Isn't this a bit misleading and can only be true for companies that don't take VC money or never go public (ex: Basecamp/37 Signals)? For VC funded or public companies, ultimately you'd have to be responsible to answer to your shareholders.
It's a valuable experience with a lot of potential upside in the long haul - but let's not pretend that it's less taxing than a cozy 9-to-5 tech job where your boss might ask you to update your OKRs once in a while.
Every one of those people was incredibly successful before and after getting fired.
:-p
Yeah but that boss is paying you mid 6 figs or even 7, plus comp and other stuff, then maybe it's not so bad. Why else are these tech companies inundated with so many job applications if having a boss is supposed to be so bad. I think this guy is still stuck in a '90s or early 2000s 'Dilbert' mindset when salaries were way worse and bosses had more leverage and employees were closer to being like slaves. A lot has changed. .
The vast majority of employees at the largest, most successful companies, do not earn that much.
Your boss's job is to oversee the minutiae of your day-to-day activities. Like in most workplaces, you can't choose to just chill for a few days, work only at night, or choose to avoid meetings for a few days, etc.
You will have a level autonomy and the ability to change directions/features, etc. that you cannot have working for others.
My reports absolutely can chill for a couple days, work only at night, or skip meetings. My job is to get them promoted, which can’t happen until they land projects that demonstrate business impact.