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

On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

cwbuecheler.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 187 posts

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#111

Post by Lagged2Death »

jmduke wrote: post #7

I 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…

Also, lots and lots of ad hominem.

Ad hominem is when you say, in effect, "You butter your toast on the wrong side, so I'm going to discount anything you say, you wrong-side-butterer, you."

It's not ad hominem to point out that a a specific claim ("I don't even really like toast," while sitting on a throne and dais made entirely of toast) is calculatedly disingenuous.

The argument isn't "This guy's a hypocrite and therefore he's wrong about absolutely everything," which would arguably be ad hominem. The argument is "This guy doesn't even believe what he's telling you right now, maybe you shouldn't believe it either."

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#112

Post by mncolinlee »

tvladeck wrote: post #108
mncolinlee wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So to extend your argument-- as long as a worker is fully informed that he may die working in a dangerous factory, it's not unethical to lock the doors and windows? Are you redefining ethics to suit your argument? Consent does not voids ethics. It's only a single component of ethical behavior.

How does that bear any relationship to my argument?

You said "it's not exploitation; it's a trade." I'm saying the two are clearly not mutually exclusive.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#113

Post by mcv »

GFischer wrote: post #6

"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 might be hard to find for the money they're offering.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#114

Post by taeric »

MatthewJBrown wrote: post #107
taeric wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the post is {Khoo, Penny Arcade} are shrewd business folks that are looking for a sucker. Don't be the sucker. With lots of exposition on why this author feels they are looking for a sucker. Hell, we don't even really know what the compensation is for this position. Could be they are willing to pay upwards of 200k. Am I just missing where they are saying this will pay terribly? I saw they are not "money ori…

You don't say you're not money oriented in a job posting unless you intend to not pay a competitive salary for the skills you're asking for and the workload you intend. It's pretty upfront about the fact that if working for Penny Arcade isn't a huge plus point for you, you're not the person for the job. That's supposed to be part of your compensation.

This still says nothing about what they are willing or even expecting to pay. Pretty much all I can infer is that they are not interested in trying to attract people based on seeing a ludicrously high number in a posting.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#115

Post by danielweber »

Jemaclus wrote: post #59
jonlucc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was standard at startups to offer company stock in exchange for small salaries for the first set of employees. If so, those employees with stock have at least some upside for the risk.

True, but it's generally something like 0.25% equity (almost always <1%). So you're working roughly the same hours for a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of the overall equity.

And if they ever need to raise money and you are not, at that moment, vital to the company, your 0.25% becomes 0.05%.

Assuming success at a $50 million valuation, you did all that sweat equity for 25K, while probably giving up a lot more in salary.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#116

Post by webhat »

eshvk wrote: post #99
saalweachter wrote: post #87

I think this job posting is running up against the difference between an employee and a partner . This isn't really unique to software, so I'll use the example of the dying American family farm. I grew up on a small farm, for most of the time it was owned by four men, all related by blood. They each individually took full responsibility for the business, and were never off the clock. If something needed doing -- plan…

But but but stock options, 'generous equity' etc

Stock options and equity make you a half-partner, they rarely bestow you more than a honorary partnership. Just ask Marissa Mayer.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#117

Post by dllthomas »

Double_Cast wrote: post #109
dllthomas wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the Wikipedia link: "Although test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd."

http://www.talyarkoni.org/blog/2010/07/07/what-the-dunning-k... A glance at the graph above should explain everything. Though many assume the slope of the "perception graph" is monotonically negative, the slope is actually positive.

Ah, so everyone is pulled toward the average of what people think, not the average of what people are. My reading nerfhammer as saying the latter is, I think, what is responsible for my unease with his characterization.

Distributions still overlap, though.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#118

Post by rhizome »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #91
taeric wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This rhetorical style reads terribly. Since not everyone is objectivist, the first is sort of contradictory. The second point is lost on comparing the job to illicit drugs. This is more like comparing it to an intern where you may not get as high of a salary as you could possibly demand, but you will get to work with people you likely view as celebrities. Would be closer to a roadie position with a very established b…

>Since not everyone is objectivist, the first is sort of contradictory. That seems like circular logic to me. It assumes that being subjective blocks objective arguments, based on the subjective opinion of some people. >The second point is lost on comparing the job to illicit drugs. It's just an example of a tempting but harmful habit.

It assumes that being subjective blocks objective arguments

Take this as you will, but I would (subjectively, natch) contend that the only objective argument is that objectivity doesn't exist. There is always selectivity in play when making an argument, both by what is included to support the argument and by what is not. So, subjectivity itself blocks objective arguments. I'm willing to be proven wrong, though.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#119

Post by Yen »

eshvk wrote: post #99
saalweachter wrote: post #87

I think this job posting is running up against the difference between an employee and a partner . This isn't really unique to software, so I'll use the example of the dying American family farm. I grew up on a small farm, for most of the time it was owned by four men, all related by blood. They each individually took full responsibility for the business, and were never off the clock. If something needed doing -- plan…

But but but stock options, 'generous equity' etc

In the general case, equity could serve to create a realistic in-between position between employee and partner. An employee with equity might not have control or responsibility for the entire business, but they have a more direct stake in its success. So there's that.

In this specific case, Penny Arcade's job offer doesn't mention anything about equity. Their IT guy won't be part of their branding or image, so they don't even get any social equity out of the deal. The IT guy would be an employee, who'd be expected to expend effort like someone who's bootstrapping the business.

Re: On Penny Arcade, Exploitation, and the Myth of the Do-Everything Rock Star

#120

Post by rhizome »

ceol wrote: post #96
danudey wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a huge long reply to this comment, but by the time I got to the end I realized you were just making cynical, shitty comments because you're upset with them for whatever reason. 'attention to detail' - If I hire someone I want them to have a good attention to detail and not just do whatever works. It's the little things that make the difference between a good server admin and a great one. 'motivated self-start…

> They run conventions. Obviously they want their IT guy around to help set everything up. The wifi at PAX Prime 2012 was unusable the majority of the time. How do you mitigate that? Their website developer is supposed to be in charge of their convention networking? > 'on-call 24/7' - Again, this is normal. Not if there's only one person handling everything. Normally, you have the main developer and someone who is on…

It's also a single-point of failure. I have to wonder what the turnover for these unicorns is. Maybe that's why they're trolling LinkedIn with this stuff.
Post reply on HN