Ask HN: How do you suggest we technologists get our industry back?

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.

I work for a big technology company, I am one of the lowest level of "technologists" (a few steps above an intern). I get paid over twice the average household income of the surrounding area...all that money for just me! And that is just my base salary!

On top of that I get bonuses, to travel around the country (and occasionally to a different country) and stock.

And what do I have to "deal with"?? I get into work around 10am, we do standup, I grab a coffee, have a few meetings maybe, code away, a design review, grab an hour long relaxed lunch with my team at a nearby restaurant, back to work, code, maybe the odd board game or table football game, design etc. 6-7pm head off home (some of my team get in at 8 and are home by 4-5 - i prefer the later mornings), back to my lovely, spacious Downtown apartment, go for a walk with my girlfriend along the waterfront.

I find my work interesting - I don't choose the projects, people with business goals and spreadsheets do that, but I find there are fun challenges everywhere when you start talking to people. And I get dedicated time to explore my own ideas.

On top of that I get 3 weeks paid vacation, plus statutory holidays (2 weeks less than I got in europe.. but meh), not forgetting the weekends.

99.9999% (probably more) of people on this planet work harder, for less (or no) money, struggle to live day by day and I spent $10 a day ($300 a month, $3600 a year!!) on coffee.

I have no plans to "rally against" that.

There are a few bizarre jobs paying bizarre salaries, except for that,the IT sector has very high salary for the workers, one of the factor is the less number of employee compared to most of the industries.

I work with people like you describe. I'm not saying your plan is not working out for you. But I'm willing to be you are not an enthusiast. You work for a living, and are interested in the things that work brings, not the work itself.

Do you understand how awful it is to work with people who are only trying to do a job, won't take any risks, and are generally satisfied? It absolutely sucks trying to make a difference and getting stuck on a team with casual, 8-5 coders who want to dumb down every project, add limits and impose process because that supports their goals of just keeping a job. And it's not about having 'fun challenges.' I can find enough fun challenges at my home with a few books to waste the entire rest of my life.

This whole "Many people have it worse off, so technologists should accept being a conquered, plundered people" attitude just reeks of mediocrity. I can't stand it. It makes me physically ill.

A couple things. First, you have to consistently come out in the top 10-20% of the project allocation heap to have a career in this industry. You realize that almost no one can have top-10% luck over a period of 20 years, right? If you don't get the absolute best projects available, you become a second-class citizen around 28 because you're competing against people who were politically fortunate enough to get real work. Have fun with that. Unless you die early, you will turn 40, and unless you rape the project-allocation game into ribbons, you won't have high-enough quality work experience to survive what this industry considers "advanced" age. You'll be a 40-year-old with the typical dogshit work experience (that only makes you a bitter loser; you don't learn anything from it) that most people get, competing against 25-year-olds who haven't learned yet that the game is rigged against them.

Second, at least in New York or the Bay Area, no programmer gets to raise kids. We are, as a people, being sterilized by the cocksuckers who control this shitpile of an industry. To make raise-a-family money, you have to become more like one of those parasitic VP/NTWTFK's that I talked about who get huge paychecks just for using the bathroom. If you do actual work, you'll never make enough money to, for example, own a house in the Bay Area. It's the VP/NTWTFK's who are driving up those prices, not legitimate people.

Unless you're extremely fortunate (1-in-1000) and work for a startup that IPO's, you'll see things exactly as I do in a matter of a few years. Big fucking deal, you get to spend $10 a day on coffee. Yeah, you're fucking Marie Antoinette. Congratulations on your awesome life.

Did the oppressed people of Paris in the 1780s say, "You know, they have it worse in Somalia", and therefore decide that their ruling classes were wonderful human beings? No. They took responsibility for making their lives better, and they went out and fucking did something.

> Second, at least in New York or the Bay Area, no programmer gets to raise kids.

Now you are getting carried away :).

No, that's actually how it works.

First of all, if you have kids older than about 3, no more renting. You can't put your kids through a move just because your landlord decided to raise prices 20%. If you move 5 times in their first 15 years, their likelihoods of having psychotic mental illness in adolescence and adulthood go way up.

Extreme commuting is no longer an option either. If you commute 3 hours per day in addition to a 9+ hour job, you're going to be miserable and irritable and your kids are going to see you at your worst and end up fucked-up. Then they'll end up needing the validation of VC-istan narcissism too... the cycle repeats.

Then, housework. If you have two people working career jobs, and you have kids, you're way beyond being able to do your own cleaning. If you don't have kids, you don't need to hire maids because having a tidy place is optional and most people just do without; but that shit no longer flies when you have helpless creatures you must keep alive. If you're both working career jobs, you need the resources to hire for all that shit to keep the place clean.

Finally, tuition and health insurance.

Mostly, it's goddamn fucking housing, though. Seriously, all this NIMBY shit that keeps house prices high is one of the most twisted dysgenic programs ever devised. It creates a world in which future-oriented smart people realize how fucked-up everything is and refuse to bring more people into the world, while the present-focused dumbasses (and the rich psychopaths making money off this horrible arrangement) breed like rabbits. Compassionate people who actually observe the state of the world objectively (and realize that it's borderline torture to force some being that hasn't yet been afflicted with existence to be born into this ruined world) are being selected against.

Well, I know several software engineers with kids in NYC. Some live in NJ, some live in Brooklyn, some live in Manhattan. In fact, among married immigrants almost everyone has at least one kid after 30. Often mother does not work or works part time and looks for kids. Almost everyone of the "extreme commuters" has kids.

Tuition and health insurance is about the same everywhere. Housework is not that hard, maids are not that expensive. Absolute cleanliness is not something that kids require, neither is owning a (2-bed, 3-bed, huge) house.

In my opinion, your restrictions are quite arbitrary. So you would not have kids while working as a software engineer, but plenty of people do.

It's as if you actually life in a world where people with kids don't routinely rent.

Here is a powerful clue for you: if you talk to actual people in the real world, you will find schoolteachers, construction workers, real estate agents, Windows desktop support staff, and even meter readers who are successfully raising children. I know it's jarring to hear this, but software developers do not actually have it hard in this regard.

edited for brevity

The comment you're replying to was implying that the median job in software development tends to be significantly better than most other available jobs. Software developers are alone among professionals in the control they have over their own schedules. They're in far more stable demand than lawyers are. They work vastly better hours than doctors. And, obviously, software developers don't come home every day barely able to move from the physical toll of their job.

It seems like what you did with your comment was to reframe his comment, without his consent, so that instead of the median it referred to some platonic ideal you have regarding the role software developers should have in the market.

What do you think line of business devs at Global 2000 companies do all day? Hew nuggets of C#/ADO code out of solid rock in a dank tunnel with only the lamp affixed to their helmet to see it with? No, they lead exactly the life the parent commenter said they do.

For that matter, how many 40 year old developers do you know? The last 8 years of my career have been a tour of every conceivable kind of software developer, and I've met lots and lots of 40 year olds, and 50 year olds, and (gasp) older. I do not know a lot of 40 year old developers who think of their lot as "dogshit". Your ageism assessment isn't even valid in startupland! Look at the stats on tech entrepreneurship. The only place 40 year olds are disfavored is on message boards, and (if we want to stipulate any part of your argument) on the small subset of startups that are important primarily to message board nerds.

No (P)rofession has an easier time raising children than software developers. Corp lawyers have 50%+ travel burdens and work 60-70 hour weeks. High-paid accountants work for firms that similarly keep them on the road half the year. Doctors? Heh. I raised 2 kids while starting two startups and working for a third and saw my kids all the time. And that's startupland. Most developers do - not - work - for - startups. Line of business software developers at State Farm do not work 70 hour weeks.

edited for brevity

Dude! I was just browsing and upvoted this for the talk of onion-parody-level sense of entitlement and the all-caps reminder the OP is not, in fact, Gavroche. Edited for butchery!

This problem is not confined to the technology industry. Many other skilled professionals such as psychiatrists and teachers are in the same situation.

Making a trade guild is one option, but it may cause one set of useless bureaucrats to be replaced by another. I think it is a good thing that even college dropouts can be successful in the software industry.

One option may be to change the terminology that we use to talk about computer programming. The terminology used to explain technology was designed to sell computers back when computers were foreign, frightening, and expensive. Words like "Enterprise Architecture" were designed to sell millions of dollars worth of computers and make it seem as if someone with little knowledge would never be in over their head in dense logic.

Technological populism got a computer into everybody's pocket, but I think that instead of watering down logic when presenting computers to a nontechnical person, we should take the core of programming and have them look at each aspect slowly and clearly. This will show people that although anybody can understand computers, you yourself do not. Although C is complicated, a topic such as how ascii characters work is understandable by a nontechnical person.

Also, programmers could simply refuse to work with jerks, but if that is not happening during a huge boom, then it will definitely not happen once the industry looses steam.

This is a good article on the topic by Adm. Hyman "I would sink them all" Rickover. http://www.wholeearth.com/issue/2034/article/399/doing.a.job

If you want to spread philosophy XYZ in the business world, you have to prove that it can make money. The reason we originally shifted from 60 hour weeks to 40 hour weeks was nothing moralistic, it was because Ford found that 40 hour weeks were more profitable than 60 hour weeks.

Now as a rule, programmers generally are good at execution but tend to execute on problems no one cares about. The #1 cause of startup failure is not failure to execute-it's good execution on a problem that nobody cares about.

That's why non-technical VPs earn so much. It's because the skill of picking great problems and managing people is massively valuable. If it weren't, then all the companies that emphasized market over technology would go bankrupt, and companies that emphasized technology over market would succeed.

Now, someone who can understand what people want and understand what's possible with technology is significantly more valuable than someone with either individual skill. That's because they can combine what's valuable and what's just become possible. This is a rare combination-Steve Jobs and Elon Musk are two people who've executed this really well.

My personal plan is to learn this combination of skills and drive technology that's both extremely valuable and at the very edge of what's possible. We'll see how far I get.

"WE technologists","it's well-known that WE","answer to arrogant non-technical forces","forced","miserable working lives","half-decent money","what WE have to deal with","non-technical Who-The-Fuck-Knows","We have the talent to stop the world if WE want to do so","WE do to win back","rightfully ours","restore OUR industry","WE answer only to our own","WE do to SHAME...out of existence","phony startups".

How about you start showing some respect for other people's work?We have something called Diversity, ok?Some people are engineers, some doctors..some make more money than you, some don't.Fair or not, this is how the world works.

You can't just come here and say "WE" in order to make us feel we are on the same boat.Speak for yourself.And your attitude makes me sick.I mean, who do you think you are?the architect of the world(speaking of arrogance)?Who are you to say what's "rightfully yours" and what's not?Your post is so insulting that I won't even bother talking about the rest of it.No wonder you're so frustrated.

One thing is for sure though: I would never work with someone with a personality like yours.And by the looks of it not many people do.

After careful consideration I've come up with a three step plan to solve all of this -

1) Love yourself, but less. We can't "stop the world if you want to", almost 100% of developers just aren't that special, most struggle to make the same CRUD apps over and over again.

2) If you don't like your job find another one, if you've got the stones create your own job, if you can't do either of those things then find something to look forward to when you clock out.

3) If someone above you undeservedly makes more than you go to www.facebook.com and join the group called "Everyone except Larry Ellison".

Then you'll find peace.

The plan is to start a dead simple non-tech business. Like build dog houses in the back yard. I'd make just enough money for me. None of those dummies want to be VP of dog house development.

I find it amusing that you think attorneys and physicians only answer to their own. Attorneys are sandwiched between clients and judges, and physicians have regulation to deal with, to say nothing of the fact that at anytime they could get sued into oblivion based on a simple mistake.

"Technologists" are worthless independent of the business value they create.

Attorneys have clients, but it's not the same thing... or, at least, it's not supposed to be. Attorneys can lose clients and some amount of income, but no client is supposed to have career-wrecking managerial power over an attorney.

Even for in-house corporate attorneys, their managers are other attorneys, all the way up to the general counsel, who answers to the board (not the CEO) itself; the board is the GC's client.

Of course, if you manage your client list badly and end up dependent on one client, you essentially have a boss. In theory, it's not supposed to be that way; in practice, obviously it can be. But the aspiration (lawyers answer only to their own) is noble.