Live data from Hacker News

If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

activevoice.charlesbivona.com

61–70 of 152 posts

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#61

If this story is trying to convince me that it makes sense to dumb down credentials ("at least I was employed") it was not successful. He apparently sent out his resume to roughly every business he saw on the street. Perhaps if he had represented himself better on it, he would have gotten a different job that doesn't suck.

You haven't been out on the market lately, I suspect. People don't read resumes anymore, so there's no real chance to impress anyone. They scan keywords. If you try to represent yourself well, chances are you won't be keyword-rich enough to get attention.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then we disagree on the value of staying alive irrespective of one's productivity level.

You're being intentionally ignorant of the way everyone else uses the term "creating value," which describes work that improves the world around you, not just work that happens to keep you alive.

Except my point is that you can still improve the world around you (create value) even if your work does not do so. In that sense, maintaining your own survival is also a means of creating value. On the other hand, you seem to define "creating value" in excessively narrow terms by accepting whatever preconceived notion you insist it is defined by.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#63
While I think this story is largely fictitious, when someone argues that they're downtrodden and victimized because they sound smart -- in verbal or written form -- they're often missing the forest for the trees.

Unless you're debating esoterica of a specialized domain, the smartest people manage to communicate in a simple, effective manner(1). The person accused of using too many syllables, in contrast, tends to be someone who isn't actually terribly smart at all, and the compensation is a verbal find/replace of commonplace words with a cargo cult collection of "smart" words, because that's what they think smart people do.

When someone says "you're too smart", or "you sound too smart" or "try to dumb yourself down", most of the time they're not really saying that you're too smart. They're saying "can the act."

(1) - The best example of this, I think, was Richard Feynman. He never tried to sell the idea that he was smart -- anyone who needed to know that already knew it -- but instead managed to communicate the most incredible ideas clearly and effectively.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#65
post #50
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>One thing newly minted adults would do well to realize is your first few years at any job are going to be spent doing the grunt work. Is this what most people experience? The earliest bits of my career consisted of me getting thrown in to situations for which I was in no way qualified, then being expected to sink or swim without much help. Often nobody at the company really knew how to do the job I was hired for. Gr…

I had something similar, but we're lucky. If you go to work for a "big company" they'll have their whole dumbed down training program, you'll have to learn to push paper around "their way", etc.

is this always so? when I was working for yahoo a few years back I got my little brother a internship. He did a whole lot of useful work; on his resume he brags that he replaced three temps, and he's not exaggerating... he really was more productive than three dudes from a well-known technical body shop.

I mean, I think the difference is more in the person than in the job. At yahoo, if my brother wanted to, he would have been able to skate by doing almost no real work at all... but he didn't. well, part of that was me pushing him a little... if I get you a job I expect you not to embarrass me. But I think he would have done useful things anyhow.

In my experience, yeah, you aren't always expected to accomplish much... but if you decide to do something useful anyhow, people almost never go out of their way to stop you. (they might not help you... but they won't stop you if you don't require anything of them.)

I remember my first programming job was littered with finished projects that were never put into production because that would have been work. (I converted our access billing system from a shared-file db that was crashing once a week because 300 people accessed the file over a NT share at the same time to an ODBC connected database... never implemented because the parent company was going to replace it anyhow. We continued repairing the database for the rest of the year I worked there.)

But enough of the shit I wrote had enough of an 'immediate need' (customer impacting seemed to be the line) to get implemented that I was pretty happy with the job.

Actually, that job was /really satisfying/ because so much was so obviously broken that a few small fixes on my end (a three line patch to apache to make dynamically configured mass virtual hosting work with our weird naming scheme/directory layout, and a few lines of c to make our pop3 redirector use a real db rather than a seperate file for each of our three million emails to determine where to redirect the user) made some really dramatic improvements to the service. Yeah, that was really, really fun. Honestly, I'm not sure I've been quite as productive since.

Part of it might have been that nobody knew what to do with. I was hired up from tech support (god, I sucked at phone tech support) to the NOC, but the rest of the NOC were network guys and i was hired as a programmer. (Hah. that was a laugh. I had read the white book in high school, and I taught myself perl while I was on phone support at night.) and the boss was some leathery EE who was great fun at first, then it was switched out to a MBA who wanted to be my friend, but otherwise pretty much let me do what I wanted as long as I didn't piss off the ops guys.

Funny story, I found one of the ops guys who worked with me at that job many years later, after the .com crash... working in a deli, and I hired him.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#66

I don't get the mentality of sending out thousands of resumes. I sent out one to get my current job because I wanted to work there.

And if they turned you down? Then what? Eventually, after scores of weeks of silence, you'd start blanketing too.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Because this isn't reddit. Random quotes add little to the discussion. 2. Because it misses the point, in that the problem is the author, not everyone else being stupid.

No humor allowed. Got it. Thanks.

I said nothing regarding humour.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#68

I'm 35. I'll try not to be too critical. Moral of the story: Being educated doesn't say anything about you being smart. Here's the rub. A college degree is a specialization. That's why you "major" in something. It was never designed to be an extension of high school. So, you should get a degree in something that you are both passionate about and also accept the limited career paths that come with that particular pass…

Part of the problem is that there is almost no career path for the specialization called "Masters in Humanities." Even with a PhD, the career path is very limited. I've watched my sister-in-law, with a PhD in English and teaching experience, pretty much give up on her career because it is nearly impossible to find a tenure-track position in the humanities.

"Smart people" evaluate this prior to spending 4-5 years and a shitload of money trying to obtain a "Masters in Humanities".

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#69

I'm 35. I'll try not to be too critical. Moral of the story: Being educated doesn't say anything about you being smart. Here's the rub. A college degree is a specialization. That's why you "major" in something. It was never designed to be an extension of high school. So, you should get a degree in something that you are both passionate about and also accept the limited career paths that come with that particular pass…

Specialization can definitely be a negative when you apply for a position where your degree doesn't apply. As an employer, if you see someone applying for a "billing specialist" (read: fairly unspecialized) job with a masters or PhD, you instantly think: "This person is not going to be satisfied working this job, this person is going to want to get paid too much, etc"

Exactly, which is basically what the author of the post is feeling.

Re: If You’re So Damn Smart, Why Aren’t You Rich?

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the problem is that there is almost no career path for the specialization called "Masters in Humanities." Even with a PhD, the career path is very limited. I've watched my sister-in-law, with a PhD in English and teaching experience, pretty much give up on her career because it is nearly impossible to find a tenure-track position in the humanities.

"Smart people" evaluate this prior to spending 4-5 years and a shitload of money trying to obtain a "Masters in Humanities".

Does it really take this long to get a "Master's in Humanities?" It only takes 3 years to get a law degree. FWIW, my sister has what effectively has a "master's in humanities." It took her 18 months and she makes 6 figs working at some sort of think tank in DC, so I think the individual matters a lot more than the degree...
Post reply on HN