thetrumanshow

A great story of persistence, until the last bit. Were you just playing a game of tit-for-tat hard-to-get against Google hiring managers? Joking, but I am actually curious why you finally said no.

Adding more choices. Thanks!

So, at least one person said they were hired by Google. I have a question for those folks...

When you applied, did you have any reasonable expectation that you would actually be hired to work there, or was it just on a whim... like a lottery ticket?

I setup a poll to see how many of you won't ever apply to Google simply because you don't think you have a snowball's chance.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2140822

I tend to think that Google really suffers when smart people like you don't even try to apply.

I think the typical awesome engineer is just a shade too self-deprecating to even think it possible to get hired there.

App Engine and Heroku have recently taken a couple of my projects infrastructure costs down to nil... so it is getting less expensive. However, the opportunity costs are still eating me alive. :)

What on earth could it be using to make this estimation? Pete?

Edit: "61.5 years is about the time it would take to rank in the top 3 results for the keyword 'google'."

Awesome, my grandkids are going to be so rich!

When the first deposit from a paying customer hits your bank account, or the first serious investor opens their wallet to validate you, or you convince some innocent wide-eyed soul to quit their job and join you, then you can call it a business. Before that, I'd just call it an expensive hobby.

Chivalry is the result of poor estimation of the liquid value of an act of kindness, specifically its ability to be exchanged for adoration from a female.

IMO, engineers have a tendency to calculate the value more precisely. :)

Or, build apps, lots of them, keep them alive, find distribution channels to push them through (platforms), improve the winners, sideline the losers, find a niche, build apps for the niche, keep slugging away at it, build up a portfolio of complementary things.. and then build a business out of it.

I mean, its very very hard to get it right the first time and hit one out of the park, so you have to try a million tiny things to find some things that stick. The trick is knowing when you're on to something and when you need to double-down. If you can't do that yourself, get outside people involved when you think you have something. If everyone walks away disinterested, you may not have anything yet... keep going.

Sounds like someone has been beating their husband into submission for years by criticizing every decision he tries to make, therefore rendering him afraid to try anything even remotely useful.

The cure: both people must accept that the other person may actually have a good idea occasionally.

Thanks, you're absolutely right.

My intention wasn't to detract from his means of self-fulfillment, but perhaps that is what I have done.

Is it really a pie fallacy?

Here's what I really mean by subsidizing, in context, and you can decide if it fits, or if I am suggesting something else...

If you buy into the idea that a developer, for example, can be 10x more productive than another, which I do (and I'm not one of the 10x guys at all), then you tend to think that those people should be paid a heap more than the average IT guy... but in fact, they are bound by the same corporate salary ranges as everyone else on the team... so you end up with the delta between the bottom guy and the most productive guy is at most 70K.

Therefore, thanks primarily to the top performers, our overall team performs well and everyone benefits similarly... but they really shouldn't benefit similarly since the amount of value creation is wildly different from developer to developer.

I'm not really arguing against these points at all.

What I mean by my comment is that, as an entrepreneur, when I detect high marginal return on a given activity, I want to find ways of extracting more value from the situation for myself (profit seeking), rather than just getting a paycheck (profit taking).

All that value getting skimmed off and given to someone else is a lost opportunity, especially when you're working for someone else, as there are rarely ways to insert yourself at a higher point in the value chain.

It is very possible, I agree.

I have often wondered why some companies (even mature ones) actively recruit entrepreneurially-minded folks. It just seems to me that they would create trouble for you once they realize you aren't acting like a market internally, and are only willing to pay labor-market rates (except in discreet circumstances).

Even so, if you're a top performer, you end up subsidizing the paychecks of a lot of people.

I certainly didn't mean that I think these gaps shouldn't exist at all, but rather that I am spurred to move up the value chain and have a chance at taking a greater %... as opposed to just getting to play with neat technology.

Took an idea from jacquesm (thanks!): http://fcgadgets.blogspot.com/2010/10/ad-spaces-gadget.html

Launched this last month: http://www.textmyoffice.com

Some other things still in the pipe.

"...the value Google is getting out of my work is worth many multiples of my total compensation. And that’s a position that every engineer should strive for, since that’s how you can be confident that you will remain gainfully employed."

As an entrepreneur, something about this statement bothers me... something about all the value I create getting skimmed off the top and taken away by someone else. Yeah, that's probably it.

But if you just want to do neat engineering work, then, sure, I get it.

Whoa, full global thermo-nuclear economic warfare? That would be a sight to see.

I'm now going to change my employment status on linkedin to "participating in the maximum alleviation of scarcity".

One that works well for me: give the talk (ahead of time) in front of a bunch of people you respect. When you totally screw that one up and look like an idiot, you'll be so afraid of a repeat performance on game day that you'll be able to find and fix most of your problems.

Wow, its so optimistic, I hate to say anything to the hurt of the optimistic message. However, it feels to me like what is happening in the software startup world is that, thanks to the falling cost of launching a product, the pie is not only being distributed to the smaller guys, but it is also shrinking... because the small guy is willing to put out a competing product in some cases just for the fun of it.

Edit: One more thing... I think the end-game here is perfect competition, and I don't think that will be good for anyone.

While we wait for his server to recover, there's this analysis:

http://tjic.com/?p=18531

If there is a talent bubble causing salaries to surge, it must be HIGHLY localized... say, at the top 3% of talent.

1 & 2) http://www.printingchoice.com/battle-of-the-business-cards/

3) Ideally, the name should describe what you do (or at least symbolize it), or be incredibly memorable.

It takes a while to come up with a good name. Spend the time necessary to pick the right one.

The OP described perks that were illiquid, of low value, and generally non-transferrable in nature. I think that is what we're talking about.

"I want direct benefits....free parking, a free night, coffee for free or dessert, discounts and so forth"

If you provide illiquid perks for participating in a review process, I don't see much wrong with that. If they were handing out cash, then yes, that is a grey area.

Repeat business is how you reward a business for being awesome. Its over-and-above to give them word-of-mouth recommendations or to post positive reviews.

In general I don't think its wrong to ask for something in return for staking your reputation on a recommendation.

Rather: "Popular apps developer and former Principal Development Manager at Microsoft gets a call from Steve Jobs"