Hacker News Reader

Comment by benfarahmand | Hacker News Reader

If the goal is developing grantee self-efficacy, the funding should require pairing with a mentor. Finding a mentor that is willing to guide a grantee to bring an idea to fruition is also validation of that individual's ability to accomplish the task.

View on HN

I think that follows the mentality of VC, the idea here seems to support agency and unique views on the world, for diverging from the path is when a new path is found. I think enforcing a mentor program would harm that goal.

I'd love to take a year and just build free security tools for people to use. I don't need a mentor to do that, I just need a salary replacement for that time period.

This reeks of the mantra of product managers everywhere... "There is no way a brilliant engineer would be able to create something great without management."

1. Apply for new job, get 30% raise (apparently everyone is doing it).

2. Cut expenses by 30% (how hard can it be? Avocado toast is tre expensive!)

3. Save for just one single year.

4. Hey there’s your salary replacement! Looking forward to awesome security tools (seriously, legit looking forward to it).

(Lest you fear obsolescence;

5. Get your new new job, 30% raise again).

Probably easier to just work part time. I do 32 hour work weeks. I'm still well paid by non-IT standards, and it allows me to put at least some time toward not-for-profit R&D-type stuff. I do appreciate not everyone is in a situation where that's viable.

Would I like to just get money to build cool stuff, sure. But since I'm not an actual Ferengi, I like to build cool stuff more than I like hoarding money. So this is my compromise, I make enough to make due but not so much I don't have time to do good things.

Having a mentor wouldn't be like having a manager at all. A mentor can't control what you do, or interact with your goal. The only (shallow) similarity I might admit is as someone that you infrequently explain what you're working on that isn't intimately involved with the details. ... Maybe someone having your back, helping you stay honest with yourself, and pointing out obvious potholes you missed before you fall into them face first wouldn't be so bad.

I'm not against the general idea of a mentor program, but a "validation gatekeeper" smells ripe for abuse. Maybe a better implementation for a general mentor program in this context would be a "peer mentor" -- every grantee is paired with two other grantees, one to mentor and one to be mentored by. Maybe there would be a loose expectation that your mentoring peers would rotate periodically.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com