4 ms·

There is no malice in my post but the author really needs to think about the world from other peoples perspectives. > I'm not a fan of your previous methods of

There is no malice in my post but the author really needs to think about the world from other peoples perspectives. > I'm not a fan of your previous methods of making money. Not because I see things in binary or I have a strong desire to follow rules, but because I enjoy the sport of it. When using an exploit, you detract from that sport, whether doing it from the supplier side or whether you play the role of the kid walking about kicking over others sand castles, you are talking a stance that you don't give a toss about the victims and they're pretty well justified in feeling the same way about you. > If you want someone to give you money for a research grant or another type of funding, or even just a job, you're going to have to give them a reason to believe in you. Your life story may make them feel sad for you but it's not going to land you a well paying job. > The fact you've built a 'successful business' on a house of cards and either forgot to save or never made enough money to justify it in the first place is not something that reflects amazingly well on you. > If you want to be employed by someone else, you'll need to build a reputation. You can do that by taking an entry level job and working your way up, or by getting a degree and then taking an entry level job and working your way up. Unless you're doing some pretty prolific and utilised works, you're not gonna skip those entry level jobs. > You come across as a bit lazy or too cocky, always looking for the quick fix or to skip to the end. Fact is, a lot of people know enough to build things, few know enough to build things well. There's a lot of knowledge that is supposed to be passed down during those junior roles that you want to bypass. Still, like I said there's no malice here. I wish you all the best and I figure if you really have that much drive, you'll land on your feet eventually. But don't get caught in the trap that you're too good for QA work, you'll find most of your peers eat some dirt climbing the ladder, degree or no.

scobar 12y ago
Thank you for your comment. When I wrote the blog post, I had no idea it would be read by so many people. I wrote it thinking some friends, family, and acquaintances would be the majority of the audience. Those people already know who I am, and would understand that it was not written as a plea for more respect or attention, nor to seek employment. You are right, I'm not too good for QA work (remember I also delivered newspapers to make ends meet), but I couldn't afford to relocate and pay my monthly expenses on a QA job salary at that point in my life. Having been born in the US, I have it easy (even if I haven't taken full advantage of my privilege) compared with many others in the world. Your suggestion is to get an entry level job, or finish the degree first, then get an entry level job. I'm curious, is that is the same advice you'd offer to a non-US citizen? We take for granted how easy it is to climb the corporate ladder or get a degree, and our society values those indicators. It seems as if the objectives behind them have been forgotten though. What should be valued is humility, a good work ethic, and a solid education with curiosity to continue learning and improving. If one meets the objectives but hasn't accomplished the accepted indicators, then that person often faces prejudice (at least in the countries I've lived in). I'm not trying to imply I've met all of the desired objectives. I just strongly disagree with jumping through the necessary hoops to get ahead because everyone has to do it; especially if jumping through the hoops gets someone no closer to meeting the desired objective. I'm sorry for the rant. I hope you understand my response is not about me, but about how unfair I think it is that most are so fiercely judged by indicators rather than the characteristics they're meant to imply.
- ownagefool 12y ago
  For the record, if you can skip some rungs on the ladder, you should definitely do it as long as you're not overselling yourself into a disaster later on. My point wasn't that you should be a good little boy and play be the rules, just consider what you offer potential employers and how you convay that to them. You know how this is typically done, if you can figure out a better way, do it. Just don't spend next 5 years ignoring the beaten path because you could easily be earning that $1000 a day by then. All the best man.
- stickfigure 12y ago
  I just strongly disagree with jumping through the necessary hoops to get ahead because everyone has to do it While I agree with this sentiment in general, I think you have to look at some hoops as just part of hacking life. If you aren't finding the kind of success you seek using alternative strategies, maybe incorporating some conventional approaches could help. I'm somewhat surprised that you didn't take the QA job. Even if it didn't make immediate economic sense, it was a foot in the door and after a few months you'd likely be doing something more lucrative, especially with tech chops exceeding what I've seen from typical game QA workers in the past. It sounds like this company already has a ladder like this in place. And even if "random employee in a game company" isn't your end goal, it's probably a good step along the way. Think of it as a months-long internship; it can't be worse than delivering newspapers. Speaking of non-US citizens, I can't help but think of the countless immigrants to this country who sailed over alone, working until they could save up enough to send for their families. My overall feeling from reading both of your (well-written and interesting) blog entries is that you have had the misfortune of hitting upon a startup-type "success" early and that has given you an unrealistic expectation about how easy it is to replicate that kind of success in the future. Also, you're entering a stage in your life at which you need to dial down the amount of risk you can assume. It sounds precarious.

scobar 12y ago

Thank you for your comment. When I wrote the blog post, I had no idea it would be read by so many people. I wrote it thinking some friends, family, and acquaintances would be the majority of the audience. Those people already know who I am, and would understand that it was not written as a plea for more respect or attention, nor to seek employment. You are right, I'm not too good for QA work (remember I also delivered newspapers to make ends meet), but I couldn't afford to relocate and pay my monthly expenses on a QA job salary at that point in my life. Having been born in the US, I have it easy (even if I haven't taken full advantage of my privilege) compared with many others in the world. Your suggestion is to get an entry level job, or finish the degree first, then get an entry level job. I'm curious, is that is the same advice you'd offer to a non-US citizen? We take for granted how easy it is to climb the corporate ladder or get a degree, and our society values those indicators. It seems as if the objectives behind them have been forgotten though. What should be valued is humility, a good work ethic, and a solid education with curiosity to continue learning and improving. If one meets the objectives but hasn't accomplished the accepted indicators, then that person often faces prejudice (at least in the countries I've lived in). I'm not trying to imply I've met all of the desired objectives. I just strongly disagree with jumping through the necessary hoops to get ahead because everyone has to do it; especially if jumping through the hoops gets someone no closer to meeting the desired objective. I'm sorry for the rant. I hope you understand my response is not about me, but about how unfair I think it is that most are so fiercely judged by indicators rather than the characteristics they're meant to imply.

ownagefool 12y ago
For the record, if you can skip some rungs on the ladder, you should definitely do it as long as you're not overselling yourself into a disaster later on. My point wasn't that you should be a good little boy and play be the rules, just consider what you offer potential employers and how you convay that to them. You know how this is typically done, if you can figure out a better way, do it. Just don't spend next 5 years ignoring the beaten path because you could easily be earning that $1000 a day by then. All the best man.
stickfigure 12y ago
I just strongly disagree with jumping through the necessary hoops to get ahead because everyone has to do it While I agree with this sentiment in general, I think you have to look at some hoops as just part of hacking life. If you aren't finding the kind of success you seek using alternative strategies, maybe incorporating some conventional approaches could help. I'm somewhat surprised that you didn't take the QA job. Even if it didn't make immediate economic sense, it was a foot in the door and after a few months you'd likely be doing something more lucrative, especially with tech chops exceeding what I've seen from typical game QA workers in the past. It sounds like this company already has a ladder like this in place. And even if "random employee in a game company" isn't your end goal, it's probably a good step along the way. Think of it as a months-long internship; it can't be worse than delivering newspapers. Speaking of non-US citizens, I can't help but think of the countless immigrants to this country who sailed over alone, working until they could save up enough to send for their families. My overall feeling from reading both of your (well-written and interesting) blog entries is that you have had the misfortune of hitting upon a startup-type "success" early and that has given you an unrealistic expectation about how easy it is to replicate that kind of success in the future. Also, you're entering a stage in your life at which you need to dial down the amount of risk you can assume. It sounds precarious.