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

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#391

Post by mixmastamyk » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 8:42 PM UTC

neogodless wrote: post #259

anvil-on-my-toe wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$60-100k salary is not enough to support a family and retire; it's probably not enough for a single person to make meaningful progress towards retirement because at that level of pay home ownership is constantly out of reach and inflation outpaces wage growth. It's sacrificing your life so someone else can get rich.

In today's environment, home prices really seem to be getting nuts. As I said, anyone in software is likely making over $100K. A $500K house with 20% down would have a P&I payment of $2,715 / month (at 7.2%, plus taxes/insurance.) That's less than $33K / year. (I bought my first house for $155K making $55K / year, and my second house for $390K making $100K.) If you're making over $100K, and spending under a third of…

If you bought in the past, you made it. That doesn't help the current generation.

Hundred year-old teardowns are two million in our neighborhood. 60+ y-o condos are $800k. Redfin est payment/mo: $5,974. Just the property tax and HOA fee is over $1,000 a month.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#392

Post by mixmastamyk » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 8:46 PM UTC

ta988 wrote: post #303

anvil-on-my-toe wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$60-100k salary is not enough to support a family and retire; it's probably not enough for a single person to make meaningful progress towards retirement because at that level of pay home ownership is constantly out of reach and inflation outpaces wage growth. It's sacrificing your life so someone else can get rich.

So you say a salary above the median salary is not enough? This raises a big question of how is half the population in the country getting by.

Roommates, living with parents. A decade+ past when earlier generations moved to their own homes.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#393

Post by lr4444lr » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 8:52 PM UTC

pdimitar wrote: post #33

lr4444lr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd leave, and prioritize a functional organization in my next job requirements.

I did that. A number of times, because it turns out people lie through their teeth that their organization is functional (during interviews). At one point people started asking why I have 3 contracts in a single year. Checkmate. What would you do?

Either develop a better intuition for when people are lying and how ti read between the lines, or use friends, family, and associates you can trust who can do so.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#394

Post by mixmastamyk » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 8:58 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #387

antupis wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also work life balance is usually better in big corp you actually can clock that 9:5 and go home.

Depends on the company. My stints with BigCorp life were full of 6-7PM meeting times and expectations to keep up with Slack and email even during vacations and holidays. I have friends at Amazon who have started to miss our Saturday events because they’re feverishly working to avoid being caught in the next round of layoffs. I also have friends at some FAANG companies who seem like they’re barely working (their own a…

Bezos is a known taskmaster.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#395

Post by phero_cnstrcts » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 9:04 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #364

neogodless wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know a lot of software engineers that barely make $100k? That's why I'm not getting caught up in the particulars of this example.

There are many people in software that are making under $100k Anyone working in in a government position, or for a state university, or for a nonprofit is probably not earning $100k except maybe in high COL areas or those with quite senior positions.

In Europe frontend is about 60k annually.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#396

Post by starky » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 9:13 PM UTC

gcapu wrote: post #210

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…

God points but: 1) For someone in BigCo it is fun to read. 2) BigCo is not a bad place for most people. Management should just shut up about efficiency and data driven. No one believes them, not even themselves.

Yeah, at this point in my career I'm tired of the bullshit that management spouts. I know they don't believe one bit of what they are saying except as a method to get product out quicker. We aren't even necessarily labour bound, but management doesn't accept that 9 women can't make a baby in a month.

I'm all for looking at processes periodically to make sure we are doing the right things to get everything released, but when you come at it from a hitting ever tighter arbitrary KPIs you just make everyone angry or apathetic to your words.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#397

Post by zmgsabst » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 9:26 PM UTC

joaonmatos wrote: post #273

zmgsabst wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens when you were right? Eg, as an SDE in 2017 you worked on Amazon Device’s econometrics team and were screaming the entire org was in trouble — but the PhD economists and directors ignored you. We’re at 5 years, a gutted department, billions in losses, etc. Now what? Or you warned WarnerMedia executives about their internal corporate misandry just before they fired Johnny Depp for being a male victim — and…

I think you’re right in the aggregate and the abstract. But it’s also funny that two of the situations you mentioned (Johnny Depp “victim” and Bud Light) are fake stories based on conservative media astroturfing where any judge would be hard pressed to find that there was unreasonable behaviour on the corporate end. And of course, being a white knight only works if you’re privileged enough to be able to jump ship or…

WarnerMedia fired Johnny Depp based on unsubstantiated allegations from a woman who herself has a history of domestic violence and Mr Depp was subsequently found to have been defamed and awarded damages for that lost work.

WarnerMedia fired Mr Depp for mere allegations, but retained Ms Heard despite police reports documenting her abusing her girlfriend at an airport.

The sexism shown by WarnerMedia executives is not in the interests of shareholders — and is part of not only why WarnerMedia had to be sold off from ATT for a massive loss, but has failed to recover post merger with Discovery.

- - - - -

Similarly, Bud Light decided to endorse a controversial spokesman, call their core audience bigots when they objected, denigrated them as “fratty” and “out of touch”… then seemed confused when the people they were openly rude to stopped buying their product.

- - - - -

What particular facts do you believe I’m wrong about?

I’m curious — and explaining that is much more interesting than Poisoning the Well fallacies, such as calling things you disagree with “astroturf”.

- - - - -

Finally, that’s excuses: you made up a stereotype about who I am, then decided you can safely ignore my point because that stereotype doesn’t apply to you.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#398

Post by Draiken » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 9:39 PM UTC

lapcat wrote: post #367

Draiken wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> yes you have the choice of not working on big corps. Finally admitting the truth. > You have to accept the risk that you might be a few emergencies away from bankruptcy. Working for a BigCo doesn't magically protect you from emergencies. Accumulating $millions might protect you, but you don't just walk in the door of a BigCo and pick up your treasure chest. You have to work there for many years. In the meantime, yo…

God the amount of unnecessary hostility coming from you is absurd. From my original comment:

> So I agree with some other comments here. No it's not really a choice.

From the very beginning I said it's not really a choice, but I always acknowledged it. Whatever, your pedantry wins.

> Anyway, what makes you think you would be BigCo material?

I can't really know since I'm automatically excluded from it simply because of I don't live there (and I would never work with a visa, having a corporation ruling over my life). But it's very possible I wouldn't make the cut, or if I did I'd likely be another one writing blog posts like this one - assuming reality is how they portray it.

Technically I know I can hold my own, but that's not really what work is all about in my experience (barring few exceptions). Connections, ivy leagues, kissing ass, leetcode and other aspects that shouldn't matter are valued more than actually getting shit done.

But I'd sure as hell try because even though it's not a guarantee of protection, it's as close as we can get to it in a capitalist society. Money is, unfortunately, crucial.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#399

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 11:06 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #357

argiopetech wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...)

[deleted]

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#400

Post by disqard » Sun, Oct 08, 2023, 11:17 PM UTC

hooverd wrote: post #34

campbel wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the problem has to be that as an individual in an organization it seems like a better ROI for your effort to grow your share of the pie than the entire pie itself. Individual incentives are naturally going to be aligned by advancement and "being difficult" is something everyone wants to avoid. Easier to shed blame and avoid accountability than try to fix the social and political structure of your organization…

Your reward for growing the pie is one (1) pizza pie.

When the moonshot hits the sky

You score a bonus pizza pie!

That's amore...