Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think there is a bit of a contradiction in this logic. Why would redistributing 'skills' that lead other companies to lose cash at an astronomical scale help other companies improve? If their product and innovation was truly transformative perhaps the tech industry wouldn't be in the state it is in as sustainable business.



If someone is fired from a start-up that just has some kind of nebulous speculated future value, it doesn’t mean they lacked skills — they might have been successfully creating some part of it. The market just has decided that what they were working on might not actually have that nebulous future value.

They might be able to for example go work for a company that produces objects, and then sells them to consumers in exchange for money. Then the value of their skills will be a little more obvious I guess.


How many engineers feel restricted by management? Putting them in smaller and more flexible companies can help them shine and finally put their experience to full use


You are assuming that in these companies the managers are a completely separate class, but the truth is in most of big tech most senior developers / architects feed directly into product roadmap and management. In fact most of big tech make a point of trying not to hire pure managerial folks.

In other words it is not purely management who are responsible for most user-hostile interfaces, ethically dubious business models (how to optimise gaming addiction) or bloated infrastructure (kubernetes when it is not needed,...), highly-skilled tech folks need to own up for these low-interest rate phenomena as well.


> Why would redistributing 'skills' that lead other companies to lose cash [...] help [...]?

My guess at the parent commenter's presupposition would be that they had been overpaid and will now be forced to work for normal wages. At those lower wages, it might become economical to employ them, while those same people weren't economical at silicon-valley-scale wages.


I think the companies got worse because they changed organizationally, not because their programmers got worse.


Part of the problem is they hired way too many non-programmers. Became like construction work with one guy working and 4 planning around.


That seems plausible to me, at least in some cases. I don't know the full picture in other companies, but in the case of Meta/Facebook, the company actually asked managers to transition to individual contributor jobs.


Why do you believe this was a widespread problem?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: