4 ms·

Light on details and mostly seems to revolve around money.

moosedev 2y ago
> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
- stonethrowaway 2y ago
  It’s a shallow postmortem.
  - bitpush 2y ago
    [flagged]
- sk5t 2y ago
  It’s an appropriate dismissal as the article itself is surprisingly shallow.
redrix 2y ago
Isn’t this the whole point of working; particularly at a FAANG? > It’s a shallow post-mortem I respectfully disagree. It’s an 8 minute read. Sure, it’s mostly in dot-point form, but personally I’d rather that than some massive 80,000 word blog post that I’m going to drop 1/8 of the way through. Since when does a personal blog post need to be a well constructed and lengthy document?
- stonethrowaway 2y ago
  I would rather read an 80,000 word blog post. It would satisfy my curiosity and it’s exactly the sort of material I come to HN for. It’s Hacker News. Not Digest. It’s also why I don’t read the news often posted here from big media companies - they’re often just awful hit pieces against someone or something. Or are pushing a product. But a well articulated, technically correct post that’s evenly paced? Heavenly. Its a David Attenborough documentary for tech nerds. It’s exactly what I am after. I wouldn’t say anything against having an upfront summary for people who don’t have time/patience. 9 years working at a top tech company of bleeding edge work reduced down to “I made money. Oh, I made money. My stocks did well, so I made even more money” is the pinnacle of intellectual laziness. That’s not a postmortem by any stretch of imagination.
- bzhang255 2y ago
  I think it's shallow and not because it's short. To me, it just sounds very typical: "I joined Google back when it was fun. Now it's more bureaucratic and less fun. But I made a ton of money on the stock." I think there have been countless blog posts from Ex-Googlers like this. It's fairly shallow. And it is worth noting that a lot of the bullet point lists do start with "I made a ton of money" in as many words, which is also just not very interesting to most folks, though it is certainly very relevant and important to the writer.
  - lexlash 2y ago
    The most interesting thing is the timeline at the end, which shows what they were successful at and promoted for (management-type roles) and what happened when they tried to transition from SRE management to SWE IC (they fell back into management). I don't see that reflected in the rest of their postmortem learning - other than them being dissatisfied with doing what they were good at / promoted for - so that kind of helps me ignore the rest of the postmortem. :)
  - tickerticker 2y ago
    Level 1: a ton of money. Level 2: L1 + interesting work Level 3: L2 + intelligent co-workers Level 4: L3 + deep skills Level 5: L4 + mentor Level 6: L5 + awesome network Level 7: L6 + personal growth Level 8: L7 + meaningful contribution Level 9: L8 + work-life balance Level 10: L9 + recognized SME Timing and circumstances influence what you get....not always the same for equally talented ppl. Making a "ton of money"....it matters because new people want to know what price is paid for exceptional comp.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
steelframe 2y ago
When I worked at Google I immediately sold my stock and diversified. In hindsight that "cost" me at least $2MM. At a subsequent employer I held the stock, determined not to make the same mistake again. That "cost" me nearly $100k before I realized that the new employer's stock was not going to do what GOOG did. Anyway, congratulations to those Googlers who "picked" GOOG by not selling their GSUs and who made out like bandits. You certainly got lucky, and nobody should expect their own employers' RSUs to do the same. Googlers from the past ~15 years are comparatively filthy rich. Imagine having had an opportunity to miss out on 8 figures of stock returns and only be left with 7 figures because you followed sound financial advice. Bruce Willis is no doubt dabbing his eyes on Memegen.
- paulpauper 2y ago
  yeah, survivorship bias is a thing
- YZF 2y ago
  Different big tech but similar strategy. Sell and diversify. I think it's a reasonable one. The people that made more money took on more risk and gambled. If you went into e.g. the S&P 500 or real estate you probably did ok. The last 15 years were good in tech but the earlier Google employees did even better. I'm guessing neither of us made money on bitcoin or gamestop... I don't lose sleep over that.
- troad 2y ago
  > Imagine having had an opportunity to miss out on 8 figures of stock returns and only be left with 7 figures because you followed sound financial advice. A bit of perspective may be warranted. There are single mothers busting ass raising kids on tips and food stamps, while you're asking for sympathy for making out with only seven figures from your Google stock options.
- j_timberlake 2y ago
  > You certainly got lucky I'm pretty sure the luck of being born with sufficient intelligence to work at Google is orders of magnitude greater than the luck of making big ROI on Google stock. > because you followed sound financial advice Most financial advice is there to help the clueless masses to not lose their savings to get-rich-quick schemes and then default on their debt during their next unemployment period. Anyone smart enough to do Silicon Valley work has probably outgrown those training wheels and can think for themselves when investing.
oulu2006 2y ago
I too found it a fairly boring read mostly just self congratulatory.

> Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

stonethrowaway 2y ago
It’s a shallow postmortem.
- bitpush 2y ago
  [flagged]
sk5t 2y ago
It’s an appropriate dismissal as the article itself is surprisingly shallow.

redrix 2y ago

Isn’t this the whole point of working; particularly at a FAANG? > It’s a shallow post-mortem I respectfully disagree. It’s an 8 minute read. Sure, it’s mostly in dot-point form, but personally I’d rather that than some massive 80,000 word blog post that I’m going to drop 1/8 of the way through. Since when does a personal blog post need to be a well constructed and lengthy document?

stonethrowaway 2y ago
I would rather read an 80,000 word blog post. It would satisfy my curiosity and it’s exactly the sort of material I come to HN for. It’s Hacker News. Not Digest. It’s also why I don’t read the news often posted here from big media companies - they’re often just awful hit pieces against someone or something. Or are pushing a product. But a well articulated, technically correct post that’s evenly paced? Heavenly. Its a David Attenborough documentary for tech nerds. It’s exactly what I am after. I wouldn’t say anything against having an upfront summary for people who don’t have time/patience. 9 years working at a top tech company of bleeding edge work reduced down to “I made money. Oh, I made money. My stocks did well, so I made even more money” is the pinnacle of intellectual laziness. That’s not a postmortem by any stretch of imagination.
bzhang255 2y ago
I think it's shallow and not because it's short. To me, it just sounds very typical: "I joined Google back when it was fun. Now it's more bureaucratic and less fun. But I made a ton of money on the stock." I think there have been countless blog posts from Ex-Googlers like this. It's fairly shallow. And it is worth noting that a lot of the bullet point lists do start with "I made a ton of money" in as many words, which is also just not very interesting to most folks, though it is certainly very relevant and important to the writer.
- lexlash 2y ago
  The most interesting thing is the timeline at the end, which shows what they were successful at and promoted for (management-type roles) and what happened when they tried to transition from SRE management to SWE IC (they fell back into management). I don't see that reflected in the rest of their postmortem learning - other than them being dissatisfied with doing what they were good at / promoted for - so that kind of helps me ignore the rest of the postmortem. :)
- tickerticker 2y ago
  Level 1: a ton of money. Level 2: L1 + interesting work Level 3: L2 + intelligent co-workers Level 4: L3 + deep skills Level 5: L4 + mentor Level 6: L5 + awesome network Level 7: L6 + personal growth Level 8: L7 + meaningful contribution Level 9: L8 + work-life balance Level 10: L9 + recognized SME Timing and circumstances influence what you get....not always the same for equally talented ppl. Making a "ton of money"....it matters because new people want to know what price is paid for exceptional comp.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

steelframe 2y ago

When I worked at Google I immediately sold my stock and diversified. In hindsight that "cost" me at least $2MM. At a subsequent employer I held the stock, determined not to make the same mistake again. That "cost" me nearly $100k before I realized that the new employer's stock was not going to do what GOOG did. Anyway, congratulations to those Googlers who "picked" GOOG by not selling their GSUs and who made out like bandits. You certainly got lucky, and nobody should expect their own employers' RSUs to do the same. Googlers from the past ~15 years are comparatively filthy rich. Imagine having had an opportunity to miss out on 8 figures of stock returns and only be left with 7 figures because you followed sound financial advice. Bruce Willis is no doubt dabbing his eyes on Memegen.

paulpauper 2y ago
yeah, survivorship bias is a thing
YZF 2y ago
Different big tech but similar strategy. Sell and diversify. I think it's a reasonable one. The people that made more money took on more risk and gambled. If you went into e.g. the S&P 500 or real estate you probably did ok. The last 15 years were good in tech but the earlier Google employees did even better. I'm guessing neither of us made money on bitcoin or gamestop... I don't lose sleep over that.
troad 2y ago
> Imagine having had an opportunity to miss out on 8 figures of stock returns and only be left with 7 figures because you followed sound financial advice. A bit of perspective may be warranted. There are single mothers busting ass raising kids on tips and food stamps, while you're asking for sympathy for making out with only seven figures from your Google stock options.
j_timberlake 2y ago
> You certainly got lucky I'm pretty sure the luck of being born with sufficient intelligence to work at Google is orders of magnitude greater than the luck of making big ROI on Google stock. > because you followed sound financial advice Most financial advice is there to help the clueless masses to not lose their savings to get-rich-quick schemes and then default on their debt during their next unemployment period. Anyone smart enough to do Silicon Valley work has probably outgrown those training wheels and can think for themselves when investing.

oulu2006 2y ago

I too found it a fairly boring read mostly just self congratulatory.