4 ms·

>OK, here's some harsh truth for you. The vast majority of people at Google and Facebook aren't "looking down on you" because they don't know you exist. And the

>OK, here's some harsh truth for you. The vast majority of people at Google and Facebook aren't "looking down on you" because they don't know you exist. And they wouldn't give two fucks if they did know. They're all too busy worrying about their own problems to worry about you. You're 100% correct. They don't. But if they ever do, they're not going to be impressed, they're going to be at worst condescending, or at best will pity me for being stupid. >Anyway, if you are just as good as those guys at Google, then I say follow the immortal words[1] of Rocky Balbo: That's the problem. The hiring process has proven that I am not. I'm wondering if it persists over the years, especially now that the bar is so low.

yongjik 8y ago
So have you seen a doctor? Suicidal thoughts because your friend joined Google is not normal. I'm serious. You need help. Go talk to a doctor.
mindcrime 8y ago
The hiring process has proven that I am not. But it hasn't. You're putting faith in the veracity of "the hiring process" that isn't justified. Nobody in this industry actually knows how to properly evaluate people, and especially not over the long-term. If it worked like that there would be no stories of the guy/gal who gets rejected by Google and then goes on to start a "unicorn" startup, etc. The "hiring process" is full of false positives, false negatives, etc. I'm wondering if it persists over the years You are not static - unless you choose to be.
konradb 8y ago
> But if they ever do, they're not going to be impressed, they're going to be at worst condescending, or at best will pity me for being stupid. Then they are wearing their own insecurities and psychological issues on their sleeves; they are not class acts; they have unresolved issues of their own that they should look at. Why would you use how damaged people treat you as a way of measuring your own worth?
- sadamznintern 8y ago
  But they aren't damaged. They're superior by nearly every metric. Schools, GPA, 1st author papers, height, physical attractiveness - they have it all. I don't.
  - konradb 8y ago
    If they are doing as you say: > they're not going to be impressed, they're going to be at worst condescending, or at best will pity me for being stupid. ...being condescending or pitying, or concluding that you are stupid because you don't work for the same company, they are damaged. Because they aren't seeing you or regarding you as another human. Just because someone is superior according to whatever arbitrary metric you have picked, does not mean that they should be condescending or pitying to others. The other person is just another human with different circumstances that led them to where they are now. Making value judgements about that only says something about the person making the judgement. Everyone is where they are, and if they are not damaged, they will wish only success for you.

yongjik 8y ago

So have you seen a doctor? Suicidal thoughts because your friend joined Google is not normal. I'm serious. You need help. Go talk to a doctor.

mindcrime 8y ago

The hiring process has proven that I am not. But it hasn't. You're putting faith in the veracity of "the hiring process" that isn't justified. Nobody in this industry actually knows how to properly evaluate people, and especially not over the long-term. If it worked like that there would be no stories of the guy/gal who gets rejected by Google and then goes on to start a "unicorn" startup, etc. The "hiring process" is full of false positives, false negatives, etc. I'm wondering if it persists over the years You are not static - unless you choose to be.

konradb 8y ago

> But if they ever do, they're not going to be impressed, they're going to be at worst condescending, or at best will pity me for being stupid. Then they are wearing their own insecurities and psychological issues on their sleeves; they are not class acts; they have unresolved issues of their own that they should look at. Why would you use how damaged people treat you as a way of measuring your own worth?

sadamznintern 8y ago
But they aren't damaged. They're superior by nearly every metric. Schools, GPA, 1st author papers, height, physical attractiveness - they have it all. I don't.
- konradb 8y ago
  If they are doing as you say: > they're not going to be impressed, they're going to be at worst condescending, or at best will pity me for being stupid. ...being condescending or pitying, or concluding that you are stupid because you don't work for the same company, they are damaged. Because they aren't seeing you or regarding you as another human. Just because someone is superior according to whatever arbitrary metric you have picked, does not mean that they should be condescending or pitying to others. The other person is just another human with different circumstances that led them to where they are now. Making value judgements about that only says something about the person making the judgement. Everyone is where they are, and if they are not damaged, they will wish only success for you.