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

Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

ludic.mataroa.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 482 posts

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#411

Post by smeej »

borroka wrote: post #188
smeej wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you just gave words to something I'd noticed about myself but had never been able to articulate, which is the reason I can't operate in large companies. Every time a company gets past its first thousand employees, I have to find another job, because it starts to become as you describe and it feels like it grinds my soul to dust. I'm convinced there do need to be big companies, therefore I'm glad so many peopl…

If I were interested in doing the work I am able to do, and if my life satisfaction depended on this fulfillment, I would never work where I work. That would be intolerably frustrating. But I see my work as a means to other ends, and I am fine with my current situation.

This actually corresponds to another thing I've only recently admitted to myself, namely that I put a lot more pressure on my job for meaning and satisfaction because I'm compensating for perceived deficits in other areas of my life, like not having a spouse or children, even though those are important to me (not just a societal pressure).

I do have friends and activities that are important to me, but nothing within an order of magnitude the time devoted to my job.

If I had another important full-time role that applied whether or not I was working, I think I would have an easier time seeing my job as a means to that end, and I have a lot of respect for people whose lives are ordered that way.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#412

Post by johnnyanmac »

mutex_man wrote: post #299
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…

Every time I see these articles I'm amazed at how at odds it is with my experience. I work for a tiny company of ~30 people and it's awesome. I'm super well taken care of in pay, benefits, and work/life balance. I could make a bit more at a large corp, but I get some pretty stellar benefits here. Also if it's anything like what I read on here then there's no way it's worth it.

I work in games and that already risky to begin with. Finding a small game studio that can pay decently is pretty much like finding a needle in a hay stack.

The smallest studio I worked at was still 100+ people, and grew to 200+ by the time I left.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#413

Post by somsak2 »

While I share some of the same frustrations as the author, I have a really hard time getting on board with the tone of most of these kinds of posts. It seems like they've gotten so far into frustration with work that it's crazy to me they wouldn't make a change. Personally if I were feeling even 50% or 25% as frustrated, I'd seek to quit, or at least a leave of absence or another role in the company.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#414

Post by johnnyanmac »

borroka wrote: post #59
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…

I work for a company that employs 100k people. The effects of my work strategy and behavior on the company's revenue, profit, vision, products are zero. On the contrary, the effects of my work strategy and behavior on my salary and position can be quite pronounced. My company can fire me tomorrow, they will forget my name in 5 days. To "fire" my company, I need to find another job, maybe in another city, working with…

>It is not hard to guess where I spend most of my efforts and thinking.

Hope it's in a savings buffer. Everyone should have "fuck you" money[1] for this exact reason, but the next best thing is 3-6 months in immediate savings for rainy days. coporate shutting you down shouldn't be the immediate end of the world, especially not at the salaries tech is paid at.

[1] https://www.steveglaveski.com/blog/you-dont-need-f-ck-you-mo...

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#415

Post by johnnyanmac »

l0b0 wrote: post #116
tuatoru wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've known a few company owners long time ago who ... swore on their lives they will not fire the managers for bringing them bad news It needs to go further. Fire everyone who says there are no problems. If there are no problems, why is an under-manager needed? Also fire everyone who makes up bullshit problems. If you're going to agree with me all the time, why do I need you?

Too easy to game: People are just going to gauge for themselves what management considers "not a bullshit problem" and report that, making sure that the blame rests on unpopular people or third parties. Too prone to false positives: Any project which is genuinely going really well results in everyone getting fired, and the company absolutely tanks as a result.

They already do that in some indusries, so I'm down to experiment with literally any other option.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#417

Post by somsak2 »

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…

I think it depends how you look at it. For me, it's a pretty small price to pay to look at Slack here and there, whether over the weekend or on vacation, to get paid significantly more. Rarely do I have to actually put in more than an hour or two during these times, and I can very easily take that time off during the work week.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#418

Post by somsak2 »

skrebbel wrote: post #375
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

While I meant globally, and I’m not sure that these stats generalize beyond the US (but they very much might), I’m surprised! I had expected 2/3rd to work at companies under 1000 employees simply because there’s so extremely many of those and many of them need devs. EDIT woa that page says there’s 320k software engineers in the US. That’s one entire percent of the population! That’s a lot, could that really be true?

Seems pretty off, Department of Labor clocks it more around 1.8m https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/...

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#419

Post by somsak2 »

borroka wrote: post #59
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…

I work for a company that employs 100k people. The effects of my work strategy and behavior on the company's revenue, profit, vision, products are zero. On the contrary, the effects of my work strategy and behavior on my salary and position can be quite pronounced. My company can fire me tomorrow, they will forget my name in 5 days. To "fire" my company, I need to find another job, maybe in another city, working with…

> the effects of my work strategy and behavior on my salary and position can be quite pronounced

I think you vastly overestimate the impact you can have on your career at a company of that size.

Re: Organization probably doesn't want to improve things

#420

Post by johnnyanmac »

astrange wrote: post #105
pault wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you hiring? I'm looking for a job that will allow me to explore my passions. My passions are: video games, anime, and watching youtube videos about video games and anime.

If you enjoy anime I can't think you'd get much enjoyment out of the horrifying low quality of anime YouTubers. They certainly don't seem to like it much. One of the most popular channels is called Trash Taste in an attempt to act like it's all foreign oriental nonsense they're wallowing in. (Although to be fair, the current anime trend is "guy who hates women gets transported to a fantasy novel where he gets a sex s…

>I can't think you'd get much enjoyment out of the horrifying low quality of anime YouTubers. They certainly don't seem to like it much.

I love game reviews and they give me very different lenses on how to view video games. Even the ones that absolutely hate a game.

I have yet to really find a useful anime reviewer. There are a few videos from a few youtubers that offer some interesting insight, but seasonal anime reviewers are either poor writers/critics or are simply trying to appeal to an audience who wants to hear their opinions regurgitated. So they focus less on insightful interesting anime and more on hating [current anime trend].

>the previous trend was "incest romance"

it's still around in manga/light novels. I think the "issue" is that these days most anime use it as a small trope instead of the entire premise. Heck, even in most of the infamous examples the element wasnt omnipresent.

- 75% of OreImo is not focused at all about the romance of the siblings. In fact, the male lead dates someone else entirely in the 2nd season.

- Kiss X Sis opens up to a more general harem in the middle of the anime and that MC dates the teacher for a while (SPOILERS I guess, for anime only. But that anime is a decade+ out and the manga ended 2 years ago. You're not getting that arc animated).

- Domestic girlfriend is the most recent and probably tamest example. Yes, I guess it's technically incest to date your new 17YO stepsister that you had sex with before you even knew your parents were getting married. We're well past Westermarck effect though.

Post reply on HN