6 ms·

Be careful what you wish for: Many of those highly talented individuals will likely end up channeling their skills into areas that one could view as equally neg

Be careful what you wish for: Many of those highly talented individuals will likely end up channeling their skills into areas that one could view as equally negative societally, such as hedge funds or defense contracting (like Palantir). This isn't to justify the current state of advertising, but rather to express skepticism that dismantling an industry will lead talented individuals to willingly accept a significant reduction in their salary to go work on unlucrative-but-exciting frontiers.

Sirizarry 3y ago
Programmers in my experience are some of the least risky people I know. The majority will absolutely take their talents to the next highest bidder regardless of moral or ethical scruples. I don’t blame em, personally, I also see it as the only logical outcome
- arielweisberg 3y ago
  In a country with not much of a social safety net and runaway medical/elder care costs is there really another option? You need to sock away massive amounts of money as quickly as possible if you want to reduce tail risk and as a side bonus you might get to reach financial freedom earlier. My choices would be very different if I didn't think I was more or less on my own.
  - lapcat 3y ago
    > In a country with not much of a social safety net and runaway medical/elder care costs is there really another option? Yes, there is really another option, because most people don't even have the option of taking Google-level compensation. Indeed, it's very likely that working as a software engineer for less than BigCo compensation will still put you ahead financially of most people. "How is it an option to live like 99% of the people actually do live?" seems like a very strange idea to me.
    - etrautmann 3y ago
      That doesn’t address the tail risk concern, and a huge number of people are living far below a comfortable level. Just because it’s possible doesn’t mean it’s reasonable or desirable.
      - lapcat 3y ago
        > That doesn’t address the tail risk concern Medicaid covers the cost of nursing homes, and it's not necessarily an advantage to have money saved just for that, because they'll just take the money anyway. Some people try to give away their assets to their families beforehand so that Medicaid will cover the costs, which is a legal no-no. > Just because it’s possible This is an understatement, when the subject is how 99% of the people live. Of course it can be great to be in the top 1%, but it's not "unreasonable" to be outside the top 1%.
        arielweisberg 3y ago
        My mother ran a senior family home for 15 year. Private business founded by her. I do not want to end up in a Medicaid paid for nursing home or family home. Even the stories of her residents coming from other expensive family homes were horrifying. Elder care is horrifying. People die in pain all the time from neglect and incompetence. People who came to her were regularly on their way to a painful death and she brought them back by just not being an idiot and putting in some effort. Broken bones and many other conditions went undiagnosed or improperly diagnosed/treated. Doctors prescribing medication after medication to deal with the side effects of the medications they already prescribed that weren’t needed in the first place. Dosages all over the map that are inappropriate for someone in the given age and condition. You better hope you keep your brain to manage your own medical care or have someone who can do it for you.
        lapcat 3y ago
        > Even the stories of her residents coming from other expensive family homes were horrifying. You just made my point for me. The money you've saved won't actually "reduce tail risk". To the contrary, your best strategy for that is to focus on your family rather than on your job, to ensure that there's someone on the tail end who cares enough about you to take care of you if you can no longer take care of yourself.
  - lambic 3y ago
    My country does have a good safety net, so I choose to work for a company that shares my core ethics and has a solid work/life balance. I could be earning a lot more but I choose sanity over wealth.
  - techdmn 3y ago
    > My choices would be very different if I didn't think I was more or less on my own. I suspect this is well understood by the forces that shape social structure in the U.S., and that the current state of affairs is largely by design.
  - itishappy 3y ago
    > is there really another option? Let's be super explicit here: you're arguing that risk reduction is your top priority, above any moral or ethical concerns. (And that risk reduction requires maximizing compensation.) Can't really fault ya, but yeah, there is another option.
  - neves 3y ago
    Well, that's why your country has no social safety net. It is a feature, not a bug :-) That's why you don't have public health system, or maternity leave, or you have high student debt. To take way your freedom and power where to work.
- nytesky 3y ago
  That’s an interesting change, from when I graduated two decades ago. I remember I did not want to work for defense contractor and wanted to work on worthwhile work like NASA or something. Course is early-Internet, and I had no idea how expensive life was going to be. But a lot of people did not want to work for a big company, like Microsoft, and open source was a much more heralded movement.
  - Sirizarry 3y ago
    I think that attitude is definitely still around with hackers and enthusiasts but tech and programming as a job has expanded so much that it’s picked up anyone who wants a high paying job with little/less qualification. It’s become a means of rising out of poverty without having to spend thousands on school. I had a solid 7 year run as (mostly) a web dev and I was fully self taught so it was definitely the case for me
    - nytesky 3y ago
      Interestingly, I came from a very modest family (rural south, one parent was a teacher, the other disabled), so I never knew how expensive “city” life would be that most professionals aspire to. So I was mostly interested in interesting and meaningful work, and assumed literally any salary for a college graduate would be more than I ever need. Wow was I wrong. So current tech gens are making a killer salary as early and often as possible are making the wise choice. I do also thing the class of grads who used to go to investment banking and consulting now go to tech, and they were always “mercenaries”.
      - Sirizarry 3y ago
        I think mercenary is a very apt word to use here. I think I’ll have to use it more often
jebarker 3y ago
I don't think exciting is the right word here. What's being called for is careers that are deemed worthy/virtuous according to the OP.
- BoxFour 3y ago
  I agree. By 'exciting,' I assume OP thinks people will go for roles that are socially beneficial but typically lower-paying, eg for NASA or similar. My experience is that individuals with a passion and aptitude for such work are likely already engaged in those fields, rather than in adtech.
laidoffamazon 3y ago
Actual defense contracting (Boeing/Lockheed, not Palantir) are hugely societally positive in defending the homeland. Unfortunately, Google engineers likely think of these companies as employing lesser people, mostly because they genuinely do pay very poorly.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  Which homeland? My view of society extends beyond american borders, and it is not improved by the US drone bombing teenagers a world away.
  - CoastalCoder 3y ago
    I agree there's not a consensus on this kind of thing. My main takeaway is that voting (and organizing votes) really matters a lot.
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      "Should we violate the borders of other countries to bomb their citizens when it serves our interest" doesn't actually seem to be an issue americans get a meaningful vote-based choice about though. Bother parties seem to love that shit!
  - laidoffamazon 3y ago
    The United States is the sole superpower and the only bulwark against illiberalism and authoritarianism so that one
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      Have you considered the possibility that your fifth grade social studies teacher was not explaining the entire situation to you?
      - laidoffamazon 3y ago
reaperducer 3y ago
Many of those highly talented individuals will likely end up channeling their skills into areas that one could view as equally negative societally Or they could go the other way. Just like after previous bubbles. When the real estate bubble burst and took a good chunk of the financial industry with it, plenty of people went into healthcare, or the arts, or started their own small businesses without the goal of taking over the world. People aren't boolean. They aren't rats trained to only go after the biggest piece of cheese. The vast majority have human-scale goals and families and desires. Very few people, even in the tech sector, are comic book villains.
- BoxFour 3y ago
  > When the real estate bubble burst and took a good chunk of the financial industry with it… Didn’t a large amount of those finance people just end up at big tech or in crypto? Plenty of news to be found suggesting as such (that people who previously would’ve gone into finance are going into big tech or crypto instead). Which, if true, sort of just proves my original point. Further the list of successful startups from that era aren’t exactly a list of things that people universally consider good for society (lots of gig economy startups, for example).

Sirizarry 3y ago

Programmers in my experience are some of the least risky people I know. The majority will absolutely take their talents to the next highest bidder regardless of moral or ethical scruples. I don’t blame em, personally, I also see it as the only logical outcome

arielweisberg 3y ago
In a country with not much of a social safety net and runaway medical/elder care costs is there really another option? You need to sock away massive amounts of money as quickly as possible if you want to reduce tail risk and as a side bonus you might get to reach financial freedom earlier. My choices would be very different if I didn't think I was more or less on my own.
- lapcat 3y ago
  > In a country with not much of a social safety net and runaway medical/elder care costs is there really another option? Yes, there is really another option, because most people don't even have the option of taking Google-level compensation. Indeed, it's very likely that working as a software engineer for less than BigCo compensation will still put you ahead financially of most people. "How is it an option to live like 99% of the people actually do live?" seems like a very strange idea to me.
  - etrautmann 3y ago
    That doesn’t address the tail risk concern, and a huge number of people are living far below a comfortable level. Just because it’s possible doesn’t mean it’s reasonable or desirable.
    - lapcat 3y ago
      > That doesn’t address the tail risk concern Medicaid covers the cost of nursing homes, and it's not necessarily an advantage to have money saved just for that, because they'll just take the money anyway. Some people try to give away their assets to their families beforehand so that Medicaid will cover the costs, which is a legal no-no. > Just because it’s possible This is an understatement, when the subject is how 99% of the people live. Of course it can be great to be in the top 1%, but it's not "unreasonable" to be outside the top 1%.
      - arielweisberg 3y ago
        My mother ran a senior family home for 15 year. Private business founded by her. I do not want to end up in a Medicaid paid for nursing home or family home. Even the stories of her residents coming from other expensive family homes were horrifying. Elder care is horrifying. People die in pain all the time from neglect and incompetence. People who came to her were regularly on their way to a painful death and she brought them back by just not being an idiot and putting in some effort. Broken bones and many other conditions went undiagnosed or improperly diagnosed/treated. Doctors prescribing medication after medication to deal with the side effects of the medications they already prescribed that weren’t needed in the first place. Dosages all over the map that are inappropriate for someone in the given age and condition. You better hope you keep your brain to manage your own medical care or have someone who can do it for you.
        lapcat 3y ago
        > Even the stories of her residents coming from other expensive family homes were horrifying. You just made my point for me. The money you've saved won't actually "reduce tail risk". To the contrary, your best strategy for that is to focus on your family rather than on your job, to ensure that there's someone on the tail end who cares enough about you to take care of you if you can no longer take care of yourself.
- lambic 3y ago
  My country does have a good safety net, so I choose to work for a company that shares my core ethics and has a solid work/life balance. I could be earning a lot more but I choose sanity over wealth.
- techdmn 3y ago
  > My choices would be very different if I didn't think I was more or less on my own. I suspect this is well understood by the forces that shape social structure in the U.S., and that the current state of affairs is largely by design.
- itishappy 3y ago
  > is there really another option? Let's be super explicit here: you're arguing that risk reduction is your top priority, above any moral or ethical concerns. (And that risk reduction requires maximizing compensation.) Can't really fault ya, but yeah, there is another option.
- neves 3y ago
  Well, that's why your country has no social safety net. It is a feature, not a bug :-) That's why you don't have public health system, or maternity leave, or you have high student debt. To take way your freedom and power where to work.
nytesky 3y ago
That’s an interesting change, from when I graduated two decades ago. I remember I did not want to work for defense contractor and wanted to work on worthwhile work like NASA or something. Course is early-Internet, and I had no idea how expensive life was going to be. But a lot of people did not want to work for a big company, like Microsoft, and open source was a much more heralded movement.
- Sirizarry 3y ago
  I think that attitude is definitely still around with hackers and enthusiasts but tech and programming as a job has expanded so much that it’s picked up anyone who wants a high paying job with little/less qualification. It’s become a means of rising out of poverty without having to spend thousands on school. I had a solid 7 year run as (mostly) a web dev and I was fully self taught so it was definitely the case for me
  - nytesky 3y ago
    Interestingly, I came from a very modest family (rural south, one parent was a teacher, the other disabled), so I never knew how expensive “city” life would be that most professionals aspire to. So I was mostly interested in interesting and meaningful work, and assumed literally any salary for a college graduate would be more than I ever need. Wow was I wrong. So current tech gens are making a killer salary as early and often as possible are making the wise choice. I do also thing the class of grads who used to go to investment banking and consulting now go to tech, and they were always “mercenaries”.
    - Sirizarry 3y ago
      I think mercenary is a very apt word to use here. I think I’ll have to use it more often

jebarker 3y ago

I don't think exciting is the right word here. What's being called for is careers that are deemed worthy/virtuous according to the OP.

BoxFour 3y ago
I agree. By 'exciting,' I assume OP thinks people will go for roles that are socially beneficial but typically lower-paying, eg for NASA or similar. My experience is that individuals with a passion and aptitude for such work are likely already engaged in those fields, rather than in adtech.

laidoffamazon 3y ago

Actual defense contracting (Boeing/Lockheed, not Palantir) are hugely societally positive in defending the homeland. Unfortunately, Google engineers likely think of these companies as employing lesser people, mostly because they genuinely do pay very poorly.

giraffe_lady 3y ago
Which homeland? My view of society extends beyond american borders, and it is not improved by the US drone bombing teenagers a world away.
- CoastalCoder 3y ago
  I agree there's not a consensus on this kind of thing. My main takeaway is that voting (and organizing votes) really matters a lot.
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    "Should we violate the borders of other countries to bomb their citizens when it serves our interest" doesn't actually seem to be an issue americans get a meaningful vote-based choice about though. Bother parties seem to love that shit!
- laidoffamazon 3y ago
  The United States is the sole superpower and the only bulwark against illiberalism and authoritarianism so that one
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    Have you considered the possibility that your fifth grade social studies teacher was not explaining the entire situation to you?
    - laidoffamazon 3y ago

reaperducer 3y ago

Many of those highly talented individuals will likely end up channeling their skills into areas that one could view as equally negative societally Or they could go the other way. Just like after previous bubbles. When the real estate bubble burst and took a good chunk of the financial industry with it, plenty of people went into healthcare, or the arts, or started their own small businesses without the goal of taking over the world. People aren't boolean. They aren't rats trained to only go after the biggest piece of cheese. The vast majority have human-scale goals and families and desires. Very few people, even in the tech sector, are comic book villains.

BoxFour 3y ago
> When the real estate bubble burst and took a good chunk of the financial industry with it… Didn’t a large amount of those finance people just end up at big tech or in crypto? Plenty of news to be found suggesting as such (that people who previously would’ve gone into finance are going into big tech or crypto instead). Which, if true, sort of just proves my original point. Further the list of successful startups from that era aren’t exactly a list of things that people universally consider good for society (lots of gig economy startups, for example).