3 ms·

I've been sitting with this for a little while, and I think I've figured out what I want to say. The first thing is that I 100% identify with and understand wh

I've been sitting with this for a little while, and I think I've figured out what I want to say. The first thing is that I 100% identify with and understand what Op's written here. It does feel amazing to be a member of a committed, like-minded group of people all working as hard as they can towards a common, worthy goal--especially when you haven't found a lot of acceptance previously in life. I found this working on US presidential campaigns (etc), all of which were life changing for me in every way I can think of. It's exhilarating in a way I find hard to describe, but I recognize it in this post. The second thing is that these experiences are, similarly, 100% exploitative. Presidential campaigns aren't good working environments. They're not good for people--even people who enjoy them and seemingly thrive are insidiously destroyed by them. Relationships are very hard. Balance with other aspects of your life (like parenting) is impossible. Taking care of yourself mentally, physically, and emotionally is laughable. Toxic behavior and substance abuse is rampant. More often than not, people use campaigns and "the mission" as excuses to be their worst selves: which means anything you can imagine that might mean (implementing dark patterns, abusing people, workaholism). You are wildly overworked and underpaid. Your relationship to work is forever warped by the workload, the mission, and the experiences (highs, lows, etc). No other job is like it. Which brings me to the last thing, which is: at least presidential campaigns are for a good cause (well, half of them anyway ;). Stripe seems fine and I enjoy all the posts I read from them, but they're a payments company. We (and by "we" here I mean humanity) don't need young people mortgaging every other aspect of their lives for years to get a payments company off the ground. This goes for ridesharing companies, search engine/ad companies, social networking companies, probably 99.999% of what SV works on (maybe there's a climate change or refugee startup out there that's worthy, hard to know). We don't need it, and we don't need the fallout from it. We don't need to warp people's sense of work. We don't need managers extorting their ICs with "who will be responsible for your work while you're on vacation" (the answer is "the person who built my team with redundancies so we don't burn out", btw). We don't need to reduce our understanding of our lives to who we are and what we do at work. This isn't a war; it's not us against the fascists. It's a payments company. I'm pushing 40 at this point (what a wild thing to say haha), and to my fellow near-middle-agers out there, I will say it's up to us to not do this to the next generation. Don't let people work 15 hour days, ever. Don't let people work on weekends. Ensure they take vacations, even if they're just staying home and taking longer showers. Don't text/Slack/whatever them outside work hours. Hold the line when your manager tries to do this to you. Talk about it openly; make this the culture where you work. If you're looking for an experience like Op describes, this is what community is for. Find a hackerspace, find an activist community to volunteer in, mentor a child. You can find communities of capable, like-minded people without the annihilation of the rest of your life. It's not a necessary component.

throw_away_1234 4y ago
100% agree. I think it's also important to acknowledge the extent to which financial distortion can cause cognitive distortion. Some other comments here have pointed out that this person probably made between three and five million US Dollars per year, and the commenters have used this information to reach some relatively specious conclusions (e.g. that comments against the work culture are not founded due to the amount of money in play). It is true that most people cannot even imagine making enough money to buy six to ten million Jack in the Box tacos every year. I am a public defender, and this person's alleged salary exceeds the annual budget of most places I have worked, and the five-year budget of some of them. I think it's precisely this effect that makes the article itself so problematic. Nobody would care what this person thought about work culture (or hire them to consult on the topic) if they didn't graduate from a SV unicorn that generated mythic profit. But many people, especially hopeful managers will read this, and try to emulate the obviously toxic and harmful practices espoused by the author. Emulation will be more harmful than the original practice, because organizations who emulate will not have junior level employees who can buy four to seven reasonably priced single family homes in NYC every year. I say "organizations" rather than "companies" because fetishization of the hypercapitalist "grow fast and get rich" myth is not limited to the for-profit world. Plenty of government agencies and nonprofits will read blogs like this and plunder their organizations in a misguided quest for success. Entangled with this is a causation fallacy. There is actually no reason to believe that Stripe was successful because of its culture. I acknowledge that this is not the author's explicit thesis, but one must make that underlying assumption to engage with the article. I think the most we should responsibly believe (I'm doing my best to be generous to the author), is that all of the toxic policies and cultural artifacts described in the article were endemic in the industry at the time. For example, everyone was expected to eat dinner at work, but it just felt good at this time and place because of the culture. With that frame, it's just as easy to infer that the causal link is reversed: it was more tolerable to work at Stripe because the company was sufficiently funded that it could hire the author at a salary which allowed her to buy a fully loaded Tesla Model X either three or four times every month.
- camgunz 4y ago
  Absolutely. What the "this person probably made 3-5M a year" comments say to me is "if you pay someone enough, you can do whatever you want to them". We got rid of "right to contract" > 100 years ago for a reason: it's deeply exploitative. > There is actually no reason to believe that Stripe was successful because of its culture. Even if there is (and I agree there isn't), I would argue that cultures like this exist in order to compete in a race to the bottom of who can exploit their workers the most. That's certainly the feeling in presidential campaigns: you can't control a lot, but you can control how hard you work, so work the hardest. We need legislation to protect workers here, but in the absence of that, we need unions and leaders in the workplace to firmly reject this culture. > Nobody would care what this person thought about work culture (or hire them to consult on the topic) if they didn't graduate from a SV unicorn that generated mythic profit. Again agree. I will say there were some things in there that I liked and didn't think were toxic: the encouragement of open communication, the focus on precise language (something I constantly fail at), an emphasis on documentation, building teams (relying on others and being a person that can be relied on). But the overwork is just pure toxicity, e.g. this quote: > He looked down at his coffee for a moment. “I’m afraid I’m never going to see my best work again.” Far from being my best work, my worst work materialized because I worked 16-18 hours a day, 7 days a week, and my brain was so broken afterwards I was afraid I would never see my best work again. I've mostly recovered, but I can still feel a difference. My experience isn't singular or even rare, though I don't know if it's the norm. I've read about this happening to others in other sectors (gaming, FAANG through stress and toxicity). It's a real concern. I'm being pretty stark and unsentimental because I want to push strongly against any notion that this is romantic or honorable. Like you said, there's a real danger of this kind of mentality spreading and causing significant harm. Again, worth it for war (and maybe politics, I'm bearish though); not worth it for SV.

throw_away_1234 4y ago

100% agree. I think it's also important to acknowledge the extent to which financial distortion can cause cognitive distortion. Some other comments here have pointed out that this person probably made between three and five million US Dollars per year, and the commenters have used this information to reach some relatively specious conclusions (e.g. that comments against the work culture are not founded due to the amount of money in play). It is true that most people cannot even imagine making enough money to buy six to ten million Jack in the Box tacos every year. I am a public defender, and this person's alleged salary exceeds the annual budget of most places I have worked, and the five-year budget of some of them. I think it's precisely this effect that makes the article itself so problematic. Nobody would care what this person thought about work culture (or hire them to consult on the topic) if they didn't graduate from a SV unicorn that generated mythic profit. But many people, especially hopeful managers will read this, and try to emulate the obviously toxic and harmful practices espoused by the author. Emulation will be more harmful than the original practice, because organizations who emulate will not have junior level employees who can buy four to seven reasonably priced single family homes in NYC every year. I say "organizations" rather than "companies" because fetishization of the hypercapitalist "grow fast and get rich" myth is not limited to the for-profit world. Plenty of government agencies and nonprofits will read blogs like this and plunder their organizations in a misguided quest for success. Entangled with this is a causation fallacy. There is actually no reason to believe that Stripe was successful because of its culture. I acknowledge that this is not the author's explicit thesis, but one must make that underlying assumption to engage with the article. I think the most we should responsibly believe (I'm doing my best to be generous to the author), is that all of the toxic policies and cultural artifacts described in the article were endemic in the industry at the time. For example, everyone was expected to eat dinner at work, but it just felt good at this time and place because of the culture. With that frame, it's just as easy to infer that the causal link is reversed: it was more tolerable to work at Stripe because the company was sufficiently funded that it could hire the author at a salary which allowed her to buy a fully loaded Tesla Model X either three or four times every month.

camgunz 4y ago
Absolutely. What the "this person probably made 3-5M a year" comments say to me is "if you pay someone enough, you can do whatever you want to them". We got rid of "right to contract" > 100 years ago for a reason: it's deeply exploitative. > There is actually no reason to believe that Stripe was successful because of its culture. Even if there is (and I agree there isn't), I would argue that cultures like this exist in order to compete in a race to the bottom of who can exploit their workers the most. That's certainly the feeling in presidential campaigns: you can't control a lot, but you can control how hard you work, so work the hardest. We need legislation to protect workers here, but in the absence of that, we need unions and leaders in the workplace to firmly reject this culture. > Nobody would care what this person thought about work culture (or hire them to consult on the topic) if they didn't graduate from a SV unicorn that generated mythic profit. Again agree. I will say there were some things in there that I liked and didn't think were toxic: the encouragement of open communication, the focus on precise language (something I constantly fail at), an emphasis on documentation, building teams (relying on others and being a person that can be relied on). But the overwork is just pure toxicity, e.g. this quote: > He looked down at his coffee for a moment. “I’m afraid I’m never going to see my best work again.” Far from being my best work, my worst work materialized because I worked 16-18 hours a day, 7 days a week, and my brain was so broken afterwards I was afraid I would never see my best work again. I've mostly recovered, but I can still feel a difference. My experience isn't singular or even rare, though I don't know if it's the norm. I've read about this happening to others in other sectors (gaming, FAANG through stress and toxicity). It's a real concern. I'm being pretty stark and unsentimental because I want to push strongly against any notion that this is romantic or honorable. Like you said, there's a real danger of this kind of mentality spreading and causing significant harm. Again, worth it for war (and maybe politics, I'm bearish though); not worth it for SV.