitation; it's a trade, and Penny Arcade have listed out their terms. Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want. The author mixes two messages: (1) the merits of the offer, and (2) the ethics of the offer. The author may be right about (1)…
> Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want.
But in America, with no social safety net, the alternative is not pretty.
Reading about unpaid internships, Wal-mart having food drives for their employees and McDonald's recommending employees get a second job makes me sick to my stomach.
The very fact that people even take these jobs is proof they don't have another choice - what sane person would work these jobs if they had a viable alternative - any alternative.
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#16I think the thing that frustrates me the most about it is: they’ll probably get a thousand applicants. A bunch of 25 year-old kids with a ton of talent and stars in their eyes are going to try to get this crap job for crap pay so they can work somewhere “cool” and feel like a part of something big. The Penny Arcade “machine” (their term) will roll on, making its millions of dollars while somehow retaining the “little…
>This confuses me, because its as if the author tries to force his valuation of the opportunity onto all prospective applicants.
Perhaps it's rather as the author believes in an objective reality, where there is one true valuation of a thing, and he's not so much trying to "force his valuation onto all prospective applicants" as trying to "communicate the real valuation to all prospective applicants".
>He recognizes that a position at Penny Arcade has a level of cachet, but doesn't recognize that that level of cachet is transitive: if someone "can work somewhere “cool” and feel like a part of something big", then good for them.
Perhaps he recognizes that what some people perceive as "cachet" is actually BS and can be bad for them, regardless of what they believe, in the same way that a teenager wanna-be rockstar that thinks heroin is cool and an early death is "romantic" needs to be told otherwise...
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#17Wait, the (linkedin) post isn't sarcastic? I heard Jeff Jaques (QC) mocking the idea on twitter earlier[1], and thought he was joining in a wider joke. [1] https://twitter.com/jephjacques << at the moment, the posts are about 4 hours old and the first 5 or so.
It is only sarcasm if half the people that reads it will wonder if it is serious. otherwise it is just slapstick humor. Also, while this is sarcasm in the tech industry, this is the life blood of non-profits.
Sufficiently convincing parody, the internet, etc..
The salary you'd consider for a for-profit and for a mission you believed in are two different domains, though. (I speak, from the heart, as one who finds the idea of believing in money incomprehensible - I am aware that not everyone's brain has the same bug/feature.)
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#18"you know what’s even more rare? A guy who can write excellent code in several disparate languages, manage multiple different server installs, administrate databases, and configure office firewalls." Is that really so hard to find? I might be selling myself short... (I actually thought I'm worth less on the marketplace by being a "generalist")
It's hard enough to find someone who can write excellent code in one language. If you can also manage servers, do DBA work, and configure firewalls/networking equipment, you are actually very valuable to the right team/client.
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#19"you know what’s even more rare? A guy who can write excellent code in several disparate languages, manage multiple different server installs, administrate databases, and configure office firewalls." Is that really so hard to find? I might be selling myself short... (I actually thought I'm worth less on the marketplace by being a "generalist")
Yes. And of the small number of people who believe they can do that, 99% of them can not.
Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star
#20I have the opposite reaction to this posting: Penny Arcade are being abundantly clear and transparent about the requirements and drawbacks of the role. It's not exploitation; it's a trade, and Penny Arcade have listed out their terms. Everyone is free, or not, to go along with what they want. The author mixes two messages: (1) the merits of the offer, and (2) the ethics of the offer. The author may be right about (1)…
He makes an explicit case for both (1) and (2). He doesn't try and merely imply (2). Also, a transparent trade can still be exploitive. If I were to advertise for a slave, that would be an advertisement for an exploitive "offer." The real question is if this offer, in particular, is exploitive or not. I think he makes a solid case that it is.
> He makes an explicit case for both (1) and (2). He doesn't try and merely imply (2).
You read wrong. tvladek did not say Buecheler implied anything, only that being correct about one thing does not imply being correct about another.
And if you advertised for a slave you would presumably be dealing with the owner of said slave, so if you were offering a reasonable price, then no that would not be an exploitative offer.
Khoo's job posting offers value and leaves it up to the applicant to decide if that is inline with their requirements. For some it will be a dream job. For others it will not.
Slaves do not choose to be slaves, that is part of the definition of the term. The introduction of hyperbole and apples to oranges comparisons does not further conversation.