Giving a shit as a service
allenpike.com
allenpike.com
I was once asked by a client (bank) to take a call with one of _their_ clients (a pretty important hedge fund). I did this as a courtesy even though I thought our product wasn't appropriate for the hedge fund. Anyhow I get on the call and it's the COO, the Chief Investment Officer, the CTO and a couple of other _very_ important people at this big fund. (ie a much more senior call than I really expected). Anyway, because I give a shit, I told them our product wouldn't really be right for them and explained why. They thanked me and I heard nothing more of it.
Until a couple of years later where I offered a job out of the blue because one of the people on the call had been impressed by how I had dealt with it, and by pure coincidence his partner was a recruiter who was tasked with headhunting for a CTO role and he said "hey you should check this guy out".
I have never been one to deliberately "build my network" and even I have had several beneficial things come about via my network.
I've also never thought of myself as deliberately building a network but the (few) jobs I've landed over the past 25 years have been directly through people I knew.
What's the alternative? If he'd fibbed and tried to make it work, and then wasted everyone's time during the sales process. Or worse had an unhappy team at the end of the POC or a contract that the company wouldn't renew?
I guess he could have not taken the call, but I think if a client asks you to do that and it isn't invasive in terms of effort, most consulting folks would do it.
And hedge fund employees impressed by a presentation are likely to talk to and occasionally move to work at banks. The headhunting relative with the ideal job vacancy certainly wasn't the most likely of the many potential positive outcomes!
The difference is that you're not optimizing for a single lottery. If you build a habit of caring about things and doing a good job, people will notice. You'll meet thousands or tens of thousands of people across your career. The more of those people who walk away with a positive idea of your reputation, the more "lotteries" you've entered. The more positive your reputation, the more entries you get.
This really shows up in the second decade of a career, when many of the people you've worked with in the past have moved up into management positions and are looking for good candidates to recruit. Having established a reputation as a person who cares and who does the right thing will fast-track you through interview processes and move you to the top of recruiting lists (and rightly so, because you've already proven yourself).
One argument is that the parts of our life that make it our particular life are the things that are, by design not optimal. Any optimal choice we make is an optimal choice any rational actor in our shoes would make, so says nothing about us or our particular place in the universe.
You are what you're willing to squandor time and attention on.
Thanks for sharing!
What they don't see is how the "lucky" people put extra effort in over an extended period of time, without immediate personal gain. It's not worth it... Until it is.
Instead of waiting to be picked, you could have been proactive and reached out to them for a job. The odds massively improve in your favor compared to a lottery in terms of winning (winning = getting a job in this case). And to belabor the obvious, no matter how cool I am with the gas station clerk, it's not going to improve my odds of winning the lottery.
That leads us to part 2, which is "why do anything at all for your career when you already have skills" and it's because doing things like signalling that you give a shit alerts other folks with decision-making powers that can benefit you.
Case in point:
I remember working on a project that was taking a long time to get stuff done. One day, I took lunch in our project room and was there with another junior dev as we were both trying to finish a few things up and working and eating lunch.
Suddenly in walks three older gentlemen in suits. They start looking at all the stuff (charts, metrics, designs, etc) we have posted up around the room and start talking and pointing to some charts. I kindly ask them if there's something I can help them with.
They walk over and introduce themselves. Two are executive VP's of the department we're building the app for. The other is a senior VP who is showing them what we do. I start explaining how the progress is going, "Well, Bob, its really all rainbows and unicorns right now. If we can get server A talking to server B, it will be even better."
Exec A puts his hand and I stop talking. Looks at me and says, "Atfateshands, tell me honestly how the project is going. I didn't come down here for a sales presentation, tell me honestly what your thoughts are."
That evolved into a 30 min talk about what I thought was holding the project back and possibly transitioning out of some the tech that was kind of forced on the project to a better framework that would speed up building this app. I stood at a whiteboard and quickly ran the numbers for them showed them it wasn't too late to pivot.
They thanked me for my time and left. I figured nothing would come of it. Then a few days later, the project manager comes to me and says, "You know how you wanted to pivot to that new JS Framework? You got the green light. Let's get started ASAP, ok?" The same three guys showed up about a month later, and pulled me outside the room to thank me for my honesty and not just telling them what they wanted to hear and believed that pivoting to the tech I recommended essentially saved the entire project from getting scrapped. Because of all the delays we were having, they were discussing the possibilities of just shutting the project down in the next few weeks when they visited our room that day. The most senior VP also told me in the future not to wait around before speaking up.
It was a pretty eye opening experience, but gave me a really valuable lesson.
The execs were shocked I was "just a contractor". So that was pretty cool.
I have caught the good and the bad from speaking up but the universal message is to always keep your mouth shut...and that's why we can't have nice things.
I power through and speak up usually, but most people are deathly afraid to because of the spoken/unspoken "keep your mouth shut" cultural message born of hierarchies. Toxic, and probably the reason people flee corporate life ASAP.
I've been in the same position a few times after this and it really is all about reading the room and the people you're talking to.
It was clear the execs I was talking to wanted to get a more "feet on the street" perspective on the project and find out what was really making the project lag behind. I felt like I had nothing to lose and could explain things in a simple manner so they could understand what the issue was and give them a viable alternative that could save the project.
In other situations, I've had the CTO sit in front of a room and berate a dev team I was on for not testing an external app and having it crash a bevy of servers for almost two days while asking if anybody had any answers as to why we didn't test enough. The other situation was getting pulled into a VP's office and ask me why a project wasn't hitting our goals. It felt like more of a "Tell me who I should be firing for this." meeting and I wasn't about to throw anybody under the bus and felt like being honest and speaking up wasn't in my best interest.
It sounds like the PM also wanted to pivot. But someone between you and the VP on the org chart didn't.
Were they bitter about the situation where it seemed like you went over their head? Were there repercussions from that?
I'm not saying you did anything wrong, but you make it sound like the decision was unambiguous - you are being forced to use some tech that's slowing you down, and you know of a way to speed things up. Why did that need a VP to be approved?
I'm not bringing this up to blame you - but I also want to make sure anyone reading this doesn't feel like their only action in a situation like this is to wait for a VP to come in, hear all their complaints, and magically solve their problems. In another situation, your exact actions would have led to no change, and a ruined relationship with a manager who would have vindictively punished you by going outside the reporting chain.
"In the Abilene paradox, a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of many or all of the individuals in the group. It involves a common breakdown of group communication in which each member mistakenly believes that their own preferences are counter to the group's and, therefore, does not raise objections, or even states support for an outcome they do not want. A common phrase relating to the Abilene paradox is a desire to not "rock the boat". "
I ran a meeting once where a significant consensus decision was made after lengthy discussion of several alternatives.
The result surprised and disappointed me, so I checked with everyone individually later, away from the meeting, to find nobody in the group wanted the option they voted for, they just voted for what they thought everyone else wanted. Which turned out to be wrong. It wasn't even a compromise, it was just incorrect belief from misinterpreting everyone else's sentiment.
The least popular option prevailed, with unanimous consensus, and nobody knew it was unpopular until I checked after.
Most of the department was still on Waterfall, we were doing Agile. They mandated we use their old tech stack since we opted for Agile instead of their standard Waterfall project management. This was communicated as a compromise, not knowing how old the tech stack was.
There was a lot of back and forth and the PM showed incredibly courage to stand up to the department heads. Using the old tech stack was a compromise, but in the end, started slowing the project down. Once I was able to explain in more layman terms how it was affecting the project, the people with more say allowed us to pivot.
There was minimal backlash, once we pivoted. I made sure we started hitting goals and gaining traction quickly to offset any arguments they were going to make. I knew we'd be under a microscope, so I put in the extra work to make sure we were covered.
It's a tough game to play when you are trying to hit quarterly numbers, but it is a fun game to play over a career.
It’s tough knowing the difference. A lot of people baulk when I say I won’t “go the extra mile” sometimes, but frankly I just have to make my own calculations and sometimes you (royal you) are just being greedy. If I “go the extra” mile as a video producer for every person who asks me, not only am I potentially setting steeper expectations for next time (because it is NEVER just once with most people and they may tell others), but I am also taking on more work for less pay. That’s other work I could be doing, that’s being with my kids, that’s all sorts of valuable time for potentially nothing.
I don’t know. I hope this little rant has something useful in it haha
The feedback loop on these actions is so long that it's hard to understand the value of a positive reputation. It can take years of consistent positive actions before the long-term, indirect benefits of building a good reputation become apparent.
This is a constant sticking point when I mentor young people: It's easy to enter the business world and assume every interaction with other people is purely transactional. What's in it for me right now? Why should I help you?
It's also easy for junior people to think that changing jobs is a perfect reset button for their reputation or that the consequences of their actions will be neatly contained to the people around them. It can be a shock to discover just how much backchannel reference checking happens when evaluating candidates as well as how often they'll end up working with former coworkers again at other companies down the road.
Reputations are very asymmetric: They take a long time to build, but they can be destroyed very quickly. It can take years to see the benefits of having built a positive reputation, but it's an incredibly powerful asset once you've built it.
I agree with the vast majority of what you've shared, but this one is a bit trickier.
Reputations can be destroyed quickly, but it isn't normal or easy for them to be destroyed quickly. Someone can end up in the press for something flagrant, sure, but usually what happens is that the people that have seen your work first hand may hear of a lapse of judgement or a flub with technology, raise their eyebrows a bit, and think to themselves "that's not the person I know, but I'll keep an eye out for next time."
A certain degree of humble appreciation for our shared fallibility is a marker of maturity. I've had the opportunity to be both gracious and the receiver of grace in situations like this, and I don't think the message we should be sharing with younger software developers is one that would inspire paranoia. Treat others as you would want to be treated, even when it hurts, and the rest will work itself out even if you mess up here or there is a better orientation to adopt in my opinion.
-Nassim Taleb
But you could parse it as: "reputation" is your standing in the eyes of others, and if you define success as a good reputation then you cede control of your success to others. "Honour", "courage", and "integrity" are self-assessed, so if you define success as "acting with honour" then it's your definition of honour that matters.
It's framed as an either-or, but you have a reputation whether you want one or not. It's what other people say about you when you're not in the room. If you want others to choose to work with/buy from/hang out with you, then you care about your reputation for that is what will determine whether they engage with you.
Reputation doesn't automatically follow from the values you live (consistently good people can have weak reputations, consistently awful people can duplicitously craft good reputations). Two people can act with honour, courage, and integrity, yet have different reputations. I think Taleb's rhetoric clouds the point.
It means that Taleb got stupidly, ridiculously lucky with an option trade one time (in a way that he didn't expect or intend) and, as a result, he is rich and therefore people now pay attention to him on all kinds of subjects outside of his expertise.
If you do the former, you are essentially handing over your free will over to thr judgements of others.
I am one of the few actually good recruiters that exist and am now capable of doing the good work that got me where I was but absolutely no one wants to hear it or give me a chance.
One of the main issues is I was very senior (but still actively worked on search assignments for niche technical and or c suite) and there are few senior roles and most junior people don’t want to manage me at 45 or even consider me for less senior positions.
45 is oooooooold in recruitment where you are up or out in a sink or swim environment and 90% are just glorified telemarketers.
None of this is anyones fault but man I got emotional writing this.
I hear so much about how terrible the recruitment ‘industry’ is, much of it true, I’m desperate to work and to help but how the hell do I break this loop?
How do I get past the ‘he took his pants off in the office once’ reputation? put CAT scans on my CV?
Look ma no tumor!
Within my chosen specialty I was pretty well known and my issues were very public.
It's getting a bit better as the counter story gets out but its exhausting sometimes and hard to talk about in a 30 minute phone screen, the entire conversation becomes about that.
I guess there isn't really a point to this comment other than to say you definitely have my sympathies, that stuff can be brutal. I hope you can get past this professionally.
I gambled all our money away, stopped showing up for work, presented as drunk unknowingly.
I was never violent but I was basically like a child with no self control or ability to delay gratification.
I was lucky that I started getting severe headaches and nausea that lead to scans otherwise I'd be divorced, homeless and who knows what.
I don't know nearly enough about your industry to know where reputation fits into the system but it's certainly not a concern from my point of view.
It is word of mouth and the actual contract/consulting work I have had has come from friends in the industry who know me and pass the lead on.
Having said that some of this is just me being negative and beat down - I've had two positions to fill on a freelance basis and that lead to the CFO recommending me for a third role which was enough to launch a llc!
Then the pandemic happened.
So I'm starting again.
Except now it's five years instead of three since I've been in the game, and really now eight years since my troubles started so contacts start to wane and move on and forget you.
I'm not the guy who can play golf and entertain anymore.
Just do good work.
Hopefully that will be enough.
Lots of new areas and ideas floating around right now, and it'd be worth looking around before setting your sights on an old career trajectory.
How common is it for recruiters to work with commercial real estate agents? It's weird how little I know about your industry.
From HN earlier, thought it was on topic: https://allenpike.com/2022/giving-a-shit
>"Honestly, it's because I struggle to get to the stage where I can tell the story because people see my name and back channel it."
Assuming you can afford it, have you considered a reputation firm to bury negative search results for your name? The ability to find well-paying work can outsize the cost. Good research is needed here, as some firms are likely ineffective, while others do work.
Have you also considered going by an alternative version of your name? If you have a spouse, could you adopt their last name? If the problem is really that serious, even a name change may be warranted. At the least, a "doing business as (DBA)" name change could work, similar to what gopher_space wrote about operating as a small shop.
>"Within my chosen specialty I was pretty well known and my issues were very public."
Would your skills and experience in recruitment be relevant to another specialty? A real option is to lower your expectations of seniority, and start at a more junior level in a different field/specialty that uses the same skills, and build up new experience and have new connections. With your background, you should progress much faster than a genuine junior recruiter.
>"Except now it's five years instead of three since I've been in the game, and really now eight years since my troubles started so contacts start to wane and move on and forget you."
How have you created those contacts in the first place? There must have been a time when you succeeded without relying on established contacts, and you created them as you were getting your foot in the door. Age and reputation may work against you, but reputational obstacles can be mitigated from the suggestions above.
>"45 is oooooooold in recruitment where you are up or out in a sink or swim environment and 90% are just glorified telemarketers."
Are there ways to obscure your age? If you have a degree, can you remove the year? Can you remove earlier experiences from your C.V.? Would there be anything you can do to physically look younger, or at least make your age ambiguous for in-person interviews?
>"I'm not the guy who can play golf and entertain anymore."
There is a sales book (less relevant for recruiting) called "The Challenger Sale," which asserts that likability, while important, is far less useful and valued by others than helping people identify problems they may not have considered, and offering solutions. Instead of focusing on golfing and entertainment (likability), would it be possible to focus more on outcomes you had at previous work positions?
In a completely different tack, would you be willing to switch to an adjacent field outside of recruiting? For a moment, assume that recruiting is completely non-viable (this isn't true, but consider this for a moment). What do you like about recruiting? What specific skills do you excel at, within recruiting? Are there any other career directions you would really enjoy, where these skills will give you a strong advantage, even if you had to learn additional skills?
Overall, you really can get back on your feet. There are a lot of stories on HN where people are worse off (felony criminal record or homeless), yet who have still created enjoyable and sustainable careers. It's completely valid to feel emotional about your circumstances, but there is a clear pathway to find work you enjoy (address the obstacle of reputation; consider a different style of pitching your skillset that is challenge-focussed while leveraging your past experience; changing fields outside of your specialty, while accepting a junior position and working up; and changing your career path while leveraging your existing skills).
It's late now and I'm going to bed but I will digest this properly tomorrow, after a quick read just now.
“It takes the Navy three years to build a new ship. It will take 300 years to build a new tradition.”
The evacuation went ahead.
I recently finished Warren Buffett's biography Snowball, and this is a recurring theme in his life. His integrity is one of the most important factors in his success; he got a great deal or gotten out of a sticky situation with regulators simply because people trusted him to do the right thing.
This took decades though, he'd been operating in this manner since he was a child, but it wasn't until he was in his 50s that all that goodwill began to work for him on an unimaginable scale.
Scaling is a winner-take-all, venture capital mindset. The article is about service businesses, which do not need to hit web scale! We are talking about services here not your web startup.
Even beyond services, giving a shit and building saas is not impossible. In fact, I wish more tech companies started small and stayed small. I absolutely want to run a digital small business and I want to give a shit, it makes the building feel purposeful instead of this product-led growth at all costs bullshit.
I hope we see a software middle class grow in the next decade. Middle class tech companies are going to be coming from the bootstrapper + founder focused funds (TinySeed / Calm) and they are going to have a distinct advantage if they understand their strategy/context in their chosen verticals.
There are many small consultancies that are humming along, making high six figures to low seven figures a year in income, with good paying jobs and work/life balance. It can be a bit of a grind for the owners (who assume a lot of risk and have to land clients) and there are some ups and downs due to the realities of consulting (okay, just lost a big client, time to tighten the belt), but I've seen this work a number of times. Having a recurring source of income (productized service, hosting) can really help.
The main thing these companies do is "be excellent", aka give a shit.
Career-wise, if you give a shit about your work and your colleagues this does add up to a reputation. When you do things "right", don't gossip or backstab, act with integrity and honesty, people notice. You'll be seen as trustworthy, a pillar to fall back on.
The thing is though, the person screwing everybody over and job hopping before the damage becomes visible may actually get more out of their career, financially. It's a rather philosophical question as to which character type you want to be.
Another reward of giving a shit is the gratitude people show, because it has become a rare behavior it seems.
For example, I'm running a web community (photography), non-profit, as a hobby. One particular user, an old Australian guy, is very much not tech savvy and recently I spent two nights in a row to get him onboarded again. He struggles with the simplest things but it's all good now.
To a calculating mind, this is a ridiculous investment of scarce free time with virtually no gain. The last part is where that mind couldn't be more wrong.
The man was almost in tears from gratitude. He's alone, struggles and nobody bothers to explain him anything, not even his family, most of which live far away. He got helped, by somebody he never met, for no particular reason but giving a shit.
I will remember that gratitude a decade from now. By comparison, a stranger could now send me 10K and it would mean absolutely nothing to me. I don't need it, I have my stuff. You can't buy deep and memorable human connections and moments, they are by definition a result of giving a shit.
Look at how little it takes and how giant the impact is. A company put genuine effort into a customer's table needs, and here we are.
Sign me up. I've been unable to give a shit for quite some time. I wish I could give a shit, but the world has become a pretty ugly place, in large part because of deliberate attempts to demoralize those who give a shit.
You see it all over the place on social media. People do a weak-ass form of shit-giving in the form of "raising awareness", the least conceivable level of effort for something you wish you could give a shit about, but don't actually give a shit.
Of course even if somebody tried to GaSaaS, the space would promptly fill with people giving as few shits as possible for as much money as possible. Too many major charities do that: they'll take your money and spend it mostly on advertising for other people to give their money, too, and very little on the things you'd expect if they actually gave a shit.
I know TFA is more about the business sense of giving a shit, but I'd love to see somebody able to give a shit in a larger sense. Unfortunately, I can't give a shit because it seems nobody gives a shit any more -- except the people who are passionately devoted to making sure other people feel miserable instead.
Of course, you can get away with a lot of bad things. The question is: should you do such things? The answer is: no. No one of any sense of dignity will lie, cheat, steal, or bullshit. No one who know how harmful it is to themselves to do such things will do them. It is beneath them and their love themselves too much to want to harm themselves. It's degrading. Wine won through illicit means tastes like urine anyway, if it tastes like anything at all. It's like the devil has offered you a glass of Chateau Lafite under the condition that you hand him your taste buds, or that you let him take a dump in it first.
Give a shit about things worth giving a shit to the degree that they are worthy of being given a shit about. Don't worry about approval from others. Virtue is its own reward. Don't whine. Don't be envious.
Those companies have already failed though (Zillow is practically about to go out of business because they failed so hard), probably can never succeed because of the adverse selection effect, and "investors are buying all the housing" is a myth propagated by NIMBYs.
Is it?
https://www.redfin.com/news/investor-home-purchases-q4-2021/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2022/hou...
Same reason car companies sell you cars instead of keeping them for themselves. They naturally depreciate, except we intervene in the market to help boomers’ retirements.
And yet, in the very most-constrained markets, they are still NOT doing that, after DECADES of pressure to do so.
But if you're a young person who doesn't own a home, X corporation owning the homes isn't worse for you than random boomer landlords owning them. Corporate landlords at least don't take things personally when you ask them to do maintenance, and theoretically you can be part owners of them since they're publicly traded.
And corporate landlords didn't defeat the social housing legislation in California just now, boomers did.
Also, car companies are more than happy to lease their vehicles, but people would prefer to own.
We were told often by sales and the executives that they were often told that despite our product being more expensive they bought our equipment because:
"When we call your tech support guys you answer, and your support team seems to actually care about fixing the problem in a way that it doesn't happen again."
That tech support team would stay together as a team through a couple acquisitions (and being acquired) for nearly 20 years (of my time at least) supporting new products and so on, until finally as always happens with tech support they were eventually devalued by the company enough that one final sale of the company happened and everyone was laid off.
Years later I met up with some of the product engineers (who survived the last acquisition) told me "We still talk about how that team did it the right way. The team we have now is three times as big and handles fewer tickets and is horrible at their job."
I always thought that team should have been sold as a group to someone who cared but really nobody values good tech support teams ... not for long.
Now I work at a small software shop where we just keep picking up customers based on word of mouth ... because someone told them "these guys can deliver and care".
Through this, I've ended up with a lot of ancillary benefits and connections. The interaction is so much more pleasant this way, I don't think I'll go back. They're delivering a consisting product or service, and I'm predictable as a customer as a result. Here's an example: when I walk into the meat shop, they know I'm going to be there, so when something unique or special comes in, they have something set aside that they knew I'd want. They always have a recipe too or something they made to share. To me, that's service.
You don't have to be my best man or fishing buddy, you just have to acknowledge the reciprocal relationship we have.
I would like to protest this sentiment.
With technology, you can empower non-wizards to give substantially more of a shit than they otherwise would be able to.
The danger lies in the specific nature of those technological implementations and the engagement models applied to their usage. Today, our models look something like "fuck your dopamine loop as hard and fast as possible without any subsequent regard for anything at all"
The only time in my life I had the possibility to give a shit was when I was working for shit money contracting for the government. I've never been in that situation again where I could spend as much time as I needed until I delivered to the quality I desired. Architecture diagrams, properly planned executions, testing etc etc. Much slower moving than startups but I trust the systems I wrote to continue saving lifes as they have done until now. Most of the code I delivered for startups, I don't even trust at release, what can I say about decades down the line...
I know it's not universal but in the parts I've worked in, it's intoxicating.
You’re paying for the rare access to people who get genuine satisfaction of doing something well. The fact that it is a precious commodity saddens me. I think a lack of decent financial security keeps people from G’ing an S.
If you try and fail, you won’t be recognized.
I'm a developer but have studied sales quite a lot over the last 10 years. The most important thing I learned is to find clients that fit you really well when it comes to skills, culture and budget.
To do this you have to give a shit and not be afraid to ask potentially off-putting questions. Stuff like:
"Are you sure you want to build this app, your business case doesn't add up so why bother?"
"Can you demonstrate you're in this for the long haul? There's no joy in building an app that fails, which is what happens if you don't budget to iterate your app."
"How come you don't hire freelancers or contractors, it will cost you less?"
Obviously I ask nicer questions too, but these are good "give a shit enough to risk losing the sale" kind of questions.
As a consequence of this, we deliver good work - highly focused on client needs, bespoke, and at high quality. We've got a name for it and have never done anything apart from rely on word of mouth for new work.
It's good work and I love it :-)
Same with staff at the V&A. The new management destroyed all the goodwill behind the scenes.
https://www.amazon.com/Shop-Class-Soulcraft-Inquiry-Value/dp...
Meta-cognition. Mentalisation. Intersubjectivity.
When a sentient being picks up the (apparent) communications of another being, instead of taking these 'noises' on face value as signals requiring action/process, they perceive another. Another being, like them, with thoughts and feelings, that they "hold in mind". These are first steps towards empathy/sympathy.
The distancing function of technology is very efficient at suppressing this. What we do in a purely protocol/process based world made only of responses, targets, KPIs is forget meta-cognition. It's not that people are being "evil" [1] but that quality frameworks based only on measuring things don't accommodate it.
[1] Cold Evil: Technology and Modern Ethics - Andrew Kimbrell
You: I'd love to work with you but I need to know X,Y,Z and we need a couple more meetings. I want to fully understand your project and your goals before committing to price.
Someone else: I can do it for $
Some people pick (thoughtful & detailed) you, and some will pick (easy and vague) someone else - it really depends on their personality.
Some business owners simply want to write a check. Others want to be intimately involved - the skill is determining which is sitting in front of you.
I think the author found a company who gives a shit, but I'd also like to point to other makers who give a shit without the five-figure price point.
Here's a small list: - https://woodgears.ca (you will be making these items yourself! Plans are ~15 USD) - Dave Moore (https://www.youtube.com/user/dpmbn8) – That one support agent who didn't give up :)
If the small ISP has a sufficient amount of network engineering knowledge and acumen to build small-scale things at very high quality.
More along the lines of the custom wood business referenced in the original post, I am familiar with a few small welding/steel fabrication and custom carbon fiber CNC cutting shops in the metro Vancouver area that also give a shit.
They aren't trying to scale up to some huge size or go for economies of scale, they are perfectly content to serve a mid sized local market with not cheap, high quality products.
And if we don't have integrity what does it matter what the other values are?
Bang on. And good luck, It can be a rough road.
[1] https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/are_empathic_d...
But what enables honesty, integrity, authenticity?
Was that really the best use of this CEOs time? Is the company that much better off because of their fancy table?
This adventure seems incredibly decadent and pointless to me. It's just a fucking table, focus on what matters.
Clearly there needs to be shit giving limits for both counterparties regardless of <thing>.
Lol, it's the nerd equivalent of penny wise, pond foolish.
How many shits do you have to give to stay fit as a poor person? Lots. Many shits must be given. You must be a shit-giving machine. 100% of shits given toward your goal must come from you.
How many shits do you have to give to stay fit as a rich person? Let's see... you're paying an amount of money that's meaningless to you to have someone else give a shit about your meals, both making sure that your diet is healthy and balanced and that it's tasty and appealing to minimize the shit-giving you need to stick with it... and someone else give a shit about your work-outs... and someone else to give a shit about your schedule to make sure that stuff fits in... gee, look at that, you hardly have to give any shits at all, personally!
I'm doing this now. No one believes that it's worth paying for, which is a bit sad, but I'm OK with that.
Draw what conclusions you will. I would gladly give up this incessant "growth" for quality.
* great pay (relative to other jobs)
* good working conditions (sitting at a desk)
* low barrier to entry (no credentialing)
* the ability to be a craftsman (or craftsperson, I suppose)
I'm trying to think of other jobs that allow you to hone your craft in modern industrial society while fulfilling the other criteria and can't think of any.
But as far as comfort, I've done manual labor (farm work, trail work) in the past.
I would choose sitting at a desk in AC with bodily autonomy (to go to the restroom or take a walk when I want) over such manual labor. All. Day. Long. :)
But you're correct, humans should move.
I know that is why I like doing what it do.
GaS comes in many forms, and can scale without issue for forms that fall within (for example) product design and development processes. I think we can agree that some companies do this better than others. Improved shit-giving at this stage actually gets cheaper per customer with scale.
Per-unit/per-customer forms of GAS can scale as well, but not for free. For example, Google and YouTube could vastly improve customer/creator support, but explicitly chooses not to because they believe there's no GaS ROI there.
Take OP's example of buying a table - the company they worked with really spent a lot of time understanding their needs and making something custom for them. An alternative would be to go to IKEA and buy a table. IKEA does not give a shit in the same way and will not spend a great deal of time learning about you and what you're going to use your table for to ensure you get something perfect.
There's absolutely nothing dishonest about that. It's not even to say that they don't care about the quality of their products. It just means they're not going to go the extra mile. Of course, it also means you're going to get a table for probably an order of magnitude less money. That's a perfectly reasonable tradeoff, and it's a good thing both types of businesses exist.
It's both 1) a fraction of some of those a few order of magnitude lower who WANT to get to the top, and 2) those who believe only growth can sustain the "world" system (and they are not necessarily wrong, only it's become critical to redefine growth in a radical different way, or we'll all burn).
It was Apple.
Giving a shit does scale and it's precisely when apple stop giving shit (keyboard, pro) that they enter the danger zone for theirs reputation.
https://github.com/DontShaveTheYak/jenkins-std-lib
Hit me up. I will help with your pipelines.
TLDR: You have to GaS as you scale because otherwise people will start discounting you or your product as not trustworthy or worth the frustration.
It is like leetcode meets tinder meets GaSaaS.