[kirpekar]

I read the whole article and do not agree. Here in Silicon Valley the importance of appearances has become marginal. Yes, you have to be clean, presentable, but that's it. After that you need the skills, talent, knowledge and aptitude to perform your job. And you need that everyday, to keep your job, in this hyper-competitive environment.

I was a poor starving immigrant student at one point. I did fine without even mildly expensive clothes, shoes or cars. I've also hired poor resource-less college kids. Anecdotal, but the best workers (in our technical field) were the ones who cared the least about appearances.

[potatolicious]

Disagree entirely. Silicon Valley is just as superficial as the rest of them, except the points your'e being judged from are a somewhat different set from mainstream society.

In the Valley tech scene (and all tech scenes everywhere) the respect we afford people is heavily influenced by a lot of cultural markers. Access to newfangled gadgetry, neighborhoods we live in, even freaking toe shoes. Don't have the spare time or money to hobnob with other startup types at an expensive trendy bar? Whoops.

We may hire you without these signals, we may be happy with your work. But all else being equal someone as good as you, who presents the correct cultural markers, is going to be afforded a lot more respect and leeway.

The Silicon Valley "meritocracy" is largely a myth. The subculture rejects a lot of mainstream ways of brutally judging people, which is often interpreted as our culture being less judgmental. On the contrary, we simply have formed different ways of brutally judging people. Appearance is everything, tech or otherwise.

Hell, just look at the threads on hiring every time they show up on HN. Lots of people insisting that a candidate must have a fleshed out Github account to qualify - as if activity on Github is the same thing as programming aptitude. Lots of people insisting that side projects are necessary, or participation in open source - as if those things indicate or guarantee aptitude. The brutal ageism we suffer from in this industry is also an indication of just how superficially judgmental we are.

[eropple]

I think your post hits the mark pretty well--I don't live in the Valley, hopefully never will, but the cultural markers are similar in the Boston area.

The one quibble is that I do ask for a Github account and I don't think it's the same sort of marker. It's a skill-based metric first[1], a cultural one a very distant second. Toe shoes don't provide a risk-mitigation signal. A Github profile does: it lets me see what you do. It's not unlike publishing in academia--it gives me a window into what you do, making it easier for me to hire the right person because I know what I'm getting. And I'd rather not hire than hire the wrong person, because hiring the wrong person hurts everyone.

[1] - Yes, it (probably) implies you have side projects and that you're writing open source. You're right about that. But the primary reason I want to see a Github profile is to make sure you can code.

[MarkPNeyer]

what is it about toe shoes? i always wear them - what kind of signal am i sending?

[potatolicious]

"One of us". It's tribalism. Same applies to logo hoodies, conference t-shirts, and various other things programmers do, deliberately or otherwise, to provide authenticity.

It may have started as simply being too lazy to pick out clothes from the closet, but at this point it's a full-blown subculture, with signals and counter-signals. Notice that if you walk the streets of San Francisco you can spot the tech workers incredibly easily. They're not just dressed down, they're dressed down in an very specific way. Toe shoes is one such way - they've achieved a cult status in our subculture and almost nowhere else.

[sanskritabelt]

you're signaling "I'm the kind of person who's angling for a very painful metatarsal fracture."

[MarkPNeyer]

i must disagree. i have had foot and knee problems my entire life, to the point that i never enjoyed running or doing anything althetic becuase it hurt too badly.

since i started wearing the toe shoes, i learned to become more phsyically aware. my foot pain went away, and now i run regluarly and enjoy it. it's like night and day.

if wearing toe shoes gives people foot problems, it's because they've trained their bodies to wear shoes - and we didn't evolve walking on inch-thick slabs or rubber. our bodies weren't meant for it.

[mkeener]

It's probably more because of the running surface in combination with the shoe, than the shoe alone. Using the same logic, our bodies weren't meant to run barefoot on concrete/tarmac for long periods. They're too hard.

[sanskritabelt]

I'm speaking from experience here, I bought a pair of vibrams, lost 70 pounds taking up running, and was doing great right up until I broke my metatarsal. Coming up on three years later I had to have surgery, a pin, orthotics, and I still need regular cortisone injections.

Here's a link: http://www.runnersworld.com/barefoot-running-minimalism/stud...

[slg]

Silicon Valley is still somewhat an exception to the rule about appearances. In what other area do the rich people dress exactly like the poorest? Remember the hubbub when Zuckerberg wore a hoodie to a meeting regarding the Facebook IPO. That might be laughed off in Silicon Valley but I know many people in other parts of the country that would view it as insulting for someone to show up to a business meeting wearing something like that.

[potatolicious]

I don't think we're an exception at all. If anything we just flipped it upside down and called it a day.

In other industries you'd be mocked for wearing a hoodie to work. In this industry we mock you for wearing a suit to work. Hell, show up at most software shops in a pressed shirt and slacks and see what happens. Wear a tie non-ironically and we start assigning labels to you - "MBA", "suit", etc etc.

We've traded one superficial signal for another superficial signal, have no illusions about it. We've spent so long trying to be the anti-mainstream-business that it's no longer about letting people do what they want, and about conforming to the "cool software shop" cultural meme.

[saraid216]

Exactly? Are you really saying that you couldn't tell the difference between Mark Zuckerberg and a homeless man if you ran into them on the street?

[nicholas73]

Indeed many of the investment bankers were insulted. After all, that's where ego-driven people are.

[Qom]

What's insulting here is that Zuck is trying to keep the "hoodie-guy" image despite his unimaginable wealth. You can't have the cake and eat it.

[robotresearcher]

I think you might be easily insulted.

A very rich guy persists in wearing the hoodie he wore while doing the work that made him rich? Where do you see hypocrisy there?

[Qom]

see my reply to tghw

[tghw]

I'm sorry, are you saying Zuck should be required to dress his socioeconomic class?

[balabaster]

I don't think he's trying to be something he's not at all. I think he's trying to be the person he wants to be, and fuck everyone else's opinions on what that should or shouldn't be. At the end of the day, he's the richest guy in America, possibly the world(?), and largely he did that through his own efforts. So who is anyone to tell him what he can and can't do? If he wants to wear a hoodie, he will, if he doesn't, he won't. No amount of gossip and rumour about whose nose he bent out of shape by doing so, or people trying to tell him what he should and shouldn't waear, is going to change that. People like Zuckerberg largely don't give a shit about gossip polls or rumours; and much as I may like or dislike what has been reported on his opinion or policies at Facebook, I can relate to his disdain for being told what to do... and I think truth be told, if everyone in the I.T. industry searched their soul for the truth, they can on some level relate to that. Most people that think for a living tend to have some level of a problem with authority... certainly given Silicon Valley's disdain for suits, I interpret this is more about defiance of societal social rules than trying to be something he's not.

[Qom]

No. I just think it's posturing on his part. He's pretending to be something he's not, so that people see the friendly brogrammer instead of the ambitious "They trust me — dumb fucks" CEO who disregards privacy.

[thedufer]

Call me crazy, but maybe he wears hoodies _because they're comfortable_. That's why I do it, and I don't see how making a bunch of money would have any effect on that.

[swamp40]

Don't you think that maybe it's the other 99.9% of people that are "posturing"?

Some people just rebel against the "norm" of using clothing to represent their socioeconomic status - money or no money.

[balabaster]

Some people rebel just because "f___ you, who are you to tell me what I can and can't do?" It has nothing to do with anything else.

[Qom]

This isn't rebellion (honestly that term is used WAY too much). It's just Zuck doing a little song and dance.

[awkward]

The Buffet-drives-a-Buick school of being rich enough to not care about the social signifiers is, as mentioned in the article, a fully legit way to be filthy rich. Done right, it's a good way to fake being old money.

[sanskritabelt]

Dude probably had someone pay a hundred bucks or more for that hoodie tho, it's not the $5 dishrag off the Dollar General racks.

[mcv]

I always have trouble finding nice fleece sweaters. The best, nicest looking ones I know cost €6 at a common low-end shop. I'd have no problem wearing that if I was a billionaire CEO.

[semiel]

Tech is a weird culture, where the status symbols are totally different. Knowing weird programming languages, having open source contributions, and appreciating nerdy humor are all more important than clothing choice. (Though someone who accidentally wears something too "fancy" might not get taken seriously.)

But for pretty much anything other than "getting a programming job", this essay is pretty much spot on.

[incision]

>"I read the whole article and do not agree. Here is Silicon Valley the importance of appearances has become marginal."

Qualifying "do not agree" with anecdotal experience in one small area dominated by one industry is a bit of a stretch don't you think?

[thisAintNoGame]

I think its important to understand that Silicon Valley practices are not representative of societal trends. The examples the author uses are about going to a welfare office and interviewing for an administrative position at a cosmetology school. Just because one trend doesn't exist amongst a class of wealthy people in San Francisco doesn't mean it doesn't hold elsewhere.

So its fine to disagree with this article but I dont think that the experiences in the current tech age in Silicon Valley do anything to invalidate her experiences at welfare offices in the Mississippi delta.

[sprizzle]

I agree with you for the most part, but I think the point the author's trying to make is that "poor" people may not see it that way; instead, to them, lavish riches create a sense of belonging.

[ChikkaChiChi]

Partially right.

We live in a culture where Fergie can get up and talk about living a jet set mentality and there are songs on the radio today talking about Maybachs, etc.

Couple that with a lack of education on financial well being, and suddenly you have people making unwise choices.

[zasz]

That's great, but did you notice that the author was talking about completely different than engineers? Surely you've noticed that even within the Valley the sales and marketing people dress up better?