[almostgotcaught]

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice.

It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work".

> Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-hours work I did with Dimtriy to expand our offering to include IPv6.

I wish people would introspect more deeply instead of perpetuating toxic relationships with corporations; you're basically saying your most gratifying experience at work (where you are given a small slice of the net on your labor) was when you did something completely abstract and not when you got more money, more status, more whatever? Ok that's like saying my most gratifying experience at school was not when I graduated but when I had to sit in detention. Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary in the overall scheme (learn skills and move into the workforce).

[dmoy]

> are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters

We may have to agree to disagree here.

Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore...

A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.

[almostgotcaught]

> Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore...

This is the most out of touch (and also irrelevant) take you can have. I work in FAANG in the bay. The people around me are solid upper middle class but mortgages, day care, regular cars, medical bills, aging parents, college tuitions, etc etc etc mean very few of them can retire today and continue to live in the same place.

> A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.

Then you just work in a completely universe than I do because at every single job I've ever had, from lowly bus boy to FAANG ML engineer, not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". Quite the opposite in fact - many people I know would quit at the drop a hat if not for "golden handcuffs".

[marssaxman]

I'm doing this for the love of it. I never meant to make it a career, originally; I just spent so much time at it when I was young that it became a career, whether I liked it or not. I've never sought to maximize my compensation; I just need to get paid enough that I can comfortably keep doing the work, because the work is what I want to do.

Yes, I have a family and a mortgage and bills, blah blah blah. All this is adaptable.

Lest you simply dismiss me, I will say that I have worked at two FAANG companies and another tech giant which was larger than any of them; but my ambition is measured in terms of technical impact, not money.

[brian_cunnie]

> not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it".

I'm doing this for the love of it.

Maybe "love" is too strong a word, but I certainly "like" what I'm doing, and I "like" computers, and I have a computer side project that I "like" doing and don't get paid for. Heck, when I was a summer student at IBM I couldn't believe they were paying me for something that was so fun!

[almostgotcaught]

congrats you're an extremely privileged and exceptional person. basketball players also generally love their jobs but they happen to be on average 6'7" so i'm not sure how either your experience theirs apply to me and the people i work with.

[ClaraForm]

You’re getting awfully close to being rude. There’s no reason to try to go around imposing your perspective when it’s just you venting about feeling stuck. We all feel stuck from time to time, the solution is generally to wait it out until something that genuinely excites you comes along and you ask to hop on that opportunity. That’s possible in all work cultures, including egalitarian flat organizations.

[dmoy]

> This is the most out of touch (and also irrelevant) take you can have. I work in FAANG in the bay. The people around me are solid upper middle class but mortgages, day care, regular cars, medical bills, aging parents, college tuitions, etc etc etc mean very few of them can retire today and continue to live in the same place.

I don't know the particulars of your budget, but up here in Seattle an FAANG E5/L5/etc makes over 3x median Seattle household income. And has medical insurance with like a <$10k OOP max. And can rent a house, and drive a $10k used car (like me) that gets replaced once every 10 years. Add public Uni tuition and $150k for 5 years of daycare (or have one working parent, see above r.e. 3x median income from one person), and say $30k/yr of elder parent support, and you can still run a 50%+ savings rate. That won't let you retire in 5 years, but it very likely will in 20 years.

I've met quite a few FAANG who've been at it long enough with a modest enough lifestyle that they don't need to work after 20 years. Some quit, some quit and moved to cheaper local, but some are still at it 'cus they like the problem solving.

I've also met several FAANG who bought a house worth 5x their income, are saving for $100k/yr of private Uni for 2-3 kids, drive $100k cars, etc, and save <10% of their income.

It's all tradeoffs.

And yea probably earning 3x median income makes someone out of touch to begin with. But what you do after that income is kinda up to you, and different choices yield different possibilities.

> Then you just work in a completely universe than I do because at every single job I've ever had, from lowly bus boy to FAANG ML engineer, not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". Quite the opposite in fact - many people I know would quit at the drop a hat if not for "golden handcuffs".

Well you can count me as one. I've met several others, and was on a team where most were like that for awhile.

[xp84]

I hope you’re not feeling superior to others because you’re able to have a “low expense lifestyle.” That tends to go right out the window if you have a spouse who doesn’t work in tech, and especially with children. Though I could just be a little biased because for a special needs child, basically take your expected ‘child expenses’ and square that number.

Note: all of the above was my own choice, so I can’t complain. I only just want to point out that you can really only keep a true low-expense lifestyle as a single person, or as a childless couple if both of you share that frugality passion.

[AlotOfReading]

You're coming at the employer relationship from a fundamentally different place than the parent comment you're responding to.

I'm assuming their age because of when Pivotal Labs was a thing, but there was a period from about the late 90s to the early 2010s where many people in the valley believed in an ideal of ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money. It's not like those elements were ever wholly absent, but nominally egalitarian hierarchies weren't the weirdest things in hindsight.

[brian_cunnie]

> ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money

And this is not limited to 2010s! My father worked as a software engineer in Poland in the 1960s, and the communist party had a problem: every profession had at least one member of the communist party except the programming profession. But the Polish programmers weren't interested in joining, not even with the perks of a bigger apartment or cars. Finally they got one programmer to join the communist party, but he wasn't interested in programming, and only became a programmer so he could join the communist party & get the perks.

[Nevermark]

> Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary

Wow. I cannot relate to someone who only (mostly) view's their own accomplishments as bargaining chips for money/prestige. Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others.

But I accept productive people can operate in different ways.

[almostgotcaught]

> Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others.

Which ones would those be? The ones where you optimized some process so your company could make 10MM more annually? I'm not a doctor/teacher/public defender. I write code that my company sells. I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company.

[Nevermark]

> discovered XYZ mathematical principle

As I noted, I wasn't critiquing you.

> I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company.

I don't know what you do, and all good work should be rewarded, but in most work third parties, such as customers or others benefit from work well done.

But I strongly share your opinion that good work should be matched with proportional compensation.

I had a similar problem. I was compensated well for what I could achieve, as a partner to a company, but after many good years, asymptotically prevented from achieving anything. The irony of being bought out of a contract for a price that reflected how much I could no longer achieve in those circumstances wasn't lost on me.