4 ms·
It probably works like that in the corporate world. But then again, most corporations today are pretty much like taxi companies waiting for their own Uber to pu
by gizi 11y ago
It probably works like that in the corporate world. But then again, most corporations today are pretty much like taxi companies waiting for their own Uber to put them out of business. The company of the future is rather a platform running on the internet. Any company that looks more like a collection of politicking corporate offices instead of an internet platform, is just a dinosaur waiting to get wiped from the face of the earth. The logic and rationale in things like Uber is totally different than what you have described. Uber does not "overvalue" the work of its devs. The essence of what it does, is created by its devs. Furthermore, there are pretty much no other departments in the business. These other departments are all just automated or outsourced distractions. They are not supposed to disturb the core business.
- mantas 11y agoLaw, at least in Europe, seems to be one of the core bits of their business too.
- generic_user 11y agoAny sufficiently large 'internet platform' is going to be a corporation. Complete with politicking corporate offices, lawyers, human resources departments, accounting, support staff, etc, etc. While there are some differences in culture the basic model is not much different then any other industry that relies on skilled labour or engineers to produce a product. Small startups can do things differently but once you become a 'platform' with millions of dollars changing hands investors and public stock there is an entirely different set of logistical and legal components that have to be taken care of.
- dasil003 11y agoWhat an interesting dichotomy you have painted: internet platform versus politicking corporate office. This is exactly the kind of myopia I was referring to where a software engineer thinks everything that is not tech is bullshit. In fact there is a huge range of ways to succeed in business, and while all are helped by efficient technology to varying degrees, technology is not the primary driver of value most of the time. You can bet your career that Uber leadership is spending every waking minute figuring out how to gain structural advantages to solidify their position—the tech is easily replicable and becomes more so every day. In any case though, you seem to be putting some words in my mouth since I never said anything about Uber's valuation of its engineering. My point was much more universal than that and had absolutely nothing to do with the corporate world or anything else. Employers pay their employees what they feel they have to. Uber pays them more because they need the best and the market is very competitive, but there is absolutely no link to the bottom line.
- gizi 11y ago> technology is not the primary driver of value most of the time Most probably. My advice is just that it is a bad idea for a software engineer to work in an environment where technology is clearly not the primary driver of value. > Uber pays them more because they need the best and the market is very competitive, but there is absolutely no link to the bottom line. Without internet platform, there would be no Uber at all. It would be like saying: "Their warships are not the essence of the Navy. The Navy wants the best ships, but there is absolutely no link to winning naval battles."
- dasil003 11y ago> It would be like saying: "Their warships are not the essence of the Navy. The Navy wants the best ships, but there is absolutely no link to winning naval battles." No, it wouldn't be like saying that at all. We are talking about the link between profits and salaries, not assets and objectives. If you can't understand that there's nothing more I can really say.