|
TheBalor posted:Actually, since it came up: can anyone explain what is the likely future of the current tech valuation issue? I've been hearing for years that companies like Twitter are immensely overvalued, but the other shoe never seems to drop. I'm getting china stock market blue balls here. First it's important to differentiate between startups (like Twitter) and more established companies like Amazon, Google, and the like. The latter probably won't have many issues when this bubble pops. Currently, startups are funded by venture capitalists (VCs), which are basically rich guys that give you money in the hopes that you become the next Google or whatever. The status quo for the past few years has been venture capitalists dumping money at anything tech related because everyone else was doing it (thus continuing the cycle). This is how you get things like Uber having revenue of $420 million and having expenses of twice that amount. These days, there has been a slow and quiet drawdown of the VC money, because it turns out barely any of these companies actually make tangible revenue (Facebook is a notable exception, as are a few others). Once the money really runs out you're going to see Uber et all close, and a whole bunch of coders are going to flood the market looking for jobs. Nonsense posted:I wouldn't want any kind of market correction on tech companies as I do not desire another deep recession. Actually the great thing about tech companies is that there are relatively small numbers of people actually working at these companies. Like, 10% of the number of people working at them during the Dot Com bubble of 15 years ago.
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:This job posting is infamous in the IT industry: Oh, I thought that was the Penny Arcade one. quote:Job description
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:Every single time I see what leading software companies pay new grads, it makes me want to start drinking. I'm an engineer in a really hard to recruit for field and I make about half that with bonuses. It's insane. That's generally how you can tell that a field is unsustainable. Like, Petroleum Engineers also make six figures right out of college but there's a reason for that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:
Yes. https://cdn.ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SWE-Apr-2013.pdf
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
etalian posted:Probably doesn't help that companies like Tesla are run by weirdos who can't understand why a employee would want good work life balance and consider vacation to be distractions from the glory of work. Vacation, seeing the birth of your child, stuff like that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
twodot posted:My experience is that this is true, but then a lot of people get home and log into their work computer remotely and are sending email at all hours. Concrete data would be good if you have it. With those parameters it's much closer to 72 hours a week.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Your Weird Uncle posted:what are all these "devs" gonna do once the bubble bursts They're gonna drive down wages. SquadronROE posted:I actually am a programming engineer. Even though I understand it, it still amazes me that some new grads make that much. My dad is a geologist and he teaches Petroleum Engineers (or did until recently). They start out of college making $10k more than what he did after 30 years in academia, and he made six figures. poo poo is just as crazy and pretty much for the same reasons. computer parts fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Typo posted:idk dude, I don't understand why every time an IT industry thread comes up people think everyone who program is some spergie. Most people who are in the software industry are 30+/married, have families and life outside of work and are there mostly to collect a paycheque. I'm interested in demographics of workers, do you have any links about this? Particularly the Bay Area if possible.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
ChipNDip posted:The Bay Area is not the whole world. Less than 10% of developers work in the Bay Area. Throw in Seattle, and we're still talking less than 15% using the most restrictive occupation code of Software developers, applications and systems software . Plenty of people we would consider to be working in the field fall into other job classifications according to the government. And what about the Bay Area specifically?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
TheOtherContraGuy posted:This article seems to suggest otherwise. http://www.businessinsider.com/charts-show-the-political-bias-of-each-profession-2014-11 Almost as though political affiliation is not one dimensional.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
It's at least an independently forming idea since that doesn't explain the similar phenomena in Asia.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Typo posted:I think that's true of the general American population as well though It's popular among certain classes of white people.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
ChipNDip posted:Who cares? They only make up a fraction of the industry. They just get all the attention because mobile apps are sexy and interesting. 10% is a fairly significant portion of the industry.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:I've finally joined this venerated brotherhood of highly-educated and trustworthy individuals who are vetted by licensing boards that are governed by law. Time to get to work on my dumpster fuckbuddy app I'm a computer doctor.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:This is actually backed up by data, for what it's worth. Working long hours is bad for your health, and I suspect that the negative effects probably extend into the regular 40 hour work week as well. I seem to remember 8 hours being around the peak output, so not so much. What is true is that there's a decrease in productivity per unit time if you don't work long enough - in other words, someone who works for two hours will get more than twice as much done as someone who works for one hour.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Not sure I follow what you're saying here. The article I linked is discussing a study on the health effects of working more than 40 hours per week, not productivity. It boils down to an increased risk of strokes and cardiovascular disease. Oh, well then yeah any amount of exertion will cause health effects but I don't know if it's actually seen in significant/troublesome amounts before 8 hours/day (discounting obvious things like skipping lunch).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
etalian posted:
By which you mean legally required.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 00:59
|
|