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

The three year myth

green.spacedino.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 191 posts

Re: The three year myth

#61

Post by rrr_oh_man »

arjie wrote: post #38

One of the notable things about FAANG processes that I've observed from my friends there is that roles and processes are mechanized[0]. Individuals are placed like precision robotics in a bigger machine. This kind of structure means that you have a defined process for promotion or pay raises and you know what your role is. In fact, one might even posit that the ability for these large organizations to create a machin…

> A classic example of this is that no one can "get you into Google/Facebook/whatever".

That is so not true.

Re: The three year myth

#62

Post by reverius42 »

grebc wrote: post #24
sneak wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that so many companies operate this way is really depressing. I want to work with people I trust to have some genuine respect for my future, personally or career wise. I disagree. It’s not depressing, it’s business. Treating people as if they are business professionals is showing them respect. This is why we negotiate salary. (Separately: your coworkers treating you as a business professional is in no way…

The jokes on you if you think the written piece of paper means anything.

I think the joke might be on you if you end up in court arguing over whether that piece of paper means anything.

Re: The three year myth

#63

Post by matwood »

sublinear wrote: post #55

I have to somewhat disagree, but the details matter a lot. If you insist on seeking the absolute top pay for the work and want to always be on the cutting edge in a fast-paced environment, sure the advice in the blog post is correct. If you instead take 80% of the pay and pick a place to work that's more slow and steady, the traditional advice starts to make sense again. The key thing is you must have strong and uniq…

> You just have to truly know your worth and not overplay your hand.

This is super hard for a lot of people to hear, but nearly everyone is replaceable. There are a lot of smart people who work hard - that's table stakes in many high paying jobs.

One of the things I liked about playing sports both team and individual is there's little room to hide. At the end of the day you know exactly where you stand, and your ego has to accept that and either get better or be happy with your spot.

Re: The three year myth

#64

Post by ozim »

massysett wrote: post #52
ozim wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am doing that but I also got annoyed by recruiters or HR or whoever that was in last 2 inquiries I sent out. They would call me out of the blue in the middle of the day expecting I pick up and have time to talk with them like I would be jobless person waiting for them to call. I didn’t pick up at all because I was busy. Earlier I remember I would get an email to at least give me heads up they will contact me next w…

With a mentality like that no, you’re not going to get another job. Job seeking while you’re employed means you have to subjugate the needs of your current employer. When an opportunity calls? You pick up the phone! You’re the kind of person who is so dedicated to your job that you will have to lose it and then be unemployed before you get a new one. That is absolutely ok. Job seeking while employed takes a ton of en…

Well the point is I am not looking. I have a nice job. But in case there is something worth jumping the ship I will.

Re: The three year myth

#65

Post by NedF »

ozim wrote: post #45
krisoft wrote: post #31

If you ask for a raise and they say “maybe in two to three years” thats simply a polite no. > “you know the world outside is hostile to job seekers and a steady paycheck beats the unemployment line” You can search for a new job while employed. Unless you are stuck on an underwater submarine playing hide-and-seek you can always fire off a few inquiries.

I am doing that but I also got annoyed by recruiters or HR or whoever that was in last 2 inquiries I sent out. They would call me out of the blue in the middle of the day expecting I pick up and have time to talk with them like I would be jobless person waiting for them to call. I didn’t pick up at all because I was busy. Earlier I remember I would get an email to at least give me heads up they will contact me next w…

[dead]

Re: The three year myth

#66

Post by pipes »

hunta2097 wrote: post #53
massysett wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With a mentality like that no, you’re not going to get another job. Job seeking while you’re employed means you have to subjugate the needs of your current employer. When an opportunity calls? You pick up the phone! You’re the kind of person who is so dedicated to your job that you will have to lose it and then be unemployed before you get a new one. That is absolutely ok. Job seeking while employed takes a ton of en…

I know someone who has used this trick to get a pay rise whilst not looking for work. You wait until your boss is in earshot, get someone to ring you and the walk quickly away from your desk saying "yes, yes I'm still interested... Just a sec". It might make your boss actually consider the reality of replacing you.

I'm sorry that just comes across as unprofessional, weak and passive aggressive. If someone started doing that on my team I'd take it as part of the case against them not a reason to fight to keep them. Also presumably that's in ear shot of other team members, it's disruptive to team morale. If you are serious about looking elsewhere, make it clear you want to stay but xyz is making you consider other options. Do it in private with the right people. Or say nothing at all.

Re: The three year myth

#67

Post by mathgeek »

iberator wrote: post #48
atleastoptimal wrote: post #5

there r companies that scale 100x in 3 years If you aren't scaling yourself as much then you're moving too slow

you are insane. only 0.01% of companies are like that GLOBALLY. And no: they are not even winning on the long run

Oddly enough, this is just the American Dream under exponential growth. "Someday you'll be rich as well" is just weaponized hope, and folks that follow GP's advice gobble it up because it's aspirational.

Re: The three year myth

#68

Post by cardanome »

jtrn wrote: post #54

For anybody that is interested in a clinical psychologist's take, here is mine… This article triggers an overwhelming feeling that something is missing in the story. Of course, being fired is genuinely painful, and the author's emotional state is understandable. But I think there is a much better way to understand this situation that would be beneficial to the author. Please note that this is just a guess, and in rea…

> The OCD mention functions similarly and it explains the overanalysis as a feature, not something that might be creating friction with colleagues.

Because it is both and this is a very classic problem for neurodivergent people.

As a ADHD person I could very much relate. My pattern recognition allows me to see connections and structure where neurotypical people only see chaos. I am often three, four, five steps ahead and can see potential problems and solutions so much earlier.

Of course this doesn't help. If I point these things out, I will only be met with resistance regardless if I happen to be right later on or not.

So really the best solution is to just shut up. Let them catch up eventually. It just feels so isolating and frustrating. Not only do I have to mask the deficits that ADHD gives me but also my talents.

I think this is the core issue here. OP is hated and discriminated for their OCD. Corporations are not equipped harness the talents of people that think differently. They are not a "culture fit".

I don't really have a solution. Yes you can learn to mask and play the game but that is also not healthy in the long term.

Re: The three year myth

#69

Post by komali2 »

> I was given a warning because said proposal was (unknowingly) opposed to a Senior Director's vision, one they'd already presented to the customer prior to seeking my input and neglected to mention when I reached out. My timing was perfect for the market, but poor for the systems of power within the organization.

I feel like there's two paths you can take in your career: corporate stooge, or productive worker. The corporate stooge will be more capitalistically rewarded, because businesses aren't optimized for productivity or quality, they're optimized for capitalistic rewards.

There was an article recently about dating apps and their inherently contradictory incentives. They're incentivized to keep you on the app, which means getting you kinda good matches, but not so good that you stop needing the app. The business world seems to be nothing but these contradictions, and it seems our choices are to learn to take this Kafkaesque fully into our internal model of the world, or give up and accept that we'll be disposed of every few years, despite keeping some part of the company's heart beating (a part some exec will one day gleefuly rip out of their own metaphorical chest so as to drive up price immediately before acquisition or something).

Re: The three year myth

#70

Post by Majromax »

jtrn wrote: post #54

For anybody that is interested in a clinical psychologist's take, here is mine… This article triggers an overwhelming feeling that something is missing in the story. Of course, being fired is genuinely painful, and the author's emotional state is understandable. But I think there is a much better way to understand this situation that would be beneficial to the author. Please note that this is just a guess, and in rea…

> And receiving a formal warning is an extremely serious signal.

To be nitpicky, the article doesn't say 'formal warning,' just 'warning.' That could have been anything from a gentle let-down to a reprimand.

That being said, I think your broader point is reasonably true: the author frames the 'political games' of promotion as a regrettable necessity rather than a job requirement beyond the juniormost levels. Despite their self-description as helpful and cooperative, they disdain the dyadic sport of cooperatively making their boss look good.

That's not to say that one should submit to base exploitation, of course, but there's a fine art to understanding the constraints and incentives of others and working with (and often within) that framework.

A second skill is being able to separate the person from the position, to maintain friendly or at least respectful personal relationships with people who might be professional adversaries at the moment. This is harder, but if professional hostility reads as personal contempt that will definitely destroy one's social weight in an organization.

Post reply on HN