6 ms·

This is a pretty amazing analysis. I think a lot of really talented engineers in Silicon Valley fit into a kind of hybrid category I might call 'loser with soc

This is a pretty amazing analysis. I think a lot of really talented engineers in Silicon Valley fit into a kind of hybrid category I might call 'loser with sociopathic tendencies' (gotta love these terms--hey, I didn't invent them, I'm just following the article). Although they deliberately choose to remain at the 'loser' level in terms of the org chart, they have a 'sociopathic' level of awareness of how the business operates (maybe from being an early employee or founder of previous startups). They're never truly comfortable at the 'loser' level, but maybe not willing or capable of making a move to the 'sociopath' level, and consciously avoid the 'clueless' level (which I think they eventually enter anyway, even if they avoid becoming managers, by entering some kind of 'emeritus' engineering position). The article suggests that Toby might be in this category, which I didn't think fit at first, but maybe it does--this type of person seemed to me to generally be laconic, cultivated a high degree of irony about the nature of the organization and their role within it, and usually carried an 'escape plan' as a prominent part of their mental outlook (based on either past actual or future fantasized stock option earnings) --all quite similar to the Toby character. I also think there's a type of person who views anyone at the 'sociopath' level as being inherently morally corrupt, and therefore preemptively excludes him/herself from ever reaching that level, even if they'd otherwise be capable of it. I don't think this is a correct view; the 'sociopath' type may just be the type of person who is more willing to face the full reality of how the business is run and make tough decisions that involve firing and so on. For example, even in the show I don't think the David Wallace character is portrayed as being particularly corrupt. Ryan, on the other hand, is purely selfish and greedy for power--but this actually causes him to fail at the higher levels (which I think often happens in real life as well). (By the way, in case it's not obvious, I'm trying to use these terms in the sense they're defined in the article--I don't mean them to be truly pejorative to anyone operating at any of these levels.)

strlen 17y ago
You could also argue that engineers derive a meaning from their work that isn't in terms of money or power (they do work that they enjoy).
- Dilpil 17y ago
  Indeed, the real goal of a sociopath engineer might not be to gain control over the org charts, but instead to gain control over the UML diagrams.
  - eru 17y ago
    Or rather get rid of them.
    - philwelch 17y ago
      Get rid of the drawings, yes. But also to gain control over the product design and architecture that they are meant to convey. Org charts are meant to convey the power structure of an organization, but they are usually a lie as well. A good "sociopath" will gain rank in the real power structure, while the clueless middle manager will gain rank in the nominal org chart.
- wsprague 17y ago
  Which means that an engineer is a "loser" in this system; and in terms of monetary gain, they may very well be. The author stresses that "loser" is not the same as "bad person" or "living their life according to wacked principles".
  - strlen 17y ago
    The problem I had with this article is that while it covers the case of people who are "losers" monetarily but have meaning outside of work (Pam, Angela) it doesn't cover the case of people who find that meaning in their work ; the latter category includes most good scientists and engineers and many business professionals as well. That being said, the engineer position is also fairly privileged: the pay of a Silicon Valley engineer -- even if you take into account the standard of living (provided you live in a part of Bay Area that's comparable to most suburbs e.g. San Jose, rather than a hip part of SOMA) -- is more than middle management in most other parts of the country. The starting salary for a software engineer out of college can be as high as $75,000-$95,000. They can live a very comfortable lifestyle, where additional money (outside of "fuck you money") just brings diminished returns. This isn't true for many scientists (postdocs generally make a pittance).
noonespecial 17y ago
Although they deliberately choose to remain at the 'loser' level in terms of the org chart, they have a 'sociopathic' level of awareness of how the business operates (maybe from being an early employee or founder of previous startups). They're never truly comfortable at the 'loser' level, but maybe not willing or capable of making a move to the 'sociopath' level... The Steves, Wozniak and Jobs spring instantly to mind. Did the Woz have fun during his career. Absolutely. Did Jobs? Well, that depends...
netsp 17y ago
It's tricky placing yourself in the "loser with sociopathic tendencies" category. Most people see themselves this way. No one identifies with Michael. Everyone identifies with Jim.

strlen 17y ago

You could also argue that engineers derive a meaning from their work that isn't in terms of money or power (they do work that they enjoy).

Dilpil 17y ago
Indeed, the real goal of a sociopath engineer might not be to gain control over the org charts, but instead to gain control over the UML diagrams.
- eru 17y ago
  Or rather get rid of them.
  - philwelch 17y ago
    Get rid of the drawings, yes. But also to gain control over the product design and architecture that they are meant to convey. Org charts are meant to convey the power structure of an organization, but they are usually a lie as well. A good "sociopath" will gain rank in the real power structure, while the clueless middle manager will gain rank in the nominal org chart.
wsprague 17y ago
Which means that an engineer is a "loser" in this system; and in terms of monetary gain, they may very well be. The author stresses that "loser" is not the same as "bad person" or "living their life according to wacked principles".
- strlen 17y ago
  The problem I had with this article is that while it covers the case of people who are "losers" monetarily but have meaning outside of work (Pam, Angela) it doesn't cover the case of people who find that meaning in their work ; the latter category includes most good scientists and engineers and many business professionals as well. That being said, the engineer position is also fairly privileged: the pay of a Silicon Valley engineer -- even if you take into account the standard of living (provided you live in a part of Bay Area that's comparable to most suburbs e.g. San Jose, rather than a hip part of SOMA) -- is more than middle management in most other parts of the country. The starting salary for a software engineer out of college can be as high as $75,000-$95,000. They can live a very comfortable lifestyle, where additional money (outside of "fuck you money") just brings diminished returns. This isn't true for many scientists (postdocs generally make a pittance).

noonespecial 17y ago

Although they deliberately choose to remain at the 'loser' level in terms of the org chart, they have a 'sociopathic' level of awareness of how the business operates (maybe from being an early employee or founder of previous startups). They're never truly comfortable at the 'loser' level, but maybe not willing or capable of making a move to the 'sociopath' level... The Steves, Wozniak and Jobs spring instantly to mind. Did the Woz have fun during his career. Absolutely. Did Jobs? Well, that depends...

netsp 17y ago

It's tricky placing yourself in the "loser with sociopathic tendencies" category. Most people see themselves this way. No one identifies with Michael. Everyone identifies with Jim.