At the possibility of starting a (blind) war..

Dec 5, 2019 68 Comments

How many of you think that some of the big tech companies are destroying engineers and just producing arrogant cocky know it all folks with high TC.

Here is what I see:

FAANG hires the brightest, that at young age they have the potential to be fantastic engineers.

They pay these guys well.

Then they put them in IC roles, with minimal supervision, as it is expected that they will be able to handle things well, as they are so bright.

These guys without prior experience I the industry can write code quickly, but design is something they are not experienced with. So they design as they design college projects and these don't last. They mindset is, we will fix it when there is a bug or a need. And this causes too much code churn and/or low quality deliverables.

But they deliver fast, and their mentors, who are used to this pattern also ignore it and instead reward them with more pay and promotions.

At the end they just get cockier and cockier and become bad engineers at high positions with high TC and they generate the next level of engineers.

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 68 Comments
  • Microsoft / Eng TC_slut
    Ok Boomer
    Dec 5, 2019 0
  • New / Eng
    Aloha 🍻

    New Eng

    PRE
    500 Startups
    Aloha 🍻more
    If what you say holds substance then FAANG would had been out of business 🤷‍♂️
    Dec 5, 2019 6
    • Weedmaps AUFy44
      Do you believe that “older” code was easier to maintain? Because all legacy code I’ve ever dealt with (admittedly not a lot) has been a nightmare. I think maintaining code is just hard, period.
      Dec 5, 2019
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      No. Older code is shit. if you look at windows core or office code it is horrible. And that is because it lacks a few things.
      Testable design.
      Coded in a language that makes it harder to maintain, test and debug.
      Obsolete engineers(even older than me) who have no idea about the modern ways.

      And such code would remain because they have legacy. No one dares to change the io manager in windows because it is solid. And that is a design from 1980 that still works, because it was designed well.

      The learnings from such bohemoths, have made things like agile.
      Has made testable code and design a thing.

      I am saying that wisdom is lost in most engineers in FAANG , and I wonder why
      Dec 5, 2019
  • Compass HWV39
    Inferiority complex?
    Dec 5, 2019 7
    • Compass HWV39
      Just trying to key in on your inferiority complex.
      Dec 5, 2019
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      How? I don't even work there, but I have seen Amazon engineers at work. They are talented, have excellent understanding of concepts, but experience and talent are not the same thing
      Dec 5, 2019
  • VMware hitref
    Why do you think deliver fast is bad and good design with slow delivery is good? Managers and higher ups are mainly concerned with deliverables. Some trade-offs on design are fine - as long as its not too bad. There is no point in spending countless hours in perfecting design.
    Dec 5, 2019 3
    • Facebook vBQi18
      Countless hours. No. I think the right amount of thought, process. there is a process to design, it shouldn’t be throw things at a wall and see what sticks. The problem is we are partners in solutioning and when we both have different incentives for what performance is, we are influencing each other to put out half baked, sometimes outright bad things into the world.

      Delivering fast is not bad. Delivering low quality products with the intent to fix later is bad. It’s not professional, nor is it reflective of how we use the immense talents available to our disposals.
      Dec 5, 2019
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      Facebook, you articulated better than I did
      Dec 5, 2019
  • Microsoft yBYC07
    There is value in speed to market. You really don’t think FAANG companies know what they are doing
    Dec 5, 2019 12
    • New ctheta
      On the side note as an individual it’s perfectly fine to play the game that market demands. It is basis of any rational economic theory. Leetcode is defacto benchmark of your ability to code. I once interviewed in one of the fangs where a fresh developer gave me a LC hard ( I did not know then what LC is) it was 5 years ago and concluded I might not be strong in coding. This is totally fine as this is how she was filtered and benchmarked for that job. She expects every one following her to go through same standard test like she did to get the job. Eventually everyone you know realizes it makes no sense to spend time and effort ( unless you love to) to craft and get better at coding . That time is well spent grinding LeetCode because that’s all that matters to get crazy salaries. So let’s do that!

      I am new to blind, but have read stories how many months people spend leetcoding which otherwise could have been spent on getting better at what you do everyday. ( it might be they do that in addition to LeetCoding, but it’s highly unlikely).
      Dec 5, 2019
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      Well the boeing example is spot on example about your comment that businesses care just about cost and capastrophies happen.

      Your articulation is spectacular. I loved the UDP example.

      About the LC part, I just think it is perhaps not a standard we want to rate and rank with, but then I also do not know what is another metric to substitute it.
      Dec 6, 2019
  • LinkedIn fizzwater
    You’d be surprised how many endless design docs are created and critiqued by numerous experienced individuals - some of whom are leaders in their industry before the first line of code is written. It is annoying red tape that big co workers often complain about
    Dec 5, 2019 5
    • LinkedIn fizzwater
      Do you really see across orgs though? How much insight do you actually have on other teams. The outsider view is limited and has no context. Your problem statement seems so generic, how is being outside of faang mitigating this problem? Especially with startups moving at an even faster pace with less experienced staff and big old companies with stale talent and outdated methods.
      Dec 5, 2019
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      Excellent points. I am glad you bought up those angles.

      I actually do have a lot of visibility in atleast 5-6 orgs, because of my role. Orfource FAANGM is way bigger than that, but it does show a pattern and I have spoken or heard from other people in other orgs, and other FAANGs.

      Remeber, Symantec is gone, so a lot of us moved to different firms.

      To and your question, let me first speak of sync, where I was.

      It wasn't great. Too heavy, burocratic, but it did have some solid engineering, especially my org. People were literally anal about stuff and it was deserving as those guys were subject matter experts doing this shit for 20+ years.

      Now many of them, luckily not me, have had to land in orgs where there past experience isn't so valuable, as the business is something else. And they try to get their views across, which might or might not be valid.
      I, luckily got a profile where the past counted. And I was shocked to see how things are run in a (almost)trillion $ company.

      Now I would assume for startups, it can go either way.

      Usually the core of the startup is a very mature engineer with the idea who develops the code and the culture, before they go to hiring. As long as they hire well, and train well, in those ideologies, things are good. But once it grows, it is hard to maintain that level of visibility across the orgs all the way to the roots. And if you are doing good, you will hire more. And that's when you hire good engineers' but not necessarily specialists. And the growing oangs start, things break, and there are late nights, failed deliveries and angry customers
      Dec 5, 2019
  • Dynata / Product rSvh51
    For a meta post about TC, this post is missing TC
    Dec 5, 2019 0
  • Oracle DucatiDrvr
    Overcompensated young assholes have always existed. Heck, I was one. The world has its ways to fix them. They used to call us Microsoft Brats in the late 90s in Seattle. When many of us became Microsoft Widows, when the first (trophy) wives took away almost everything divorcing after the recession, when the lavish spending became impossible, most of us got back to earth eating some humble pie.
    Dec 5, 2019 4
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      Thanks
      Well, I do hope that times don't get tougher. Because that impacts a lot more than brats.
      Dec 7, 2019
    • Oracle bgCheckOut
      It is not if, it is when.
      Dec 7, 2019
  • OpenTable Meliodas
    Engineering is about building something that fits the business case and is just good enough to complete the task.

    There are plenty of folks that call themselves engineers, but want to over design things that end up never getting used.
    Dec 5, 2019 1
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      That is very true as well. I can't disagree on that
      Dec 5, 2019
  • Google / Eng Nooglǝr
    Being a good engineer means you are good at learning new things. What makes you think that once they have made it to IC , they haven't learned how to write design docs?

    Kind of agree with the overconfident remark.
    Dec 5, 2019 1
    • Symantec / Eng neshama
      OP
      Good point here about bright engineers good at learning. But there needs to be the intent to learn. If you see a round you that the focus is on quickly get the code out, not considering long term impacts there is no incentive for you to waste time on that. You would rather LC more and get more TC
      Dec 5, 2019

Salary
Comparison

    Real time salary information from verified employees