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

Hire people who give a shit

alexw.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 342 posts

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#181

Post by n0nc3 »

sgillen wrote: post #176
pmoriarty wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not confined to SV nor to tech. It's very common in the finance industry as well, but the worst is arguably in health care, where patients can literally die due to mistakes or lack of enough attention by overworked doctors and nurses running on an extreme lack of sleep. This doesn't even begin to address the casualties from burnout, which can lead to depression, stress-related health issues, and suicide. How…

>> I never understood why they didn't just hire more people and instead preferred to work the talented people they attract half to death. I think that a small number of talented people that will work themselves to death will be much more effective than a large group willing to work reasonable hours.

If you are doing anything more complicated than gluing a pair of APIs together, it is very likely that the marginal value of work past 60 hours is negative. Reaping what you coded during a 3am espresso binge is rarely a happy experience.

But yeah, if all you are trying to do is build out Facebook before some other social network gets there maybe it makes sense to pull 100 hour weeks.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#182

Post by nimbius »

pmoriarty wrote: post #156
wbronitsky wrote: post #121

This article is megalomaniacal. Insisting that your company with 200+ employees will only hire people who will work themselves to the bone without any mention of how those people will be properly compensated is wild corporate propaganda. I honestly don’t know why the tech industry continues to capitulate to leaders like this who obviously, and loudly, mistreat and dehumanize their employees by insisting that if you a…

This is not confined to SV nor to tech. It's very common in the finance industry as well, but the worst is arguably in health care, where patients can literally die due to mistakes or lack of enough attention by overworked doctors and nurses running on an extreme lack of sleep. This doesn't even begin to address the casualties from burnout, which can lead to depression, stress-related health issues, and suicide. How…

Can confirm its creeped into a few automotive repair jobs I've had. I worked for a year at a famous chain of oil and lube stores with a blue and red sign that would do spot reviews. If you habitually declined to work overtime, didnt make it a point to upsell everything, or werent above a certain number of vehicle services per day then your hours were reduced.

Turns out not a lot of people were real excited to drain boiling oil from pissed off soccer mom SUVs all day for ten dollars an hour until their arms fell off for no benefits. anyone who was talented enough on day 1 eventually became a hung over burnout that stripped bolts and took a lot of smoke breaks.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#183

Post by soneca »

I was sympathetic to the idea when I read the title. It is definitely better to work with people that both care about the future of the company and the quality of their work.

But then I read the title and learned that the author equals those qualities to ”being part of a cult” and ”being obsessed about work”. Pretty much the stereotypical startup founder that consciously scam young people out of their waking hours in exchange for an illusion.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#184

Post by sidlls »

icedchai wrote: post #129
andreilys wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The financial incentive structures are also pretty skewed. Upside for founders is much, much higher than employees. Proper incentives entice employee engagement.

The downside is also much bigger for founders. The board will cut the founder pay when times are tough, long before they touch rank-and-file employees, because they know you value your equity. The other folks can walk.

That's kind of the point: it's absurd to expect an employee--who doesn't see either the same rewards or the same risks as founders--to be as passionate about the company as the founders are. I'd go further--it's not just absurd, but astoundingly stupid and naive. It demonstrates a profound lack of both reasoning ability and experience.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#185

Post by Schiendelman »

n0nc3 wrote: post #181
sgillen wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I never understood why they didn't just hire more people and instead preferred to work the talented people they attract half to death. I think that a small number of talented people that will work themselves to death will be much more effective than a large group willing to work reasonable hours.

If you are doing anything more complicated than gluing a pair of APIs together, it is very likely that the marginal value of work past 60 hours is negative. Reaping what you coded during a 3am espresso binge is rarely a happy experience. But yeah, if all you are trying to do is build out Facebook before some other social network gets there maybe it makes sense to pull 100 hour weeks.

Cut that number in half. Work over 30 hours might be negative.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#187

Post by teh_klev »

This article is utter bollocks. I tried hard to read to the end without laughing out loud, in particular this about candidates:

> 1. they give a shit about Scale

Most companies I interview for, I, shall we say, don't give a shit about at application and interview stage. Sure, they may seem like a good fit (tech and remuneration), and I try to fit if it kinda feels good after a couple of interviews. Yes I try and understand their business, methodologies, treatment of staff (am I on call?, what's that worth?) etc

But to expect me to arrive at a series of interviews with total commitment and "giving a shit" (which I read as hand-my-life-and-all-my-free-time-to-you). Nah, fuck off.

You're just another company, it's up to you to make me give a shit wanting to work for you.

Annecdote: Been employed at what I thought would be a nice company to work for ~five months, it's turned out well, now I give a shit. It doesn't work the other way around, otherwise you seem like a cult.

And whilst at this new company I really do "give a shit", I don't allow it to trap me and will happily tell them at which point I don't "give a shit" any more and the reasons why.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#188

Post by treis »

ceilingcorner wrote: post #21

I have a genuine question and I'm not trying to be snarky -- do people actually think this way in real life, or is it an elaborate social game of pretending to be more "passionate" than the next guy? Scale seems like a cool company with an interesting product, but let's be honest, rational people here - they aren't curing cancer, creating art, or landing on Normandy Beach. This seems obvious to any self-aware person.…

>have a genuine question and I'm not trying to be snarky -- do people actually think this way in real life, or is it an elaborate social game of pretending to be more "passionate" than the next guy?

IMHO, if someone has not once wanted something in their life and worked really hard to get it then that does raise an eyebrow. It doesn't have to be a job. It could be an instrument, sport, extra ciricular, school project, volunteer work, or really anything. If you haven't, it means you either have never wanted to achieve something or didn't want to put the effort in to try.

Life happens and at some point we all make it to a point we are comfortable. So I think it's unfair to expect that out of a 45 year old with two kids. But if you get to be 45 without having really tried at something... well it's a bit sad.

Re: Hire people who give a shit

#189

Post by [deleted] »

user5994461 wrote: post #126
svrma wrote: post #116

The comments here at HN are quite harsh imho and I feel bad for possibly ruining someone's day. Is there a way for me to delete the submission? I posted it on HN as I liked the points in the article. The points in the post are reasonable provided there's fair equity for the employees (which I believe is disclosed prior to joining - I have no knowledge about dilution, preference etc). I also agree with the commenters…

>>> The points in the post are reasonable provided there's fair equity for the employees (which I believe is disclosed prior to joining - I have no knowledge about dilution, preference etc). That's why you don't understand. Long story short, employee's equity is worthless because it will always be reduced to nothing by dilution/preference and even if the company grows a hundred fold. There are only two people who ben…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN