By this logic, why just Berkeley then? Sounds like you don't plan to go into SF often. Why not somewhere beautiful like Yosemite? It's probably cheaper, too. :)
71 karma · joined February 28, 2013
"Your site paid for my Jeep Wrangler."
Other than that, I was nodding my head all the way through this :).
Can you explain this a little bit? Not trying to sound combative, just would like to hear your thoughts!
I honestly wish we could get you guys and gals better jobs more frequently tho, haha. Sometimes we do not such a good job
Although, just so it's not like I'm dodging your question for any onlookers, fixed price estimates are the way to go for a number of reasons (alignment of incentives, doesn't penalize high productivity, etc). The clients do the pricing, generally, but if something looks silly, we try to step in.
Open and extremely easy to use, while not sucking in terms of quality. I think we're doing an OK job, but this is more complex than it sounds, and quite obviously, there's always room to do better. (If anyone strongly feels that we just suck, PLEASE email me).
Thanks for allowing us the self-promotional spot, haha - but seriously, if you do want to try us out, just email me and we'll give you a post for free. I am sure our devs are itchin' for (well-compensated) work.
If you're concerned about fairly valuing the work put in until now, a month's work, even if you had done 100% of it yourself to date, is a small, small portion of the total work required to get to cruising altitude. This is a multi-year journey, after all.
Every two days, I cook up 2 lbs ground beef, boil 4 cups beans, and 4 cups rice. I let it cool off, and throw it in Tupperware, and into the fridge. I take from that whenever I'm hungry. It doesn't taste the best, but it fills you up, is cheap, and is good for you! If you're feeling the need for some extra veggies/fruit, avocado, frozen blueberries, and frozen kale offer the most nutritional content at the lowest price and least preparation time.
Like work, I don't think this will ever be 'optimal', but it's good for now, in that it saves me time, money, and waistline. Can tweak it as I go.
Agreed.
Think that, in any market, for any talent, this would be a ridiculous arrangement for any manager/CEO to propose of a remote hire.
I think the author of this blog probably mentioned that anecdote as a comedic way to highlight the challenges of having product built remotely.
As someone part of a team who advocates for / tries to enable developers to work remotely (and employers to hire remotely), frankly, I'm happy to hear (and get excited by) stories of such arrangements working out for all parties!
I'm really interested in seeing how that plays out. I've always thought that a more equitable ownership distribution across the first 10-15 members of the team (incl. 'founders') would result in better outcomes more consistently (defined to mean sale or IPO).
In any case, I like dropping in on smart people debating stuff.
Plus, sitting at a desk typing away for extended periods of time is actually pretty easy -- what's harder is making sure quality stuff is being generated for that entire time.