4 ms·
It's a lot more toxic to HN users than to the general public. They pay well, they're making a lot of money, and they have lots of interesting problems to solve.
by asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
It's a lot more toxic to HN users than to the general public. They pay well, they're making a lot of money, and they have lots of interesting problems to solve. It doesn't seem like much of a mystery to me why so many would want to work for them.
- jeremyjh 5y agoAre you saying senior engineers who don’t use HN have different values from those that do?
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoYep, that is what I'm saying. Most of my real life SWE friends have attitudes that seem different from folks on this site. Perhaps they are secretly harboring the same views, but I'd guess that there is a selection effect that biases the sort of folks who comment here.
- wikibob 5y ago> Are you saying senior engineers who don’t use HN have different values from those that do? Absolutely yes. HN posters are by far the noisy minority. Even on HN the vast majority of readers don’t post. HN posters are a sliver of a sliver.
- sigstoat 5y ago> Are you saying senior engineers who don’t use HN have different values from those that do? non-california, non-big city senior engineers have wildly different values from HN users. i'm not sure about non-HN big city or california engineers. i suspect that HN accurately reflects the values of folks working in SF/LA. if i tried to explain the shit HN freaks out about every day to my coworkers, they'd think i was making everything up.
- steelstraw 5y agoThey don't even necessarily have different values. A lot of online people are virtue signaling to get virtual points.
- jonex 5y agoIn particular, the viewpoints that are downvoted differs from those that aren't. There's probably a lot of engineers that, like me, have learnt that HN isn't very fond of posts arguing for other perspectives in relation to big tech, and therefore will refrain from presenting them. Even if they don't, their posts will be hidden from view quickly enough to prevent them from affecting the overall tone.
- freyir 5y agoWhen so much of your compensation is tied directly to the stock price, you also need to make a guess where the stock price will be in 2-4 years compared to your other options. FB is not cool, TikTok is eating Instagram’s lunch causing IG to pivot more to video, so it comes down to the Metaverse.
- voidfunc 5y agoYou just sell the stock every year and switch it to S&P 500 if you're that worried...
- d23 5y agoIf the stock price for the company goes down, the value of your unvested stock goes with it.
- wikibob 5y agoThis is a common misconception. If the value of your invested RSUs go up: fantastic now you make more. I’d the value of the invested RSUs go down: no problem, you evaluate if you want to wait to see if they go up, or if you want to go into the market and take a new job. It’s nearly all upside for the employee (in a hot market).
- d23 5y agoIt's not a "misconception." I may not want to go find a new job in 6 months because the stock tanked. There's opportunity cost if nothing else. While that company's stock is tanking, I could instead be at one that's growing at even a modest rate.
- runako 5y agoWhile true, frequently cash-rich companies account for this. There are a lot of levers CFOs of profitable companies have to prevent people from leaving when the stock drops: issuing more shares, cash bonuses, etc. Facebook and Apple have more than enough cash to retain their talent in the event their stocks get cheap.
- Jach 5y agoI also wonder how much goodwill is still left from Facebook not being part of the salary collusion stuff over a decade ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoProbably not much. That's ancient history from the perspective of the modern tech industry.