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

Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

blog.triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 524 posts

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#171

Post by rconti »

stephencanon wrote: post #62
timothycrosley wrote: post #29

The smartest thing would be to start in Bay Area, and then transfer to Seattle at the same pay rate.

If you are going to transfer somewhere at the same pay rate, transfer somewhere cheaper and nicer than Seattle. Lots of options (I'm partial to northern New England, personally, as I like having proper winter).

Funny, when I saw "nicer", I sure as hell didn't expect it to be followed by "New England". Fortunately, there's a region for everyone, but man, as someone who moved out of Seattle for better weather, New England would be a huuuge downgrade.

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#172

Post by Apocryphon »

nkassis wrote: post #148
DarkTree wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss true seasons. Hoping to make it back East in the future. Any recommendations for NE other than Boston (which I like)?

Nashua has a lot of tech companies if you would be ok with a smaller urban area close enough to Boston to enjoy the city too. Personally I just moved from Seattle to Boston. I'm conflicted on the two places. I really liked the outdoors areas in Seattle, commute was shorter and rent was also cheaper. But Boston has a lot of cool things too, food better, more interesting activities todo (other than outdoors but you can…

Isn't Montreal marginally a tech city?

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#173

Post by skylark »

_jcwu wrote: post #158
josh_carterPDX wrote: post #143

As someone who grew up in the Bay Area, but moved to Portland about three years ago, I can tell you there is a stark difference in ecosystems. However, if you are a young up-and-coming programmer coming out of school, it makes complete sense to move to the Bay Area. If you're an Actor you move to L.A. to get your big break. If you're a programmer, you go to the Bay Area to work for a big firm that will help build you…

I agree with you, but only people who want to make big buck should move to the Bay Area. As you concluded later, money is not everything. I am young and about to finish school, but I am moving away from the Bay Area and even move to a different country. I do not care about the high salaries here, as I just do not like the lifestyle here. So, I'd say that the Bay Area is for people who do not mind having to work 24/7…

My experience doesn't line up with your preconceived notions of the Bay Area at all. I've worked at three different jobs in San Francisco, and all of them were standard 9-5 jobs. I've worked weekends under 5 times. Most of my friends are in the same situation.

Sure if you want to work at an early stage startup, you can grind yourself into a paste. But there are plenty of jobs here where that's not the case.

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#174

Post by DasIch »

maqr wrote: post #65
JoshTriplett wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not understand the obsession the software industry has for locality. For many types of problems, collaborating in person works far better than collaborating online. Lower friction, easier to have a conversation, easier to sit around a computer and experiment, and generally easier to handle things in a few minutes that would take longer otherwise.

Yes, let's all keep believing that. If companies realized that all programmers can actually work decentralized, we might not be able to command a decent salary as it becomes a global race to the bottom...

You can work decentralized but it's not particularly great, especially because remote communication isn't a solved problem. You communicate a ton of stuff in an actual face to face conversation through a variety of different ways and even video calls don't really capture that.

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#175

Post by mrisse »

harterrt wrote: post #75
tom_b wrote: post #66

Interesting that Bay Area hackers make more than local hackers when they relocate outside the Bay Area. FTA: A 2015 report by Hired found that when engineers from the Bay Area relocate to other areas, they out-earn engineers on the local market. Experience in the Bay Area seems to advance careers. Engineers moving from San Francisco to Seattle make an average of $9,000 more than others who get offers in Seattle. This…

This could also be an artifact of the metric. I call this the "Geico" fallacy. Geico advertises that "People who switch to Geico save 15% or more". Notice that people who would lose money by switching to Geico should rarely switch. Accordingly, this metric will usually be positive. Consider that people moving to a new city for a job may need more incentive to move.

I like the term you've coined, but their claim is actually significantly weaker.

"Fifteen minutes could save you 15 percent or more on car insurance."

https://web.archive.org/web/20111201164345/http://www.the-dm...

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#176

Post by chrisper »

skylark wrote: post #173
_jcwu wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, but only people who want to make big buck should move to the Bay Area. As you concluded later, money is not everything. I am young and about to finish school, but I am moving away from the Bay Area and even move to a different country. I do not care about the high salaries here, as I just do not like the lifestyle here. So, I'd say that the Bay Area is for people who do not mind having to work 24/7…

My experience doesn't line up with your preconceived notions of the Bay Area at all. I've worked at three different jobs in San Francisco, and all of them were standard 9-5 jobs. I've worked weekends under 5 times. Most of my friends are in the same situation. Sure if you want to work at an early stage startup, you can grind yourself into a paste. But there are plenty of jobs here where that's not the case.

Maybe it is because I live in the South Bay. But here it seems that everyone is just going to work and back home.. and that's it. There is nothing else going on here, but work work work.

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#177

Post by DasIch »

lostcolony wrote: post #57
mcpherrinm wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to work with my team in person. That has nothing to do "making sure they're working". It's just easier, for me, and presumably many others, to be able to collaborate in person. Maybe there's a future where seamless video conferencing, Beam robots, and better text communication could replace in-person conversation, coffee and lunch chats, and other office-place experiences. I've tried, and I don't think we're t…

But that provides a better incentive for remote teams. I agree that teams work better in person, but when you have separate teams, working on only tangentially related things, it makes sense to separate them out. Obviously for small startups this doesn't make sense. But mid to late stage, opening a satellite office for development somewhere else seems like a no brainer. I assume I'm missing something though.

It does make sense to separate teams who do different things but these teams do have to align and communicate occasionally. Meeting up in person in a meeting room is an incredibly convenient way to do that.

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#178

Post by rconti »

nostrademons wrote: post #153
rconti wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment doesn't really make any sense, because there is no benefit to having a conforming loan. In fact, there are drawbacks. Recent data showed that jumbo loan rates were LOWER than the equivalent conforming loan. We bought with 10% down on a jumbo and because it's not federally-backed you don't have to pay PMI. Mortgage, taxes, insurance, that's it. Also, I don't know anybody who got that kind of parental help…

That was the reasoning given by a coworker who did this, and he put $500K down. I personally know at least 3 people who've bought Bay Area houses/condos in the $1.1-$1.2M range with multi-hundred-K parental help.

November 2013: http://money.cnn.com/2013/11/12/real_estate/jumbo-mortgages/

September 2016: http://www.bankrate.com/financing/mortgages/jumbo-home-rates...

From TFA "the jumbo loan is supposed to come with a slightly higher rate". IMO the rate should be a LOT higher; otherwise PMI is always a losing proposition. Bizarre market forces indeed.

It was certainly surprising/counterintuitive that jumbo rates would be lower than conforming, but even when they're not, it sounds like they're incredibly close.

That said, if someone wanted to throw $500k at me to buy a house, I wouldn't turn it down :)

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#179

Post by chrisweekly »

mrkurt wrote: post #146
nostrademons wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a stage-of-life effect. Bay Area is great for young people, where cost of living is a much lower proportion of income. All the excess goes straight into savings or discretionary consumer goods, where a Bay Area dollar is worth just as much as a Rust Belt dollar. It's much less great for a family, where you have additional food, housing, childcare, and health costs that rise along with cost of living.

I don't think that's entirely true. Housing and food are still the highest spending categories. Most of the excess goes to taxes, I think. Families just make it more obvious that's happening.

Childcare exceeds all other household expenses (incl housing) in a huge % of families. Wish I had stats to cite, none avlbl atm.

Re: Does It Make Sense for Programmers to Move to the Bay Area?

#180

Post by sbuttgereit »

qntty wrote: post #126
harterrt wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This could also be an artifact of the metric. I call this the "Geico" fallacy. Geico advertises that "People who switch to Geico save 15% or more". Notice that people who would lose money by switching to Geico should rarely switch. Accordingly, this metric will usually be positive. Consider that people moving to a new city for a job may need more incentive to move.

This is really insightful. Does this fallacy have an well known name?

Not that I know of... the closest might be the Broken Window Fallacy (http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fal...), where only the effect of "seen" outcomes are front of mind and considered, but "unseen" outcomes are ignored even if they are more impactful to reality.
Post reply on HN