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

Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 632 posts

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#351

Post by pcsanwald »

technofire wrote: post #230
cachemiss wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are bootstrapping, and you are starting a company in an area that does not need the top tier of engineers (which is most of them, regardless of how they talk about hiring the best), I'd consider starting someplace low cost. I think college towns in the midwest / rust belt are untapped resources, or areas that used to have strong technically focused companies that moved away. I've personally seen founders boots…

> you should at least try and do some time in SV / Seattle etc. I'm curious to know what your current thoughts are behind this. As someone who intentionally has steered clear of both those areas in order to try to optimize financially I sometimes wonder whether I'm missing out on something. Obviously one can learn more from better engineers, but don't the brightest ideas from the brightest engineers wind up being wri…

Having done a lot of hiring in SF, NYC, and Baltimore, it's not clear to me that optimizing financially means avoiding SF and NYC.

Market salaries for software engineers in Baltimore are quite a bit lower (like, 40-50% lower) than SF or NYC. Whereas for companies located in NYC/SF, they understand cost of living is high and are thus willing to pay a premium.

I'm not making a counterargument here, just saying that salaries in different areas aren't usually apples to apples.

Also, cost of living is relative: For 10 of my 17 years in NYC, I lived in a studio apartment with a 1k/month mortgage, and no car, no kids, and a lower cost of living than most of my friends in other cities. So it really depends on your family situation and what kind of environment you want to live in.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#352

Post by storgendibal »

frakkingcylons wrote: post #165
ryandrake wrote: post #7

> Often times there are hard barriers preventing people from starting a company. In these cases my best advice is to move to a tech hub (preferably the Bay Area) and work for a tech company until you can save the money I had to laugh there. Moving to the Bay Area will reduce your ability to save money, not increase it. I was probably saving 40-50% of my salary when I worked in Nowhereville, Florida. With the housing…

Saying it's impossible to save is misleading and it's laughable how often this myth about the Bay Area is perpetuated on HN. Unlike a lot of places in the US, the Bay Area has all of the following: * a meaningful degree of racial diversity (makes a big difference if you're not white) * comprehensive public transit (yeah, yeah BART and MUNI suck, but where I've lived in the US previously, they didn't even exist) * an…

The racial diversity is huge if you're not white. There are parts of the US where I've walked into a Burger King and gotten cold stared by everyone in there.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#353

Post by hahamrfunnyguy »

sidlls wrote: post #252
nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

I have a different (admittedly controversial) take, having been on the "tech ladder" for some time now (as a Senior SWE and Lead Engineer): most individual contributors overestimate how much value they actually provide, especially in the Bay Area. That isn't to say we're not under-appreciated and under-compensated (we are both). But realistically much of the time work we do is easily done by literally thousands of ot…

As a manager I disagree. The right people are difficult to come by. Sure an engineer can be replaced - but in how many weeks or months, and what about the knowledge leaving the company?

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#354

Post by mgkimsal »

Radim wrote: post #105
reuven wrote: post #91

How about freelancing? I've been doing that since 1995 -- and my income and happiness have never been higher. Pros: - Work on what you like, with the people you like - Potentially very high salary, definitely more than you would get as an employee - Want to work on side projects (e.g., software, books, and courses)? Go for it, and benefit from multiple income streams. Cons: - You're running a business. That requires…

Plenty of successful freelancers make good money just by themselves (or maybe 1-2 junior people). Great point. The underappreciated thing is how much stress bringing a few other people to your freelancing brings. Suddenly, you realize that all these things that are obvious to you (when you "flow" working alone) need explanations and coordination and planning and checking and ... You may find yourself at a substantial…

> There's like this uncanny valley between freelancing and having a stable team / process structure (aka company)

Perfect one-liner. I've found myself at the edge, and sometimes going in to that valley, for years. Finding the combination of people and process to get through that is more work than most people imagine, and a whole lot of risk. You get to the point where you can hire/contract one other person? That person better tick a lot of boxes, or you better be able to ramp up to X people quickly. Having a whole lot of effort in to one person, then to have them leave, loses you a whole lot of time/money/effort. Getting to a team of 4-5, which I've seen folks do, reduces that risk a lot, but figuring out how to get there and remain stable ... haven't done it myself, and have seen others try and fail (and some succeed, to be sure).

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#355

Post by biohax2015 »

yahna wrote: post #318
sidlls wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a different (admittedly controversial) take, having been on the "tech ladder" for some time now (as a Senior SWE and Lead Engineer): most individual contributors overestimate how much value they actually provide, especially in the Bay Area. That isn't to say we're not under-appreciated and under-compensated (we are both). But realistically much of the time work we do is easily done by literally thousands of ot…

The same just isn't true of product development, sales and marketing. Any one of those three teams, staffed well, will account for well more than the value of the entire engineering organization. Okay, slash your engineering staff and double the sales people and lets see how you do. How is any of that not done by thousands of other people as well? Especially sales.

Sales is more difficult than engineering. There, I said it.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#356

Post by lliamander »

i_cant_speel wrote: post #261
lliamander wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of money and prestige. I think this is a damn shame, and we should be striving to stop that. You may like Eric Dietrich's book Developer Hegemony[1]. He talks about both why the third group is less successful and how people within that group can potentially improve their situation within the current sy…

> He talks about both why the third group is less successful and how people within that group can potentially improve their situation within the current system. Are you able to provide a cliff note or two about why they are less successful and how to improve their situations?

Why are line level engineers less successful? In short, the Gervais Principle[1]:

"Sociopaths, in their own best interests, knowingly promote over-performing losers into middle-management, groom under-performing losers into sociopaths, and leave the average bare-minimum-effort losers to fend for themselves."

What to do about it? These things:

* recognize that as software professionals we own the means of production

* learn the business side of software

* form partnerships with other developers such that the distinctions between worker and owner, suit and techie, no longer exists

* shift focus away from developing software according to a spec, and towards being a provider of overall business efficiency (often achieved through software).

Note that this is focused primarily towards developers working in the IT cost-centers of (generally non-technology) businesses.

[1] https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#357

Post by ageek123 »

gbarc888 wrote: post #293
nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

I agree with you. The third group is also the first people to get laid off and thrown away when there is an economic downturn.

Actually execs have less job security than the third group. The execs' value is largely tied to their existing employer (vs. having transferable skills like the third group), and they are very vulnerable to random reorgs within the company, so it is not uncommon for them to be fired and not be able to find something comparable somewhere else.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#358

Post by mgkimsal »

s73ver_ wrote: post #279
reuven wrote: post #91

How about freelancing? I've been doing that since 1995 -- and my income and happiness have never been higher. Pros: - Work on what you like, with the people you like - Potentially very high salary, definitely more than you would get as an employee - Want to work on side projects (e.g., software, books, and courses)? Go for it, and benefit from multiple income streams. Cons: - You're running a business. That requires…

Cons: Insurance and pre-existing conditions. Not to put a damper on your post, as it sounds like you have had good success. But this is a very real thing for many people. When I graduated and went out into the world, I needed insurance, and this was before the ACA, which meant that my pre-existing condition was not something that would be insurable, at least at any decent rate. The ACA fixed that, but now you have th…

Getting political for a moment... it's disturbing that we've had health care fundamentally tied to employment (in the US) for decades now. I don't quite know how you break this down. I wouldn't think it has to be 'single-payer' to get past this but... I don't know.

> for many people, currently the climate is not one where they could go without a group plan that they'd get at their employer.

It's been this way for decades. 20+ years ago I remember talking to people about freelancing, or starting their own business, and the same reasons came up "Oh, i've got this medical condition" or "we can't afford to lose this insurance".

I can't speak to the 60s or 70s, but for the bulk of my adult life where I've been aware of this issue, it's been like this. :(

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#359

Post by lalos »

CalChris wrote: post #195

There is a fourth path. Levi Strauss . Don't get me wrong. The gold miners needed jeans and supplies. But Levi Strauss lived off them and not the reverse. So the fourth path is service providers: lawyers, accelerators, accountants, contractors, ..., even VCs to a degree. I think Silicon Valley has a competitive advantage in having the best but it is a different path. And as much experience as they have when I talk to…

That would be a founder solving a specific problem by providing a service.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#360

Post by [deleted] »

fny wrote: post #94
nightski wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you know, you don't have to be average and can do 300k * 60% consulting or doing some other slightly more ambitious method while still not living in the bay area.

By argument above, you'd still expect to make significantly more in the Bay Area.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN