dunpeal

55 ms·

481.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I'm in an incredible position Why? Because the founders gave you 1.8% pre-dillution equity, vesting over 8 years, and told you that's "very generous"? You're an engineer in a market where engineers are in
482.
by dunpeal 8y ago
As an early employee, his strike price should be low, so the cost of buying his stock shouldn't be prohibitive. I'm not sure about tax laws, but I'm very sure that paying some tax should not be a reason for OP to stay where h
483.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Your equity isn't "incredibly generous" for a startup in your position, where you are the 2nd engineering hire, the team is still a handful of engineers, and you're likely going to see more dilution (unless you close sho
484.
by dunpeal 8y ago
I'm seeing a lot of these irrelevant moral arguments thrown around. The fact that the founder is taking as much or more risk than you does not mean you should forgo better opportunities to work for him. You should work for him if the c
485.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> Everyone wants equity. Lots if not all employees feel like the deserve it, even the person who answers the phone and could be most easily replaced. This is not a moral question of who deserves what. Compensation is a business issue, no
486.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> Sometimes when I'm working late or working on the weekend, which is often, I wonder: Is this really worth it? The key problem in your (all too common) story is that you're only waking up to reality now. I'm guessing that
487.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I personally don’t think it’s an interesting question yet. You're probably right. I think it will become interesting once a FAANG starts losing enough stock value and cash that compensation is no longer competitive and cannot be a
488.
by dunpeal 8y ago
This needs to be higher. Most of the comments appear to assume that this clears to way to everyone buying, holding, and selling these tokenized securities. If it's limited to qualified investors, which appears to be the case, then whil
489.
by dunpeal 8y ago
It's nice that employees have a choice, but presumably some of them did choose to take stock (it would be pretty bad if none of them did), and they will see a reduction in their comp as a result of this plunge. Furthermore, the link yo
490.
by dunpeal 8y ago
An interesting question for me is whether Netflix will also experience a wave of talent departures as an additional result of this stock plunge. Netflix is competing for talent as a FAANG outfit, and as such much of the value they provide t
491.
by dunpeal 8y ago
You can control fan activation with power control utilities like powertop. I don't know why you think Dell is "very low quality". I've seen Dell laptops last for years under heavy usage.
492.
by dunpeal 8y ago
I don't see any clear path for Big Tech to be regulated like utilities. Certainly not in the US. The internet itself is still not even close to being regulated as a utility, decades after it became indispensable for our lives. So Googl
493.
by dunpeal 8y ago
XPS is great. Runs Linux very well.
494.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Right, so now it's not just "remote jet", but more of an "AI jet", and we have a whole set of challenges to go with that...
495.
by dunpeal 8y ago
I'm not the person you were responding to, nor do I claim any knowledge of jet fighters, but at a top speed of Mach 1.6 (1,200 mph), it would seem to me that relaying data back and forth from the jet would be a serious technical challe
496.
by dunpeal 8y ago
First of all, notice that none of this contradicts my comment. A prestigious school brand will help you to get into the hiring process. I did hear that for certain roles in certain companies, such prestigious brand is effectively a requirem
497.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I strongly believe that the word like 'Harvard' biases perceptions right from the start of the interview. As do appearance, culture, possible demarcations of political orientation. I'm only really familiar with engineeri
498.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I wonder if during interviewing, what would happen if interviewers were simply not allowed to know the educational background of the candidate - after all, once they have been admitted for an interview, does that information really mat
499.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Have you read the article? The issue discussed is that Harvard consistently rates Asian candidates as having "poor personality". They never got into the school, because of that assessment. That low rating is relative to other et
500.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I think issues left open > 12 months is antithetical to the idea of lean/agile and could be a sign of suboptimal project management. Totally depends on the nature of the project, its policies and users. Any popular FOSS project
501.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Hm? Plenty of startups have current valuation over $100m. However, I just chose this number because it is nice and round so the math is obvious.
502.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> You can grant equity out of the option pool, which you defined in collaboration with your investors. Obviously I'm simplifying here, but overall yes, it's far easier for a startup to give equity than cash, for the reasons I m
503.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> But they're the same thing! If investors would accept it, then you could just as easily have the investors buy the equity, and then pay the employee with it. See my [response to inimino]( https://news.ycombinator.com&#x2
504.
by dunpeal 8y ago
For a staff engineer, I'd say even $150k is very low. Even for an H1B, I'd guess $200k/year at least in additional pay beyond the base salary.
505.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> I'm not sure how H1B salaries compare to the overall average. H1B salaries are typically lower than average. Why do you think companies spend millions lobbying for more H1Bs? To pay them more than average? :-) Also, keep in mind
506.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Again, you make it seem very cut and dry. It's not. Suppose my startup is current worth $100m. According to you, I should be able to sell 0.5% of it for $500k and give that to the employee, or offer them that 0.5% directly, right? Well
507.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> It's not fair to make the employees act as unofficial investors in your company, and then give them a deal that the real investors wouldn't accept. Which is why I'm saying they should be offered a deal that investors wo
508.
by dunpeal 8y ago
There are costs to "dedication to a job". These costs must be balanced with benefits, or choosing them is irrational. Notice you're talking about "dedication", which is different than "I'm working on rewar
509.
by dunpeal 8y ago
Indeed, and even well-funded startups can't afford to burn $400k on a single engineer. They basically have to give out generous equity to compete, but they and the VCs would rather be greedy and dole out fractions of percents under the
510.
by dunpeal 8y ago
> What evidence do you have that significantly more than 10% of engineers earn more than $400K? What evidence do you have to the contrary? Compensation data isn't typically shared openly. Well-paid engineers have no reason to share

More ›