gearoidoc

50-100% sounds high for stock and bonus when you're on 200k+ but my main point was these companies are the exception, not the rule.

Those companies are very much outliers. Does those 3 all have development operations in Seattle?

Your figures don't seem to stack up RE Google:

https://www.glassdoor.ca/Salary/Google-Seattle-Salaries-EI_I...

I'd love to live in your world! How much do you think senior engineers earn?

Most people would do well to save 20% but even assuming people save 33% then you reckon senior engineers earn over 300k?

CAD 110k is definitely enough to get a decent place, live comfortably and save some money in Vancouver.

But then again 'decent' and 'comfortably' are subjective.

I'd argue its impossible since $2350 is almost half your monthly salary before tax!

Agreed - the last job offer I got was for 95k CAD and they would not budge higher.

Currently working remotely for about 115k CAD with a number of other perks.

I moved from Dublin, Ireland to Vancouver. Dublin rents are very high - probably as bad as Vancouver. The cost of living here is slightly lower though.

Its to create an impression within India that the internet == Facebook.

Think he may have been referring to Andreessens back down.

So buy an adapter.

I understand both sides of the argument - it took me considerable time to wrap me head around IB and for the longest time I just assumed I simply wouldn't "get it".

Interested to how you do versioning on UI with or without IB though. Personally I just maintain branches until an agreed upon design is in place.

Well it depends what you mean by custom. I create custom views all the time and its even better now we can render them 'live' in IB:

https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/recipes/xcode_help-I...

Interface Builder is superb once you get the hang of it.

"just because they were born"

Thats an example of a successful pregnancy project.

Thats not what gyardley is saying though. He's talking about developers who refuse to estimate how long a chunk of work will take.

There's always a flip side! My current project has a DSL (not written by me) and it functions superbly.

It does take about a full work day to wrap your head around though :)

"I mean, come on, in the grand scheme of things, developers are wizards who never have to be worried about 90% of the things other people in the world have to worry about."

wat

I think its easy to judge if a software project was successful (eg. Did we launch? Did we deploy that feature?).

The harder question I suppose is whether it was successful and we've got/maintained a quality codebase.

Some good points but the argument that software teams will be most performant as a result of autonomy really depends on the team in question.

I worked on a small team with 2 other developers who were both pretty good devs technically. However they treated the business side with almost-contempt and they would estimate even simple changes to take days.

As the most junior member on the team I couldn't really influence them. Interestingly, after about 2/3 months on the job, the business side decided to use me as their initial go-to for dev.

"exceptional quality code (albeit a bit on the spaghetti side)" is an oxymoron.

"Only" 90k.

There are plenty of large companies where you can go to your boss, express dissatisfaction with some aspect (tech used, projects youre involved with) and get an almost immediate turn around on.

Conversely, there are startups (even ones just founded) where the CEO is inapproachable and your input wont affect culture/product/whatever one jot.

As a programmer, my satisfaction comes from writing quality code on systems that are in some way complex and commonly used. There's not a lot of satisfaction to be gleaned from writing a dozen CRUD apps.

Btw, citing 'impact on the world' as a reason to join a startup is a really good way of coming across naive imo ;)

EDIT: I also disagree with your point on 50+ hours a week. 40 hours is about right with 50+ hours during crunch periods - which should be rare (2-3 a year max).

I guess because it leads to "full" internet subscription which generates revenue (assumedly profits) for them.

2. I don't see what its performance on Medium has to do with it. My point is that it was a perfectly good article pulled from the front page.

3. There are plenty of rather large companies that don't get as much attention here as Stripe does (I don't have anything against Stripe btw, just using them as an example in this case).

If HN pulled this article it would be pretty damning on the part of YC. The placement of this article in question does not disprove my previous points.

FWIW, I've enjoyed relatively decent success from my own product launches on HN.

EDIT: re: medium - I mistook you the first time. Apologies. My point still stands re: posts being pulled.

This shouldn't be downvoted. HN is far from a meritocracy. Gamey as f*ck.

I think you're off on 2 and 3 - although I only have anecdata to make me believe so.

On point 2: I've often found posts which are gaining traction on the homepage which do not subscribe to the 'scale fast'-centric belief system of YC are pulled. Most recently this one by DHH:

https://signalvnoise.com/posts/3972-reconsider

3. They're not all job ads. Stripe updates their API and it goes straight to #1? Come on...

Even if Hack Reactor is an exception to the rule paying 105k for someone with 3 months experience is genuine insanity.

Looks as though they keep a pretty high bar for their students and that will lead to an overall more talented grad than your everyday bootcamp but its still crazy.

For that price you could hire 3 excellent remote workers.

I've looked at the alumni they have on their site - most seem to be hired by startups (ie. companies that likely have more money than sense). Coupled with the knowledge that its BA then maybe we're a little closer to an explanation.

Still utter insanity.

Hahaha - average salary of 100k? Um, evidence please?

Well put. Would be interested to know your level of experience (it seems considerable).

I never said you mentioned anything along the lines of "humans as resources" - I meant that the A Player mentality lends to this. Apologies if it came across any different.

My issue is that A/B/C boxing is almost binary view.

You're either good or you're not.

Life isn't that simple.

I've worked with fantastic developers who are a pain to communicate and participate on a team with. I've worked with average developers who can anticipate customer needs from a spec better than most and are energising for a team. I've never worked with someone who is excellent at all facets of their job. I have worked with some people who seemed hopeless at all facets (though it always struck me that they're in the wrong sector rather than just being completely useless individuals).

The largest team I've led has been 5 people whom I had much experience with and so knew various strengths and weaknesses.

And I'm rambling here but that loops back to my first point: people have strengths and weaknesses and boxing them into lettered teams just ignores this.

I don't think they were trying to paint you in any way. The whole "A player" thread of thought is quite common in tech - I think this is what he was getting after.

I'd disagree his comment is unconstructive and argue that the aforementioned philsophy is a _destructive_ one.