Pixels Don’t Care (2013) • Hacker News Board

Re: Pixels Don’t Care (2013)

#101

Post by emilioolivares » Sun, Apr 16, 2017, 6:52 PM UTC

Pixels don't care, but businesses care a lot about who their vendors are. Specifically, business owners want to buy from companies that can provide more than a result.

They need to mitigate business risk so they look for vendors that will: 1. Exist as long as their solution is being used 2. Provide adequate support 3. Are legally accountable for their products and services 4. Have the proper processes in place for things like billing and invoices

Having raw talent is just part of the business puzzle. There are a lot of start-ups or freelancers that can "fake it until they make it" but it's because they really understand how a small business or corporation makes buying decisions.

Re: Pixels Don’t Care (2013)

#102

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Apr 16, 2017, 6:52 PM UTC

kneath wrote: post #95

dang wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, we changed the URL to that from https://hackerfall.com/story/pixels-dont-care and banned that site since apparently it not only steals people's articles but eats their punctuation. Your site isn't banned, and we don't moderate sites based on what they say about "Y Combinator's investment strategies". I'm not sure where you got that. Your site was getting mildly downweighted. That could have happened for a number…

Thanks for removing that! I'd be lying if your explanation didn't sound a little… Well hey, HN is always good for laughs.

[deleted]

Re: Pixels Don’t Care (2013)

#103

Post by gnrlist » Sun, Apr 16, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

atemerev wrote: post #56

gnrlist wrote: post #24

Just like in sports, you get paid more for what you have done vs what you could do. Having a few really good pieces of work to show off is no guarantee that you'll consistently pump out good work, or that you haven't left clients high and dry before. Since a third party has no real way of gauging that except by your track record, they're taking more of a chance on someone with less of a track record. More risk means…

> Most of us COULD run a Fortune 500 company as well as the average CEO I appreciate your optimism; at the same time, I think it is somewhat unwarranted. Running a 10-person company is challenging enough to have your shrink on the speed dial. As for Fortune 500 CEOs, those are superhumans on steroids (or cocaine and alcohol), who bend reality by their very presence. You have about the same chance of approaching their…

My original statement was a bit over the top, but the idea I was getting at is how little impact most CEO's have on company performance (https://hbr.org/2015/11/are-successful-ceos-just-lucky), and how their pay does not correspond to their performance (https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highe... ). Along the same lines as the original post where performance doesn't match up with compensation, CEOs are just on the other end of the spectrum.

Re: Pixels Don’t Care (2013)

#104

Post by Markoff » Mon, Apr 17, 2017, 1:02 PM UTC

dzamo_norton wrote: post #67

The author feels that his height counted against him, but did anyone actually say "sorry you're too short?". It would be strange client or employer who insisted on a tall developer while age I can accept is a factor for people out there, rightly or wrongly. I'm suggesting that it could be possible to project an inherent sensitivity about one's height onto a separate experience.

it's not about height, it's about age

Re: Pixels Don’t Care (2013)

#105

Post by ben_w » Mon, Apr 17, 2017, 1:22 PM UTC

dom0 wrote: post #55

ben_w wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I know that "fudiciary duty" is a thing, but not what it involves. There are laws about accounting standards, but I can't even say what standard accountants need to rech to know those standards. I only found put a year ago that, in the UK, the (director?) of a Limited company can become personally liable for company debts if they trade while insolvent. Import and export laws? Nope. Which parts of an employmen…

> Copyright, trademark and patent laws I think I get Probably not :) Even copyright law that's "simple" on paper gets sooo hairy so fast in practice - just look at all the FOSS licenses :)

I think I explained myself quite poorly, because I agree with you.

I meant "get" it in the sense that I can tell when I do or don't need a lawyer, rather than my friends and family who moan about Google for (c)-ing a photo of the sky ("They don't own the sky!") or what trademarks and patents are even for ("How did Apple get a patent on putting the letter 'i' in front of every product name?", to paraphrase).

I'm no expert, but I'm not a n00b either [that said, I think the monkey should own the copyright on their selfie, not the camera owner, but that's opinion not law. :)]

The rest if my examples, well… I don't even know enough to know if they are hard or easy. Which should be a good sign that I don't have the skills to run a business in its own right, so I'm not sure why other people are telling me I'm wrong about not being able to.

Re: Pixels Don’t Care (2013)

#106

Post by therealdrag0 » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 10:44 PM UTC

nailer wrote: post #35

gnrlist wrote: post #24

Just like in sports, you get paid more for what you have done vs what you could do. Having a few really good pieces of work to show off is no guarantee that you'll consistently pump out good work, or that you haven't left clients high and dry before. Since a third party has no real way of gauging that except by your track record, they're taking more of a chance on someone with less of a track record. More risk means…

I honestly do not think most of us could. I hand out with three groups of people: geeks, hacks and lawyers. All of them often easily think they could easily do any other job. This includes the lawyers and journalists thinking that making software is easy. Based on that, I think we're as deluded as they are.

There ARE studies showing that CEO pay does not correlate with company success. Which I think implies a lot of big ships nearly run themselves. So I wouldn't say most of us could, but those with a sufficient enough business/managerial experience could, and many of those make a fraction of what a fortune 500 CEO makes.