3 ms·

I worked for almost 27 years, for a company that aligned with my personal morals. The pay was substantially less than what I could have made at less-circumspect

I worked for almost 27 years, for a company that aligned with my personal morals. The pay was substantially less than what I could have made at less-circumspect outfits, and there was a nonzero amount of really annoying overhead, but I don't regret it, at all. I slept well at night, made good friends, never wrote any software that I regretted, learned heaps of stuff, and helped to develop and launch the careers of a few others. Mentioning that here, elicits scorn.

kstrauser 2y ago
Not from me, it doesn't. That's enviable and I'm glad to hear you were able to have that.
dgfitz 2y ago
I imagine the scorn would occur if you planted a flag about how the company morals aligned with your own.
- ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
  Actually, this is the first time I've done that. I pretty much enjoy the world I live in. That upsets some folks.
talldayo 2y ago
I don't think people are scornful of your work. It makes me happy to hear that people still find meaningful employment within their means of living. It's increasingly rare that someone is paid to do something impactful these days. You should feel happy. The part that will attract scorn is pretending that everyone can do that. In the same way that religion spread by preying on the poor and lecherous portions of society, so too does the tech industry offer the downtrodden and mistreated a better life in exchange for moral leniency. It's not even the "revenge of the nerd" stuff past a certain point - if a $60,000/year software engineer in America turns up their nose to a contract, you can simply send it to a development firm in Pakistan for pennies on the dollar and get roughly equivalent results. There is no moral bartering with at-will employment. It's an illusion. As individuals, you and I are both powerless to stop the proliferation and success of harmful businesses. America's number one lesson from the past 4 centuries of economic planning is that laissez-faire policy does not course-correct without government intervention. Collective bargaining only works when you're bargaining on a market you control - boycotting certain employers is entirely ineffective when you compare it to legislative reform. So, with that being said, saving your dignity is not enough to save society. You have every right to take comfort in working a job that you respected - but nobody here owes you any more respect than their dairy farmers or the guy in Thailand that made their $55 Izod sweatshirt. If you come around expecting the hero treatment, then you're bound to feel shortchanged. Sorry.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  > if a $60,000/year software engineer in America turns up their nose to a contract, you can simply send it to a development firm in Pakistan for pennies on the dollar and get roughly equivalent results. People who live in Pakistan are also capable of making moral decisions, you know. Your argument only holds if there are infinitely-many people in some kind of idealised labour market, but in the real world there are less than a million people capable of that kind of work. If you plan to take an immoral job and then work-to-rule while sabotaging the evil schemes, charismatically deflecting all blame to those who were trying to make it succeed (or, better still, keeping the organisation as a whole from understanding that their plan has been sabotaged), then that's a different question, and I'd wish you the best of luck. (Not that such a person would be bragging about it here, anyway.)
  - BurningFrog 2y ago
    Given how easy it is to recruit contract killers all over the world, I think any unethical software with money behind it will be built. Maybe with paying some premium for the worst stuff.
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      It's easy to recruit a hitman, but hard to recruit a competent hitman. (See: the subcontracting hitmen in 2019.) And killing people is, in general, much easier than writing software.
      - problemsolver12 2y ago
        Can confirm.
        staunton 2y ago
        You're saying that you've killed people for money? Or that you hired killers before?
      - 2y ago
robertlagrant 2y ago
> Mentioning that here, elicits scorn. No it doesn't. "Woe is ethical me" comments like this might.
- ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
  Seriously? I've not really mentioned ethics, before. The scorn is for working for one employer for that amount of time.
- phil21 2y ago
  From a casual observer who (used to) mostly lurk, it absolutely does. Maybe the tide has been turning the past few years but it was endemic from my point of view a decade ago when I first started reading HN. Folks who didn’t chase career maximization were typically treated like naive children at best. Working for a third of the wages in some flyover state at a boring company vs some adtech company with an options package was panned on the regular. It was always part of the zeitgeist you switch jobs early and often to maximize your career progression vs. chill with the same company for most of your life.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    I'm not sure it was so much of an ethical statement as you should be switching jobs every couple years to maximize your paycheck. Of course, now, it's more about being happy to have a well-paying job as opposed to working a "full-time" job with two or three paychecks from different companies.
globalnode 2y ago
My opinion after reading HN for quite a while is that your average HN poster is well educated and knows a lot of theory but struggles with ethics. Perhaps even seeing a debate against ethics as a game to be won.
- throwaway2037 2y ago
  Why do you think well educated non-HNers are any different? Hint: They aren't. Why do people think HN people are special or different? <repeat same hint here>
obscurette 2y ago
Almost same here, but I also understand that it's a luxury. At this point in my life I can afford it, but I've also seen times when I could do anything to get food on table for my family. Luckily for me those times didn't last.
sourcepluck 2y ago
Geez, where do I sign up? Sounds great. Don't listen to the pseudo-realists who chase dreams of grandeur rather than doing something (at least semi-) useful or good with their lives.
titanomachy 2y ago
Have a dose of anti-scorn from me. What qualifies any one of us to tell another that they're living their life wrong?

kstrauser 2y ago

Not from me, it doesn't. That's enviable and I'm glad to hear you were able to have that.

dgfitz 2y ago

I imagine the scorn would occur if you planted a flag about how the company morals aligned with your own.

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
Actually, this is the first time I've done that. I pretty much enjoy the world I live in. That upsets some folks.

talldayo 2y ago

I don't think people are scornful of your work. It makes me happy to hear that people still find meaningful employment within their means of living. It's increasingly rare that someone is paid to do something impactful these days. You should feel happy. The part that will attract scorn is pretending that everyone can do that. In the same way that religion spread by preying on the poor and lecherous portions of society, so too does the tech industry offer the downtrodden and mistreated a better life in exchange for moral leniency. It's not even the "revenge of the nerd" stuff past a certain point - if a $60,000/year software engineer in America turns up their nose to a contract, you can simply send it to a development firm in Pakistan for pennies on the dollar and get roughly equivalent results. There is no moral bartering with at-will employment. It's an illusion. As individuals, you and I are both powerless to stop the proliferation and success of harmful businesses. America's number one lesson from the past 4 centuries of economic planning is that laissez-faire policy does not course-correct without government intervention. Collective bargaining only works when you're bargaining on a market you control - boycotting certain employers is entirely ineffective when you compare it to legislative reform. So, with that being said, saving your dignity is not enough to save society. You have every right to take comfort in working a job that you respected - but nobody here owes you any more respect than their dairy farmers or the guy in Thailand that made their $55 Izod sweatshirt. If you come around expecting the hero treatment, then you're bound to feel shortchanged. Sorry.

wizzwizz4 2y ago
> if a $60,000/year software engineer in America turns up their nose to a contract, you can simply send it to a development firm in Pakistan for pennies on the dollar and get roughly equivalent results. People who live in Pakistan are also capable of making moral decisions, you know. Your argument only holds if there are infinitely-many people in some kind of idealised labour market, but in the real world there are less than a million people capable of that kind of work. If you plan to take an immoral job and then work-to-rule while sabotaging the evil schemes, charismatically deflecting all blame to those who were trying to make it succeed (or, better still, keeping the organisation as a whole from understanding that their plan has been sabotaged), then that's a different question, and I'd wish you the best of luck. (Not that such a person would be bragging about it here, anyway.)
- BurningFrog 2y ago
  Given how easy it is to recruit contract killers all over the world, I think any unethical software with money behind it will be built. Maybe with paying some premium for the worst stuff.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    It's easy to recruit a hitman, but hard to recruit a competent hitman. (See: the subcontracting hitmen in 2019.) And killing people is, in general, much easier than writing software.
    - problemsolver12 2y ago
      Can confirm.
      - staunton 2y ago
        You're saying that you've killed people for money? Or that you hired killers before?
    - 2y ago

robertlagrant 2y ago

> Mentioning that here, elicits scorn. No it doesn't. "Woe is ethical me" comments like this might.

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
Seriously? I've not really mentioned ethics, before. The scorn is for working for one employer for that amount of time.
phil21 2y ago
From a casual observer who (used to) mostly lurk, it absolutely does. Maybe the tide has been turning the past few years but it was endemic from my point of view a decade ago when I first started reading HN. Folks who didn’t chase career maximization were typically treated like naive children at best. Working for a third of the wages in some flyover state at a boring company vs some adtech company with an options package was panned on the regular. It was always part of the zeitgeist you switch jobs early and often to maximize your career progression vs. chill with the same company for most of your life.
- ghaff 2y ago
  I'm not sure it was so much of an ethical statement as you should be switching jobs every couple years to maximize your paycheck. Of course, now, it's more about being happy to have a well-paying job as opposed to working a "full-time" job with two or three paychecks from different companies.

globalnode 2y ago

My opinion after reading HN for quite a while is that your average HN poster is well educated and knows a lot of theory but struggles with ethics. Perhaps even seeing a debate against ethics as a game to be won.

throwaway2037 2y ago
Why do you think well educated non-HNers are any different? Hint: They aren't. Why do people think HN people are special or different? <repeat same hint here>

obscurette 2y ago

Almost same here, but I also understand that it's a luxury. At this point in my life I can afford it, but I've also seen times when I could do anything to get food on table for my family. Luckily for me those times didn't last.

sourcepluck 2y ago

Geez, where do I sign up? Sounds great. Don't listen to the pseudo-realists who chase dreams of grandeur rather than doing something (at least semi-) useful or good with their lives.

titanomachy 2y ago

Have a dose of anti-scorn from me. What qualifies any one of us to tell another that they're living their life wrong?