My Time at Snap • Hacker News Board

Re: My Time at Snap

#251

Post by mikepurvis » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 1:10 AM UTC

paulie_a wrote: post #244

paxys wrote: post #47

We have all worked for a "John" in the industry. The big systematic problem is that after being fired from Snap (probably after already collecting massive paychecks and a hefty chunk of equity), he will go to another big tech company and impress them with his resume and bullshitting skills. They will hire him and deal with his antics for a few years, while he ruins more people's careers, then he will move on. Rinse a…

That is why my personal rule is to never take options. I'll take the pay and invest it on my own.

Stock options allow you as a layman to access an investment with a risk profile that is normally only available to the kind of high net-worth, well-connected individuals who do angel investing.

This isn't a reason to always participate, but it is one of the many reasons that lots of people do.

Re: My Time at Snap

#252

Post by whakim » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 1:17 AM UTC

aedron wrote: post #116

thiscatis wrote: post #100

On the one hand I recognise a lot of the teams and work issues this developer had. But reading between the lines it seems like this dev wanted it all, equity without commitment, weeks of remote work without formal agreement, a quick cash out over adding value to the company...Seems very entitled to me. It looks very one-sided as well. Everything had to come from the company and its management, nothing from his side.

This does come across as an inexperienced developer with a high opinion of his own worth, and rather clueless about how organizations work. I actually came away with a good impression of Snap from the description. Even the supposedly nightmarish engineering director could, from another angle, possibly be seen in a good light: Insisting on proper analysis and design before a project commences, taking a deep interest i…

I do think that an agreement to work remotely for (cumulatively) multiple months of the year is pretty exceptional.

That being said, in what world does the Eng director look good? Insisting on using SMALLINT (and thus necessitating a change away from SQLite in development) is just terrible, and an Eng director who is halfway competent should realize that such a requirement is patently ridiculous, or at the very least know not to stick their neck out if they know so little about the subject at hand. I'd be furious if my Director of Engineering did stuff like that.

Re: My Time at Snap

#253

Post by edmundsauto » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 1:20 AM UTC

craigkerstiens wrote: post #137

paxys wrote: post #47

We have all worked for a "John" in the industry. The big systematic problem is that after being fired from Snap (probably after already collecting massive paychecks and a hefty chunk of equity), he will go to another big tech company and impress them with his resume and bullshitting skills. They will hire him and deal with his antics for a few years, while he ruins more people's careers, then he will move on. Rinse a…

25/year used to be the norm, but is less so these days. Now more and more are moving towards a heavier backloaded vesting schedule. Schedules that are 10/20/30/40 or 15/25/25/35 are more and more common at big tech co. It can make sense as well, if it takes you a certain period of time to ramp up, once you've ramped up you contribute more value and they want to retain you more there. Yes it is a mechanism to lock you…

From my reading, Snap was already public when the author joined. Is that right? I've heard that 25/25/25/25 is the standard at most of the public tech companies.

Re: My Time at Snap

#254

Post by m463 » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 1:59 AM UTC

paxys wrote: post #47

We have all worked for a "John" in the industry. The big systematic problem is that after being fired from Snap (probably after already collecting massive paychecks and a hefty chunk of equity), he will go to another big tech company and impress them with his resume and bullshitting skills. They will hire him and deal with his antics for a few years, while he ruins more people's careers, then he will move on. Rinse a…

on "John", the article said "The problem with John was not just that he was misinformed, but that he was misinformed and highly motivated."

I'm reminded of this quote:

"I divide officers into four classes -- the clever, the lazy, the stupid and the industrious. Each officer possesses at least two of these qualities. Those who are clever and industrious are fitted for the high staff appointments. Use can be made of those who are stupid and lazy. The man who is clever and lazy is fit for the very highest commands. He has the temperament and the requisite nerves to deal with all situations. But whoever is stupid and industrious must be removed immediately." - General Baron Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord

Re: My Time at Snap

#255

Post by jkp56 » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 2:42 AM UTC

anonsnap wrote: post #234

jkp56 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1M per year?

1m over 4 years in RSU

So 250k per year in stocks + up to 200k in salary + 40k annual bonus. 500k total. That's a really solid result for someone with 10yoe in the big tech companies, top performer. Solid, but nothing to shout about.

Re: My Time at Snap

#256

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 3:05 AM UTC

paxys wrote: post #44

curiousgal wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but if there's an accessible alternative then where's the issue? In this case the offices had conference rooms that were wheelchair-accessible. Sure this means able-bodied people had twice as much access to something but hasn't that always been the case? Like, if you can walk, you can take either the stairs or the ramp to get into a building.

Literally in the next line he says that the conference rooms were always booked and not really an alternative (which is pretty standard in any office)

[deleted]

Re: My Time at Snap

#257

Post by iamsb » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 3:08 AM UTC

driverdan wrote: post #230

iamsb wrote: post #43

Sadly we have all worked with John. In my first job, 15 years ago, I was preparing for a test for masters program. The test was on a Saturday at 8am in a town 4 hours away. My manager thought Friday night 7pm is a good time to schedule a meeting about what we are going to deliver in next 6 months. Meeting went on for 2 hours!

Why would you agree to participate in a 7pm Friday meeting?

This was when I was 22, just out of college at my first job, so did not realised at the time that you can say no to requests like these. Now a days I follow a short Friday routine, get in early (7am) and leave by 1 or 2pm as after that most people tend not to work and I would rather be home.

Re: My Time at Snap

#258

Post by shalmanese » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 4:31 AM UTC

gen220 wrote: post #197

slaunchwise wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He had a gig where he could come early, leave early, and work remotely instead of taking vacation. With the potential for life-changing money. He left because they made him follow the same rules as everyone else. He thought oddball office space management was worthy of hundreds and hundreds of words in an essay. He said more about himself in this piece than I dare say he meant to. That said, the short stories might h…

Not meaning to pass judgement on the author, but I agree that the literary value of this article holds promise! To me, there was something vaguely Dostoevskyan about this piece. There's the dithering nature of the conversations described (never addressing the point, always going in circles), the incessant references to people by their acts of intrigue and rank (is the "associate director" today's "titular councilor"?…

> I guess that medium-to-large-sized tech orgs are good on the path towards becoming a labyrinthine, 19th Century, Russian bureaucracy! I hope that some comparable literature emerges from such fertile soil .

Things that happen in Silicon Valley and also the Soviet Union: https://twitter.com/atroyn/status/1014974099930714115

Re: My Time at Snap

#259

Post by mmmrk » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 12:55 PM UTC

throwaway713 wrote: post #159

I find it interesting how split the HN comments on this story are. Half seem to think this guy is an entitled low performer chasing high compensation, and the other half relate to him and feel that he was treated unfairly by Snap. I’m not sure what that means.

Maybe that there's a lot of jealousy floating around that someone dared to look out for themselves. I suppose that's usually reserved for companies.

Re: My Time at Snap

#260

Post by msteffen » Wed, Oct 02, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

I wonder if some of the disagreement in this thread over whether the narrator was being reasonable is really disagreement over the productivity of remote employees.

I saw the author's request for extended remote work as entirely reasonable, but I work at a company that has an extremely generous and flexible remote policy, which I love and take full advantage of (working from home several days a week). I now believe that engineers can be at least as productive remote as on-site. Thus, denying his request to work remotely felt, to me, a little petty.

I've worked at companies in the past that discouraged remote work. I think back then, before I'd tried it, I would've seen his insistance on working remotely as a little lazy and entitled.