4 ms·

You're right, we should encourage the new generation to all strive to become overpaid mediocre SWEs only in it for the quick cash, because the world doesn't hav

You're right, we should encourage the new generation to all strive to become overpaid mediocre SWEs only in it for the quick cash, because the world doesn't have enough shitty food delivery apps. Hopefully I've painted this with a broad enough brush. There is more to a fulfilling career than money. In fact, an entire generation of SWEs who forgot the concepts of simplicity and efficiency, coding a never-ending avalanche of rubbish bloated apps is why we continually need new silicon.

runnerup 4y ago
https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death... Recent front page submission comes to mind XD
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
sudosysgen 4y ago
It's not really about quick cash. The truth is just that additional SWEs are right now more useful than additional fab engineers, in the US. It sucks to hear but it's true. There just aren't that many fab engineers necessary. Even TSMC employs a large part of SWE and IC designers, probably close to or more than process engineers. Fab engineers in the US are fairly disposable because their existence isn't based on market needs but really as a hedge by the US to be independent. That's going to suck for you because TSMC isn't going to value you that much because you're not really business critical, you're just there to get government subsidies. In Taiwan it's another story and it's almost competitive with good SWE jobs.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  This seems obviously true. It only seems unjust because we have this idea that tasks that are more intellectually challenging should pay more. That isn't how supply and demand work. If you need twice as many typists as are graduating, but only need a quarter of the radiologists that complete residency, well then typists will be paid far more than radiologists. We have an excess of people who want to work hardware, specifically because it is challenging, and that draws interest. So the interesting work is part of the compensation. We accept this as true for game development, it shouldn't surprise us for hardware, or embedded software. It doesn't matter that what you are doing is "harder", we need more bodies slinging fullstack generic buisiness logic than we can possibly educate it seems, so that is what will pay best. As for why we need that many people? I don't have any clue. It really seems like low-code should eventually replace the need for most SWE and drive down wages, but that has been a dream for decades and it hasn't happened yet.
  - elcomet 4y ago
    > we have this idea that tasks that are more intellectually challenging should pay more Why do you have this idea ? I'm not sure it sounds more "just" than saying, for example, that tasks that are physically more challenging should pay more, or humanly more challenging should pay more, etc..
    - galangalalgol 4y ago
      I was constraining the statement to tech work. It does feel to me like roofers in southern summers should get paid like C levels in the valley. But that isn't how the world works and writing a new physics engine for an indie game, while difficult, is not going to pay as much as much as modifying a payment portal ui to get 0.3% more transactions completed. Because of of those things is in far more demand.
- smaudet 4y ago
  I think its somewhere more in the middle - software bloat is getting to legendary proportions (why do I need 16+ gigs of RAM and a modern cpu+gpu to run a calculator that I could buy for 50 cents 20 years ago?), and the software bloat drives the hardware bloat. The truth is we don't need fab engineers because the applications we need to build require already "solved" hardware problems which are mostly supplied en-masse by a the few, large companies. But, the deeper truth is that we don't need any of it... I have been recently and somewhat pleasantly surprised by how little I truly need. E.g., a 200$ chrome-book satisfies most of my needs. I have much, much beefier computers, hundreds of gigs of ram and multi-core processor, etc...all a waste. (I work as a software engineer and regularly find myself maxing my cores for things I don't really need). If I could build my own hardware and have it actually do things, man, that would _useful_. Unlike this giant rickety tower of babel we have built...
  - haggy102 4y ago
    I'm all for sarcasm but please show me a calculator that needs 16GB of RAM. Your input detracts from the original argument and doesn't progress the discussion at all.
    - onion2k 4y ago
      I made a calculator app in Electron once...
quantum_state 4y ago
I would like to second your observation. Fundamentally, the entire IT industry is mostly ruined, by Moore’s “law” … the mess of the IT ecosystem in almost every large enterprise is evidence.
gonzo41 4y ago
It's not the SWE's fault that the market pays for crap. If anything, good for them for making hay whilst the sun shines.
derefr 4y ago
Rather than tearing down SWEs for being economically rational actors, how about starting a semiconductor company where people are paid more?
- formerkrogemp 4y ago
  -> SWEs for being economically rational actors It's okay just to say that you like the money. You don't always have to use the largest words. It's also okay for someone to say that software engineers are paid lots of money. Perhaps too much. -> how about starting a semiconductor company where people are paid more? I'm assuming you're being facetious given the enormous logistical and financial costs of starting a somewhat up-to-date semiconductor company. But, maybe that's the point.
  - derefr 4y ago
    > It's okay just to say that you like the money. I'm not an SWE. > You don't always have to use the largest words. Some words have specific meanings, rather than just being longer synonyms for short words. > Perhaps too much. Again, no. This was my point — this is like saying that the solution to homelessness is to take away the homes of everyone with homes, so that everyone is now equally homeless. Don't pay the people who are already getting a good deal less; pay the people who are currently getting a bad deal more. > I'm assuming you're being facetious given the enormous logistical and financial costs of starting a somewhat up-to-date semiconductor company. No. Just fucking do it. Start another company that's less complex but is an obvious money earner; get rich; reinvest your wealth into a semiconductor company. Should only take 10 years. If you care, do it. If Elon can do it — and Elon is not the smartest man — you can do it too. (To be clear, you don't have to start a company that competes in the wider semiconductor market; you just have to start a company that competes in a niche. Like, for example, 5G radios. But your goal does have to be to compete; getting acquired means you no longer have control over your own business strategy, incl. profit margins, and therefore can no longer make your company "the one where people get paid well.")
    - formerkrogemp 4y ago

runnerup 4y ago

https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death... Recent front page submission comes to mind XD

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

sudosysgen 4y ago

It's not really about quick cash. The truth is just that additional SWEs are right now more useful than additional fab engineers, in the US. It sucks to hear but it's true. There just aren't that many fab engineers necessary. Even TSMC employs a large part of SWE and IC designers, probably close to or more than process engineers. Fab engineers in the US are fairly disposable because their existence isn't based on market needs but really as a hedge by the US to be independent. That's going to suck for you because TSMC isn't going to value you that much because you're not really business critical, you're just there to get government subsidies. In Taiwan it's another story and it's almost competitive with good SWE jobs.

galangalalgol 4y ago
This seems obviously true. It only seems unjust because we have this idea that tasks that are more intellectually challenging should pay more. That isn't how supply and demand work. If you need twice as many typists as are graduating, but only need a quarter of the radiologists that complete residency, well then typists will be paid far more than radiologists. We have an excess of people who want to work hardware, specifically because it is challenging, and that draws interest. So the interesting work is part of the compensation. We accept this as true for game development, it shouldn't surprise us for hardware, or embedded software. It doesn't matter that what you are doing is "harder", we need more bodies slinging fullstack generic buisiness logic than we can possibly educate it seems, so that is what will pay best. As for why we need that many people? I don't have any clue. It really seems like low-code should eventually replace the need for most SWE and drive down wages, but that has been a dream for decades and it hasn't happened yet.
- elcomet 4y ago
  > we have this idea that tasks that are more intellectually challenging should pay more Why do you have this idea ? I'm not sure it sounds more "just" than saying, for example, that tasks that are physically more challenging should pay more, or humanly more challenging should pay more, etc..
  - galangalalgol 4y ago
    I was constraining the statement to tech work. It does feel to me like roofers in southern summers should get paid like C levels in the valley. But that isn't how the world works and writing a new physics engine for an indie game, while difficult, is not going to pay as much as much as modifying a payment portal ui to get 0.3% more transactions completed. Because of of those things is in far more demand.
smaudet 4y ago
I think its somewhere more in the middle - software bloat is getting to legendary proportions (why do I need 16+ gigs of RAM and a modern cpu+gpu to run a calculator that I could buy for 50 cents 20 years ago?), and the software bloat drives the hardware bloat. The truth is we don't need fab engineers because the applications we need to build require already "solved" hardware problems which are mostly supplied en-masse by a the few, large companies. But, the deeper truth is that we don't need any of it... I have been recently and somewhat pleasantly surprised by how little I truly need. E.g., a 200$ chrome-book satisfies most of my needs. I have much, much beefier computers, hundreds of gigs of ram and multi-core processor, etc...all a waste. (I work as a software engineer and regularly find myself maxing my cores for things I don't really need). If I could build my own hardware and have it actually do things, man, that would _useful_. Unlike this giant rickety tower of babel we have built...
- haggy102 4y ago
  I'm all for sarcasm but please show me a calculator that needs 16GB of RAM. Your input detracts from the original argument and doesn't progress the discussion at all.
  - onion2k 4y ago
    I made a calculator app in Electron once...

quantum_state 4y ago

I would like to second your observation. Fundamentally, the entire IT industry is mostly ruined, by Moore’s “law” … the mess of the IT ecosystem in almost every large enterprise is evidence.

gonzo41 4y ago

It's not the SWE's fault that the market pays for crap. If anything, good for them for making hay whilst the sun shines.

derefr 4y ago

Rather than tearing down SWEs for being economically rational actors, how about starting a semiconductor company where people are paid more?

formerkrogemp 4y ago
-> SWEs for being economically rational actors It's okay just to say that you like the money. You don't always have to use the largest words. It's also okay for someone to say that software engineers are paid lots of money. Perhaps too much. -> how about starting a semiconductor company where people are paid more? I'm assuming you're being facetious given the enormous logistical and financial costs of starting a somewhat up-to-date semiconductor company. But, maybe that's the point.
- derefr 4y ago
  > It's okay just to say that you like the money. I'm not an SWE. > You don't always have to use the largest words. Some words have specific meanings, rather than just being longer synonyms for short words. > Perhaps too much. Again, no. This was my point — this is like saying that the solution to homelessness is to take away the homes of everyone with homes, so that everyone is now equally homeless. Don't pay the people who are already getting a good deal less; pay the people who are currently getting a bad deal more. > I'm assuming you're being facetious given the enormous logistical and financial costs of starting a somewhat up-to-date semiconductor company. No. Just fucking do it. Start another company that's less complex but is an obvious money earner; get rich; reinvest your wealth into a semiconductor company. Should only take 10 years. If you care, do it. If Elon can do it — and Elon is not the smartest man — you can do it too. (To be clear, you don't have to start a company that competes in the wider semiconductor market; you just have to start a company that competes in a niche. Like, for example, 5G radios. But your goal does have to be to compete; getting acquired means you no longer have control over your own business strategy, incl. profit margins, and therefore can no longer make your company "the one where people get paid well.")
  - formerkrogemp 4y ago