3 ms·

Startups have their own pathologies, but I'm going to point you that if you think "perpetual crisis mode" is somehow a big-company problem, you're going to be d

Startups have their own pathologies, but I'm going to point you that if you think "perpetual crisis mode" is somehow a big-company problem, you're going to be disappointed. Especially at a startup that isn't profitable yet, you're essentially continually in "crisis" given that if you don't achieve profitability or sale, you're going to be out of work. It's a whole different grade of pressure from a big company where "crisis mode" rarely actually results in anyone losing their job. Also, re this comment "The prevalence of social bubble-worthy companies whose value propositions are little more than "cat pictures" suggests an inflated sense of self-importance among the founders, and I can't expect to keep my level of enthusiasm in line with their irrational exuberance." ... I think you're over thinking this. There are silly startups because people (for one reason or another) are willing to invest in them, and generally those folks aren't the founders. Whatever startup you go to, you'd better believe in what they're doing, because you're going to be taking a huge financial risk and going through a lot of stress attempting to play out that belief. If you don't believe in a startup, don't work there - but also don't denigrate whatever vision they're trying to implement, at least respect that they're trying.

thrwwy20120508 14y ago
> There are silly startups because people (for one reason or another) are willing to invest in them, and generally those folks aren't the founders. I don't think I'd be happy at a company whose own founders don't believe in their mission and are only in it for the money. Built to flip, right?
- tomkarlo 14y ago
  Well, I was really just trying to point out that the fact there are companies whose "mission" he doesn't personally value doesn't mean that their founders have an "inflated sense of self-worth." It's the nature of startups that there are going to be a lot of long-shot and far-fetched ideas involved... if he happens to not disagree with the mission of a particular startup (or its valuation), he shouldn't then jump to the assumption that the founders are arrogant or self-important. He'd only be hurting himself to do that -- they could be perfectly nice people who happen to have stumbled onto a bit of a bubble in the market, and may be willing to help him out even if he's not going to directly get involved in their particular business. It's just the nature of the Internet, and anything related to consumer entertainment, that there are going to be some really fluffy / inane things that become ridiculously popular / valuable. As long as the folks behind them realize they're not the new Shakespeare, there's no reason to assume they're any different from people working on more mundane or serious problems.
jakejake 14y ago
I agree with this. No doubt there are crappy jobs and crappy bosses that can make a situation unpleasant. But in my 24 year career I've noticed that some people are perpetually discontent in their job and they feel like there is something more important out there. People who are actually doing "important" or "exciting" work I don't think have this attitude - they consider whatever they're working on to be important and exciting. I've found this to be true from executive positions at corporations making a ton of money, all the way down to flipping burgers on a grill for minimum wage. It isn't specific to software development. If I felt I was being mistreated or forced to work unreasonable hours, that would be different story. Aside from that I really do believe that a job is largely what you make of it.

thrwwy20120508 14y ago

> There are silly startups because people (for one reason or another) are willing to invest in them, and generally those folks aren't the founders. I don't think I'd be happy at a company whose own founders don't believe in their mission and are only in it for the money. Built to flip, right?

tomkarlo 14y ago
Well, I was really just trying to point out that the fact there are companies whose "mission" he doesn't personally value doesn't mean that their founders have an "inflated sense of self-worth." It's the nature of startups that there are going to be a lot of long-shot and far-fetched ideas involved... if he happens to not disagree with the mission of a particular startup (or its valuation), he shouldn't then jump to the assumption that the founders are arrogant or self-important. He'd only be hurting himself to do that -- they could be perfectly nice people who happen to have stumbled onto a bit of a bubble in the market, and may be willing to help him out even if he's not going to directly get involved in their particular business. It's just the nature of the Internet, and anything related to consumer entertainment, that there are going to be some really fluffy / inane things that become ridiculously popular / valuable. As long as the folks behind them realize they're not the new Shakespeare, there's no reason to assume they're any different from people working on more mundane or serious problems.

jakejake 14y ago

I agree with this. No doubt there are crappy jobs and crappy bosses that can make a situation unpleasant. But in my 24 year career I've noticed that some people are perpetually discontent in their job and they feel like there is something more important out there. People who are actually doing "important" or "exciting" work I don't think have this attitude - they consider whatever they're working on to be important and exciting. I've found this to be true from executive positions at corporations making a ton of money, all the way down to flipping burgers on a grill for minimum wage. It isn't specific to software development. If I felt I was being mistreated or forced to work unreasonable hours, that would be different story. Aside from that I really do believe that a job is largely what you make of it.