Hacker News Reader

Comment by PragmaticPulp | Hacker News Reader

> It’s weird to me how many folks attest to “being at FAANG means you’re lazy.”

I’ve participated in some mentorship programs for college grads. There are a lot of students who think that the FAANG career path is basically “Study LeetCode for a few months, get FAANG job, then rest and vest”.

Of those who make it into FAANG, it’s common for them to be surprised by how demanding and competitive their jobs are. I’m not sure where people are getting the idea that the highest paid jobs in our industry also happen to be some of the easiest, but it doesn’t even make logical sense.

I suspect a lot of it stems from sour grapes: People inherently get jealous of high earners in prestigious jobs, and tend to reach for excuses to bring them down a notch.

View on HN

Netflix and Facebook are tough places to coast or to rest and vest. Other places, if one just meets expectations, he/she is fine.

I was offered a (non-tech) job at Netflix for a position 2 levels below my current title for 3x my current salary. When I expressed surprise, the HR rep said that Netflix was "top of the market" because they expect employees to work hard.

By the time I finished going through the interview process, the person who was supposed to be my boss had already left due to burnout. The person who was supposed to report to me had become my boss by the time I received an offer, but left by what would have been my start date. I would have ended up in charge of the department if I had taken the job.

Netflix, at least, is a grinder, and they pay correspondingly.

Anyone who has a spouse or children should also consider that in the very unlucky event the worst happens and a divorce or child support or alimony order is ordered while working for a FAANG, the judge may consider your FAANG income as your 'imputed income' in the future so taking a lower-stress job may not incur recomputing of your support orders. That is, your choice may look something like "grind at FAANGs forever" or wither in jail and/or always on the edge of bankruptcy. That's enough to scare the shit out of me from working at this double+ salary high-stress jobs.

This is not legal advice, IANAL.

Not a lawyer, but married to a divorcee.

This scenario doesn't work as you expect if you get your first high-paying job and are served with divorce papers a week later. You have to be making that much money for something like 1-2 years for it to be considered any sort of baseline.

IMO, salespeople are hit hardest by this due to economic boom/bust cycles. You live an extravagant life when times are good, then get divorced during a recession and end up absolutely ruined because your earning potential (and imputed income) are tied to factors beyond your immediate control.

Bankruptcy does not relieve you of child support obligations. Unsure about alimony, but I doubt it.

If you have to get a lower-paying job after maintaining a higher-paying one, you can file for a modification, but you can only do this once every 3 years or so. It works both ways too-- your ex can file for a modification of child/spousal support (every 3 years) if they anticipate raises or promotions on your part.

If you get a new job they can re calculate spousal support. That's been the rule for decades, and MRA FUD notwithstanding courts will not force a spouse to maintain a job they hate to maintain the ex spouses standard of living... Unless there's evidence that you are taking the new job for the purpose of lowering your spousal (or child) support obligations, in which case they will impute income. (But note that appellate courts have been more willing to strike down imputed income orders than they traditionally were).

A post divorce party increase generally does not result in higher spousal support unless it might restore an earlier level of spousal support, but either way it would increase child support.

I mean if you have this kind of concerns, isn't it better to get a prenup? Doesn't it solve the problem?

Or just not getting married... in my part of the world getting married is the exception rather than the norm.

In most parts of the world, married or not married, will give your partner the same rights and responsibilities.

Which part of the world? Even without civil partnership?

Does it mean that there's a legal battle to define whether a certain person can be considered a partner?

It's called a de facto union. Example:

"Unmarried Couples ...This page is about partners in a stable relationship who are not married or registered with any authority..." - https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/family/couple/de-facto...

Where is that?

Generally speaking pre-nuptial agreements in California mainly cover assets and income sources that a spouse had before the marriage. They wouldn't impact how a family law judge calculates imputed income for alimony or child support due to taking a higher paying job during the marriage. There are some additional complexities there so talk to an attorney if this is a concern for you. A post-nuptial agreement can also be an option.

Life changes. People can often grow in their careers, and also grow apart. And even if you work in FAANG, self-respecting spouses will demur or reevaluate the relationship if you go asking for a prenup. This kind of thing is almost unheard of for people who work for wages and do not have an agent, legal team or other type of representation already.

Prenup should be the default, any other agreement is fundamentally adversarial IMO.

Do you mean for a mid-level engineer with experience, or a college grad like the parent comment? My impression is if you were to try rest-and-vesting as an L3 (junior) SWE at any FAANG firm, you are eventually going to get PIP'ed out. It is very much "up or out" at least to L4 or L5. You may be able to hang around for two years, but then you're going to find yourself back in the job market.

That said if we are talking about mid-level/L5 engineers... then yes, I agree. From a far, it seems very possible to coast for a full 4 year equity grant if you situate yourself correctly, and have a manager that lets it slide.

An L3 who remains an L3 will get PIP'd. If they're tenured it's possible, but if they're forever senior people will start doubting them. Staff, I think, is the first level that can really be "sat" in. I say sat in because at Staff "coasting" probably has a different definition that's what being used by the phrase people are referencing. It's more like you don't have to chase advancement to stay employed.

Which doesn't really make sense. Not necessarily every senior engineer wants or even should become Staff. It's a completely different role, it also has much less vacancies than for seniors.

Forcing seniors to go up or out is an illogical way to shoot yourself on the foot... They are the experienced engineers who can train the next batch of junior/mid-level that might want to become Staff later. Seniors are usually the engine of onboarding.

Some people like to be good at what they do without having to chase higher positions to perform a different job, I really don't understand why a company would force seniors to go up or out.

Not for juniors,of course.

"Meets expectations" is part of managing workforce promotions.

"Average tenure at Google has been reported at 1.1 years, which stands in contrast to a broader average of 4.2 years for software developers across the board....Tech jobs at many so called titans and disrupters last less than two years, according to research from Dice..." - https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-stack-exchange-podcast/epi...

I find 1.1 years as average incredibly low. Is this really the case?

It's a symptom of how broken Google's internal culture is. It can become clear REALLY fast if you're on a dead-end project that'll never result in a promotion.

A lot of the time, it's because the project isn't some new and shiny thing getting pushed by a director. Lots of critical, difficult tasks don't get attention - which means that new engineers get saddled with them, realize they've been fucked out of a quick promo, and then leave for greener (on multiple levels) pastures where they'll be better appreciated.

"Ex-Googler" is somehow still a huge positive signal to some people, usually the ones who don't ask too many follow-up questions.

> Of those who make it into FAANG, it’s common for them to be surprised by how demanding and competitive their jobs are. I’m not sure where people are getting the idea that the highest paid jobs in our industry also happen to be some of the easiest, but it doesn’t even make logical sense.

This is where,

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33209621

and

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33205375

High earning: yes

Prestigious: no

It’s just a job.

Having a high-paying job at a well-known tech company that average people recognize is the definition of a prestigious job in society.

If you don’t think FAANG jobs are socially prestigious, you’re probably thinking too narrowly within the HN comment section bubble. Talk to first-generation college graduates looking to make it big in the engineering world and FAANG jobs are the definition of prestigious to them and their families.

Given the negative views that a lot of average people have towards some of those FAANGs (more specifically, Facebook and Google), I would disagree that they're viewed as "prestigious" jobs. Years ago, sure, but whatever air of prestige they had going for themselves is quickly disappearing.

You’re misconstruing the company’s reputation with the career’s reputation.

A lot of people have negative sentiment toward “lawyers” as a group, but getting a big lawyer job is still considered prestigious for the individual.

Also, the average person actually really likes Google search, their Microsoft Xbox, their Instagram friends, and so on. If the average person actually disliked these products, they wouldn’t be the biggest brands in the world.

Except part of the problem with these tech giants is they're truly inescapable

I don't "like" Windows but I'm using it right now to type this comment because my option is the other FAANG, Apple. Or specifically going out of my way to use Linux. (This extends also to cell phones with the effective Google/Apple duopoly)

I don't "like" Facebook but it's the only way I can keep in contact with my family across the planet, because they're technologically illiterate and only understand Facebook Messenger

I don't "like" Amazon but they've sucked most of the oxygen out of online retail

I use Linux, don't use Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter, and try my best to avoid ordering from Amazon.

You don't need to go out of your way to use Linux. It is really not that bad. Ubuntu Mate is a usable desktop and there are others, too, like Linux Mint, etc.

It doesn't artificially deprecate your hardware like new Windows releases do. And everything that you install through the package manager is kept up-to-date by it for security fixes, including your browser, mail client, word processor, text editors, Python packages, and so on, without you having to seek out updates manually.

> I use Linux, don't use Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter, and try my best to avoid ordering from Amazon.

you don't use Facebook but that doesn't mean you don't have an account there and that they aren't using it to track every mention of you by anyone you know who also has an account. They're also buying data about you from data brokers and using that to fill your dossier and tracking your browsing/app usage history through facebook buttons and "sign in with facebook" features.

That's the problem with inescapable companies like facebook, Microsoft, and Google. You don't have to like them, you don't even have use them, but they'll still be collecting your data and making money at your expense. You aren't allowed to opt out.

Let’s not pretend that Microsoft has an unreasonable deprecation strategy. I have a laptop from 2008 [1] that’s running a fully supported Windows 10.

After Apple abandoned my old Core Duo 2.66Mhz Mac Mini that was introduced in 2006, I put Windows 7 on it. Windows 7 got its last security update in January 2020 [2]. Yes my old 14 year old Mac Mini is still running. My mom just stopped using it right before Covid as a secondary computer for kids she was tutoring to use Chrome.

[1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Dell-Latitude-E6500-Not...

[2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-of-support

I am glad that it is working out for you. Not having security updates since January 2020 is a problem though. From what you're saying, it seems that you could upgrade to Windows 10 but then you're forced to stay on an old version of the OS whose EOL is approaching. This generally doesn't happen with Linux, and this is not the only benefit that Linux has.

I’m saying that the old Mac Mini that Apple discontinued support for in 2009 - Microsoft kept “supporting” until 2020. That’s 14 years of life for a computer with 1.5GB RAM, a 60GB spinning hard drive, USB 2, 802.11G. The only saving grace was that it also had Gigabit Ethernet.

My mom kept it because it was useful. But you can buy a $200 Dell (https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/inspiron-15-300...) that would serve the same purpose - a computer to run Chrome - that would run rings around a 16 year old computer. At some point it just becomes nerd pride to keep using. She does have other computers that she uses that are newer. But once it was EOL, she never used it.

Personally, I wouldn’t even think about getting any x86 laptop in 2022. Using an Intel laptop with its horrible battery life, heat and fan noise compared to an ARM Mac is like using a flip phone after the iPhone came out

I agree with you on Intel, and their CPUs also have the undisableable Intel Management Engine[1] problem.

But feeding the market power of a big company so that it can become a duopolist or a monopolist is not a good idea. Such market power is always used to perpetuate that power and to extract value from you. Hopefully with efforts like Asahi Linux,[2] Linux can soon be a daily driver on the M1, too.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine

[2] https://asahilinux.org/

Apple is part of a duopoly in personal computers with around a 10% market share?

I did not say that. Microsoft is though (which was part of our previous conversation) and Apple as a company is a duopoly in smartphones and I expect them to aspire to using the same strategy in other domains.

You mean they are “inescapable” because people used their own free will to choose them?

- Computers - you admitted that you could use Linux. But Apple and Microsoft provide a better experience for you

- phones - you could use a PinePhone. But you choose to use an Android or iPhone because it is a better experience

- your family chose to use Facebook products even though there are plenty of other messaging apps and methods to share pictures. Facebook gave them a better experience.

- I can’t think of a single product that you can get from Amazon that you couldn’t get from somewhere else. You choose to use Amazon for the convenience

> You mean they are “inescapable” because people used their own free will to choose them?

I didn't authorize facebook to create an account for me, but they made one for me in secret anyway and they buy data from data brokers to fill my dossier with details of my life. Facebook isn't giving me a better experience when they track my internet browsing and app usage.

I don't "choose by my own free will" to make government websites send my data to Google by including trackers in their pages, but I still have to use those sites to get the data they provide and the services they offer.

Lots of people could use a Pine phone, but cannot afford one and the last time I checked into pine phones the "better experience" in that case would have meant "Can actually be used to place a phone call". What kind of alternative is a phone that couldn't place calls? They've likely fixed that issue by now, but let's not pretend that all choices are remotely equivalent or accessible.

If there's no comparable alternative to something it's extremely disingenuous to suggest that people must love it, or that they are making a deliberate choice to use it. Often there is no choice that doesn't involve upending your entire life or cutting yourself off from society.

For example, I could quit my job, leave my entire career behind, and endanger the health and safety of my family to try to find some entry level job in another industry that wouldn't make me use a Microsoft product, but if I'm not willing to do that does that mean I choose to use Windows of my own free will?

At what point does "give up everything and endanger the people you love or else keep using Windows" start feeling less like a choice freely made and a lot more like someone putting a gun to your head? Sometimes a "choice" isn't much of a choice at all, and in the case of using Google or Facebook you have no choice since they are impossible to avoid in today's society.

You can block Google analytics and the fact that your family chose Facebook doesn’t mean you have to anymore than I have to go to a family reunion when the rest of my family chose to go there. Facebook didn’t force your family to use it anymore than they forced them to go to a city you didn’t want to go to for the reunion.

> For example, I could quit my job, leave my entire career behind, and endanger the health and safety of my family to try to find some entry level job in another industry that wouldn't make me use a Microsoft product, but if I'm not willing to do that does that mean I choose to use Windows of my own free will?

There are millions of other people who chose a different career path. There are also developers who never have to use an MS product. I’m sorry you were forced to choose a career where you get to sit in front of a computer everyday probably making a lot more than people in a factory.

> You can block Google analytics

You can't block googleapis or reCAPTCHA and still have the site function properly.

> Facebook didn’t force your family to use it

But I still don't get to opt out of having an facebook account, or opt out facebook collecting my personal data, or opt out of them using it for whatever they want.

> I’m sorry you were forced to choose a career where you get to sit in front of a computer everyday probably making a lot more than people in a factory.

I'm not saying it's all bad, or that it couldn't be worse, I'm just saying you don't always get a choice in things and often the "choices" you have are false choices or forced choices.

So what you're saying is, these are non-issues as long as I'm still able to go completely out of my own way to exercise as strained a free choice as possible?

Yes, just like I have a freedom of choice to sit down on my couch everyday to eat pizza, nachos and drink Coke or take the much harder route of walking over to ny home gym after work and run on my treadmill, climb my elliptical and lift weights.

There are plenty of people who use Linux as a daily driver, don’t use Facebook Messenger, and order from other places besides Amazon

So, for the sake of taking your...argument to its logical conclusion

Amazon sells an item I'm after

A physical store in a remote town in the African desert also sells it. But not online

Obviously it is my fault for not exercising my still existant, but "inconvenient" choice to not purchase the item from Amazon. Or simply book a flight across the atlantic, various other methods of transit to make the trip to the village and then return home the same way

Name an item that you can only order online from Amazon?

It is only considered prestigious if you are part of the section of society that respects lawyers to begin with. It is a shit job where you most likely exploit people's misery all day, sort of like a telemarketer. That is the sentiment you will find outside of the already rich (which as a rule have significantly fewer principles).

Go outside the SF/HN bubble and try to find people with a negative view of Google. Out in the real world nobody cares about ad tracking. In 2020 I walked around suburban Colorado wearing a FB Messenger hoodie and had multiple people comment on how cool it was that I work there and ask what it’s like.

I’m on the opposite coast working for $BigTech remotely. Just to keep the answer simple, when people outside of tech ask what I do I just say “I am a software developer” [1] and leave it at that. The same answer I’ve given for 25 years across 8 jobs. If they then ask where I work I say where I work, I tell them.

They usually just shrug and the conversation continues. Most people outside of the tech bubble just think a job is a job, many don’t even know the compensation of the large tech companies.

[1] The title isn’t strictly correct. But close enough. It beats droning on with the longer explanation

I know and work with a lot of people outside of the tech sphere, and nowhere near SF, who have quite negative views of Google and Facebook. Mainly in the Chemistry and Biology spaces, though to be fair those people are generally very highly educated and tend to maintain a high awareness of what goes on in the world in general.

Your claim about the "real world" sort of boils down to "people are less likely to dislike Facebook and Google if they do not understand what they are doing", which isn't really a great thing to be able to claim.

>Go outside the SF/HN bubble and try to find people with a negative view of Google. Out in the real world nobody cares about ad tracking.

I wasn't speaking specifically to ads/tracking. Out in the "real world" there are plenty of people who decry "big tech censorship" and have strong views about said tech firms that are tied to their political views.

The Verge has done some surveys on this[1] (not of their audience but of a national sample) and in 2021 90% of respondents had a positive view of Google, 89% of Netflix, 87% of Amazon, 79% of Apple, and 66% of Facebook (Instagram was 72%). I think plenty of people might have some kind of negative opinion about each of those companies, but view the jobs there as prestigious.

[1]https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/6/22702798/verge-tech-surve...

Yeah but that’s like 1/100 people you meet. Most people don’t care about the stuff you care about, jjulius.

>Yeah but that’s like 1/100 people you meet.

Depends on where you live and who you're frequently around; my experience seems to be quite a bit different from yours. I also don't expect that people care about what I care about, appletrotter.

For the general population, it is a whole lot less.

> Given the negative views that a lot of average people have towards some of those FAANGs

A lot of tech people. Believe it or not, Google still scores near the very top of "most trusted brands" when 3rd party analysts do studies. The tech community is highly negative of Google as a brand, but "average people" don't actually have a negative view.

I don't know about Facebook - haven't seen any recent data.

I work for a FAANG. It’s just one of the eight jobs I’ve had in my 25+ year career.

Just like the other 7 jobs, it’s just a means for me to exchange labor for money to support my addiction to food and shelter.

Admittedly more money than I’ve made before.

It's prestigious to people in tech (for those that know about the pay and the challenges of getting in). It is far less prestigious to average folks who are likely to think that Google is basically like any ol' office job but cooler decor and free lunches.

If you ask the average non tech person if working for Netflix or IBM is more prestigious they aren't going to laugh at the question like we would.

Well tbh catering to a crowd that exists in reality, like HNers, still probably makes more sense than extrapolating over a crowd of mythical normies in the absence of data.

In some places, a job at a company someone has heard of, or a job that doesn't require you to be on your feet doing manual labor all day is prestigious. These tech companies are still jobs that carry prestige and life changing money for some people, it's all relative.

When I was a corp dev living in Atlanta working at an unknown company in 2000 making $70K a year, many from the small town I came from thought that was impressive. People were impressed for some reason when I told them I was a developer at GE in 2008. It really doesn’t take much.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com