[mattgreenrocks]

It's not just tech compensation.

The zeitgeist right now is that employee comp is/was simply too high. There have lots of murmurings lately that amount to that at many different levels of the capital chain. Perhaps what's interesting about now is that people are quite okay with saying it openly. Tech is an easy target since it is well-known, and the pandemic inflated the importance of tech artificially to some degree.

Fully grokking the idea that employee comp could be "too high" for the overall health of the economy really did a number on my economic worldview. Gone is the naive belief that rare/valuable skills secure higher salaries over a long period of time. I no longer trust employers to take care of me, and that getting better at building assets (in the form of products, mostly) is something to grow into to supplant and eventually buy out time spent working for someone else.

[no_wizard]

Isn't this frustrating? Employees of course have the bare the brunt, but god forbid its shareholders and executives that need to scale down their payouts.

Feels so incredibly backward.

And yes I know its "stock performance" but what do you think drives this? With executive compensation mostly related to stocks, of course at the end of the day, thats what they want to drive up.

[rcme]

Employees have to bear the brunt of the effects because those making the macroeconomic decisions are part of the capitalist class. Jerome Powell was a partner at one of the world’s largest private equity firms. Is it any surprise that he’s trying to spin a narrative that employees are paid too much? Isn’t squeezing employees to increase profits what those in private equity typically do?

[908B64B197]

The serious companies have most of their employee's compensation in stock anyways.

[time_to_smile]

> Gone is the naive belief that rare/valuable skills secure higher salaries over a long period of time.

While I agree that this is a naive belief to have (at this point in my career I think there's almost a slightly negative correlation between skill and TC) the general talent pool for software engineers has, at least in my experience, dropped tremendously while TC has exploded.

The most important skills for getting high paying jobs in the last few years has been grinding leet code, then grinding systems design etc, etc. Software engineers no longer have "rare/valuable" skills, they have highly commodified, easily replicable skills (at least at the interview level).

Software engineers today simply aren't that skilled (at least on average) despite what they want to believe. It reminds me a lot of dotcom bubble where anyone with a pulse that could turn on a PC could get a high paying job.

[iamflimflam1]

Yes, hence comments like the one from the governor of the bank of England basically telling people that they needed to get used to being poorer.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/25/britons-nee...

[tracerbulletx]

"Too high" = one of the only careers that wasn't completely soul crushing left.

[mattgreenrocks]

In this case, "too high" = "we haven't figured out how to commoditize it well enough yet because the skill floor/ceiling is too high to scale with cheaper talent." This was one of the primary reasons I began to specialize partially in tech domains that are regarded as "hard" (compilers/perf): much smaller market means employees have a bit more leverage.

[dfjkdksjds789]

Do you feel there is much demand in those areas? I'm interested in more theoretical things but have doubts that many jobs would be available or for them to be valued even though its more difficult

[mattgreenrocks]

Definitely a tradeoff: much fewer companies, but the ones that are left are higher quality if they are seeking out that sort of thing. It really depends on what you're looking for.

I settled into a role of research software engineer, where I do both applied research and development, applying a lot of compiler-ish stuff to different domains within cybersecurity, such as building out control flow graphs from binaries, thinking about how to instrument assembly code efficiently, fast pattern matching, and static analysis, where I am currently. The role fits me like a glove, but it isn't for everyone. In my job search, I started at, "I want a job doing compiler work," and eventually broadened scope a few times until I landed on, "I want a job where compiler-type approaches are on the table of possibilities." This offers a wider variety of work, which I like.

I can discuss more over email (check my HN profile) if you'd like, but most of what I know is US-centric due to how funding works for these types of research. Larger orgs like FAANGs also have it, but the pool is much more competitive, as you'd expect.

[dfjkdksjds789]

I'd love to have some more discussion especially on what areas within cybersecurity may have good demand :) Although I can't find the email in your profile or github!

Those parts you mentioned like the static analysis or control flow graphs sounds cool