4 ms·

An expert in computer programming might make ~$180,000. But, a non-expert with basic skills might make up to $120,000. Seems like a lot of work to get that ex

by ap22213 13y ago

An expert in computer programming might make ~$180,000. But, a non-expert with basic skills might make up to $120,000. Seems like a lot of work to get that extra $60,000. The industry should be paying the experts at least double what they are currently making.

netcan 13y ago
Maybe it should be paying non experts les :)
- esalman 13y ago
  Isn't it about supply/demand?
PanickedOmlette 13y ago
Sure, but I think experts have way more opportunities and can easily get more. Maybe as contractors? Of course what an expert is is highly subjective.
kjhughes 13y ago
Or quadruple or more... The industry -- all industries, in fact -- should be paying employees commensurate with their contribution to the success of the firm. Explain how to do that well and I'll nominate you to the Nobel Committee. In the meantime, we have startups for realizing returns from out-sized contributions.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  In the meantime, we have startups for realizing returns from out-sized contributions. I don't think they solve the problem anymore. The VC-funded ecosystem is just another shitty corporate ladder (engineer => eng. manager => founder => angel investor (i.e. rich) => VC). It's now a reputation economy that depends more on pleasing the right people than on engineering excellence. Hot off the press: http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/three-capitalisms-yeoman-corporate-and-supercapitalism/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/three-capital... Most of how the current crop of startups defines engineering excellence is not talent or CS expertise but "track record", especially if it involves "scaling" (that's a business anti-intellectual's nomenclature for "hard stuff I don't understand"). That has more to do with careerist maneuvering than any real drive to understand the fundamentals of computer science, software engineering, or anything else that's truly important. I think that game's done. Yes, there are outsized returns due to the fact that the real value potential of a talented software engineer is $500k-5M, but engineers aren't going to capture the next 10 years of surplus in VC-istan. Management will. The opportunities are somewhere else. I'd like to see more action in the mid-risk/mid-growth space that's currently underserved (too risky for bank loans, not risky enough for VC): http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/gervais-macleod-17-building-the-future-and-financing-lifestyle-businesses/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/gervais-macle...
michaelochurch 13y ago
I agree with you. Actually, I would guess that it's more like this: Star city (NYC/SV) non-experts: $120k Star city (NYC/SV) experts: $150k Emerging (ATX) or second-tier tech-hub non-experts: $80k Emerging or second-tier tech-hub experts: $140k Hinterland non-experts: $50k Hinterland experts: ??? ($100k++ if they can consult and work remotely; no work for them otherwise) Some people are making $180k at a given time, but even great programmers don't have long-term reliable $180k salaries (except as consultants). Right now, your specialty has to be hot (e.g. low-latency C++ in finance) for that. The star cities have a relatively small premium for strong programming skills, for a number of reasons. The cost of living forces up the low end, but there's also a glut of programming talent which leaves it with surprisingly low leverage. Even though talent is still hard to find and rare in the Bay Area (because it's rare everywhere, just less rare there) those companies think they have a lot of talent, because software managers are too unskilled to detect high talent. So that holds the high end back. If VC weren't propping up the Bay Area and the job market weren't so flaccid outside of the VC-funded ecosystem and finance, we'd see a lot of the best programmers leaving for the #3-6 tech hubs and the excellence premium would be more ($60k by the number above, but in a low-COL area and with high autonomy).
Dewie 13y ago
Now someone just needs to post some article about 10x programmers. Then a bunch of people will comment on how they are underpaid 10x programmers (or phrase it as "an order of magnitude" better than their peers for bonus points). Then someone will reply with a Wikipedia article about the Dunning-Kruger Effect and bam, you've got a regular HN discussion work-flow going.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
ajuc 13y ago
Is that average programmer salary in USA, or just in Sillicon Valley? Seems unreal anyway - in my country non-expert programmer salary is around $12,000$-$24,000 after taxes :/
- Roboprog 13y ago
  There are rural parts of the US where pay, at least 20 years ago, was around that as well. Outside of Silicon Valley, salaries tend not to climb up toward $200K/yr as well (but it doesn't cost $800K to buy a 3 bedroom house).

by ap22213 13y ago

netcan 13y ago

Maybe it should be paying non experts les :)

esalman 13y ago
Isn't it about supply/demand?

PanickedOmlette 13y ago

Sure, but I think experts have way more opportunities and can easily get more. Maybe as contractors? Of course what an expert is is highly subjective.

kjhughes 13y ago

Or quadruple or more... The industry -- all industries, in fact -- should be paying employees commensurate with their contribution to the success of the firm. Explain how to do that well and I'll nominate you to the Nobel Committee. In the meantime, we have startups for realizing returns from out-sized contributions.

michaelochurch 13y ago
In the meantime, we have startups for realizing returns from out-sized contributions. I don't think they solve the problem anymore. The VC-funded ecosystem is just another shitty corporate ladder (engineer => eng. manager => founder => angel investor (i.e. rich) => VC). It's now a reputation economy that depends more on pleasing the right people than on engineering excellence. Hot off the press: http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/three-capitalisms-yeoman-corporate-and-supercapitalism/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/three-capital... Most of how the current crop of startups defines engineering excellence is not talent or CS expertise but "track record", especially if it involves "scaling" (that's a business anti-intellectual's nomenclature for "hard stuff I don't understand"). That has more to do with careerist maneuvering than any real drive to understand the fundamentals of computer science, software engineering, or anything else that's truly important. I think that game's done. Yes, there are outsized returns due to the fact that the real value potential of a talented software engineer is $500k-5M, but engineers aren't going to capture the next 10 years of surplus in VC-istan. Management will. The opportunities are somewhere else. I'd like to see more action in the mid-risk/mid-growth space that's currently underserved (too risky for bank loans, not risky enough for VC): http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/gervais-macleod-17-building-the-future-and-financing-lifestyle-businesses/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2013/03/26/gervais-macle...

michaelochurch 13y ago

I agree with you. Actually, I would guess that it's more like this: Star city (NYC/SV) non-experts: $120k Star city (NYC/SV) experts: $150k Emerging (ATX) or second-tier tech-hub non-experts: $80k Emerging or second-tier tech-hub experts: $140k Hinterland non-experts: $50k Hinterland experts: ??? ($100k++ if they can consult and work remotely; no work for them otherwise) Some people are making $180k at a given time, but even great programmers don't have long-term reliable $180k salaries (except as consultants). Right now, your specialty has to be hot (e.g. low-latency C++ in finance) for that. The star cities have a relatively small premium for strong programming skills, for a number of reasons. The cost of living forces up the low end, but there's also a glut of programming talent which leaves it with surprisingly low leverage. Even though talent is still hard to find and rare in the Bay Area (because it's rare everywhere, just less rare there) those companies think they have a lot of talent, because software managers are too unskilled to detect high talent. So that holds the high end back. If VC weren't propping up the Bay Area and the job market weren't so flaccid outside of the VC-funded ecosystem and finance, we'd see a lot of the best programmers leaving for the #3-6 tech hubs and the excellence premium would be more ($60k by the number above, but in a low-COL area and with high autonomy).

Dewie 13y ago

Now someone just needs to post some article about 10x programmers. Then a bunch of people will comment on how they are underpaid 10x programmers (or phrase it as "an order of magnitude" better than their peers for bonus points). Then someone will reply with a Wikipedia article about the Dunning-Kruger Effect and bam, you've got a regular HN discussion work-flow going.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

ajuc 13y ago

Is that average programmer salary in USA, or just in Sillicon Valley? Seems unreal anyway - in my country non-expert programmer salary is around $12,000$-$24,000 after taxes :/

Roboprog 13y ago
There are rural parts of the US where pay, at least 20 years ago, was around that as well. Outside of Silicon Valley, salaries tend not to climb up toward $200K/yr as well (but it doesn't cost $800K to buy a 3 bedroom house).