6 ms·

Actually, compensation is based on what the company has to pay. There are some other rules, like they have to (overall) pay less than they make from the output

Actually, compensation is based on what the company has to pay. There are some other rules, like they have to (overall) pay less than they make from the output. But in general, a company never pays their employees more than they think they have to. 10x programmers don't make 10x the pay. They might make slightly more, but not even 2x what a 1x programmer (of the same level, no comparing seniors to juniors) makes at the same company.

machiaweliczny 5y ago
Sad truth.
throwaway1777 5y ago
You’re not wrong, of course the company will pay the minimum it can get away with. My point was a bit broader regarding the market value between an executive versus a programmer.
bentlegen 5y ago
If a company is doing its job correctly, a 10x engineer should not be leveled the same as a 1x engineer. (It's more complicated than that but, y'know.)
- loeg 5y ago
  Yeah, but you have to go up quite a few levels to make 10x the pay. E.g., a Google L5 makes (ballpark) $360k. An L8 makes (ballpark) $1M. That's only 3x higher, and you probably need a lot more than 10x impact to go L5 -> L8. An L4 makes $270k, still within ~1/4 of an L8. L3s are paid almost 200k, which is still ~1/5 of an L8. I don't know what L9s or 10s are paid; it's probably highly variable and the total number are probably a handful.
  - johnhowardstein 5y ago
    Advancement at Google is tied heavily to being on the right projects to the extent that I think you're way overselling the extent to which the higher levels will be better at their jobs.
    - loeg 5y ago
      That seems plausible; I don’t work there. I think that further supports the argument that “10x engineers” are not paid 10x.
- 8note 5y ago
  if the company is doing its job correctly, its paying the 10x engineer even less than the 1x engineer. if the engineer is doing their job correctly, they are negotiating to be paid more than tne 1x
  - soperj 5y ago
    that's one way to get a lot of 1x engineers...
  - cutemonster 5y ago
    > paying the 10x engineer even less than the 1x engineer Why is that a good idea? Isn't there a risk that s/he will then quit?
abledon 5y ago
best solution is to stay a 1x developer then devote most of your energy to sidegigs and stock investing
- quickthrower2 5y ago
  yes. or better be a 10x for 4 hours a week. i feel like 10x is about flow not stress, so doing 10x might be easier than 1x ironically. there is a disconnect about how companies mildly or jot so mildly “gaslight” employees into burning all of their energy on the job. Its more cultural than profit-seeking. The profit seeker would want to maximise the effectiveness of the worker, by for example thinking hard about what work is worth doing. The biggest waste i see is cancelled projects that could have easily been pre-cancelled. The next is features that are hardly used. Followed by technical debt and its impact on velocity.
- pembrook 5y ago
  Actually, the best strategy is in fact to stay a 1x performer at work, AND to stay a 1x performer in your investing life via set-and-forget index funds. Minimize risk and time spent in efficient markets with millions of participants (the developer talent pool, the stock market). These places are treadmills. Instead, spend your free time in inefficient markets by starting a business with the rest of the time you’ve now freed up. Most B2C and B2B markets don’t have millions of competitors, and hence are much less efficient than the developer talent pool and stock market (which do). This is the optimal strategy.

machiaweliczny 5y ago

Sad truth.

throwaway1777 5y ago

You’re not wrong, of course the company will pay the minimum it can get away with. My point was a bit broader regarding the market value between an executive versus a programmer.

bentlegen 5y ago

If a company is doing its job correctly, a 10x engineer should not be leveled the same as a 1x engineer. (It's more complicated than that but, y'know.)

loeg 5y ago
Yeah, but you have to go up quite a few levels to make 10x the pay. E.g., a Google L5 makes (ballpark) $360k. An L8 makes (ballpark) $1M. That's only 3x higher, and you probably need a lot more than 10x impact to go L5 -> L8. An L4 makes $270k, still within ~1/4 of an L8. L3s are paid almost 200k, which is still ~1/5 of an L8. I don't know what L9s or 10s are paid; it's probably highly variable and the total number are probably a handful.
- johnhowardstein 5y ago
  Advancement at Google is tied heavily to being on the right projects to the extent that I think you're way overselling the extent to which the higher levels will be better at their jobs.
  - loeg 5y ago
    That seems plausible; I don’t work there. I think that further supports the argument that “10x engineers” are not paid 10x.
8note 5y ago
if the company is doing its job correctly, its paying the 10x engineer even less than the 1x engineer. if the engineer is doing their job correctly, they are negotiating to be paid more than tne 1x
- soperj 5y ago
  that's one way to get a lot of 1x engineers...
- cutemonster 5y ago
  > paying the 10x engineer even less than the 1x engineer Why is that a good idea? Isn't there a risk that s/he will then quit?

abledon 5y ago

best solution is to stay a 1x developer then devote most of your energy to sidegigs and stock investing

quickthrower2 5y ago
yes. or better be a 10x for 4 hours a week. i feel like 10x is about flow not stress, so doing 10x might be easier than 1x ironically. there is a disconnect about how companies mildly or jot so mildly “gaslight” employees into burning all of their energy on the job. Its more cultural than profit-seeking. The profit seeker would want to maximise the effectiveness of the worker, by for example thinking hard about what work is worth doing. The biggest waste i see is cancelled projects that could have easily been pre-cancelled. The next is features that are hardly used. Followed by technical debt and its impact on velocity.
pembrook 5y ago
Actually, the best strategy is in fact to stay a 1x performer at work, AND to stay a 1x performer in your investing life via set-and-forget index funds. Minimize risk and time spent in efficient markets with millions of participants (the developer talent pool, the stock market). These places are treadmills. Instead, spend your free time in inefficient markets by starting a business with the rest of the time you’ve now freed up. Most B2C and B2B markets don’t have millions of competitors, and hence are much less efficient than the developer talent pool and stock market (which do). This is the optimal strategy.