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

Career Asymtotes

molochinations.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 59 posts

Re: Career Asymtotes

#21

Post by dmoy »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #14
brian_cunnie wrote: post #12

Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. I remember at Bell Labs they had one title: MTS (Member of Technical Staff). You were an engineer, and that was that. (disclaimer: there were a handful of DMTSes (Distinguished Member of Technical Staff)). No one said, "I'm an E7" or "I'm a Staff Engineer II". Those statements strike me as distasteful. And begs the question if…

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-h…

> are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters

We may have to agree to disagree here.

Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore...

A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#22

Post by cortesoft »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #16

I think this is the first time I disagree with everything said. A properly motivated man can be whatever they want. Astronaut is absolutely within reach, along with anything else, with the exception of POTUS if you weren't born on US soil. Do not conflate your lack of 110% motivation to a cause/goal/solution as lies.

I know that you know this isn’t true. You are telling me the only thing keeping a guy in a wheelchair out of the NBA is motivation? As for astronauts, NASA has a height limit of 193cm to be on a flight crew, so no amount of motivation is going to let a 6’6” guy be an astronaut.

These are the easy and obvious counters to your assertion that motivation is all it takes to be anything, but it is even true at most things. We like to believe that hard work is all that is needed to achieve anything you want, but any rigorous thinking and life experience will show this isn’t true. People have different skills and abilities, and some people simply don’t have the skills for certain things no matter how much they work at it.

Lastly, some of these things are simply numbers games. Every profession only has a limited number of opportunities, and some of these most highly desired ones are extremely limited. If there are two people who want to be the head coach of the Los Angeles Lakers, no amount of motivation is going to prevent at least one of them from failing to get the job. Even if both candidates had infinite motivation and infinite skill and infinite experience, only one of them can have the job.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#23

Post by Nevermark »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #14
brian_cunnie wrote: post #12

Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. I remember at Bell Labs they had one title: MTS (Member of Technical Staff). You were an engineer, and that was that. (disclaimer: there were a handful of DMTSes (Distinguished Member of Technical Staff)). No one said, "I'm an E7" or "I'm a Staff Engineer II". Those statements strike me as distasteful. And begs the question if…

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-h…

> Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary

Wow. I cannot relate to someone who only (mostly) view's their own accomplishments as bargaining chips for money/prestige. Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others.

But I accept productive people can operate in different ways.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#24

Post by cortesoft »

I have often felt a little out of place when I hear how focused on career growth some people are. I was excited to advance the first few years of my career, but it didn’t take long for me to realize I just didn’t have the desire or need to keep trying to climb the career ladder. Once I started making good money working on problems I enjoyed with the level of respect and autonomy I desired, I stopped even thinking about trying to “advance my career”. I would rather do a good job at my current position, and not try to fight for a higher level job I might not even like. What’s the point?

Re: Career Asymtotes

#25

Post by almostgotcaught »

dmoy wrote: post #21
almostgotcaught wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-h…

> are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters We may have to agree to disagree here. Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore ... A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.

> Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore...

This is the most out of touch (and also irrelevant) take you can have. I work in FAANG in the bay. The people around me are solid upper middle class but mortgages, day care, regular cars, medical bills, aging parents, college tuitions, etc etc etc mean very few of them can retire today and continue to live in the same place.

> A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.

Then you just work in a completely universe than I do because at every single job I've ever had, from lowly bus boy to FAANG ML engineer, not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". Quite the opposite in fact - many people I know would quit at the drop a hat if not for "golden handcuffs".

Re: Career Asymtotes

#26

Post by ajkjk »

cortesoft wrote: post #22
1970-01-01 wrote: post #16

I think this is the first time I disagree with everything said. A properly motivated man can be whatever they want. Astronaut is absolutely within reach, along with anything else, with the exception of POTUS if you weren't born on US soil. Do not conflate your lack of 110% motivation to a cause/goal/solution as lies.

I know that you know this isn’t true. You are telling me the only thing keeping a guy in a wheelchair out of the NBA is motivation? As for astronauts, NASA has a height limit of 193cm to be on a flight crew, so no amount of motivation is going to let a 6’6” guy be an astronaut. These are the easy and obvious counters to your assertion that motivation is all it takes to be anything, but it is even true at most things.…

the storyline by which "person under the flight limit becomes astronaut" is something like: they become famous and renowned and respected for some kind of science at which they are an expert; in the next twenty years spaceflight changes tremendously; the rules change; they end up on the shortlist for a flight colonizing Mars because they deserve it and rules are made up anyway.

So "success" looks like "changing the world". Doesn't it mean it can't be done! Just that it's gonna be hard.

not that this disproves your point per se, but, like... saying something can't happen because of rules is silly. Rules change all the time. The NBA example is better. But can a wheelchair-bound person end up professionally-good at basketball? Sure, maybe, in a future where medicine accomplishes a lot and they end up with bionic legs or whatever, plus they're incredibly driven to test those legs on basketball. Why not? The future can be anything.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#27

Post by Nevermark »

Ethee wrote: post #4

This kind of self meta-analysis can be amusing to think about sometimes, but I think more often than not it's actually harmful to your own sense of progress or worth. In my opinion the two sides of this coin that are hard to reconcile are: "You shouldn't limit your own ability" and "It's important to be realistic". Comparing yourself to those around you is human nature, but here you're asking us to compare ourselves…

I think an important skill is to comfortably see things in completely different ways, and leverage each view for how it helps.

Both views are simplified models, there is no conflict. Non-parallel lines are not a contradiction. For best navigation, triangulate. In a high N-dimensional nonlinear situation, accumulate lines/models/viewpoints.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#28

Post by almostgotcaught »

Nevermark wrote: post #23
almostgotcaught wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-h…

> Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary Wow. I cannot relate to someone who only (mostly) view's their own accomplishments as bargaining chips for money/prestige. Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others. But I accept productive people can operate in different ways.

> Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others.

Which ones would those be? The ones where you optimized some process so your company could make 10MM more annually? I'm not a doctor/teacher/public defender. I write code that my company sells. I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#29

Post by AlotOfReading »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #14
brian_cunnie wrote: post #12

Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. I remember at Bell Labs they had one title: MTS (Member of Technical Staff). You were an engineer, and that was that. (disclaimer: there were a handful of DMTSes (Distinguished Member of Technical Staff)). No one said, "I'm an E7" or "I'm a Staff Engineer II". Those statements strike me as distasteful. And begs the question if…

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-h…

You're coming at the employer relationship from a fundamentally different place than the parent comment you're responding to.

I'm assuming their age because of when Pivotal Labs was a thing, but there was a period from about the late 90s to the early 2010s where many people in the valley believed in an ideal of ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money. It's not like those elements were ever wholly absent, but nominally egalitarian hierarchies weren't the weirdest things in hindsight.

Re: Career Asymtotes

#30

Post by brian_cunnie »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #25
dmoy wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters We may have to agree to disagree here. Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore ... A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.

> Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore... This is the most out of touch (and also irrelevant) take you can have. I work in FAANG in the bay. The people around me are solid upper middle class but mortgages, day care, regular cars, medical bills, aging parents, college tuition…

> not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it".

I'm doing this for the love of it.

Maybe "love" is too strong a word, but I certainly "like" what I'm doing, and I "like" computers, and I have a computer side project that I "like" doing and don't get paid for. Heck, when I was a summer student at IBM I couldn't believe they were paying me for something that was so fun!

Post reply on HN