You're a developer, so why do you work for someone else? | Hacker News Reader

You're a developer, so why do you work for someone else?

intermittentintelligence.com

234 pointscotsog107 comments

Try an experiment, grab a piece of paper and write out the top ten programmers that first come to your mind. Now next to their names write out which company they work for.

There was a time when I was tossing around the idea of starting my own business, something just wasn't clicking for me. Then I did this experiment, and I realized that most the programmers who inspired me to be a programmer worked for someone else (with pg being a major exception). I thought "It can't just be because they didn't have the courage to start there own company". And then I realized what was making me uncomfortable with starting my own business.

I enjoy the myopia I can have being paid to work reasonable hours as a developer. I have other passions in life, but I love that I can spend the vast majority of my spare time studying code, cs, math etc without worrying about business, marketing etc. Design I like (I'm not as passionate about it), but business I really just don't get excited about.

As has been discussed over and over on hn, true expertise is only going to be achieved by putting lots of time into something. For me personally, I can't help that thing be programming and CS, maybe one day that will change (it honestly wouldn't surprise me). Now if you do that same experiment with the top 10 wealthiest people you respect, you will probably come up with a bunch of entrepreneurs. The question really only comes does to which top 10 is the one you strive to be in.

That was my first thought: because I'm indeed a developer. Not an entrepreneur.

Very true, but there's no need to assign developers as "inspiring experts" and entrepreneurs as "wealthy people."

10/10 of the wealthiest people are not successful because they wanted to be rich, they're successful because they enjoy business and entrepreneurship. These people aren't any different than you; they just have different interests.

It ultimately comes down to your personal interests. Like business? Be an entrepreneur. Like programming and computer science? Be a developer. The only thing not to be is in it only for the money.

You're very right, I didn't mean to imply such a dichotomy. I was thinking more along the lines off come up with your personal top 10 at X, where X can be even as simple as people who inspire/influenced you, and look for patterns.

Maybe "top ten X's who inspired me to be an X".

This would include people who are inspired by autonomy and self-determination (read: congenitally unable to work for someone else) - the "E-Myth" claims not working for someone else is the main reason people start a business.

I agree completely about money. We all want money but the system is rigged and wealth is something most of us won't get. I'm still very young but I believe it's enough to have enough money to live comfortably, get married, raise some kids, and all that first and foremost. I aspire to be really wealthy but I'm not deluding myself into thinking this is an achievement that anyone can get. It feels like the best we can do is strive for wealth with a healthy respect and understanding of the odds of achieving it and being satisfied with regular step-wise progress over large leaps from poor house to rich.

I've also found that doing anything for the money is a sure path to unhappiness regardless of whether you get it or not. I strongly believe that if you do what youre passionate about the money will come. It won't come magically but it's kind of like that book, "The Secret" except with a realistic attitude because wishful thinking and envisioning where you want to be isn't enough, actions trump thoughts any day.

Big props to you. I mean it. Seriously 100% genuine. Because these days most people don't think the way you do. You are a rare breed.

I think the biggest winner in our society are those who can ignore money (to some degree) and enjoy their life to the fullest by doing things that matters for themselves and other people.

It is a very extremely hard mindset to achieve. Harder than working hard because that mindset requires faith that things will be okay if one can enjoy life and accept things with positive attitude regardless the situation.

I think that the ideal position for anyone would be to be able to quit their jobs, still be able to live a healthy life without being forced to work again.

Of course, there´s each one of us definition of "healthy life". For some this must include a yatch or a huge house. For some others, being with friends and being able to fullfill their basic needs is enough.

Me, I'd go for something in between. I don´t need a yatch, but I need nature. I don´t need an iPhone, but I need the Internet.

yacht

No, I do think he meant Yatch http://www.carolexclusivewatches.co.uk/Rolex-Sports/Rolex-Ya...

...but business I really just don't get excited about.

Neither do I. But, I'm willing to put up with it if other alternatives piss me off real bad.

I have the opposite problem. I'm an entrepreneur first, and a developer fifth ;) But getting dev's to see their own potential as a partner is like pulling teeth.

That's because developers hear a TON of ideas, and it's very difficult to get excited about anything when you get pitched so much. Sure, your idea sounds amazing, groundbreaking and world-changing to you, but to us? We've heard it all, a hundred times before.

I run a software development company, and whenever someone offers me to work for %, in most cases the answer is an automatic "no". In order to even consider doing something like that, we'd have to put in a ton of research into .. well, YOU mostly.

Whether your idea is good enough or not is secondary. The most important thing is whether you are qualified enough to take this business to the stars if we put in work for equity, so that equity becomes worth our time. And we, as developers, are not qualified for that work. We know code, we don't know researching potential investment decisions - that's angels' and VC's job.

I don't know your story, but usually, when someone does a similar complaint, that's my answer to them.

Of course taking on a business partner is almost exactly like getting married without the sex. So it really pays to get to know potential business partners first.

Some people just aren't interested in running a business, which is fine. However, I see things in a different light. I love developing web software. It's been a passion of mine since I was 13.

I've been working as a developer for the past 10 years and I've come to a point where I'm tired of working for other people. Your path is in their hands and many times, you will be forced down a path you don't want to take. I've seen many companies go down the toilet because of decisions that were beyond my control. It has made me despise my passion.

I would rather toil my life away on something that will make me rich rather than someone else.

This would be true, if not for co-founders. There are people who enjoy writing code, and there are people who enjoy selling and marketing. The marriage of the two can be ideal. Example: Id Software. ( Please add more ).

I'm getting tired of this crap.

You're a developer, so why do you work for someone else?

Some people would much rather take a paycheck then try to run a business for obvious reasons.

All companies with massive groups of highly-skilled developers who work for someone else.

Also the vast majority of web/mobile things these one- or two-person developer teams create are completely unimportant, uninteresting, trivial, superficial crap that I can't believe anyone would want to spend a significant amount of time creating and maintaining. It is obvious in 5 years time they will be gone and forgotten. Hardly much different from working on some back-office CRUD app only you get to use trendy languages and tools and pretend you're an 'entrepreneur'. Well you're not. Henry Ford is an entrepreneur, you just created a new way for rich people to distract themselves from their empty lives.

(Sorry, got a little venomous at the end. This wasn't directed at anyone in particular.)

Unless you are doing cutting-edge research in your daily job, you are not much different from those indies working on "superficial crap", apart from the fact that being "part of a company" gives you the illusion that it's more legitimate. Was google search or skype superficial and trivial? They started as programmer toys. The point of the article is that a programmer can start with $0 and build the whole product. A programmer is like a farmer or an artist, a de facto entrepreneur.

Both Google and Skype were more then "programmers toys" they started out as solution to actual problems: how to find useful things on the web, and how to connect to other people through the internet.

Also, nothing is stopping you from using your software chops on cutting edge research projects. The issue is that the required skill sets are usually different then the latest Web 2.0 technologies.

You're a developer, so why do you work for someone else?

John Resig, creator of jQuery (who also joined Y Combinator a long time ago), answer this question when he joined Khan Academy[1]. Very intersting point of view.

[1] http://www.startupsopensourced.com/2011/06/21/john-resig-dis...

I used to have the belief that most web businesses are uninspiring and useless, but if you go down that rabbit hole, you may as say every business out there is unimportant. Louis Vuitton and Prada just makes us more vain, and waste money. Who needs iPhones anyway when a regular ole phone can do? McDonalds kills people. Wall Street causes the recession. Cars? They pollute the air and are destroying the Earth!

Oh you give the automated beasts that run on our roads too much credit. Not only do they pollute our air but they are killing us. 20% more Americans died in auto accidents in September 2001 than in the 9/11 attacks.......

The point is that so much in life is really a matter of perspective. Being able to help customers is where the sense of accomplishment is at.

I think the article is a little off-base too even if I generally agree with the title. The fact is that although it takes time and effort to get going, working for yourself, as part of a flexible team is something I don't think one can trade for anything.

The open source world is becoming one where the aggregate weight of independent developers is way larger than the weight of corporate contributions (as critical as those may be in some areas). I'd hence say "you don't have to come up with ideas. Get a few customers and see what they need!"

In the end, working for yourself gives you important things you cannot get from any company. These include:

1) Once mature, most businesses fail gracefully. You wont get laid off and so you get more economic security than you would otherwise.

2) Freedom: You can always fire any of your bosses (we call them "customers") if they cause you too much trouble.

3) Strength in negotiation means higher wages

4) You can integrate your work and family life in ways others can't. You can set your own hours and move them around however it works best.

The economy is healthiest when there are more self-employed individuals around and fewer employers or employees, for obvious reasons. As was once said, "too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few."

Been there, done that. Being a developer is a small fraction of what you need in order to create a successful product. If you are the kind of person who can do it, you don't need to read posts like these.

I don't know about this guy, but it looks like he hasn't done it, and he has little idea of what lies ahead. Best of luck to him.

Spot on.

This article is based a lot on sheer effort and force-of-will in order to succeed. So is this:

http://www.despair.com/incompetence.html

I agree with the author's overall message of "just try it", but recognize what that is and how far it gets you. Turns out, generally not very far.

Not to pick on the author, as he does sound a bit bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, but anyone reading this who doesn't find it naive is, well, naive.

This is only true if you're 100% unwilling/unable to do anything except code.

This is not true of all "developers." Being able to code does not disqualify you from being an intelligent, versatile human being capable of all sorts of things. And, failing that, it certainly does not prevent you from taking a holistic look at your business and outsourcing the things you can't handle.

The funny thing you realize is how many designers can't design, how many salespeople can't sell, etc. By being committed and flexible, it's amazing the edge you can have, even if you have to pay other people sometimes.

Contrary to popular belief, the first time you code something, the computer does not shoot beams out to alter your DNA and devolve you into a developer sapiens/developer-o-saurus. What you choose to spend your time on and prioritize is up to you, and being able to code only makes you more capable, not less.

Life is far too short to take time away from things we want to, or like doing, to waste on things we are merely willing, or able to do.

So, bring in other people onto projects who can do these other things.

Ooh ooh! I know this one! [bzzzzt]

What is... a company!

What'd I win?

It could be.

You could also be hiring a guy who does marketing to help you get more customers, give some other guy a sales commission for sending work your way, and so forth.

These things don't always require formal structures. You have more power as one who is self-employed rather than an employee.

The fact is there is nothing limiting this advice to developers. If you know how to do bookkeeping, for example, you can become self-employed and rent out your services to customers rather than having them hire an employee.

Who has this popular belief?

On the contrary, most people I know assume competency in one discipline automatically grants them competency in others.

Depends. Being a developer means you can also iterate lots of different ideas before finding the one that works. In that case development is 80% of the time. With today's tools (social, advertising, job outsourcing) the rest of the work can become trivial. I am now a believer that developers can be entrepreneurs and try to motivate former colleagues to do the same. Remember that recent article from M. Andreesen about software eating the world[1]? It's true.

[1] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405311190348090457651...

"If you are the kind of person who can do it, you don't need to read posts like these."

If you are the kind of person who can do it you don't even need to be a developer either. Entrepreneurs can hire developers. Even if you need some cash for that, it's not hard to find it.

So I agree the blog post is quite useless.

That's where flexible teams come in, and being able to bring in other individuals who can contribute the missing pieces.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3202914

You should really read patio11's comment on the Google 250K thread...individual developer productivity is indeed through the roof!

We would not actually mind working for a company but companies seem to be lowballing us heavily and also giving us shit work...Going and making our own thing can not only be infinitely satisfying but it can also make sense financially!

I wrote and submitted this article to HN about a year ago. I've since moved it from a self-hosted Wordpress site to Posterous, which is probably why the dupe-checker didn't catch it (slightly different URL). A lot has happened since then. I'm still working toward my goal of doing my own thing (ironically, still working for someone else myself). When you're trying to create and market a bootstrapped business, its pretty easy to get distracted unless you have the ability to go full-time.

When I wrote the article, it was essentially me expressing my thoughts about how anyone if they want to (because not everyone does) CAN build something and start their own business, even without substantial capital. The barrier to entry is so low (comparatively speaking) that if you want to go out on your own as a developer, it is entirely possible. The post was meant to be encouragement to those who are interested, not sensational (although I did make some generalizations) :)

I actually built the original thing I discussed in the article (a service to manage Boy Scouts), and it got some great reviews and initial interest, but then the Boy Scouts wanted me to pay huge fees to license the term "Boy Scout" or use anything even resembling any of their trademarks. I decided to let that go and build something that does not piggyback on any other organization. That's what I'm working on now.

A year "lost" is a long time, but I haven't given up. I haven't lost anything other than time, since I was bootstrapping it and building it on my own time in the evenings. I won't be happy until I am doing my own thing. I'll post a follow-up with what I've learned and what has happened over the past year to anyone who is interested.

Seriously? Why don't you make the system generic enough (a service to manage "youth organizations") while still marketing it to Boy Scouts chapters? I'm sure there's more to it, but I can't imagine how you could have a system that is sellable to a client that somehow ceases to be sellable when you remove literal mentions of the client's trademarks.

I suppose I could have re-branded it and generalized it a bit. I decided to move on partially because I was so turned off by the attitude of the Boy Scouts organization at the corporate level. At a local level, they all rock (I'm an Eagle Scout myself), but at the top corporate level, its a different story.

Perhaps I gave up too soon, but I've moved on. I'm well into my new project, which is certainly not sexy, but I'm excited about it.

Great article and don't give up. One thing you missed was that you could do contract work for part of the year and then work the rest of the year on your idea. In the UK (where I am) contract rates are two or three times permanent rates so with a one year contract you can spend nearly all of the following year on your idea.

So you actually wrote the article at the same time you started your first side project, and expect people to follow your @#$% goldmine example?

As any software developer knows, projects fail. And 90% of the time they do not fail from technical reasons, as you found out (the hard way). Any developer worth his salt can make a project work from the technical point of view, but only few have a great idea that they can actually market. It's not the programming that matters, it's what you sell with that program. And you have to know how and what to sell more than you know how to program.

I think you missed the point. It was meant to be inspirational to those who WANT to. There are no valid excuses if you WANT to.

I agree with the article in principal. It's goal is to inspire people to work on their projects and stop making up excuses. I think it does a pretty good job of that. As long as you're a developer, you can pretty much build whatever you want with little to no funds. All you need is time. I have done this myself and its making me a few thousand per month. (check my submissions if interested, I'm not going to spam)

What I've learned is that not everyone is up for the uphill battle that they will face.

I think everyone should at least try to start their own little project. Whether they invest a weekend in it, or an entire summer. There is nothing quite like minimizing bullshit and stupid decisions while having complete control.

Another thing I've learned is that most people in start-ups that make the decisions don't know what they are doing. They just piss away money and people's time.

People may never know whats a good or bad decision unless you've tried your own start-up.

I'm a developer because I want to develop software, and by working for someone else, I'm paying them (with my time) to deal with all the nonsense I don't want to do. Things like marketing, infrastructure, support, etc... I'm employing my employer to let me focus on exactly what I want to.

I'm pretty early in my career and I'm certainly open to the idea of working for myself. However, there are advantages to having a job and working a little part-time contracting on the side.

I find though that companies often place as much nonsense in my way as they remove so there can be a trade off.

For sure - there's a trick in finding the right company.

In my experience, the amount of bullshit is directly correlated with company size.

There is that... and of course all Public Companies in the US have the SOX BS baked into the process.

Having never worked for one, I have no idea what SOX BS is. Can you elaborate?

Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It was enacted following Enron and Worldcom to prevent corporate malfeasance. Sadly it gave a lot of auditors a lot of power which translated to 'controls' placed on the work environment. Some make sense (e.g. no read/write access to production for development). Others make no sense (e.g. no access to log files from production for developers troubleshooting issues). It really depends on the company and the audit process.

I generally take this attitude - work for yourself - sure gentle plug - that was part of the motivation behind http://indieconf.com ;)

BUT... I think we see a large amount of survivorship bias in the tech porn we read daily.

-----

Think about the biggest websites you visit or use on a regular basis: Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Foursquare, or even Google for that matter -- all of them were created by developers who created something from little more than an idea in their head. Was it easy for them? Heck no. But it could only have been done in today's day and age. So why in the world are you sitting there day after day working for someone else?

-----

Wow... so because some people could do it, you can too? Yeah... well... call me negative, but I don't suspect we're going to see another Google or Facebook or Apple or Microsoft any time soon, and it's not because people don't try, or it's not hard.

In fact, I'm a bit dismayed by many entrepreneurs I find that "shoot for the stars", thinking that they'll be the next Gates or Jobs or Zuck, encouraged by these sorts of articles. Many of the success stories we look at today weren't started by someone who had the goal of conquering the world - they set out to solve a problem for themselves (I'm thinking more especially of the web-based services, not so much the hardware ones).

Working on lifestyle businesses - contracting yourself out on a project basis - yeah, that's more achievable for more people. This may lead to the ability to earn more, save up a runway, and work on product - sure. But... this "swing for the fences" mentality seems like it may be causing problems for people who follow the party line, but truly aren't ready/capable to execute.

I can't believe that the top comments in a thread on hacker news boil down to: most developers should probably just stick to working 40 hours a week, because most developers don't have the other skills required to run a company.

Yes it's true running a business takes more than just tech skills, and not every developer is capable of running a multi million dollar company.

However, I think that most developers are capable of running a successful small business.

Most people can't run facebook, but most intelligent people can run a small web business.

You may not want to run your own business, but that doesn't mean you don't have the ability.

1. I'm new at this

Self taught programmer learning the ropes. Just because your title qualifies you as a 'developer' doesn't mean you shouldn't have a realistic understanding of your own abilities.

2. My team is great

I have the enviable position of working for some really talented, extremely successful entrepreneurs. There is so much I (or anyone) could learn here, that giving that up would be stupid.

3. I'm doing exactly what I want to do.

The problems we are working on (biologically inspired machine intelligence) are hard, fascinating, revolutionary, and just plain cool. Every time I think of starting something else I end up with the conclusion that my ideal startup exists and someone just happened to start it before I did. Fine with me!

Any one of these is sufficient, together they make up few really good reasons to stay.

What I can achieve by myself is so much smaller than what I can help achieve as part of a team. I worked independently for 4 years in electrical engineering and now that I'm with a team of 10 other engineers the quality, variety, and magnitude of the projects I am working on has increased 20x. Working independently all that time had a huge opportunity cost but did afford a great lifestyle.

I believe start up advice is not necessarily 'one size fits all', especially for someone relatively inexperienced and which is something I expected from the article. I've read way too many "just do it" articles.

This is advice I've been giving myself and living before I attempt to jump in:

1. Get really good at your craft, in this case, programming. You don't want to spend time learning how you need to configure your server when you'd rather prepare for your meeting with that client.And importantly, you have something to fall back on if it doesn't work out.

2. Get enough people to take you seriously. I mean really, work on open source, maintain a blog, attend hackathons etc. Build a decent enough profile that another developer would recommend to someone.

3. If possible, get paid while you pick up these and many other vital skills. You'll learn a lot on the job and clear your bills. Of course, make sure you're sincere enough to focus on 1 and 2.

Young and relatively inexperienced programmer here. Been working for someone else since about a year now (soon after graduating) and plan to continue to do so for at least another year. I've been living this advice for a while now and I feel I'm coming along ok. Would love to hear thoughts from much more experienced programmers/entrepreneurs.

Working on a side project for yourself is easy and as he says, it's possible to find the time.

However, having my own founded and co-founded companies for the last 20 years, I must say unless you have enough money to really work on what you want, you're always working for someone else. As a consultant, you're always working for clients and if business isn't too bad, you can at some point be picky and chose your clients. But, your still working for someone else.

Then, as a pure startup that gets funded, you are working for your investors. Usually, you try to have the best fit and keep enough ownership to make your own decisions, but you're still accountable, which is ok with me. It's sometimes good to have someone to check a bit over your decisions.

But, unless your are extremely fortunate, you are still usually working for someone else. Still, you gain more autonomy and flexibility as opposed to purely being employed.

This said, working for myself works for me and I would never go back to being employed by someone else.

Just know that you'll still be accountable to someone else. The difference is if you screw up, you cannot blame the company. You can only blame yourself. If this happens, it will be a good learning experience.

The difference is that as a self-employed consultant, you can fire bosses (we call them customers) that cause you too much trouble. It's a question of balance of power, and one should not underestimate that difference.

Similarly with startups and investors. If you have the ability to walk away and find another job, that gives you power. This is a big reason CEO's make obscene amounts of money in this country while floor workers don't.

I agree. As long as you can afford to. But even when you think you can't afford to, you're probably better off firing the client that gives you to much trouble.

As for having a startup with investors, if the fun isn't there anymore you always have the option of walking away.

Walking away isn't for everyone, though. Getting to the point where it's an option in your arsenal, having the confidence and experience of knowing you'll find something else to make a living by yourself is what separate entrepreneurs and employees.

"Walking away isn't for everyone, though. Getting to the point where it's an option in your arsenal, having the confidence and experience of knowing you'll find something else to make a living by yourself is what separate entrepreneurs and employees."

And this is exactly why telling people that this is not for everyone is harmful to everyone. If all the applicants for a job can walk away and find something else, the company has to be far better at keeping them and the companies which add too much BS end up dying rather quickly.

I work for someone else because today, my expertise is in software development, not in

* sales & marketing

* graphic design

* finance

* business law

All of the above can be obtained and I plan to obtain enough expertise in those over time so that I could start my own software shop. But today, I assess my risk of total failure to be very high, with no soft landing.

You can also ask lawyers legal questions, pay graphic designers where you need to, and hire marketing firms......

The finance you'd need to learn enough to do, but you could hire a bookkeeper for day to day stuff, and learn enough to make sure you aren't being robbed.

The most striking bit: he found a Borders to sit at.

OK, just kidding. This post is a year old. Naive? Sure. Doesn't mean the sentiments aren't correct. I wonder how he's doing one year on.

The "just do it" theme is good to hear once in a while for those of us who have shelved their startup dream temporarily.

I tried to hack out my ideas for the last three years with zero development experience.

Eventually I hit a wall of ability, because I was working alone, completley self taught. I felt like my options were 1) work with other developers, or 2) back to school.

So last month I got a development job. I'm learning a ton everyday, but it's leaving me with almost no energy to pursue my own ideas. I hope to save some money this next year to kickstart my own projects.

I was in nearly the same position as you around this time last year. It was tough and exhausting for a while until I wasn't learning as much throughout the day. You'll get back to a point where you have the energy to come home at the end of the day and spend a few hours working on your own projects.

Hacking out your idea is more resistance than genius. I would say, 99% persistence.

I got my first job a few month ago doing programming, and I learn a lot. However, how I learn is mostly banging my head day after day. When I am at work, I have no choice but to bang my head against the code, trying to figure out why it is not working.

Banging your head is not the best debugging technique; many people try to learn programming but neglect learning the fine arts of debugging.

I disagree, struggling with your own bad code is an important part of learning the art.

Ugh. It's just a metaphor. All that really mean is to try damn hard everyday.

I'm going to plug worker cooperatives here. Small agile companies fit the model perfectly. If anyone does reply to this with questions, I'll answer.

I love this idea. They can also get big too, here is one from Spain that employs ~80K people - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation

Where would you recommend looking for help and information on doing this in the US?

thirdcoastworkers.coop is a Texas based group that might be helpful.

http://usworker.coop/front is also good. Mondragon is cool; another group with the same name operates in Quebec. Worker coops can be flat structures or simply be companies where the board is elected. Either way, the members control profits and mission.

I have nothing but vague questions :)

I've been thinking for a while now that I would be able to find much more work by teaming up with some web/frontend devs.

Where corporations are necessary, some sort of worker cooperative is the way to go. It prevents the division between labor and capital from developing and so it empowers workers. Anything that empowers workers is likely to improve productivity too.

I want to work on challenging problems that have a real world impact. Right now, I personally thinking that building distributed data infrastructure is such a problem. If I were to start or join a small web/business software startup chances are I'd never actually get to solve this problem: I know I'll never be happy if I'm not solving what I think is the most fascinating problem I have the aptitude to solve. I've left companies in the past for this reason and (as pg had said a number of times) lack of determination to succeed is more important than raw intelligence.

I could start a systems startup, but having worked for such a company in the past, I know I don't want to start one, especially at this stage in my career: finding funding (this isn't something you can bootstrap), customer support, doing business development (to find a sales channel) and/or sales/marketing (the sales model is not self-serve) would be what I'd spend huge portions most of my time on. Note how that list doesn't include "solving actual technical problems" -- doing something I love would only be a minority of my time. Nor would I have access to true scalability challenges (i.e., to envision scenarios that my customers would encounter further down the line) like I do at my current employer.

Might I do a startup one day? Sure, if it's the best way for me to solve the problems that I find meaningful and interesting. As for the money? Not really a motivating factor, plus statistically it's just not likely that I'll make more as an entrepreneur than as a software engineer.

I tried starting a business with a few friends. We made a pretty good go of it for a year or so. We didn't get rich, but we broke even compared to having regular jobs, which ain't bad. But, even though I wasn't really one of the business people in the group, I still had to be aware of and keep up to date with a whole lot of "running the business"/"schmoozing customers" crap that I had absolutely no interest in. I don't care. It's not interesting, or rewarding, or fun. I just want to build stuff. I'm not that bothered who decides what I'm building, so long as it's not an obviously complete waste of time.

So I work for someone else. It's a small company, and I'm a big cog in it, but I don't have to worry about any of the crap I don't want to worry about. I just build stuff that our clients want.

Yeah, I'm not raking in mad coin. Big fscking deal.

"My point is: an hour here and an hour there adds up! You have time, its just a matter of what you choose to do with it."

This trivializes the situation for full time employed programmers. Sure, you have spare hours intermixed throughout your work day, but these are not _productive_ hours. Your brain is worn out due to the effort spent in your 9 to 5 and distracted since when you're not at your job you have all sorts of other life responsibilities to manage (eat, exercise, socialize, family).

The author has a busy family life and a full time job and is still able to find 20 hours a week to work on his own thing. I find this very impressive.

I worked like this for a time before leaving my full time job last August. I found full time + half time + the rest of life was unsustainable. At first I made progress but quickly the rest of my life began to suffer. My relationship with my girlfriend became strained. I barely saw my friends or did things I enjoyed. Burnout started to appear. I got to the point where I realized that none of my programming hours were as productive as they once were. I was working more but getting about the same amount done.

I'm not saying it's not possible. It's just not as easy as he is making it sound. He is right that as a developer I was sitting on a gold mine but the mining didn't really begin until I quit my day job and focused.

Exactly. I'm a developer, not a businessman. I don't want to deal with the problems of running a business, all I want to do is make cool things. Letting somebody else run the business allows me to do that. I'm not here for the money - my employer pays me enough that I don't have to worry about money. That's all I want.

My boss spends all day answering emails and dealing with clients, while I write code. I see no reason why I would want to trade places.

If your boss actually lets you make cool things then you are lucky....chances are that you are a salaried bitch who can code!

How can you be happy when your boss makes much more money than you writing emails all day...point is that you should really be the boss having an assistant who can write emails!

I don't care how much my boss is making, I make enough money. How can you be happy worrying about everybody else's salaries?

I understand your opinion here, and in fact I sort of share it, but having myself been in a situation where I affected the balance sheet in the low seven-figure range (in a good way) and received in return a good review and a 'keep it up', i.e. no raise or bonus, I can completely sympathize. It is maddening when people are buying expensive cars and nice homes with profits made possible by your work.

not everybody....only the person who tells me what to do ,writes emails all day and makes almost double my base and at least 5 times my bonus.

If the the desire to not get fucked over is being selfish...then so be it!

Some people have signed contracts that assign the copyright of anything they create to their employer, so starting a business on the side isn't possible.

http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422/if-im-working-...

I appreciate that this is often a geographical and jurisdictional question, but that falls firmly in my "Don't do that, then" category.

Sometimes building something entirely on your own takes you away from the craft you love. If you are master chocolate maker, but have to focus on business, accounting, marketing, etc., maybe you'd rather just work for an awesome little chocolate company and focus on your craft, ya know?

Maybe you'll end up working for Hershey's.

I think this debate has been had several times before. And I respect the opinion of everyone who has an opinion, but there is one topic which I have never seen discussed, and it arises from the fact that bigger companies have more money. If you are working for companies like google, amazon, facebook, IBM etc you get a lot of opportunities that only money can buy. Traveling the world being one, high salary and holidays being two, we should throw in working on much larger projects as three. This list is only limited by my experience. The point is, if you are working for a good company, you get to do a lot of stuff a startup wouldn't even dream of.

There's a whole class of interesting, valuable challenges that you'll never get close to working on when you're alone and bootstrapping. Building value at a larger scale, as part of a larger team, can be equally fulfilling, as long as the team is great.

Also, while Google, Twitter and Facebook are great outcomes, there's a 1000:1 chance against your particular idea. It's 10:1 you'll be able to start it at all, then 10:1 you'll survive until funding/bootstrap, and then 10:1 you'll exit. If you want the best expected value (in dollars) for your time, go work for wall street firms!

> Myth #1: I don't have any time. This is a common excuse (...)

This is a really common case. When you are alone with your startup idea, you often fail to give the right priority to the tasks you need to complete to get to something of value finished. Advisors are the best solution to me. <shameless-on-topic-plug> And I'm working on a solution for all the (would-be) single founders to get help with this issue: http://www.asaclock.com </shameless-on-topic-plug>

I bet for a lot of people, you don't have to look much further than the current #1 story on HN for the answer: Programmers Salaries at Google $250k (and up)

The main reason is that most startups fail, and being a developer and transitioning to an entrepreneur is a huge leap. The gap is big. It takes a lot of effort, money, emotional strength and perhaps, some luck. So getting a job and decent salary ($250k in Google from today's top post) is usually the prudent thing to do. I wouldn't advise every developer to try and be an entrepreneur. That's just bad advice.

The author of this blog posting seems to equate being self employed with having a startup or online business. This is certainly a great thing to do, but there are other paths to self-employment. And self employment isn't for everyone.

Take me, for example: I'm a developer, and I've been an independent Web/database consultant for 16 years now. I feel incredibly fortunate to be able to have my job. I work with half a dozen different companies and organizations each week, I meet new people and businesses all of the time, I get to learn and work with a variety of technologies, I work as a senior technical person rather than as a manager (which would be expected at most companies), and I have a fair amount of control over when and how I work -- although with three kids, a mortgage, and a bunch of clients, I definitely work more hours than I would if I were an employee somewhere. (But I really enjoy what I do, so that's OK.) I don't have to ask anyone for permission to go on vacation, to go to a conference, or just to pick up my kids from school once per week.

That said, I remember when the current recession started, and high-tech companies were laying people off in droves. I told my accountant that I was worried about a large crop of these laid-off workers starting to compete with me. He told me that I shouldn't worry, that most people want to just have a steady paycheck, and don't want to deal with all of the things that a small business owner needs to worry about.

And indeed, being in business for yourself means dealing with the month-to-month worries of ensuring you have enough income, that you're marketing yourself in the right ways (and yes, I market myself, although it might not be obvious at first glance), that you know how to choose clients, that you can negotiate with clients and banks, and that you can balance the various demands that your clients put on your time. It's definitely not for everyone; my wife has gotten used to the ups and downs of our income (and we live pretty well overall), but it's not nearly as straightforward or relaxed as having a paycheck come in every month.

If you can pull it off, though, then being self-employed (whether in a startup or a business like mine) is incredibly rewarding and exciting. I've been offered full-time jobs by a number of companies, and while I've always said, "I'm willing to consider anything," the fact is that I'm really enjoying myself now, and can't imagine returning to the days when I went to the same office, with the same people, and the same tasks day after day.

I think with all those exclamation marks, it would have been fit if he had ended with "Let's quit together. I just forwarded my resignation to my boss."

However, since he didn't, I assume writing a blog post about this was just a way to let out the pent up frustration, thereby taking away from the credibility of the post.

I think it's similar to owning vs. renting a house. Working for someone else is like renting. When rats are running through your kitchen you pickup your crap and leave. But while you live in this rented house you might repaint the walls and generally take great care of the place.

And most of the time, renting is a better investment! :)

Because they have money and I don't?

Additionally, any time spent running the business (ie., all that other stuff that isn't programming) is time not spent programming.

It's not like I ever plan to stop. I figure I can still do this when I'm 80 or 90, barring complications.

I'm working in a sector where several companies have spent $50M and produced things worse than what I want to produce.

It's sobering, and makes me think that there's a lot to know about business that I don't know.

This guy finds 20 hours week. This means he is spending 60 hours a week working. Its not healthy.

He names 5 tech companies. How many developers are there in the world? So what hundreds of thousands of developers have the potential to make a Google? I think not.

In reality you will probably be happier sticking to employment and working on and launching a side project as and when inspiration strikes. Burning 20 hours a week of your free time will likely lead to - in this guys case - divorce and for other people burnout.

"In reality you will probably be happier sticking to employment and working on and launching a side project as and when inspiration strikes. Burning 20 hours a week of your free time will likely lead to - in this guys case - divorce and for other people burnout."

That will work until your employer makes the wrong business decision and the company goes out of business or there are budget cuts and you get laid off.

Oh yeah, and if you work for any technology company and have a side project, you better check any contract you signed. Most say that anything you work in your off time is company property.

"That will work until your employer makes the wrong business decision and the company goes out of business or there are budget cuts and you get laid off."

That doesn't matter. This is no different from being self employed and making bad decisions yourself.

When you are employed you typically know if you job is safe enough as you have a fair idea of how the company is doing and have a feeling about how important you are to the company.

If you know you are dispensable and your company just lost a big contract you would worry. Otherwise you wouldn't. Self employment is very similar.

Regarding contracts, this is why it is very important to read your contract before signing. I have turned down a number of jobs due to unrealistic non-compete agreements and the potential employer owning discoveries I make in my own time.

"That doesn't matter. This is no different from being self employed and making bad decisions yourself."

The difference is that you have control over your own path. There were many bad decisions at my previous job that I warned my managers and bosses against. They wouldn't listen to me and the company ended up losing money or the idea was a complete failure. I could see the company on a path of failure and the only thing I had the power to do was ride it out. Every good idea was squashed.

"When you are employed you typically know if you job is safe enough as you have a fair idea of how the company is doing and have a feeling about how important you are to the company."

This is sometimes true and it sometimes isn't. I've been in the dark about how well the company is actually doing. It happened at my last job: They kept assuring us that the company was still profitable and everything was fine. Two weeks later, I got laid off.

In the end, it was actually positive, because I used it as an opportunity to start my own company. I was always on the treadmill of a 9-5 and it was tough to really get anywhere.

"Regarding contracts, this is why it is very important to read your contract before signing. I have turned down a number of jobs due to unrealistic non-compete agreements and the potential employer owning discoveries I make in my own time."

Very true. However, most of the big tech companies require this (Microsoft, Google, Facebook).

I disagree. Most small business owners in fact work at least 60 hrs/wk.

There's a tremendous difference between work that is well integrated with family life (as self-employment can be) and work that's away from everyone else. Indeed if he is lucky he'd have his spouse helping with business administration.....

I think the chances are that if you are working 60hrs a week you are doing it wrong.

Working that amount of time for a month to power through a launch or get something done is fine.

However if you are working that amount of time week in, week out and have a family which you actually want to spend time with then it doesn't really matter where you work. You could work in your families living room. You would still be turned off to them for 8-12 hours a day.

If your single, this may be the life for you. If you work with your partner it may doable at times.

Realistically though, most people will not need to put in this much time. If they are there are a number of things they can do to reduce this time. You really do not need to work yourself into the ground to make a good living.

It's rather different than that in all areas.

The first thing is "defining work." When you work for someone else, a lot of things you do on personal time are entirely separate from work. When you work for yourself, there are opportunities for more integration.

Maybe that time blogging ends up being an extra way you spend promoting your business? Maybe that time spent on facebook ends up at least in part being marketing time? Certainly that time spent reading industry magazines is work time.

If your spouse is helping with the financial management, you have time that you'd talk about household budgets and stuff that will often bleed over into impromptu family business meetings.

And so forth.

I don't think you can entirely compare 40 hrs in a cube with 60 hrs for yourself. They are in fact two entirely different things.

For example, I generally try to spend about 20 hrs per week in heavy engineering and development, no more (usually in 4 hr chunks if possible). Maybe 10-15 hrs per week doing light development and tech support in small doses scattered throughout the rest of the day.

On my afternoon breaks I play with the kids. Sure I probably work 60 hrs/wk but I can do a lot of it when it is most convenient for everyone else, and so ensure that it isn't as you describe.

precisely because i'm a developer. i want to spend my day writing code, not dealing with the myriad other concerns of running a business. (and, to a lesser but still significant extent, i want the security of a steady salary while i do so; i'm not by nature much of a risk-taker)

Because I am a great problem solver, but, without a problem, I have no ideas. :(

Because they pay me. Why not work for someone else?

The sentiment sounds nice but this isnt helping the vast majority of people.

People work for others because they need that steady paycheck. Maybe they like it! Not everyone has a terrible job. Not everyone hates their job. Not everyone wants to start a business. This assumes that just anyone has what it takes to start a company and it isn't so. I agree with the guy who said that those who who actually can do this don't need to read this.

The biggest problem with articles like this is that it feeds unrealistic ideas to all those idiots out there with terrible ideas, the ones who want to be the next JobZuckerbergParkerBezos for the sake of being a billionaire because hey, its cool and they think they have what it takes too. They're gonna be the next big thing! Yeah! But not really.

This makes people think that just because they can, they should and glosses over all the harsh realities of getting into business like the enormous personal risk, the high odds of failure, and the fact that, quite frankly, most people aren't competent enough to run a business.

It also does a disservice to those of us who have started a company. It makes it look like we're slave drivers making money off the backs of our poor employees when really our poor employees are getting as much as we can give them without having to deal with the problems we do which are far more than theirs. We take on the stresses they do plus the ones they don't have to. It also makes us look kind of, well... Common.

You know, I used to read articles like these before I started my business and now that I see things from the other perspective, I sometimes wonder if I'm one of those idiots I rail against that have no business being in business. I wonder if I'm delusional and if I'll ever get where I want to be or if I'll have to close up shop and say I was wrong and I'm not one of those people who are cut out for this. I'd tell people don't start a business. It's an ungodly amount of stress, the risks can far outweigh the rewards, and it's incredibly egomaniacal to think you're one of the special ones who will make it. This isn't something where you just open up shop, collect money and live large. You struggle, it can suck, and your personal relationships will suffer. Your ideas aren't special either. Everyone has a website or app idea that they think is the next big thing and it just isn't. I know because my clients are those people. That said while I often think these things of myself, the rewards have been worth it. But I must stress that it's not like that for almost everyone else.

The article lacked a warning to people to tread carefully into entrepreneurship with a supremely grounded attitude. Think realistically. Life isn't like The Social Network. It's ugly as sin and encouraging the masses to take a leap like this is scary.

You're not good enough, that's why ;-)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com