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

Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

neomindlabs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 441 posts

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#271

Post by pepemon »

mhaberl wrote: post #226
whatshisface wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google is willing to pay $200k over your current employer for you, your employer is paying you $200k under your market rate.

You can view this issue from another standpoint. Imagine some market where 10 companies sell bread and it costs $5. And lets assume that the costs are $4 and $1 is profit. Then comes a company that makes its money on selling water and it is doing very well. It comes to a bread market and starts selling bread for $3. The competition is quickly destroyed and the bread prices rise. Edit: as a sibling comment mentioned:…

Are you sure that there's the direct analogy between pricing and salary models like that?

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#272

Post by auganov »

> “Staying on the Rails” makes any new developer productive almost immediately ... Sticking to the standards evangelized by the community and adding proper documentation ... makes onboarding a breeze, which creates more productive developers, which makes hiring more accessible, which reduces your “bus factor.”

You could make the reverse argument. Using "industry standard" tools makes your top performers much more likely to get poached. Using unusual (but enjoyable) technologies might increase employee loyalty.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#273

Post by Rapzid »

LargeWu wrote: post #57
roland35 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I think "hit by a bus" generally means there is 0 chance of knowledge transfer and is more a disaster recovery term than a talent retention term. Unless you really burn a bridge with your workers they should have at least a week or 2 to transfer knowledge!

In practice, "knowledge transfer" is pretty much a joke anyway. Unless they have been documenting important things to know along the way it's usually at best an ad-hoc, partial data dump of the most recent thing they were working on.

There should be knowledge transfer as part of work review..

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#274

Post by wolco »

oarabbus_ wrote: post #115
jpxw wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly their actions don’t seem particularly unreasonable to me.

It seems like a prudent business decision on the agency's part, to be honest, rather than some kind of underhanded anti-employee move.

Until he applies directly and cuts out the agency if that's possible.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#275

Post by ryaan_anthony »

laurentdc wrote: post #46
roland35 wrote: post #11

FAANG companies can certainly offer more money, but there are lots of things other companies can offer too (besides Ruby on Rails apparently). - ownership of the product and process - less red tape and politics - good work life balance - location other than Silicon Valley - boss who pays attention to engineer needs and wants Money is a huge factor but it isn't the only one!

Anecdotal, but when I hear of people working impossible hours and with a clueless boss it's almost always a startup or some small shop.

ive worked for 2 fortune 50s and in both cases i had lots of autonomy and ownership of the product and process.. however other teams in the same org were clearly being burned out and worked to the bone by their bosses. its a management thing. smaller companies have fewer managers so your odds of working under a bad one go up.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#276

Post by redisman »

MattGaiser wrote: post #59
BrentOzar wrote: post #15

Instead of "hit by a bus," I prefer the term "win the lotto." Any member of your team could win a life-changing amount of money in the lottery, inherit it, win a gambling bet, etc. Frame it as a good thing rather than a death or a change of hire - somebody might just flat out retire because they don't financially need your employment anymore.

I see this one as a different problem. If your team members who won the lotto would just give their two weeks and quit, then your company/team has a substantial morale/motivation problem. Such a company is not creating an environment where people enjoy being a part of it.

People work jobs to get paid money. Not because it's the most fun thing they can imagine in the whole wide world.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#277

Post by game_the0ry »

tschwimmer wrote: post #92
game_the0ry wrote: post #23

I agree with the author's point about using popular tech stacks to alleviate the ramp-up time for new hire productivity, but that is not the optimal solution. The optimal solution is for management to not let high-productivity talent from leaving - increase their comp to whatever offers they might get in the open market. That's how labor economic works - it's a market. Investment bank and management consulting figure…

Investment Banks are a terrible example of low attrition workplaces, as attrition is quite high. It used to be the case (not sure if it still is) that expected attrition was ~100% after the first 2 years as an analyst as you were expected to go to B-school, the buyside or somewhere else.

Less of comparison of attrition, more of a comparison of:

* competing for talent by paying very well and wiling to do so

* investment in training early on

Two things that tech workers do not benefit from as much.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#278

Post by zhengyi13 »

SNosTrAnDbLe wrote: post #219
cptskippy wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's intentional language used by employers because it has preconceived notions and they succinctly communicate a story that benefits the employer. When you hear poached, you think illegal and victims. It makes you think that the employer has been wronged in some way and that the employee was both participatory in something illegal or at least underhanded and at the s…

On the same note, what is the difference between a company being acquired by Netflix vs the employee being poached by Netflix. Why is the first one a positive and the second one a negative.

Perspective.

The employer sees employees as resources. Property. Property doesn't have agency. Someone else is taking the employer's property, but the employer isn't being compensated for the loss of their property.

But buying a whole company? That's paying the shareholders for their property. Therefore that's good.

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#279

Post by ghaff »

stale2002 wrote: post #246
jefftk wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If McDonalds does have enough capital to buy long-term customers and kill off competition with free burgers, perhaps they should consider it. I'm pretty sure they should not consider it, because it is generally illegal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing

> I'm pretty sure they should not consider it, because it is generally illegal. It is really not. At least in America. In America, where laws are based on consumer benefit, it is extremely difficult to prosecute companies for having too awesome of a service, that they give away for too good of a price, in a way that helps consumers too much. It really just isn't something that gets prosecuted, except in absolutely ex…

Leaving aside any skirting of regulations also involved, is the government going to prosecute Uber or Lyft because they're losing boatloads of money and therefore obviously priced too low?

Re: Developer won’t get hit by a bus, they’ll get hired by Netflix

#280

Post by notJim »

JPKab wrote: post #86
paulgb wrote: post #3

> never underestimate the amount of money the FAANGs have to poach your talent. I really wish we'd stop using the word "poach". It's a loaded word with negative connotations, but what it really means here is "offer someone a better situation than you offered them". Employees have agency, they aren't wild elephants who need your "protection" from "predators" who just want to pay them more.

The thing that hits me is the "$500k+/year in the valley". Is this really a thing? Am I a giant dumbass for staying in Colorado? Even factoring in my stock grants, I'm nowhere close to that number.

IMO the move is to find a remote-friendly company that will pay you $200-400k, and stay in Colorado, unless you're already making that and happy where you are of course. Stripe and Github are two companies that are known for paying in the higher range and that hire remotely.
Post reply on HN