[chollida1]

> Work for free. This is my boilerplate advice for anyone getting started in any industry, not just web developers. Finding someone that will let you work with them is not that hard, if you offer to do it for free.

Yikes.... I would never advise someone to work for free for a company. If you want to work on an open source project then that's probably a better use of your time.

The problem with free is that it lowers your worth to a company.m

Heck even university co-op terms pay well these days.

[nknighthb]

It's also highly illegal. If you're performing valuable work for a business, they have to pay you, lest they get a visit from a deeply unimpressed Department of Labor.

Internships are almost always paid now. Even where the internship might qualify to be unpaid, it's cheaper to just pay minimum wage than try to prove you're not extracting value from the intern's labor.

[chasing]

This cannot be stressed enough. It's not an option for a company to pay you for your work. It's a legal requirement. Do not work for free.

An internship is not employment. It's something a company does that's supposed to benefit you educationally. It's not a way for a company to get free labor.

It took a lot of fight to get labor laws in place in the United States and they exist for a very good reason.

[steevdave]

I got my first computer job this way - I offered to work for free for the first two weeks, if it didn't work out, they got free labor for two weeks. They hired me by the third day. This was back in 2002 or so though, and I was still at home with my parents. Nowadays I could not make such an offer.

[ed209]

That depends on how you class "for free". Most people think free = not being paid money.

I'm actually looking into working for the whole of July for no monetary compensation. But in return, I expect to learn something from whoever I work with/for.

Most of the time money is good. You can exchange that for many things in life. But sometimes, knowledge is better to have as you can exchange that for (even more) money.

And from an employer point of view, you should not be judged by the size of your pay cheque, but by how much value you actually add to a company.

[jmduke]

>> Most of the time money is good. You can exchange that for many things in life. But sometimes, knowledge is better to have as you can exchange that for (even more) money.

This is a false dichotomy. With some very rare exceptions, you do not choose between monetary compensation and experience: you need -- and should get -- both.

[ed209]

I agree completely, other than calling them rare exceptions. You can't quantify the rarity of these opportunities until you know how big the gap is between your current knowledge and what you'd learn.

The bigger the gap, the less money you are likely to make but the more you'll learn. If you get paid nothing, you're basically there to learn (to the value at least the salary you would receive).

[showsover]

Especially when starting out.

[justinsteele]

I've learned the most in paid positions. Companies that value their employees with monetary compensation are far more likely to value learning and successful experiences than a company who decides you are worth $0 to them.

[davemello]

>> But sometimes, knowledge is better to have as you can exchange that for (even more) money.

Thanks ed209, that's great, and exactly what I was getting at.

[phazmatis]

What if you're self-taught? Getting actual, resume-usable job experience must look better than open source contributions, at least outside of the SF startup/hacker culture.

[VexXtreme]

That is definitely the case in most professional fields outside of the whole startup culture (which can hardly be called professional). I find the whole concept of expecting people to be open-source contributors, to maintain active Github accounts etc to even be able to get their foot in the door in the hiring process completely abhorrent. This practice is a blight on this industry, benefiting only greedy exploitative startup founders and VC folks (usually calling themselves "progressive", ironically).

My dad is a civil engineer and I don't see him drafting construction plans for bridges and highways in his free time. My mom is a social worker and I won't see her dealing with domestic violence and welfare cases in her free time. Why is it that the modern IT industry expects people to put in massive hours contributing to some useless obscure projects just to be employable? I will tell you exactly why - because it lowers the bar for everyone and screens in for people who are willing to bend over backwards, work 90 hour weeks with no paid overtime, who will never stand up for themselves or have any self respect whatsoever.

There are plenty of professional industries out there (such as finance, medical, aerospace etc) which value software engineers greatly, pay big bucks and don't force people to jump through these kinds of arbitrary hoops.

I have better things to do with my free time (such as spending it with my friends, girlfriend, family etc) and that is exactly why I don't want to work in your shitty little startup. Engineers always complain about being treated like dirt by "the suits", but I can tell you that it's usually other engineers/"hackers" coming up with these kinds of abysmal borderline extortionist hiring practices. This shit won't stop until people just say no and stop linking their Github accounts in their resumes in a supplicatory sycophantic fashion just to be even considered for a position.

Want to contribute to an open-source project? Fine, that's a legit hobby as any other. But let's just stop using that as a leverage in the hiring process.

[greghinch]

I read "work for free" as doing open source work, at least by contributing to projects you make use of regularly, which I whole-heartedly recommend. This alone has probably accounted for 50% of any success I've had in my career, in terms of making connections with other talented people, having publicly visible code (which has brought opportunities to me I was never even aware of), and of course honing my own skills.

[omni]

Did the author change the article after this comment got so highly ranked here? If you were indeed directly quoting the article, then it has changed quite a bit.

Shame on the author of the article if he changed it. We can't have a meaningful discussion if you get scared of a little criticism and change the source material.

[davemello]

Omni, I did change the title on one of my four points from 'Work for free.' to 'Intern/volunteer', as that was my original intention. I used the phrase 'work for free' to make a point - that when you start out, gaining the best experience often does not go hand-in-hand with a big pay-check. I also added a couple of sentences to reinforce that point. Sorry - I didn't think of that as responding to criticism, but rather clarifying my poor choice of words. The feedback posted here showed that I was unclear on that.

I appreciate everyone's feedback here. This is my first post on Hacker News, and I didn't expect this kind of response.

I realize that the idea of not valuing one's own time can be dangerous, and lead to a bad dynamic down the road. This is especially true for freelancers. That said, I stand by the point. For a student or beginner, the idea of getting involved with real-world communities, whether its a company you respect, an open-source project you support, or even a non-profit that you believe in, can be very valuable. Sometimes the best way to get involved with these groups, particularly if you have little to offer on paper, is to be creative with how you can help them, knowing that your biggest reward for the contribution will be the experience you gain. I don't see this as being unfair to yourself at all, nor do I see it as selling yourself short.

[omni]

Sorry for coming across as a jerk. This is just my opinion, but I highly prefer striking-through the original content if you need to make meaningful changes to an article after its publication. Good on you for the post and your reasoned responses to the comments here.

[chollida1]

Yikes, it looks like the author silently updated her/his post . I guess the message got through:)