Hacker News Reader

Comment by asdff | Hacker News Reader

SAG doesn't require a degree in screen acting. It's a little convoluted but they basically operate mainly on proof of work. That sort of system would probably give self taught engineers who spent their years from 18-22 doing actual work a huge leg up compared to those who were in school during that time doing no work on any projects for any company.

View on HN

>It's a little convoluted but they basically operate mainly on proof of work.

It's mainly leveraging cartel power rather than proof of work. Even if you have a lot of experience acting in non-union productions, you're still ineligible from joining SAG. To be clear, I don't think this is a bad thing for SAG because the number of aspiring actors far exceeds demand, so SAG increase wages without causing the most of negative effects with cartels, but I don't think this is the same for tech.

Those people have a huge leg up right now in large swaths of the industry anyway.

The issue with the "proof of work" standard is it sets up a difficult conundrum. You need to work to join the guild, and you need to be a guild member to get most work.

You can get hired for guild work as a non guild member, usually you join the guild after though.

Sure, it's obviously possible. If it weren't there would never be new actors on the scene.

But the number of times I've heard directors and such tell stories about how they wrote a line for a non-speaking part as a favor to the actor in the role, solely to allow them to get their SAG card, is disturbing.

It's indicative of a high degree of gatekeeping.

The sag rules have changed in recent years to be a lot simpler.

And that is the main gatekeeping mechanism that keeps so many talented young writers, actors, cinematographers, etc. out of the game or working for pennies on the dollar as assistants.

It’s great when you’re in but if you don’t have the connections to get in you can find yourself on the outs for years.

If a SWE guild can find a way to eliminate the nepotism and create a meritocratic way to get into a guild…

You don't think school has any value? There's a reason we have higher education - Work-based learning is somewhat prone to leaving significant gaps in a person's knowledge.

Not to say working has no value, but neither does schooling have no value.

It has approximately zero value for doing the job of software development vs. equivalent time spent with actual work experience. It has value otherwise, but I'm really not concerned about that when hiring my future coworkers. There are other ways to acquire the skills you learn in college. This credentialist bias of yours is exactly what I'm arguing against. Guilds tend to promote this mindset, when they're not too busy promoting nepotism.

School is a good tool to gain a comprehensive education. It is not the only tool to gain a comprehensive education, and it is not effective for everybody.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com