5 ms·

Its been a while since my undergrad (>10 yrs) but many of my peers were majoring in CS or EE/CE because of the money, at the time I thought it was a bit depress

Its been a while since my undergrad (>10 yrs) but many of my peers were majoring in CS or EE/CE because of the money, at the time I thought it was a bit depressing as well. With a few more years under my belt I realized theres nothing wrong with doing good work and providing yourself/your family a decent living. Not everyone needs the passion in their field to become among the best or become a "10x"er to contribute. We all have different passions, but we all need to pay the bills.

neilv 2y ago
Yeah, I think that the quality of work (skill + conscientiousness), and the motivation for doing the work, are two separate things. Off-the-cuff, three groups: 1. There are people who are motivated by having a solid income, yet they take the professionalism seriously, and do skilled rock-solid work, 9-5. I'd be happy to work with these people. 2. There are other people who are motivated by having a solid or more-than-solid income, and (regardless of skill level), it's non-stop sprint performance art, gaming promotion metrics, resume-driven development, practicing Leetcode, and hopping at the next opportunity regardless of where that leaves the project and team. 3. Then there's those weirdos who are motivated by something about the work itself, and would be doing it even if it didn't pay well. Over the years, these people spend so much time and energy on the something, that they tend to develop more and stronger skills than the others. I'd be happy to work with these people, so long as they can also be professional (including rolling up sleeves for the non-fun parts), or amenable to learning to be professional. Half-joke: The potential of group #3 is threatening to sharp-elbowed group #2, so group #2 neutralizes them via frat gatekeeping tactics (yeah-but-what-school-did-you-go-to snobbery, Leetcode shibboleth for nothing but whether you rehearsed Leetcode rituals, cliques, culture fit, etc.). Startups might do well to have a mix of #3 and #1, and to stay far away from #2. But startups -- especially the last decade-plus of too many growth investment scams -- are often run by affluent people who grew up being taught #2 skills (for how you game your way into prestigious school, aggressively self-interested networking and promoting yourself, etc.).
- dartos 2y ago
  I’m in group 3 for sure. The hardest part of any job I’ve had is doing the not so fun parts (meetings, keeping up with emails, solidly finishing work before moving on to something new)
  - neilv 2y ago
    You're on the nominally right Web site. #1 is engineers, #2 is cancer, and #3 is hackers (possibly also engineers). :)
    - collyw 2y ago
      The problem being that interviews are often more likely to favor 2 over 1.
  - XenophileJKO 2y ago
    As I progressed, I've learned I am more valuable for the company working on things I am interested in. Delegate the boring stuff to people that don't care. If it is critical to get it done right, do it yourself.
    - dartos 2y ago
      This wasn’t possible for me at my last job at all. 0 autonomy, the only people who got recognition were those who self promoted on internal blogs, etc.
- sgarland 2y ago
  I would definitely do this job even if it paid half as well. Nothing else is nearly as interesting to me, and I’ve tried quite a range.
- zquzra 2y ago
  #3 is the old school hacker, "a high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die" :-)

neilv 2y ago

Yeah, I think that the quality of work (skill + conscientiousness), and the motivation for doing the work, are two separate things. Off-the-cuff, three groups: 1. There are people who are motivated by having a solid income, yet they take the professionalism seriously, and do skilled rock-solid work, 9-5. I'd be happy to work with these people. 2. There are other people who are motivated by having a solid or more-than-solid income, and (regardless of skill level), it's non-stop sprint performance art, gaming promotion metrics, resume-driven development, practicing Leetcode, and hopping at the next opportunity regardless of where that leaves the project and team. 3. Then there's those weirdos who are motivated by something about the work itself, and would be doing it even if it didn't pay well. Over the years, these people spend so much time and energy on the something, that they tend to develop more and stronger skills than the others. I'd be happy to work with these people, so long as they can also be professional (including rolling up sleeves for the non-fun parts), or amenable to learning to be professional. Half-joke: The potential of group #3 is threatening to sharp-elbowed group #2, so group #2 neutralizes them via frat gatekeeping tactics (yeah-but-what-school-did-you-go-to snobbery, Leetcode shibboleth for nothing but whether you rehearsed Leetcode rituals, cliques, culture fit, etc.). Startups might do well to have a mix of #3 and #1, and to stay far away from #2. But startups -- especially the last decade-plus of too many growth investment scams -- are often run by affluent people who grew up being taught #2 skills (for how you game your way into prestigious school, aggressively self-interested networking and promoting yourself, etc.).

dartos 2y ago
I’m in group 3 for sure. The hardest part of any job I’ve had is doing the not so fun parts (meetings, keeping up with emails, solidly finishing work before moving on to something new)
- neilv 2y ago
  You're on the nominally right Web site. #1 is engineers, #2 is cancer, and #3 is hackers (possibly also engineers). :)
  - collyw 2y ago
    The problem being that interviews are often more likely to favor 2 over 1.
- XenophileJKO 2y ago
  As I progressed, I've learned I am more valuable for the company working on things I am interested in. Delegate the boring stuff to people that don't care. If it is critical to get it done right, do it yourself.
  - dartos 2y ago
    This wasn’t possible for me at my last job at all. 0 autonomy, the only people who got recognition were those who self promoted on internal blogs, etc.
sgarland 2y ago
I would definitely do this job even if it paid half as well. Nothing else is nearly as interesting to me, and I’ve tried quite a range.
zquzra 2y ago
#3 is the old school hacker, "a high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die" :-)