Hacker News Reader

Comment by jey | Hacker News Reader

> I'm also totally sick of the ideological crap at lots of startups. I don't want to have to drink the kool-aid.

I don't mean to threadjack, but what are some examples of this?

The typical is we are the best and we are changing the world for the better. If you make critical comments, you get pulled aside and told that criticism is frowned upon. The general expectation that employees be true believers while the founders are just in it for the money. The ideological belief that entrepreneurship is the solution to the world's ills.

Basically, I'd say the TED ideology. Look, tech is amazing, and it can all the solve all the worlds problems. Yet, beneath the veneer it is just propagandizing the power and wealth of 'divine' founders.

I'm also sick of startups talking how they are doing good for the world, when it turns out they are actually serving ads. When you look at the ads, the ads are often dishonest, unethical, and encourage behavior not in the interest of the viewer or broader society.

This can all be compounded by the creation of 'reality distortion fields' by dishonest founders. This can be compounded by the whole game of misrepresenting the value of stock option. Then, this is compounded by the naive belief in stock options. Further, I object cult-like devotion to the startup cult over strong moral values.

The irony here is that many of the responses in this thread are pushing you to start your own thing and change the world in a way you care about... which is pretty much the origin of these cult mentalities you're trying to get away from.

It's a real tough challenge to go from strong founding values and vision to then having to promote those values in a way that keeps your business alive. In fact, it's antithetical to the dominant business model of the internet.

My suggestion: focus first on the business model you want to operate with. How do you want to exchange with the world? As a non-profit? As a VC funded startup? A private company bootstrapped on revenue? A large public company? A consultancy? Making royalties on IP? Investing? A small local business?

IMO you'll find more relevant people and opportunities that share your value system this way.

Not O.P., but 1 type of "ideological crap" is probably in reference to how certain startups enforce and indoctrinate certain "practices" that they staunchly believe are core to their organization. Some even wear these practices like a badge of honor on their job listings.

Example: Pivotal Labs is known for it's insistence on "Pair Programming" and touts it as an "extremely beneficial" practice.

Source: Pair Programming Considered Extremely Beneficial => https://content.pivotal.io/blog/pair-programming-considered-...

...and here's one person who left because of that.

> When you pair program, you're effectively joined at the hip with your pair. You can't pair if only one of you is there. This means that you both come into work at the same time, you both take lunch at the same time, you both take breaks at the same time, and you both leave at the same time. The work is so concentrated that you work 8-hour days (which is good). But you can't take time off without affecting your pair.

Source: Why I Don't Like Pair Programming (and Why I Left Pivotal) => http://mwilden.blogspot.com/2009/11/why-i-dont-like-pair-pro...

Your link is quite a good read, and I say that as a "pair programming advocate". Some people don't like pair programming. Some people will never be particularly good at pair programming -- often for the very real and reasonable reason: because they don't want to. That doesn't mean it's a bad practice. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't build a team around that practice. It just means that some people won't want to join your team -- and if you are building your team around that practice, then that's an incredibly good thing!

I can tell you from experience that good pair programming teams exist. They get tremendous benefit from pair programming. These benefits may not be obvious to those who do not want to do pair programming -- even after a month of trying. The same can be said of many, many, many other practices.

At some point, when you are building a team, you have to decide on practices that you are going to follow -- even if those practices are, "Do whatever the heck you like". Imagine if you are working on such a team and everybody is getting along well and is productive. Imagine hiring someone and saying, "Feel free to institute any group wide practices that you want. You may force anyone to do anything you like". Yeah, obviously it won't work

Similarly, imagine working on a team with an established set of practices. Imagine that everyone is getting along well and is productive. Then imagine hiring someone and saying, "Feel free to work however you want. You can ignore any group wide practice that doesn't suit you." It's not nearly as obvious, I suppose, but that's just as disastrous. Everybody then has to work around that person and none of the practices work any more.

So, as you are building your team, you need to hire people who will be willing to work with your practices. If it's a "do whatever the heck you like" team, then you've got to be pretty clear: "We value programmer freedom over group coordination. We are unlikely to value practices that require everyone to work the same way". On the other side of the coin, if you are working in a coordinated manner (and is there anything more coordinated than pair programming???) then you have to be pretty clear, "This is how we work as a team. If you do not like that, then you will be very unlikely to be happy on this team".

Neither one of these scenarios is "ideological crap". It's reality. Both scenarios are realities that some people don't like -- and let's face it: both scenarios are referred to as "crap" by people who don't like it.

So, I get the point that you don't think pair programming is a practice that is worth build a team around. I think that's a thing where reasonable people can differ. But from the perspective of this thread, my best advice is to pick a team where you think you will be happy and successful. If you turn out to make a mistake, then try to find another team. If you go through that experience many times without finding a place where you can be happy -- perhaps you should consider the possibility that external factors are not the driving force in your unhappiness. YMMV.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com