4 ms·

If you want to be recession-proof, get a job at a non-software company (or in academia, state/city government, etc). In theory, "programmer" is the same job wh

If you want to be recession-proof, get a job at a non-software company (or in academia, state/city government, etc). In theory, "programmer" is the same job whether you work for a startup or the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, but in practice they feel like completely different industries. In one, you can make fantastic money but the interviews are famously difficult, the culture can be borderline abusive, and layoffs are a way of life. In the other, the money is only pretty good but you leave at 5, the toughest interview question you'll get is "Please name three design patterns," and your job is mostly immune to macro trends.

alar44 4y ago
This is a great point. I work for a medical device manufacturing company. Times have never been better for us. There was a dip in the beginning of Covid, but after a few months we just started sucking up clients from companies that went under. Joining that industry was a conscious decision I made because I want to work for a company that makes tangible things, not "just" software. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with "just software" but I find it's more interesting when you're making widgets and the software needs to interface with the physical world.
eikenberry 4y ago
I'd recommend the opposite approach and go for stable software companies as the best employers. Non-software companies usually see software as a cost that is often at the top of the list when layoffs come up. IMO working for a software company means not only better treatment (eg. see the recent discussions on staff vs. line jobs) but you get better stability as you are core to the business. None of this applies to start-ups which are volatile in every industry. But if looking at established players I'd 100% rather work for a software company or, more specifically, any company where the software is core to what they do (ie. SaS companies, hardware+software companies, etc. all are usually good).
- DeathArrow 4y ago
  Not sure about that. Let's say you work for a bank. ATMs still need to work, wiring money still need to work, accounts still need to be tracked and new legal regulations still need to be implemented. I guess they aren't going to fire their IT department.
  - eikenberry 4y ago
    Better job in this case is the ATM company. They are the hardware/software vendor that has the better chance of being a good employer as the ATM is their product. Working for a bank on ATMs would probably suck.
twblalock 4y ago
> In one, you can make fantastic money but the interviews are famously difficult, the culture can be borderline abusive, and layoffs are a way of life. These generalizations are untrue for a lot of companies, and for a lot of teams. Software companies, even FAANGs, can be very relaxed and comfortable places to work. It all really depends on the team -- and you can end up with an abusive boss in any industry. Job security depends on the nature of the recession. In 2008 a lot of government employees in California (and probably other states) got furloughed without pay for a while because the state government basically ran out of money. Also, the pay difference for software engineers at tech and non-tech companies is not small. It's at least 4X, often more. If you work at an established tech company for several years and you aren't totally irresponsible, you will be able to save enough money to live for a long time without an income -- even while paying a Silicon Valley mortgage.
- ineptech 4y ago
  Of course these are generalizations. "All models are wrong, but some are useful." I'm sure there are some laid-back jobs at startups and some stressful jobs at the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, but I also think it is generally fair to say that those are less common than the opposite.
  - ineptech 4y ago
    To explain this more clearly: what I'm trying to say is that the different parts of the software industry seem more like a bimodal distribution than a smooth one. If you think broadly of the extremes in software jobs (say, "fresh college grads making $250k+ to use cutting-edge frameworks to build a 'doordash for pet food' app" on the one hand, and "SE3s making $120k to add features to a jankety legacy application that gets manually deployed once every three months" on the other), thinking of those as separate industries is a more useful mental model than thinking of them as two ends of the same industry. I thought this was relevant because one is more recession-proof than the other, but that's hardly the only way that they're different. So my point probably came across muddled because I was referring to a larger distinction in the industry without describing it very well.
- 4y ago
rozap 4y ago
Even better: a software company that makes software for the government. And has actual revenue and long term contracts. Yes we are hiring, email in bio.
- rhexs 4y ago
  Contractors are immediately brutalized in any sort of government budget cut. They go first, instantly.
  - rozap 4y ago
    Government contractors are different than private companies that sell to the government.
wutbrodo 4y ago
It seems like bigtech gets you both of these, right? More bureaucratic and stable than startups, less abusive than startups, more stability and salary than either startups or "Minnesota DOT"-type places.
bradlys 4y ago
Why do people really even try to compare FAANG/SV-companies with random government org? In my experience and from talking to peers - random eng job in most parts of the country is less than or equal to $150k even for people with 10+ years. If you’re at FAANG with 10+ years - clearing $500k+ is reasonably accomplished. Sure - one of those is markedly higher than the average random person in the US - the other is in the top 1% of household incomes off a single income. It’s markedly different.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Maybe because out of the 2.7 million developers in the US, most are “dark matter developers”? I know plenty of developers who “only” make $150K-$160k a year and are living in their nice house in the burbs with 2.1 kids, the white picket fence in the “good school system” with a spouse making decent money and don’t have a care in the world.
  - bradlys 4y ago
    I think these folks are often very different than FAANG crew tbh. That’s why I say - why bother comparing. It’s not the same even remotely. People I work with at FAANG-etc tend to be top 10 school, upper class upbringing, want to go even higher, etc. It’s different. It’s what you’d expect from doctors. I think different types of personalities are attracted to SV than to rest of the country. We’ve built the stereotype around the Midwest developer than the SV one though. The SV ones are just so different in background and ambition.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      As someone who can sort of see things from both sides, I have opinions… I graduated from a small unknown college in the south in 1996. I moved to the major metropolitan area where I still live after graduating and by 2000, I was making around $70K. For reference, my rent was $600 a month and the 2700 square foot brand new build I bought in the burbs in 2002 was $175K. Life happened and by the time salaries for SV started getting crazy around 2012-2014, I was 40 years old, remarried and I had a wife and two teenage (step)sons in another 3000+ square foot house in the burbs that we had built in the good school system. I was the dark matter developer who was quite comfortable. By 2017, I saw the writing on the wall, I knew I was going to plateau soon locally and my youngest was graduating in 2020. I knew I didn’t want to be a 46 year old software engineer at a large company. I didn’t know what I wanted to do. I was going to be content bumbing around smaller companies as “the adult in the room”. I just happen to fall into a remote role in cloud consulting (cloud enterprise application development and deployment) at BigTech (yes full time with the same compensation structure as SDEs). I have former coworkers my age that did the same calculus. They had no interest in working in software development at a large company. They already had the life they wanted. https://bemorewithless.com/the-story-of-the-mexican-fisherman/ https://bemorewithless.com/the-story-of-the-mexican-fisherma...

alar44 4y ago

This is a great point. I work for a medical device manufacturing company. Times have never been better for us. There was a dip in the beginning of Covid, but after a few months we just started sucking up clients from companies that went under. Joining that industry was a conscious decision I made because I want to work for a company that makes tangible things, not "just" software. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with "just software" but I find it's more interesting when you're making widgets and the software needs to interface with the physical world.

eikenberry 4y ago

I'd recommend the opposite approach and go for stable software companies as the best employers. Non-software companies usually see software as a cost that is often at the top of the list when layoffs come up. IMO working for a software company means not only better treatment (eg. see the recent discussions on staff vs. line jobs) but you get better stability as you are core to the business. None of this applies to start-ups which are volatile in every industry. But if looking at established players I'd 100% rather work for a software company or, more specifically, any company where the software is core to what they do (ie. SaS companies, hardware+software companies, etc. all are usually good).

DeathArrow 4y ago
Not sure about that. Let's say you work for a bank. ATMs still need to work, wiring money still need to work, accounts still need to be tracked and new legal regulations still need to be implemented. I guess they aren't going to fire their IT department.
- eikenberry 4y ago
  Better job in this case is the ATM company. They are the hardware/software vendor that has the better chance of being a good employer as the ATM is their product. Working for a bank on ATMs would probably suck.

twblalock 4y ago

> In one, you can make fantastic money but the interviews are famously difficult, the culture can be borderline abusive, and layoffs are a way of life. These generalizations are untrue for a lot of companies, and for a lot of teams. Software companies, even FAANGs, can be very relaxed and comfortable places to work. It all really depends on the team -- and you can end up with an abusive boss in any industry. Job security depends on the nature of the recession. In 2008 a lot of government employees in California (and probably other states) got furloughed without pay for a while because the state government basically ran out of money. Also, the pay difference for software engineers at tech and non-tech companies is not small. It's at least 4X, often more. If you work at an established tech company for several years and you aren't totally irresponsible, you will be able to save enough money to live for a long time without an income -- even while paying a Silicon Valley mortgage.

ineptech 4y ago
Of course these are generalizations. "All models are wrong, but some are useful." I'm sure there are some laid-back jobs at startups and some stressful jobs at the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, but I also think it is generally fair to say that those are less common than the opposite.
- ineptech 4y ago
  To explain this more clearly: what I'm trying to say is that the different parts of the software industry seem more like a bimodal distribution than a smooth one. If you think broadly of the extremes in software jobs (say, "fresh college grads making $250k+ to use cutting-edge frameworks to build a 'doordash for pet food' app" on the one hand, and "SE3s making $120k to add features to a jankety legacy application that gets manually deployed once every three months" on the other), thinking of those as separate industries is a more useful mental model than thinking of them as two ends of the same industry. I thought this was relevant because one is more recession-proof than the other, but that's hardly the only way that they're different. So my point probably came across muddled because I was referring to a larger distinction in the industry without describing it very well.
4y ago

rozap 4y ago

Even better: a software company that makes software for the government. And has actual revenue and long term contracts. Yes we are hiring, email in bio.

rhexs 4y ago
Contractors are immediately brutalized in any sort of government budget cut. They go first, instantly.
- rozap 4y ago
  Government contractors are different than private companies that sell to the government.

wutbrodo 4y ago

It seems like bigtech gets you both of these, right? More bureaucratic and stable than startups, less abusive than startups, more stability and salary than either startups or "Minnesota DOT"-type places.

bradlys 4y ago

Why do people really even try to compare FAANG/SV-companies with random government org? In my experience and from talking to peers - random eng job in most parts of the country is less than or equal to $150k even for people with 10+ years. If you’re at FAANG with 10+ years - clearing $500k+ is reasonably accomplished. Sure - one of those is markedly higher than the average random person in the US - the other is in the top 1% of household incomes off a single income. It’s markedly different.

scarface74 4y ago
Maybe because out of the 2.7 million developers in the US, most are “dark matter developers”? I know plenty of developers who “only” make $150K-$160k a year and are living in their nice house in the burbs with 2.1 kids, the white picket fence in the “good school system” with a spouse making decent money and don’t have a care in the world.
- bradlys 4y ago
  I think these folks are often very different than FAANG crew tbh. That’s why I say - why bother comparing. It’s not the same even remotely. People I work with at FAANG-etc tend to be top 10 school, upper class upbringing, want to go even higher, etc. It’s different. It’s what you’d expect from doctors. I think different types of personalities are attracted to SV than to rest of the country. We’ve built the stereotype around the Midwest developer than the SV one though. The SV ones are just so different in background and ambition.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    As someone who can sort of see things from both sides, I have opinions… I graduated from a small unknown college in the south in 1996. I moved to the major metropolitan area where I still live after graduating and by 2000, I was making around $70K. For reference, my rent was $600 a month and the 2700 square foot brand new build I bought in the burbs in 2002 was $175K. Life happened and by the time salaries for SV started getting crazy around 2012-2014, I was 40 years old, remarried and I had a wife and two teenage (step)sons in another 3000+ square foot house in the burbs that we had built in the good school system. I was the dark matter developer who was quite comfortable. By 2017, I saw the writing on the wall, I knew I was going to plateau soon locally and my youngest was graduating in 2020. I knew I didn’t want to be a 46 year old software engineer at a large company. I didn’t know what I wanted to do. I was going to be content bumbing around smaller companies as “the adult in the room”. I just happen to fall into a remote role in cloud consulting (cloud enterprise application development and deployment) at BigTech (yes full time with the same compensation structure as SDEs). I have former coworkers my age that did the same calculus. They had no interest in working in software development at a large company. They already had the life they wanted. https://bemorewithless.com/the-story-of-the-mexican-fisherman/ https://bemorewithless.com/the-story-of-the-mexican-fisherma...