a few of my friends were really wired. one ended up dropping out of high school to program at $150k a year, others at $80k a year. It was an insane time. And it could have been another auction site, but i remember "something" bay. McHenry, IL had a pretty interesting BBS network. If only I was roaming on their instead of roaming on prodigy net.
Probably not (much to my regret). The only distinguishing factor is Bezos' name, and that is obvious only in retrospect. I see too many ads like this everyday for any one to stand out. Anyway, I'm going to console myself by saying I would've replied and seen them in person, and immediately realized they were onto something huge, blah blah blah
If anything the ad could discourage some because, not knowing any better, it may have looked like Bezos was one of those people who thinks you can make a late project finish sooner by working sweatshop hours (3x more hours to finish in 1/3 the time).
Everyone asks for "communication skills" and everyone says they're the best and that their shit doesn't stink, too.
Its important to remember that market for Internet skills was completely different back in 1994. Working sweatshop hours, and jumping to unknown VC-backed companies for a shot at an IPO was just part of the game.
I will also note that the ad is promoting explicit high-level programming skills and states that "[F]amiliarity with web servers and HTML would be helpful but is not necessary." This would have cut-off a lot of people who were riding the "web development" bandwagon (rudimentary HTML, perhaps some CGI scripting) and gotten the attention of lot of skilled people looking to catch a quick IPO.
I actually would have responded just for the "you should be able to do so in about one-third the time that most competent people think possible" part.
Note that it doesn't say work 3x longer. I measure time in hours not days, so finishing something 3x faster doesn't mean 120hour weeks, it means finishing something in 13 hours instead of 40.
What determines the meaning of that phrase is not how you measure time; it's how the employer measures time. And what ultimately matters to them is days. Hours only matter (and that, to some employers) inasmuch they affect your present or future productivity, measured in functionality/day.
An employer can certainly measure time in days, and sometimes demand/expect people to put in extra hours in order to make a deadline.
But working extra hours doesn't make one more productive than average and no employer should measure productivity that way. If person A works 80 hours per week and gets as much done as person B that works 40 hours per week no employer will claim that A is as productive as B.
On a side note, given that I do contract work currently you can be certain that both me and my employer measure time in hours not days.
in '94 my friends were learning assembly language, and c. had my father been an electrical engineer rather than a chemical and plastics engineer, i might have caught the bandwagon. instead i was learning CAD, and winning Math and Junior Engineering competitions. by 96 i was learning java with only the value of getting me away from my homework. looking back, i did not tell my teachers off enough in high school. (they actually tried to hold be back because the school was going to run out of math courses, and they wanted me to take spanish over engineering graphics. i should have taken programming independently too. oh well hind sight is 20/20 and will do none of us any good unless we can some how make use of a time machine)
Compare:
"You must have experience designing and building large and complex (yet maintainable) systems, and you should be able to do so in about one-third the time that most competent people think possible. You should have a BS, MS, or PhD in Computer Science or the equivalent."
with:
"Requirements: BS or MS in Computer Science or equivalent (PhD a plus). Several years of software development experience. Extensive experience programming in C++ and/or Java. Enthusiasm for solving interesting problems. Experience with Unix/Linux or Windows environments, C++ development, distributed systems, machine learning, information retrieval, network programming and/or developing large software systems a plus."
The first is from Amazon, the latter is from Google.
Great companies grow where top-notch engineers meet exciting market meet confident coworkers with high expectations. :-)
"Energetic detail-oriented software engineer who wants to create systems with mind-numbing performance. Should enjoy working with people, solving non-trivial problems, and communicating these solutions. Should also wish to learn more about how others have engineered high-performance systems. We desire someone who is an expert in at least some of the following areas and eager to learn the others: distributed computing, compilers & interpreters, fault tolerance, network & storage devices, high-performance computation, algorithms & data structures, os/kernel experience."
That's from my last employer, which has been around for 8 years and has I believe about 4 recurring customers. In the 2 years I was there, they got no new major customers and only a few consulting jobs. 3 key employees have left in the last 8 months.
My point is that all job applications basically look alike. It's very difficult to pick out winners just from the job-app. In hindsight, the big successful companies all require top-notch engineers, exciting markets, and confident coworkers with high expectations. But many employers have that (or ask for it; it's often hard to tell the difference until you've been working there for a while) and still fail.
He was obviously looking for the right people for the right OS and programming languages at that time for highly scalable communication systems. Would be interesting to compare that with job offers of competitors of that time (who were those, btw?).
I think there were a few technical bookstores online, but he was one of the very earliest, and certainly the first to try to have a larger scope (e.g. before it was 'let's sell our inventories online', Amazon's idea was 'let's sell every possible book online').
Interestingly enough, Amazon was (if I recall correctly) started as a research project: David Shaw (of the hedge fund D. E. Shaw) asked Bezos (then a VP there) for a list of ways to make money online. At the top of Bezos' list was bookstores. Shaw decided it wasn't worth the risk, Bezos decided it was, so Bezos left the company to found Amazon. Shaw ended up starting Juno, though, so it's not a total loss.
The add seems very reasonable (in the startup mentality kind of way):
"Well-capitalized start-up seeks extremely talented C/C++/Unix developers to help pioneer commerce on the Internet. " -- Good. I want to work with only other top notch developers.
"You must have
experience designing and building large and complex (yet maintainable)
systems, and you should be able to do so in about one-third the time
that most competent people think possible. " -- Ok. I get it, you want the very good fast types. But are you willing to pay for it?
"Familiarity with web servers and HTML would be
helpful but is not necessary. " -- Awesome. You just showed that you know what is important. Don't you love adds that say must know HTML. How hard is to learn anyways?
"Your compensation will include meaningful equity ownership. " -- Awesome. This is what I wanted to hear. You want great developers, but you are willing to compesate them in a meaningful and fair way.
If I knew C/C++ that well, at the time, and if I wasn't in school, and if I was around the area of Seatles, I would have responded to his ad.
I am still waiting for some ad like this, but in the mobile space.
1) Yeah, it's a reasonable ad - but that's my point. Almost all ads are "reasonable". You never see an ad saying "Startup looking for mediocre developers." Nothing about this one really resonates.
2) "if I wasn't in school, and if I was around the area of seatles". If I knew this was going to be Amazon, I would MOVE to Seattle and take a leave of absence from school.
> You never see an ad saying "Startup looking for mediocre developers." Nothing about this one really resonates.
Not true. Auctomatic had a job ad for a long time looking for a so-so developer. I answered it right away but was distracted from learning smalltalk at the time.
something else to learn from this, is how we should all look for employees. a number of the books i have read like "good to great" and "built to last" have suggested the only true way to build a great company is to create an environment where the right people flock, and the wrong people leave on their own. setting the bar this high from the start will have this effect, and will give you the authority to tell someone the are good, but just not what you were looking for. it will keep your costs low, the expectations high, and the time you spend managing down.
i wonder which amazon employee/ founder was hired as a result of that ad.
going to museums hardly makes me weep, but stuff like this touches a special place in my heart. i always wonder what the future of digital anthropology will be like, especially in the wake of DRM, and encryption.
I wouldn't have the confidence to apply, thanks to "You must have experience designing and building large and complex (yet maintainable) systems, and you should be able to do so in about one-third the time that most competent people think possible."
I've answered far less intriguing ads in my 'desperate for a job phase'. The fact is that I'm simply not looking at job ads most of the time, and I'll probably only work on something if I already know the person, or I really, really like the idea.
I may be one of those someones in the MA area. ;-)
Actually, I can think of at least two offers that I may kick myself for not taking up. But if I did, I might kick myself for giving up my own startup. If only we all had 20/20 foresight...
As a clarification, I could see how this could read as a lame recruitment ploy for that company, and let me say that I am in no way affliated with friendfeed. I just wanted to point out that there are perhaps equivalent opportunities to the Amazon ad going on right now. Sorry to the friendfeed's if that happened.
I can't figure out any other reason why someone would downmod, but hopefully it wasn't because of that.
