Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The author seems to think that everybody works this way. In reality, many of us work 40-45 hour weeks with no on call and low amounts of meetings. These jobs are in the boring (military, banking, insurance etc) sectors but I make a good, not great, living.


I work at a FANG. Senior SDE. I don't have slack on my phone. I don't read emails (unless someone tells me out of band that one needs a response). Once I close this laptop work is dead to me until the following day.

You pick and choose your own involvement. I'm "passionate" about the job. I consider it a craft and a lifelong pursuit. I'm writing a book on the topic. But the job is just a job. I'm here because they give me money. That's where my obligation ends. I do have to do oncall rotations, and it sucks, but I mark that up to "what the money is for."

My only point being, one of these rants makes it to the front page every few months. "Unionize" gets thrown around. People complain as though it must be done. I've only worked 2 legit 80 weeks in my life. I decided I didn't like it, so I stopped doing it.

That means I cannot compete inside of this place with the people that work non-stop, live on slack, and devote their lives to their job. And that's OK. They can have the Top Tier rating and the salary that comes with it. I prefer to just make my little slice of the world good during the hours that I'm paid to do it. Then I go do something else.

Balance is a choice.


Exactly. Google even explicitly says that T4 is a terminal level, i.e. they're happy to pay you a high salary for 40 hours per week of protobuf copying and the occasional design doc.


> I'm here because they give me money. That's where my obligation ends.

This is reality, but we are expected to serve like dancing monkeys jumping through hoops to make up some cult-like zeal-for-productivity story to get through the interview.


I'm sorry, what?

Most of us would trade our jobs in an instant for a nice fang role where we had 0 oncall. I don't think that option is on the table for everybody.


[flagged]


He seems to have solved a mindset issue that eludes others like myself.

I reduced to 24hr billable hours a week thinking that it would help with burnout. Instead my ego is constantly deflated given that I am now the least productive developer on the team given all others work 40hrs+ and my meeting/coding ratio has become unbearable. The resulting competition anxiety ensures I think about the project all the time. The resulting lack of energy has affected my other projects/interests.

This is 100% in my head as my supervisor is happy with my output. But I can't escape it. I often lie down, stare at the ceiling for answers, only to find myself in a worse state.


The author is clear that they're talking about "billion dollar tech companies" for an audience of those people called to them.

You're right that these are not the only place that people can write software and that many of us have recognized for a very long while that these are noxious places to write software, or that they were eventually going to become so.

Billion dollar FAANGs and their smaller, cargo culting, shadows represent a certain sector with a certain work atmosphere, much as game development companies and hedge/trading firms do. 15 years ago, during the ascent of Facebook and Google, this atmosphere was different than it is now -- innovative and luxurious and inviting -- and some people still look see them through the lens of the past, but they're much larger machines now, with different priorities and incentive structures, and as the author notes, those are mostly not aligned with sustainable, satisfying, or healthy environments for most of the engineers who've found themselves inside of them.

Like finance, they pay extremely well, and like games, they can make you feel like you're part of something you can brag about at a dinner party, but also like both, they have little concern about chewing you up for as long as you're willing to bear it.


I strongly do not think that things like 80 hour weeks, abuse, uncaring managers, and especially AGILE of all things are super common at FAANG. If you join a startup (in any industry) I think there's an understanding that you will probably work over 40 hours a week and that things will generally be hectic. Many companies will openly advertise this and tell you if you ask.

I really found myself wondering who the audience was for this. The person who works hard, produces quality engineering artifacts, and DOESN'T have options at other companies? I don't think that person exists?


I have friends who are extremely smart where this is not the case. Some of them didn't know other options were available. Some did not have the bandwidth to interview.


> The author is clear that they're talking about "billion dollar tech companies" for an audience of those people called to them.

> We’re in an industry where burnout isn’t just common - it’s expected. If you’re not pulling all-nighters, you’re "not committed." If you’re not answering Slack messages at midnight, you’re "not a team player." This culture is toxic, and it’s only getting worse. The relentless churn of projects, the constant pressure to innovate, and the ever-present threat of obsolescence create a perfect storm of stress.

No, the author is generalizing what work at a billion dollar tech company is like to the whole industry. I've never worked for a company similar to the one described in this post, and I think that the vast majority of people in tech haven't either. Silicon valley is not the world.

Either ways, unionizing sounds like a great idea.


Yeah that was my take away. I don't doubt there are many company cultures like that, and you see many highly influential tech bros advocate for it. But in my ~15 year career, most of my burnout was due to lack of progress and politics, not 80+ hour work weeks.

Now, I didnt make enough to retire in this time, but same as you I do just fine in a very high cost of living state. I've always planned my career to be 30+ years and optimized for that. I have no interest in working at a place where I'll make a million+ a year in exchange for my personal ethics and life. I want to retire and be able to actually enjoy it.


> I want to retire and be able to actually enjoy it.

In hindsight the goal of retirement seems so weird.

Nobody can save their time into an account (your hours of life cannot be transferred). I have many friends that died before 65, or I know retirees with health issues that severely interfere with enjoyment of life.

In theory we can save money by investing for later (money ≠ time). In practice I strongly believe our governments will steal our investments... Demographics suggest that governments will go broke and so governments will take what whatever they can.

I'm in New Zealand and there are clear signals to me that retirement savers will get rug-pulled by our government (changes to age/$ thresholds, but also other various taxation suggestions). A government cannot reduce spending because either (1) voters don't like that or (2) other powerful beneficiaries {businesses, politicians} fight against it.

Background: I chose bootstrapped startup life in my 30s and got a small success by 50 and I'm now possibly retired. I wished I had payed more attention to what retirees actually do because previously I understood little.


The dysfunction at those places is more than enough to cause burnout by itself. Source: I work at one such job now.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: