can confirm, it's as simple PG says "just build something people want"
it will open many doors :)
it will open many doors :)
I’m hiring too, but few of my applicants include a GH link. I’ve never seen a GL link, much less Gitea, etc.
And mind you, I’m looking. Hard. I’ll often Google the person to see if I can find a GH account for them. I hit rarely, and it’s weird.
Today one of my applicants had a GH profile and a README, a couple dozen projects in various stages of abandonment, etc, and I was deliriously happy.
I’m not very experienced in hiring (this is the first opening that I’ve written the JD for, reviewed the applications, wrote the tech interview questions, etc), but we’re clearly doing something wrong. We have a few great applicants (mostly from here and Reddit) and a whole lot of low-effort, low-value noise.
Software jobs, especially at the kinds of FAANG companies largely being discussed here, are quite a stretch for the term "wageslave."
Entrepreneurship isn't for everyone, even those who've tried it before.
If you can make that much remote out in Nebraska then sure, fine.
There are people doing a lot worse. But when doing much better looks like that, what even is the point?
Maybe most of your time is spent on a computer.
and Nebraska has nice places too, especially if you have a family.
Try to raise a family with 5 kids in sf, and compare to Omaha. I would pick Omaha 10 out of 10 times, if I was not a millionaire
What am I, a farmer? I would pick not doing that 10 out of 10 times regardless of how much money I had.
>ah, yes. The American Dream of living in a 50 year old shitbox fixer that costs $2M in the suburbs of Cupertino.
So you’re right, folks living outside of metropolitan areas need to work on their insecurities and learn to be nicer to people that prioritize other things in life.
More like well-justified feeling of intellectual superiority, of being able to afford 5000 sq ft home with few acres of land, and raise a family with 5 kids on a single income, and not having kids wade their way through poop and needles on the way to school, not having to smell urine and marijuana on the streets of neighborhood
mainly because cutting edge R&D type technology has been developed in the area and alternatives to SV have not developed yet. its not even pay - I would say bay area pay is bad, because of cost of living & taxation.
But opportunities for growth are unmatched in bay area
because $300K will demand much much more than 30k job.
300k job leads to stress, anxiety, performance calibrations, mental breakdowns, overwork, competition, lack of job security etc.
30k job could be very relaxed, could be part-time gig where you work few hours in a week.
so work-life balance is really tilted worse for higher paying jobs
To be clear, it can be true, there are lots of stressful high paying jobs, my point is that it's not necessarily true.
I know low paid people with stressful jobs and highly paid people with less stress.
It's not like your savings and investments are adjusted for the cost of living when you move.
In the extreme case, you can earn as much as possible and accumulate enough to live on indefinitely in a cheap country. This is obviously better than just earning a low salary in the cheap country for the same amount of time.
main point being is that if your income doubles, your savings rate will double, but your work related stress will double, and arguably your health (mental and physical) will deteriorate at 2x faster rate
Cupertino is an hour away Santa Cruz beaches. 3 hours away from skiing (or boating) at lake tahoe. 1 hour away from one of the best NBA teams (GSW). 30 minutes away from Stanford. 1 hour away from Berkeley. Some of the best average temperatures in the country.
Maybe they live in a "shitbox fixer", maybe they don't.
You might consider that people like and care about those other properties though.
a lot of hour drives away from everything? London or Tokyo it is not.
> Maybe they live in a "shitbox fixer", maybe they don't.
I was being rather generous at $2M on a $300k salary. Let's just assume the spouse makes that much too. Where do you place the odds of getting a nice house at, in that area? Of a similar quality that would run around $200-400k in the rest of the country. It's the suburbs. You're going to be inside your home more than you would in a city.
> You might consider that people like and care about those other properties though.
The point is $300k in SV isn't living large. You save more for retirement or to move out. Great. But you still have to leave to realize that benefit. You're just planning for some tomorrow that usually never comes for most people.
That's odd, my impression is that a lot of people go to the Bay, save a lot, then leave.
Do we have any statistics on this?
People are so easily offended these days.
Having said that, if you work for a company and you get fired and blacklisted, you still don't eat. If you work for a wage, you HAVE to work for somebody or you starve. If you work for somebody, that somebody has a lot of sway over how your life looks. Better be good at kissin' ass.
Also, if you don't think the US healthcare industry will take every penny of your life's earnings upon your eventual and inevitable deterioration, you're fooling yourself.
FWIW, I'm a wage slave too.
It certainly can be like that especially early on. Hopefully you would grow enough to hire good people to manage the business. If you work for somebody though, that will never happen.
All the slavery with none of the wage.
>If you work for somebody though, that will never happen.
The alternative to starting a business that you'll hope will be self-sustaining and still earn you a respectable living is to work for the highest bidder, invest, and become financially independent. Odds of the latter are much higher for the average software engineer than the former.
You really don't. There is no way you can starve in the USA unless you do it on purpose.
Please note the literal use of the word 'starve'.
If someone with 300K+ TC gets offended by this term, playing world's smallest violin for those snowflakes would be most appropriate.
The part in brackets isn't something to hand wave about. Depends a lot on how you want to spend your time, also.
For example, if you had an idea about planting trees via drones and a big company said "come to our company and we can get this launched at scale as early as 2026". Then you think about how long it would take to do it on your own and you'd still have to convince investors and hire people and stuff.
If at the end of the day, what you care about is planting more trees quickly, you should probably join that big company. (of course there are risks too, where they cancel the project or divert its direction).
And also, not every startup found cares about achieving some grandiose mission. Some just want to get rich which is totally fine.