lolwutf

There's always management. That's my plan when I'm in my 40s/50s/tired of coding age, at least.

Otherwise, don't worry about it, because there's lots of people out there right now jumping around companies from year-to-year, doing that thing. It's the norm for an industry, right now.

There will be some conventional wisdom you can glean from colleagues, The Market, and your own heart/personal development, when the comes time for that.

You're young. You don't need all of the answers now, nor should you try to come up with them which would inevitably cause you madness.

Plus, there will always be the Googles/Apples/Microsofts, etc of the world. When you're ready for stability, move towards that pack.

Ugh. Here we go again.

I'm really beginning to become tired of the constant tension associated with being in the tech industry (and, by proxy, its rung on the economic ladder):

-we're driving up rent and destroying culture in San Francisco

-we're ruining Burning Man

-we blow big money at yuppie places on yuppie things

Can't we all just keep a low profile?

If Dustin really wanted to talk about his encounter with the Winklevii, did he really need to write a blog about the nature and economies of Burning Man, or couldn't he have just focused specifically on the nuances of his encounter?

The horrible PR we all collectively maintain for ourselves is a definite NEGATIVE in this industry, sometimes.

For the record, I'm an average dude, went with a camp of other average, well-balanced people, setup my own damn tent, had a average amount of average gear, spent an average amount of time and money on preparation, and didn't have an extravagant time above and beyond most people there. And it was enormously satisfying.

I also work in the tech industry, have done well for myself, make a crazy salary, and generally didn't make a big deal about it.

EDIT - Not saying there weren't parts of this post that didn't need to be said (the encounter and it's ramifications are incredible!), but a large part felt like ripping open a scab and just rubbing salt on the wound that is our presence.

Hats off to that! Lots of the job postings on HN tend to make outlandish requests/offerings just because 'hey we got HN front page'. Some are downright shameful.

Also, in before the HN cabal muzzles this one.

Ditto. That's the hard part.

Also, try being from the Southeast and missing Southern culture (well, the good parts of it, at least). There's very sparse tech hubs in the Southeast. Effectively none if you want to live in a coastal city.

This in a big way.

I'm curious to hear about the SF Bay Area tech scene frame in a similar point of view, from the older (wiser) hackers here.

My young brain hadn't yet connected the dots about the whole 'reaching a point where you have to move into management or finance, due to career path' thing, which is a very interesting angle.

Well, according to this link, the average 2BR condo costs ~$900k. To put it bluntly, aint no way I'm gonna spend close to a million for a 2BR condo! That's even more depressing!

So, this brings me back to the original predicament: when you get to nesting age (which normally runs concurrent, or closely precedes Having Kids Time), you're gonna start looking at your finances and looking at the local real estate market and many will need to make some very tough decisions - decisions that I, personally, don't see including San Francisco.

In the grand scheme of things, Oakland and Alameda are or are becoming quite highly priced, compared to average national housing market rates.

And this is in an industry where remote work is possible. Finance is less possible to work remotely.

/me wonders how old you are.

Sounds like an awesome recruiting product.

It's a vicious cycle. Some behavior has to break it.

Aha! Didn't see even this reply before I had posted this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6259899

Maybe more.

A 1-bedroom in a building next door to the Mission Hotel - San Francisco's biggest SRO hotel, located in the Mission District - just went for $2800/mo.

And the building isn't rent controlled.

IMO, this braindrain could possibly synergize with the current trend of increasing remote work and we'll begin to see the stranglehold the SF Bay Area has on tech workers/startups chip away at an even faster pace.

Arguably, the SF rent issue has implications in that sphere, as well.

So even you, 30 year SF resident, have some slight natural incentive to not stay in the area, once Having Kids Time rolls around.

To think that the bold 20-somethings flooding into SF these days have a path charted for long-term residency here seems all but impossible...

In my opinion, this is what will eventually spur a braindrain in SF in 5-10 years.

My theory, if it holds, says that a bunch of 20-somethings flooded into SF in the past 2-3 years. When they reach their early/mid-30s, they will begin their nesting phase.

They'll want to find/will have found their mate and will want a house with some space.... The chance to finally to get out of their dumpy studio/3-bedroom-with-roommates... Some well-deserved adult digs, after years of hard work in this industry.

However, they'll look around at house prices, look back at their bank accounts, and realize such dreams could never be fulfilled here.

At that point, they'll pick one of four paths:

-Buy property in a remote, suburban sprawl-y part of the Bay Area (an unattractive option to anyone who's lived in SF for many years)

-Buy some depressingly expensive one bedroom condo and stay here

-Become a lifetime renter

-Move away from the Bay Area ('back home', or elsewhere)

In my opinion, a 30-something, on the verge of midlife crisis anyways, will take one more shot at the great unknown and set out for a new region, outside the Bay Area.

Unless, of course, they sold their startup for 8-figures and escaped with a big chunk of compensation.

Thoughts?

'If you don’t love San Francisco like those of us who love it do, there’s a simple solution; don’t live here.'

Does this girl hear herself talk? The pretentiousness of that makes me want to gag.

I....wh... that really needs to be explained to you?

(This is classic Shit HN Says material.)

scott_karana - What you're describing is true, but is closer to anarchy (which I'm not quite an advocate for).

Do I think the military forces have grown to an excessive level? Yes.

On some things, yes (and I take the position of disagreeing with the military's management structures, here).

On other things, no, definitely not. These are the actions that I consider heroic defense of our freedoms.

> I remain unaware of any imminent threats to my personal freedom other than from the Military-Industrial-Surveillance (and also Prisons and Police) Complex.

As someone who identifies as fairly libertarian, I'll give you that.

But it stands, to some degree, some aspects of the Military Operations of this country are necessary - and even supremely honorable in nature - in order for this country to exist as have whatever degree of freedoms we (still?) have.

Well, technically speaking if there isn't anyone signed up with BDUs and a rifle in hand, then your liberty would be in peril. I mean, if the US government and her lands were just up for whoever wanted to call dibs, I'd take it.

That said, it stands to reason that the reason why your liberty isn't imminently in peril is because someone is already signed up and out there defending it.

To restate everything in broad terms: there's lots of people out in the world that don't like us. Your liberty is always in peril.

Do you want a totally anarchistic society, perhaps? I, for one, don't.

Ok, I was wrong.

Thanks for your family's service!

('family', because everyone is uneasy when a loved one is away on duty)

> It's a fact that the military-industrial complex exists to protect the military-industrial complex.

No it's not.

Perhaps you philosophically disagree with the strategy of the upper management of our Military Operations - and rightfully so, IMO, on many counts - but it's a FACT that they are the ultimate line of defense for our nation's independence.

And without someone willing to put themselves on the front lines where the bullets fly, (to use a tired cliche) we'd easily be speaking German right now.

To take the stance that 'they're putting themselves in front of bullets for their own reasons, but not for me' is incredibly selfish and myopic.

Your other option is to try living in a country with a ragtag militia and government with an organized-crime-level-of-corruption. Let me know how that works.

And 'swank control room in Vegas'? You watch too many movies. :)

<reposted correctly as a reply to toomuchtodo's comment. see it there.> /noob

Whoa, whoa, whoa, hombre.

To broadly estimate the heroism of every other serving member in any singular statement is foolhardy, at best.

There are lots of good people doing good, heroic, insanely patriotic, admirable, and honorable things in that Military-Industrial-Surveillance Complex you describe.

Don't let the mistakes and abuses of the top give you some feeling that the system and everyone in it is corrupt. That system is literally putting themselves in front of bullets right now to defend your right to have such misguided ideas. What are you doing today?

Knew this was coming.

I'm worried about the new trend of the hivemind unilaterally attacking employees from companies they are morally opposed to, regardless of their internal level (i.e. NSA, Walmart, etc).

I'm fairly confident the people behind this library are closer to being our tech brethren, rather than policymakers inside WalMart, responsible for any of WalMart's official practices.

TL;DR - Give them a break and stop shitting on their work.

Laypersons can and should read peer-reviewed medical journals and learn how to make their own, personal interpretations, within reason.

As someone who grew up with ADHD managed by stimulant drug therapy since age 7, I can earnestly say that my experience was that ADHD drugs did boost my grades and were a crucial factor in my career success, to date (and still are).