[rvz]

> Rockstar awarded them 10k for it.

The original post, analysis and the actual fix of this bug is beyond impressive. Strangely, Rockstar awarding $10k for that is like someone searching for lost treasure, identifies historical references which leads to finding a ton of it and somehow leaves with 1/8th of it, even though they did 98% of all the work.

For that detailed effort, analysis and with a fix, I'd say that is worth around $80k. At least Rockstar was generous enough to award them in the first place; so I'll give them that.

[PragmaticPulp]

> For that detailed effort, analysis and with a fix, I'd say that is worth around $80k.

No good deed goes unpunished. Rockstar went out of their way to thank this person and send them a check equivalent to several weeks of median developer salary. Can we not shame them for this goodwill gesture?

$80K would be on the order of half of the annual salary of most developers outside of SFBA.

[gambiting]

>>$80K would be on the order of half of the annual salary of most developers outside of SFBA.

Lol, I'm a lead C++ programmer in the UK and I don't make that much. It's American salaries as a whole that are completely stratospheric.

[chrisweekly]

I'm sorry to hear that you're not better compensated. I also emplore you to reframe your perspective. Consider the possibility that pay in many places outside tech hubs in the US is outrageously low. There's a race to the bottom wrt exploitative commodification of developer talent as the 3rd world comes online, and I find it abhorrent. This "SFBA / FAANG companies are the sole exception" narrative is incorrect, and harmful to you and to me and to everyone in our field. If you're living in a 1st-world economy, have solid technical chops, can communicate reasonably well in written and spoken English, working for a for-profit business, and have a few years of experience, and you're not making over $150k/yr, you're almost certainly underpaid.

Know your worth! Demand more! Capture the value you produce!

- Chris in Duxbury, MA

PS For context: I've been building web-related things for a living since 1998, and have always been paid fairly for it. Because I insist.

PPS Ofc YMMV... circumstances, personality, ambition, etc etc. But there is so much more opportunity to create and capture real wealth than you might imagine.

[gambiting]

Then I need to provide more context

"and you're not making over $150k/yr, you're almost certainly underpaid."

Those salaries don't exist in the UK, no matter your position or the company you work for. I know senior programmers working for Faang companies in London and they don't make this much. Like, in general you won't see a position offering above £100k/year. I know someone with 25+ years experience in the industry and they are on an (incredible for the UK) £90k/year.

The only way to reach the equivalent of $150k/year in the UK is to work as a contractor and be good enough to justify billing that much. As a normal employee you won't see that.

My point is - it's impossible to judge everyone in the world by the American pay standard. Would I make more money in the US? Maybe. Would my standard of living be better? Also maybe, but I lean towards no with this one. But it's almost certainly not true that by making less than $150k/year you're underpaid in a place like the UK.

[thu2111]

Where did you get that idea?

I worked for a US/UK company with its engineering HQ in London until recently and was earning drastically more than that. Now, I was an early stage employee and doing unique work for the firm. That position wasn't advertised - I created it. But some of the more senior engineers on my team (in the UK) were earning about $150k/yr GBP equivalent, a bit more in some cases.

Are salaries in the UK lower than in the USA, yes, absolutely. They are not that much lower than non-SF jobs in the USA.

[comp_throw7]

Putting aside the question of whether there's an objective standard for whether someone is underpaid - it is not true that nobody in the UK makes $150k/yr as an IC SWE without being a contractor. Filter on the UK: https://www.levels.fyi/comp.html?track=Software%20Engineer

You'll see that mid-level (L4/E4) engineers at Google & Facebook easily break 150k; senior engineers (L5) start at ~225k and hit 300k. That's about 30-40% less than what Google & Facebook pay engineers in SV.

I also saw multiple other companies where engineers with less than a decade of experience were approaching or breaking 150k - Transferwise, Improbable, Palantir, Morgan Stanley, Booking.com, Cloudflare, Bloomberg, Yelp, Babylon Health, Goldman Sachs, Stripe, etc.

[Mandatum]

My entire network makes more than that in Dev and Arch roles in that part of the world. None of them have to live in London for them either.

Either you're underpaid, or C++ has been commoditized to the same point as PHP. If you value money over language, I'd switch. But given quite a few in my network are Java developers, I doubt language is the issue here.

[gambiting]

Well then I have no idea how you and your mates do it. I know people who are in very senior positions at FAANG companies as well as couple big financial firms in the UK and not a single one of them makes over £100k/year. Two of them with PhDs in big data analytics and working in the industry. My own salary might be excused by being in the North East, but they work all over the place, in and out of London.

[marvin]

You’re framing it the right way, and this is what we should work towards. But man, I long for the day when what you’re describing here is realistic.

In Norway, country of «holy crap, I’m an employer lobbyist and our salaries are so high we can’t compete in the export markets», you’ll only be around this level if you’re a freelance contractor billing 100% and doing all the sales work yourself.

There are some CTO and probably a few lead roles paying this much, but for an IC you’ll top out around $120k. Prove me wrong if other Norwegians have a better view :)

[eins1234]

If you're reading this and are an startup founder hiring software engineers, one way to help kickstart the trend in this direction is to hire fewer engineers than you otherwise would have, and become _much more selective_ with who you hire, but pay them salaries that are competitive with not your local market, but with the hottest markets in the world (SF, NYC, etc), and actively advertise that you're doing so.

This will give your company a unique competitive advantage in capturing the best talent your market has to offer (and it likely has plenty of world-class talent to offer, but many of them end up getting brain drained away to those hotter markets today). It will also allow you to stay small for longer, dramatically reducing communication/coordination overhead and delaying the need to introduce management hierarchies, which is actually a substantial competitive advantage especially for early stage companies where agility and flexibility is the key to success. If all that's not enough, it will also do wonders for retention since it's basically a semi-permanent golden handcuff.

Over the long term, other companies in your market will end up having to compete with _you_ for talent, which raises the boat for everybody and helps your local market flourish with engineering talent and reverse the outward brain drain trend.

The unwillingness of employers in other markets to compete for talent outside their local maxima, optimizing for short-term self-interest over the long term health of the local talent market that they depend on for global competitiveness, is a true tragedy of the commons situation, and is a huge part of what makes Bay Area startups so dominant.

It's also what forced my hand into moving to SF myself. It would have been extremely financially irresponsible of me to stay. By leaving 5 years ago, I tripled my salary compared to competing local offers, and one job change later I'm now making more than double of that (at a startup, not at one of the big tech corps).

[rapsey]

This is completely unrealistic.

Nowhere in the world outside SF/NYC is there so much VC money that can support paying developers those salaries.

I would say over 90% of tech companies make their money from local markets. You can pay your developers as much as you make from your local market.

As for hiring. You have no idea how well someone is going to work out. Some people are really good at interviews but turn out to be terrible employees and vice versa. This is why the hiring process in tech tends to be pretty convoluted and broken in general. No one can figure this out. The laws regarding hiring are also much less liberal outside of CA. Hiring and firing is severely restricted in many places.

Very few companies are in the position of being "unwilling" to pay developers more. Some with plenty of cash are even simply limited by the tax laws how much they can pay. The cost of paying someone too much over local market rate incurs obscene tax costs.

[marvin]

Interesting thoughts. I think you're onto something.

Going off on a tangent: I personally won't leave for California/SF since I have family here and won't put the obviously massive financial advantage ahead of that.

But I did consider this when I was in my twenties. It wasn't a super easy choice. Interesting to hear that someone have taken the leap. Not multiplying one's salary by 3-6x could indeed be described as quite financially irresponsible, and the alternative has to be pretty important to pass on that.

[codebolt]

Sadly, you're absolutely spot on.

[mschuster91]

> I'm sorry to hear that you're not better compensated.

They are in the UK with a somewhat decent healthcare system, somewhat sane rents (notable exception: London) and a somewhat sane pension system.

US salaries are so high because US salaries have to cover for all three points additionally.

[astrange]

Companies that pay well in the US also provide good healthcare benefits. There are some weird setups like HDHPs where they give you free money at the start of the year, then immediately charge you so much for prescriptions that it gets used up again, but I think this is a way to let us farm credit card points.

[jasonkester]

That’s just silly.

I lived in the UK with all those things you describe, but I still made a point of billing my Bay Area rate because that is what the work product of a software engineer is worth on the market.

So, no. Even if you live in your parents basement and they cook your meals and take are of your other expenses, you should still approach your work life as though you were an adult.

[tjpnz]

Never lived in the US (and haven't lived in the UK for years) but the idea that you need a SV salary to get health care which meets or exceeds that of the NHS sounds a bit suspect.

[hamilyon2]

From what I know, moving to US from a country with good socialised health care is a lot like selling a lot of put options on your health with different strike "prices". You might get rich, or if you are very sick, you are bankrupt.

[TMWNN]

Multiple studies have shown that Kaiser Permanente (an integrated health insurance/care provider—basically a non-governmental equivalent of the NHS in comprehensiveness—that is available in many US states) is more efficient and effective than the NHS for about the same cost.

Examples:

* https://www.bmj.com/content/324/7330/135

* https://www.bmj.com/content/327/7426/1257

[sepin4]

You seem to have some simplistic view of how global economy works if you think all around the globe people should be payed the same for the same profession. Unless you work as freelancer in which case most of the time you have to pay your own taxes(which in most countries will amount to a big percent of your paycheck), you will get salaries according to the local market price standards regardless of what your peers in another country get. There are at least a few reasons for that one of which is that the market would not allow for huge disparities in salaries compared to other professions and to the same profession with local funding. You can try to negotiate good bonuses and/or equity but that is not mandatory and it is as much as you can get.

[ricardobayes]

An honest question... By now you could probably retire a few times over. What keeps you going?

[chrisweekly]

Actually, I have no intention to "retire". (In recent years I've taken the month of July off to take my family sailing; I can easily imagine taking longer stretches off, and/or shifting my time further from paid work towards hobbies... and at some point maybe even pivoting to writing and making music full-time.) My "ikigai" is, thankfully, mostly decoupled from making money per se.

[verst]

When you realize how high cost of living is in cities paying those salaries, how much education (for potential kids) is, how you must save for your retirement entirely on your own... and then of course insane out of pocket medical costs... you soon realize that when you adjust for lifestyle you may be in fact much better off than the person with stratospheric salary.

[sgtnoodle]

I'm in the bay area. For what it's worth, my personal out of pocket max for healthcare is something like $2500/year, and they were only half-joking when I got the "million dollar work-up" last year at UCSF. I spent 3x that when my dog ate a corn cob... There is the additional cost of premiums for the rest of my family, but it's not absurd.

Real estate and property tax is rediculous, state income tax is high, and restaurants around here charge $18 for a hamburger these days. We're going to have to move once the kid(s) are old enough to be hindered by the bad schools. It's enough to perhaps make the high salaries not quite so competitive, and especially so if you need to pay for private school.

Salary is only a partial picture of compensation in the bay area, though. If you're a software engineer at a FAANG type company, you're potentially getting 1-2x your salary between bonuses and equity. If you joined early on at a start-up that's doing well, you're perhaps getting set up to spend your 40's mowing lawns like Forrest Gump if you want. It's enough that, even if you take very conservative career choices, you could work hard out here for a decade while living comfortably, then move somewhere else, buy a nice house outright, and work for fun while not stressing out about money ever again.

[ncmncm]

Right. A very, very ordinary apartment in NYC is $6000/mo. Figure 30-40% of your salary for taxes. If you made only $240K in NYC, your apartment would use up fully half of your take-home.

[bscphil]

Even assuming this is true ($6k a month sounds absurd), this is a bad argument. The old "rent should cost no more than one third of your income" rule is basically for people around the poverty line. For them it's a question of whether they can afford to eat that month.

Just to give an extreme example: if Jeff Bezos uses half his income this year to build the largest estate the world has ever seen, he's still sitting pretty on the rest of it and has the largest estate the world has ever seen.

At a 35% tax rate, your take home income is $156K. At $6K per month ($72K/yr), you have $84K left over after rent. If this is you then YOU ARE WEALTHY. There is simply no getting around this. You are making more alone, after taxes and after rent than my partner and I have ever made together total in a year in our lives, and we live in a city with a relatively expensive rental market and are not "poor".

The absurd talk about "only" making over two hundred thousand dollars a year (plus whatever your partner makes if you have one) needs to stop. It's so out of touch with the norm in virtually every city in the world that it would be laughable if it weren't kind of sad.

[ncmncm]

<https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/>

People taking in $200k are not in any sense "very, very wealthy", except from a third-world viewpoint. $200k in today's dollars approaches what would have been called "middle class" a few decades ago, when there was one. Now you are only low, below $300k, and high, above $1M, with very few left between.

(In countries with regular health care and education, life costs less, so this about the US.)

The plutocrats have been very successful at deceiving American voters that they are not almost all now lower-class. The Powell Memorandum, 50 years ago, laid out the plan. It has been followed since then, and Americans now are routinely persuaded to vote against their own interests.

Wealth produced in the US has been rising as fast since 1975 as it did between 1945 and 1975, but normal Americans' income since 1975 has been flat. The whole difference has gone straight into the pockets of the extreme rich, and they are who are very, very rich. You and I have no concept of how different their lives are.

In 1975, regular parents could pay for putt their kids through college while paying their mortgage.

[TMWNN]

No "very, very ordinary apartment in NYC" costs $6000 a month.

[ncmncm]

What would be a very ordinary apartment anywhere else is considered palatial in NYC. NYC residents have got used to much reduced standards.

[rincebrain]

Where, in the middle of Manhattan?

I'm living in NYC right now and paying less than half that in monthly rent.

[ncmncm]

Yes, in the middle of Manhattan. A substantial number of people do live there. For reasons.

[jpz]

You are doing it wrong then. I was making 100k GBP a year in 1998 in London as a C++ developer, the jobs are out there if you have the talent.

[gambiting]

I'd love to know where and how, because I have never seen a position offering £100k and above anywhere in this country. I have friends working as seniors for Facebook in London and they don't make £100k.

I have two guesses - either you were a contractor, or worked for a bank where I've heard it's possible to cross £100k salary. Or third option, you mean <£100k of salary + bonuses?

[disgruntledphd2]

FAANG pay terribly in the UK.

The one I worked for wanted me to move to London, and I said fine, as long as you give me a comparable standard of living.

Nope, they took my Irish salary and converted it to GBP, and that was it (this was post Brexit, btw).

Obviously, I didn't move. And working with any engineers in the London office was a massive pain as anyone without family commitments worked in London for a year, and then transferred to the US for a massive salary bump.

The core issue is that FAANG don't benchmark against finance in London, which means that pay is pretty out of wack.

For instance, I got a 150K offer from an investment bank in London around that time, and I'm definitely not as useful in finance as I would be in tech.

It just blows my mind that they haven't fixed this to be honest (I suspect that they'll have to, now that Brexit has actually happened).

[comp_throw7]

Almost certainly the conversation is about total comp rather than base salary; at FAANG the difference is marginal (especially since at Facebook, there's no 1-year cliff; your equity starts vesting immediately every month).

But even putting that aside, most senior (E5) Facebook engineers in the UK make 125-160k base salary in the UK. Even if that's denominated in USD, that still leaves a significant % breaking 100k GBP base.

Source: https://www.levels.fyi/company/Facebook/salaries/Software-En... (filter for "United Kingdom")

[sumedh]

> I'm a lead C++ programmer in the UK and I don't make that much.

Normal software engineers make that in Sydney and Melbourne. You need to negotiate a higher salary or switch jobs.

[gambiting]

As I explained in other comments, salaries that high don't exist in the UK. And you can't just negotiate to have your salary be double the market rate where you live, no matter how good you are. Also, isn't Sydney the most expensive place to live in the world? My mortgage where I live is £600/month for an actual house, what good does making 2x the money give me if I have to pay 4x the money for rent?

[TheKarateKid]

It probably would've cost Rockstar at least $100k in employee time to have one of their teams find, debug, and fix the issue.

The extra time can now be spent playing the game instead of waiting, increasing revenue.

So relatively speaking, it's a low payout for a huge company like Rockstar to give on their game grossing billions.

[bla3]

$100k pays a dev several months. Someone who has source access and needs more than a few days to fix this problem doesn't deserve that kind of salary.

[TheKarateKid]

I said employee time as in it being a dev team effort not a single developer.

[ncmncm]

Yet, instead they took years and failed to fix it.

[bla3]

Which shows you that before that blog post they valued the fix less than that.

[paulmd]

Rockstar will make tens of millions of additional revenue from increased player retention over the years (GTA Online is a massive cash cow, it is pretty much the original hyper-monetized game-as-a-service as a continues to fountain cash to this day), slow load times are an extremely commonly cited reason for marks (excuse me, customers) leaving the casino. This is a product that had made six billion dollars as of two and a half years ago, it is likely the most profitable entertainment product ever created, $10k is an almost insultingly low fraction of the value he created for the company.

Better than nothing I guess, but suggesting that it's OK to exploit people because of where they live is kinda crass. This is an industry where you are (should be) valued based on what you can create, not where you live.

To flip this around, if this guy lived in Haiti would you say it would have been fine to give him $1k because welp, cost of living is even lower there? Insulting.

And again they had years and years they could have fixed this themselves, at in-house prices if they wanted to. They had to be shamed into it by a third-party developer pointing out their "could be fixed in a day by a single developer" tier mistakes. O(n^2) algorithms causing minutes-long load times, repeatedly reported by thousands of customers across the game's 10+ year lifespan.

It's like giving a waiter a 1% tip. Is it nice that you gave them a tip at all? I guess. Technically nobody asked them to get you your food. Is it a reasonable fraction of the value delivered by customary standards? Not really. And in this case it's like a 0.01% tip.

[wcarss]

"It's one banana Michael, what could it cost -- ten dollars?"

[cbozeman]

"There's always money in the banana stand."

[krn]

> $80K would be on the order of half of the annual salary of most developers outside of SFBA.

If the author of the bug fix is indeed from Latvia (.lv), the median annual income of a senior software engineer in the Baltic states is currently around 30K-40K after taxes.

[munk-a]

Sorry is that number in Euros, USD or another currency?

[krn]

It's in EUR, since all the Baltic states are already in the eurozone.

[scrapcode]

Half? I live in the Midwestern US. Have been dabbling in software for most of my life, have some decent working examples and am finishing my BS:CS this year.

I can't even get close to my current salary in my current unrelated field ($85k) to even consider a career switch. Are the jumps from junior to mid-level/pm that high? I am a PM in construction so that may end up being my path.

[ecshafer]

Junior to Mid level is pretty significant, even outside of the bay area. At a finance company, Junior to Senior for me was about $45k base salary over ~5 years, with another $20k in bonuses annually. If you can only find say a $70k job, I would think its not unlikely that you would be able to work 2 years at that, and jump for $90-110k.

[srswtf123]

As someone searching for employment in the Midwest, I feel your pain. I saw a position yesterday that wanted 15+ years of experience and paid, I kid you not, $17/hr.

Compensation in the Midwest is a joke. If my family weren’t here, I’d return to one of the coasts.

[wavefunction]

They're looking to fill the position with a foreign contractor, almost certainly. I wrote some PHP sites 20 years ago and get contacted every now and then about taking a 2 month contract for $16 an hour writing PHP in Pittsburgh, which I'm sure has its charms but is also halfway across the country from me.

[dmix]

The terrible smells, pretty sunset, and constant threat of petty violence in SF is offset with significant extra hiring fees.

[pezezin]

Dude, I'm currently living in Japan and $80k is almost double my salary, and I'm already above the national average and live pretty decently here.

Disclaimer: I don't live in a big city like Tokyo.

[burnte]

80k is about the ANNUAL salary for most devs outside of SF.

[astrea]

> $80K would be on the order of half of the annual salary of most developers outside of SFBA.

Wow, I need a raise.

[Someone1234]

Edit: Nevermind misread it.

[kortilla]

we’re punishing rockstar for giving this dev $10k when there was no bounty program in the first place

[yarcob]

I think this is a great example of a fallacy that's pretty popular on HN: That work should be rewarded based on "value created" rather than effort.

I don't think this line of thinking is helpful. Should Amazon increase the price of their VMs if you made more money with them? Should a doctor charge a lawyer a higher price for a flu shot because their time is worth more?

Of course not. Because in all these cases, the clients would just go buy someone else's service.

Of course it is helpful to consider the value of the work you produce, and you can use that in negotiations. But you are not entitled to a higher rate just because your client is big or successful.

If the developer had offered a two day consultation for $80.000 to Rockstar they would most likely have declined and said, sorry, for that money we can hire someone else to do a lot more performance improvements.

If you want to get paid based on value created, you need to negotiate. But you don't have a moral right to get more money for the same effort just because your client is rich.

[yanderekko]

>For that detailed effort, analysis and with a fix, I'd say that is worth around $80k.

Do you think the fix is actually worth 80k in terms of additional revenue for Rockstar? I wouldn't be so sure. If not though then no it's not worth $80k.

"I'm a developer and I'm paid a lot to do my job, therefore everything I do must be very valuable" is not the right line of reasoning to use here.

[keypusher]

It’s absolutely worth that much and more. GTA5 Online pulled in well over $500 million in 2019, and even more in 2020. It’s now the 3rd best selling game of all time, behind only Tetris and Minecraft. https://www.tweaktown.com/news/69666/gta-made-half-billion-d...

[crazygringo]

That's not a relevant number.

The only relevant fact to justify $80K is -- would slow loading times have resulted in at least $80K of lost sales going forwards? Or at $50 a copy, then starting today would there be 1,600 people who would buy GTA V, but won't because they know loading times were slow? Maybe because a friend or reviewer mentions that as a con? (And you can also add lost DLC revenue from people who gave up playing earlier than they would have otherwise.)

Honestly, that's an incredibly hard question to answer. But it is in no way obvious that it is "absolutely worth that much and more".

In contrast, $10K is a nice round number that demonstrates gratitude for their charitable work. And keep in mind this was probably a weekend's worth of investigation or so. Not many months of dedicated work, which is what $80K buys on the job market.

[jjmarinho]

If the 500 million figure is correct, you would need only a 0,02% (1/5000) increase in spending for a change to be worth $80.000.

Diminishing the notoriously bad load times of GTA:Online by 70% could probably do that. I actually never got into the multiplayer because at the time my HDD was taking several minutes to load the game.

[crazygringo]

Just a note, it doesn't apply retroactively.

It doesn't matter how much money GTA V made in the past. This applies only to future profit that would be have been lost going forwards.

[keypusher]

It's not about $50/copy, it's about lost revenue from GTA:Online which makes money off micro-transactions and continued spending from existing customers. And yes, I think it should be obvious that very long load times has made a significant number of people spend less time and money than they would have with fast load times.

[stuaxo]

Hard to say, but definitely more than the 10k, all the people that just clicked off before it loaded.

[gustavpaul]

This reminds me of my 13 year old sibling yelling at our mother when we were teenagers for not buying them the exact item they wanted, but something pretty close. Disappointing.

One should not hold people responsible for acting "non-perfectly". Any behavior exceeding "average" should be met with admiration and gratitude, average behavior with "respect and appreciation", and anything somewhat sub-average with "mild disappointment but no surprise and some understanding".

Having a company spend money they are technically obligated to allocate to share holders, to a developer who, without any pre-existing contract or even verbal or commonlaw understanding, helped them, is way beyond "average response" for modern businesses.

Please, don't hate on the vanishingly small number of counter-examples blazing a trail in this space.

[Havoc]

True. I’m glad he got anything at all. Game improvements generally don’t. Think of all the mods that exist just to fix bugs in say Skyrim

[munk-a]

They tend to get a lot of community accolades but yea - spending time fixing someone else's intellectual property isn't a great place to start your proposition if you want to make money.

Even traditionally mod friendly companies will tend to sweep in and either block any derivative work that's monetizing their improvements or else negotiate with the creators to take the lion's share and republish the content under their company label. There are a bunch of examples of this but Counter Strike is a pretty famous one.

That all said, it's pretty hard to argue that making minor alterations to a product should allow me to resell it as a novel work. Fan Fiction exists - but it doesn't (legally) exist as taking a novel and taking on a few new chapters then reselling it without giving a portion to the original author.

[viraptor]

He got paid a good month salary for spending a bit of time fixing an issue (which is tricky but not extreme if you know re). I feel like people having strong opinions that's not enough should just open a GFM campaign to give him more and add their own money. It easier to say how others should spend.

[hypertele-Xii]

> even though they did 98% of all the work.

You are forgetting the game which Rockstar made. A loading times fix is not 98% of the final product.

[httpsterio]

That's basically 6x the average Latvian developer salary. The country the original developer is from.

[httpsterio]

6x their monthly salary*. In a lot of European countries, salary is always referred to by the monthly amount, not yearly.

[f430]

they could've given him nothing tho so im glad they gave him something. sure it would've been nice if it was more