[yfiapo]

Yeesh, the mindwash is strong. I had a hard time continuing to read this post after the Prestige by Association section. Working at a respected company known for cutting edge work is generally a good sign but it does not make you an Internet God or widen my eyes.

It is like saying you went to Harvard or MIT. That's neat. You are probably reasonably intelligent. However, even that isn't an automatic and I'll reserve judgement until I've made my own assessment.

[ksk]

Association and Reputation puts people into seats on premier nights, or on the streets outside Apple stores, or gets a foot in the door in business. Its a real thing, and people are wise to leverage it whenever they can!

[notyourwork]

Leverage it and treating it as gospel aren't the same.

[ksk]

Why would anyone confuse the two?

[fatjokes]

Good on you, but you're also kidding yourself. First impressions matter---and hearing someone went to MIT or Harvard or works at GoogFace immediately implies that they passed their rigorous vetting. In the absence of more information and the time to process it, it's a pretty strong signal.

It also matters socially. I went to an Ivy League grad school and a no-name undergrad, so I can provide a point of anecdata that people treat you differently.

[fwdpropaganda]

> Working at a respected company known for cutting edge work is generally a good sign but it does not make you an Internet God or widen my eyes.

I suggest you take a walk in the real world.

[pathseeker]

What real world are you referring to? Non-techies are not blown away by people who work at Google/Facebook/Apple. In my experience they are just always interested in the perks, etc.

[filoleg]

What? My experience was the complete opposite of yours. Not a single tech person I interacted with even batted an eye if someone said they worked at Google, most of the time you will just get "nice, what team?" When talking to non-tech people, a lot of them tend to think that everyone working at Google is a super genius changing the world.

[fwdpropaganda]

EVERY tech article about the hot new startup introduces the founders in the following way. If they previously worked at Google, Facebook, they mentioned it. They don't say "founders previously worked at Google therefore THEY'RE AMAZING". But they mention it. If they previously worked at an irrelevant company, they don't mention the company. What's implicit is that if you worked at Google that's remarkable and worth mentioning.

That is prestige by association. If you can't see it.... well, I just hope it's not because you're in denial.

EDIT: Also, VCs. It's a lot easier to get a VCs attention, or a recruiter's attention, if you say you previously worked at Google. If any of this is news to you, I don't know what else to tell you...

[pathseeker]

>EVERY tech article about the hot new startup introduces the founders in the following way.

No it doesn't. Just because you see some articles do that doesn't mean all articles do it.[1] Also, keep in mind that the people writing these articles usually understand tech much better than the layman so that's still not evidence of the general public giving a shit about googlers.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[ryandrake]

Same with schools. If they’re from Stanford I guarantee the article will mention it. If they’re from Generic State University they won’t (unless the article is for GSU’s campus paper).

[lainga]

Yes, if you work for Facebook right now, you might cause a few eyes to actually narrow.

[walshemj]

You might not and I agree with you but HR and the recruiting function wont.

[Asdfbla]

As I understood it, the author didn't really claim that working at such a company makes you a god or super hacker, just that it might give you such a reputation among certain circles (not you, but others perhaps) - which many people will derive confidence from. Seems like a reasonable statement.

The article seems to be less about what some objective truth about good jobs is but more about how people perceive themselves, others and their goals in life.

[nyrulez]

My experience isn't the same as yours. It probably depends on your circle. For my non tech circle, I always come across as some kind of hero, which is amusing. When entering the country, even the immigration officers like to make small chat about my high tech job. But I don't mind it.

[ttul]

Two fucking years of savings? What world is this guy living in?

[tyrust]

Sounds reasonable to me.

You should have an emergency fund that covers six months of expenses, ideally you never touch this. If you quit without another offer it's safe to prepare for a job hunt lasting up to a year. Six more months for safety is just smart.

[protonimitate]

Those types of statements are usually made by people who have never had to scrape by to survive for any major time period.

Work 6 months for minimum wage in a major city and you'll find what most people consider 'low wages' to be laughable.

Of course, you should do everything your power to have and maintain an emergency fund, but two years of savings is insane. Don't waste two years of life if you are unhappy in your job just because you're afraid of not finding new work. 6 months is a good target to shoot for.

[Shaanie]

Outside of a life-altering sickness I see no way for someone who had worked for a top-tier tech company to go without employment opportunities for half a year, let alone two years.

[ryandrake]

I think a lot of people forget what it was like during the last tech downturn, or the previous one, or the previous one... or they’re too young to have lived through them. I remember being a month from total bankruptcy, 12 months into a job search, and I had a decade of experience at the time. Almost nobody was hiring. If you haven’t been through it you have no idea. Fund that emergency fund, people!! Minimum 6 months but 2 years is much better.

[Redoubts]

I don't understand how you couldn't save 50% of your income per year while working at facebook.

[danans]

Assuming a $200k income, a modest 2bd Bay area house, 2 preschool aged children, between mortgage/rent (4k/mo), childcare (20+k/child/year), car, food, taxes, and other basic life expenses, it's totally possible not to save 50%.

Unless you meant as a childless single person making 200k/yr. Then yes, it's easy.

[thaumasiotes]

> Assuming a $200k income... 2 preschool aged children... childcare (20+k/child/year)

Does $200k not seem low for a two-income family? Does paying for childcare not seem strange for a one-income family?

[dragonwriter]

> Does $200k not seem low for a two-income family?

Not really, even in the BA, unless they are both in tech or similar; $200K is nearly double the median household (not individual) income for San Francisco & San Mateo Counties.

[danans]

The previous comment's scenario was "A Facebook employee", with no mention of another income. Also, many people's spouses are students, or non-highly remunerated.

[thaumasiotes]

Hence the other question, "Does paying for childcare not seem strange for a one-income family?"

[fatjokes]

It's amazing how much your expenses and tastes can grow with your income.

[jstanier]

I didn't get that either.

Surely if you work somewhere like that you're pretty employable and not in the middle or nowhere. Why not just go work elsewhere for a bit while you work out what you really want to do next?

[PeterisP]

If you're working a top tier tech job, then having savings worth two years of necessary expenses is much, much lower than e.g. two years of income.

[jogjayr]

You are aware Facebook pays well right?

Unless what you're saying is "Only 2 years?"

[debt]

It's actually quite hilarious to me this Prestige by Association.

I've worked at a couple very high-profile companies in the Valley and have never felt this prestige primarily because I don't hang out with complete douchebags.

If people get all starry-eyed when you announce the company you work for; run in the opposite direction. Also, don't kidd yourself, you and I know both know you're not working on anything that cool. Especially because almost everyone works on a team so responsibility is pretty spread out.

And even if you are working on the very algorithm that determines which ads are shown when, you're still buried in seventeen layers of process and bureaucracy for a change or product that will probably never ship or will take years to market.

The day-to-day is about unglamorous as it gets. People need to realize the big "names" in the Valley are simply large corporations.

[SystemOut]

Or you have family/friends that aren't very technical and don't know any better. I saw people's faces change as soon as someone mentioned where I worked to others in my circle while I was at Google. I had never seen that before. It was weird at first and then I just accepted it. Then having to explain why I wanted to/did leave there was just a major PITA.

I'd be lying if there wasn't some reservation or me doubting myself a bit at first when I realized I just wasn't happy there and needed to get out and I'd also be lying if I said some of it wasn't because of the above reaction of family/friends.

[SubuSS]

I don't know how many non-tech people you hangout with - but these are over reaches:

- That it's wrong to judge using school etc. when you have no other way of judging. For example, if I give you a choice of a cardiologist from hopkins vs someone from a podunk university you haven't heard of, barring no other information - I can put money on your choice being the hopkins dude:)

- The fact that you are working on crud in google is the same as crud in xyz company: No. At least in a true scotsman way, the good teams I have worked on have always had better crud apps than the worse ones.

- That they are complete douchebags. May be a few are, but that's not exclusive to non-tech. (you might not have meant this though)

IOW your familiarity might have bred some contempt / diluted the glamour. For me, I still am very proud of my history of companies.

[throwaway13991]

As someone who works at one of the very high profile companies, on something cool, that people get in contact with every day (and sometimes discuss publicly), I respectfully disagree.

Bureaucracy and process often exist, but it varies extremely. Sometimes it can be quite direct.

(I certainly don't think that "working on the very algorithm that determines which ads are shown" is cool, though, as I work on products.)

[walshemj]

Ever had any friends who went to a public (private in the US) school.

One of my mates who went to a mid tier public school and he commented he made sure when sending out his cv the fact that he was a old bedfordian was prominent.

And if I had stayed in Birmingham (UK) and my mum's plan to use family connections to get me into King Edwards had come off dam right I would use that - btw this is the school that is always in the top 3 in the rankings.

[gaius]

he made sure when sending out his cv the fact that he was a old bedfordian was prominent

That’s not prestige exactly, it’s a signal to the Old Boys Network that he can skip the usual process. Some people might describe this as corruption.

[DarkTree]

> I've worked at a couple very high-profile companies in the Valley and have never felt this prestige primarily because I don't hang out with complete douchebags.

> If people get all starry-eyed when you announce the company you work for; run in the opposite direction.

Get over yourself and out of your bubble. American culture constantly pushes the value of prestige and the way of obtaining that being going to good schools and working at popular companies. If you are a person who didn't go to an ivy league or work at Facebook, it's easy to believe that the person who did is better than you in some way. It is more rare to attain that status, so therefor many people both in and outside of the industry look starry-eyed at them.

I don't work at one of the big tech firms and nor do I want to, but I know for a fact most people in my family would think highly of me if I told them I worked at Google, because it is prestigious whether you like it or not. Does that make them douchebags?

[debt]

It’s one thing for friends or family to think where you working at is cool and another thing for random people to be inflating your ego. Or you may start to think you’re better than other people because of where you work.

I’ve seen this phenomenon in San Francisco quite a bit. That is where the person and their entire social circles become cliques that serve simply to reinforce their ego.

It’s sad and weird to observe first hand.

[ryandrake]

I think many people ask that “So... where do you work?” or “What do you do for a living?” question as a polite way to figure out where to stack you on their social status totem pole. At least in the Bay Area and likely other places, you kind of have to go out of your way to find people who dont do this. Usually I just say I’m an exotic dancer, which often gets a chuckle, breaks the ice and subtly sends the message that I’m not interested in being silently judged based on where I work.

[magic_beans]

He's (likely) Chinese-American. Chinese culture is HUGE on prestige.

[fatjokes]

Because Americans and Europeans didn't judge people by their schools or careers at all before Chinese came along /s.

[lostlogin]

As are all others I’ve encountered too.