,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Polite disagree on this: there are a lot of ways to structure a trade with the rest of the world for your time and talent. A very important component of this trade will be the price. Price and structure are far, far less dependent than many smart people believe them to be.
If this sounds like a very financier-flavored metaphor it is because having the lens to look at the world like Wall Street is a useful tool instrumentally regardless of your cultural background, goals, job, or aesthetics.
(Believe much the same about thinking like a dev, FWIW)
(Believe much the same about thinking like a dev, FWIW)
Also, non-specific observation: you don't have to always join the winning team but it's generally a good idea to be able to articulate what you want in ways which are incentive-compatible for them to, as a result of your suasion, also want what you want.
Oh back to the original topic: it is underappreciated:
* How much line employees get paid at extremely successful companies (e.g. AppAmaGooFaceSoft)
* How much companies can spend on consulting, including by solo shops
* How appealing relatively small software shops can be
* How much line employees get paid at extremely successful companies (e.g. AppAmaGooFaceSoft)
* How much companies can spend on consulting, including by solo shops
* How appealing relatively small software shops can be
People tend to come up with a particular background in a particular system which exposes them to none of or very few of these facts, and often the availability heuristic causes them to believe that the other paths functionally don't exist.
I think this is mostly downstream of differential access to information and understandable quirks of our cultural understandings about careers and money rather than active dissimulation to prevent market conditions from moving against folks' positions, by the way.
