Organization probably doesn't want to improve things • Hacker News Board

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#351

Post by campbel » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 4:58 PM UTC

_shadi wrote: post #276

stinkytaco wrote: post #41

I'd like to see a post like this on HN where someone revisits their organization 10 years later and decides if they were right or not. It's not that all organizations don't have disfunction, but as a younger person I was very fixated on everything I saw that was wrong and ignored either the problems I myself was introducing which were (and probably still are) numerous or the systems and programs that made the organiz…

> It's not that all organizations don't have disfunction, but as a younger person I was very fixated on everything I saw that was wrong and ignored either the problems I myself was introducing which were (and probably still are) numerous or the systems and programs that made the organization successful. speaking from my own experience, when I look at my earlier career years I didn't appreciate how resilient organizat…

Not to mention how incredibly challenging it is to build an organization that is highly functioning. I've had the pleasure of working at a few different companies and I feel the most internally mature were the companies that had been around the longest. Sure, they had issues, but fundamentally they had insulated themselves from a large class of problems that the startups were constantly fighting through.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#352

Post by BoiledCabbage » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:08 PM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #192

Blog posts like these are a staple on HN and I’m always mildly offended by them. It seems to me that there’s a class of programmer that will take an overpaid job at a terrible BigCo, spend their evenings writing ranty blog posts about how terrible it all is, culminating in the inevitable “I quit” article, only subsequently to accept a job at a different terrible BigCo. At no point does this article, or most articles…

I have no idea who Zippia is, but according to them 1/3rd of software engineers in the US work at companies >10,000 people. And 2/3rds of software engineers work at companies still > 1,000 people.

So I'd argue, working at a small shop, while not rare, also isn't as predominant as you're portraying.

https://www.zippia.com/software-engineer-jobs/demographics/

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#353

Post by lapcat » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:14 PM UTC

Draiken wrote: post #346

lapcat wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You seemingly care about this but also can't be bothered to bring any empirical evidence for any of your claims. Goes both ways. Which claims? That Social Security exists? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States... That Medicare exists? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States) That 10x savings is the recommendation? https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/retirement/how-much-do-i... >…

>Says you, but you apparently aspire to live and work here, so it's different enough. Never said that. It's just where tech salaries are bigger. >Have you checked North Korea? What does this have to do with anything? Unless you're writing from North Korea, this is childish. Apparently I hit a nerve and that was not my intention. My point was never specifically about the US but you keep insisting on it and have a bone…

> My point was never specifically about the US but you keep insisting on it and have a bone to grind.

You said: "I don't live in the US, but if I did I would grind all the leetcode (as insulting as I find them) for one single reason: I don't want to work forever." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37809983

My first reply to you was to that comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37810176

The HN thread history doesn't lie. Your point that I replied to was specifically about the US.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#354

Post by lapcat » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

Draiken wrote: post #350

lapcat wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since you're so adamant I had a quick search and it turns out I'm right. No, you changed the subject. You said: > You're telling me most retired Americans have more than hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings? To which the answer is no, but you don't need a million dollars to retire. Whereas your link is not about retired Americans, it's about UN -retired Americans: "Statistics are for households headed by adu…

Read the article. It's about people that will retire. Unless you're trying to be facetious and say they'll never retire, which I guess will be true for many.

> Read the article. It's about people that will retire.

Yes, and the point that everyone is trying to explain to you, which you refuse to acknowledge, is that in general, software developers in the US are doing fine. They don't need to "grind all the leetcode" and work for a BigCo. It's a choice not a financial mandate. Software developers, even outside of BigCos, are in the upper income brackets in the US.

I'm not saying that everyone in the US is doing fine as far as retirement is concerned, but the idea that software developers have to work for BigCos is absurd. I've never worked for a BigCo, and I'm doing fine.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#355

Post by AnimalMuppet » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:21 PM UTC

throaway234 wrote: post #336

Draiken wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we lived in a world where money wasn't so important I would fully agree with you. But it is. I can't earn the same as you all can because I don't live in the US, but if I did I would grind all the leetcode (as insulting as I find them) for one single reason: I don't want to work forever. So I agree with some other comments here. No it's not really a choice. Choosing to earn less and hope for a lottery ticket win l…

> If we lived in a world where money wasn't so important... Money being important is not part of the world, it's part of you. You even say so a few lines later: > ... I don't want to work forever. So yes, you indeed have no choice but to treat money as important because... you've chosen to treat money as important. I'm offering this in the hopes that you can stand back and look at your need from a distance. What are…

Money is kind of important, though, at least to those of us who don't want to depend on a soup kitchen.

Look, money isn't everything. This isn't a video game, where the highest score wins, and you chase points just for points. But money lets you buy things, and some of those things are important - food for yourself and those who depend on you, shelter, healthcare. (But there's a bunch of stuff that money can buy that isn't important, and learning to let go of those things is really healthy.)

So: Money is important, because some of the stuff it can buy is important. That's not going to change any time soon.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#356

Post by Draiken » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

lapcat wrote: post #353

Draiken wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Says you, but you apparently aspire to live and work here, so it's different enough. Never said that. It's just where tech salaries are bigger. >Have you checked North Korea? What does this have to do with anything? Unless you're writing from North Korea, this is childish. Apparently I hit a nerve and that was not my intention. My point was never specifically about the US but you keep insisting on it and have a bone…

> My point was never specifically about the US but you keep insisting on it and have a bone to grind. You said: "I don't live in the US, but if I did I would grind all the leetcode (as insulting as I find them) for one single reason: I don't want to work forever." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37809983 My first reply to you was to that comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37810176 The HN thread histor…

You're interpreting my mention of the US which is incidentally where tech salaries are higher as the focus of my comment. That's not it.

You could replace that with whatever country could offer those salaries.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#357

Post by AnimalMuppet » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:30 PM UTC

argiopetech wrote: post #330

neogodless wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. > extremely common for people to increase their standard of living That was a choice. But the opposite is "not a choice"? You choose to spend so much money that you are forced into work you may despise to support the spending choices you make, so there's no option to... not make those spending choices?

I'm unsure why you've quoted "not a choice", as I never said any such thing. I said it's difficult for many to decide to change their lifestyle to afford a less lucrative but more enjoyable job. You've also got the cause and effect backward. You do the work you can be employed to do with the promise of (in your opinion, and relative to your skill and responsibility) competitive compensation. Years go by, you get used…

> I'm unsure why you've quoted "not a choice", as I never said any such thing.

TeMPORaL did, though, in the parent chain. That's why neogodless is quoting it. (This isn't a one-on-one conversation here...)

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#358

Post by Draiken » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:40 PM UTC

lapcat wrote: post #354

Draiken wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the article. It's about people that will retire. Unless you're trying to be facetious and say they'll never retire, which I guess will be true for many.

> Read the article. It's about people that will retire. Yes, and the point that everyone is trying to explain to you, which you refuse to acknowledge, is that in general, software developers in the US are doing fine. They don't need to "grind all the leetcode" and work for a BigCo. It's a choice not a financial mandate. Software developers, even outside of BigCos, are in the upper income brackets in the US. I'm not s…

Well now you're moving the goalpost. Your original comment mentioned hundreds of millions of Americans so it can't be only about software developers. That's why the focus changed to everyone.

Anyways, yes you have the choice of not working on big corps. My point is that it's not a real choice unless you want to accept all of the consequences of leaving all that money on the table. You have to accept the risk that you might be a few emergencies away from bankruptcy.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#359

Post by lifeisstillgood » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:42 PM UTC

The problem with software engineering in large companies is that the large companies are encoding themselves in software - it's the natural endpoint of software eating the world.

The problem is that software engineers are then asked to square all the circles - the hacks, the business models that don't work, the illogical policies that have kept the peace between powerful entrenched parties.

Volkswagen found it impossible to build a diesel engine that met California emissions criteria. So they encoded a cheat.

They did not write the cheat in an email, the CTO literally committed a line of code. (wish I could see the repo).

The point is that software demands clarity - it has no vagueness. So if you are going to digitise your business your business processes and model must also be clean and clear.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#360

Post by datavirtue » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 5:42 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #223

skrebbel wrote: post #192

Blog posts like these are a staple on HN and I’m always mildly offended by them. It seems to me that there’s a class of programmer that will take an overpaid job at a terrible BigCo, spend their evenings writing ranty blog posts about how terrible it all is, culminating in the inevitable “I quit” article, only subsequently to accept a job at a different terrible BigCo. At no point does this article, or most articles…

"It seems to me that there’s a class of programmer that will take an overpaid job at a terrible BigCo, spend their evenings writing ranty blog posts about how terrible it all is, culminating in the inevitable “I quit” article, only subsequently to accept a job at a different terrible BigCo." I don't know, it sounds like you think people actually like their jobs. Seems like for most of us, we do work at shitty BigCos.…

Agreed. It takes constant effort and a lot of luck to land at a small company with competent people and good, sane culture.

I scored that once by accident. We all keep in touch, people from every department, and recount how it was the best job we ever had.

It was acquired by a medium company of limited competence and everyone was scattered to the wind in a frenzy of empire building by the managers in that company.

I have been consulting/contracting and visiting megacorps since then. Traumatizing, to say the least.