|
Stinky_Pete posted:around when my Google stock is done vesting. How it'll work is you'll have your sign-on RSU's. Then every year after that you'll have another grant, probably on the same order of magnitude & time. When your sign-on RSU's are expiring, you'll have built up 4 years of equity grants and likely be receiving the majority of your compensation that way. No matter when you leave, you're probably leaving huge equity on the table to do so.
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:So you're saying by the time my sign-on stock has finished vesting (4 years), I'll be offered additional RSUs across my career there?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:So if I'm at a large established company with a lot of stock stuff (finance/insurance), is it in my interest to stick around as long as possible? asur posted:I wouldn't say that you're losing anything in most situations. Unvested stock is compensation for the year it vests in so you can just compare total comp and make your decision based on that and any other factors. asur posted:If you work for a large public company, it is generally very easy to calculate total compensation and then compare that. Where it gets more difficult is if the company is private and/or issuing options as there may be restrictions or requirements on what happens when you leave and there is also the issue of dilution if the company is going through series funding.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:They just are the people that are "here to help" with the infrastructure and blablabla I want to rip off my face. Some approaches to consider: 1) Pre-chew everything possible. File tickets when they'd want you to, just include your already-completed version of the request as a "suggestion" 2) Put them in the critical path. If you're working on something critical and this is significantly delaying you, make that obvious to the business person who cares about your work.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:renegade titans of silicon valley.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
I disagree with all these nice folks, if you're so much of a downer that you're able to bring down a peppy interviewin' Googler over a phone call and suck the joy out of their self-description you should do the recruiter a favor and withdraw yourself from consideration.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:could just be a busy day Yeah, GWH have you been involved in interviewing from the other side? It's really easy to let things slip a day or two without really worrying, multiply by the body count of the decision and it can add up. As a candidate I agonize all the same, but in this specific instance you've done everything right and there's no real action to be taken other than wait. One of the best case emails from the recruiter might be "I'm still waiting on Person X's feedback," and there's nothing you could really do with that either.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
AskYourself posted:For me it's almost always been because of the direction/vision/strategy of the org rather than co-workers and manager. Maybe I've been lucky but I've mostly had nice coworker and or managers. Or at least I can see enough niceness in them to not hate them. How does the direction/vision/strategy of the org affect your day to day though? More than the person who functions as your interface to the whole system and has the largest say in your regular review? Maybe I'm just some dumb prole, but "existential thread 5+ years out" doesn't weigh on me quite as heavily as "vast majority of in-person interactions"
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:Tons of variation across companies but for me it has meant lay-offs, loss of contracts, 80+ hour weeks, death marches, truly useless "morale" type meetings, etc. When most big companies make changes of direction now, they're wanting action now because they're getting desperate (see: IBM - they're on "near-bankruptcy" status for the what 3rd time in the past 2 decades I think?). If you're a market leader and quite comfortable with healthy margins, it's not the same as if you're in a cagematch industry like a lot of others are facing increasing consolidation to keep things afloat. Huge difference between Apple making OS X more iOS-like and a company like GE that's trying to become a major tech employer by 2020 when most of its employees are in old school manufacturing. I generally agree with the notion that people quit managers, not companies, but I'm not eager go into too many specifics.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Steve French posted:I think you've hit on the difference here: company size. The jobs I have quit have been after joining onto a promising project / small company, and then after a few years things weren't turning out as well as hoped, or growth slowed, or whatever else caused things to appear relatively greener elsewhere. I've had lovely coworkers, but I've never quit over them, personally. There's an interesting failure mode in larger companies with several verticals where an IC's front line manager can be unaware, uncaring, or downright hostile to work performed outside of their silo. Escalation can be difficult, transferring elsewhere may not be an option. Smaller companies are much better at that, everyone generally understands the global picture and can respect or at least tolerate work happening outside of an org chart solid line. I've generally left places because of a compelling option that I just couldn't turn down. But I don't think "bad manager" is a problem specific to company size. I appreciate the insight that that smaller companies make one more sensitive to those higher concerns, I had my doubts about one place starting to creep up before they resolved them by laying me off rt4 posted:I just received an offer for a full-time remote job I've been interviewing about over the last few weeks. The HR person sent me a PDF to sign and scan within two days with the salary written directly on it. No details about benefits at all.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
You'd also be living in Palo Alto
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Got contacted for a position where the bottom end of the salary range is what I make now and the top is about 10k lower than what I want but still a 20k raise.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:I've got about 5 places in the pipeline now so we'll see. But really, be creative when you're negotiating. Sign-on bonus, extra vacation, paying for classes/conferences/etc. Want a night MBA? Ask for it when they decline your 1.1x base request. Recruiters will be clear when you've maxed out some bucket (this is the max RSU grant we can give for this position) but they generally have a lot of extra levers and if you're not happy with the base salary you can push them to see what those levers are.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:Oh no. I'll have to meet with her at 1. So inefficient There's a lot of talking past each other, but I've generally seen more shade thrown at folks who leave at 5PM sharp than the ones who work off-hours. Stinky_Pete posted:Also, if you're in more than 2 meetings per day as a developer something is very very wrong
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:So, I'm supposed to take things off my resume that I haven't used in a while? It's not really esoteric but I haven't used SQL much since college (beyond the basics) and definitely don't remember the exact way certain aggregations and such work, but feel pretty confident that if I actually got the time to use it I'd ramp back up pretty quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:I felt more inclined to do take home stuff because it's very low stress to me. I can do it in my own element and it's more reflective of me coding on a whiteboard or even Sublime. I had one place that wanted to do a trial 8 hour day as an interview stage. I sent back my contracting rate.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Ralith posted:Surely they can't actually expect you to be a net benefit to their company in a single day. Common wisdom seems to be that it takes at least a couple weeks for someone to ramp up and be productive. 2) It was a startup, so the relative complexity of the product and the company wouldn't take that long to get a simple intuition for. Think of a Kickstarter, could you materially help a kickstarter in a day? Most could benefit from a professional hour or two.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
Ralith posted:We're talking about a company's reasonable expectations for an typical new engineering employee, not anyone's particular abilities AskYourself posted:It's a big ego game where we expect candidate to play a game of wits with the interviewer while at the same time the candidate must not show total dominance over his interviewee or he'll fear for his own position. But for pollyanna and other folks in the peanut gallery: someone demonstrating they can take every single one of your responsibilities and execute on them should be a joyous moment. In a well-run company it means you're freed up to work on bigger & better things. Training your own replacement happens, but it should be outside of normal operating conditions. AskYourself posted:Truth is, getting your license does not prove you are a good dev. VOTE YES ON 69 posted:Counterpoint: you're gonna kvetch about the fact that every 3-5 years you have to spend several of your probably paid vacation days to score another job that will pay you 2-3x the median household income a year?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Is not getting any sort of career advancement/mentorship/working on anything remotely stimulating (or anything at all really)/sitting there while your brain rots/on a team that's already overstaffed that just hired another senior developer a valid reason for leaving that future employers would find "Acceptable"? Cause I'm really close. To wit, "overstaffed" means "confident I can move on to better things without leaving the team in a lurch", "avoid brain rot" means "eager for new areas & challenges to explore now that I have a solid grounding in one core competency".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Analytic Engine posted:What is the ultimate career goal of Scrum masters? It seems like PMs are shooting for middle/upper management, and the only good Scrum Master I've known was laid off and then hired elsewhere as a senior PM. Not trying to judge, this is totally outside my experience.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:My general issues are with it being rather open ended meaning performance is pretty strongly tied to available free-time and the metrics we're using to judge it not being that clearly documented (I work in security so theres a development part and a security auditing part). VOTE YES ON 69 posted:To make that discussion work well, it's good for you to have an idea of where you want to take the 'further design' discussion, but make sure that the assignment is specific and scoped to implementing something concrete that is the first step of that bigger design you have in mind. Also treat the assignment less as an actual filtering step, and more as prep work to get on common ground for an interview. Of course if someone flaming fails it, give them the boot. But you're probably not gonna be blown away with anyone's boringly competent solution to a kind of artificial task, so don't hold your breath waiting for that. Instead use it to find those people when discussing the implementation or further design.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:My main question for stuff like this is how much can I Google? Part of ours was designing a networked gambling machine with tickets so one of the questions was about threat models. You have an antagonistic user who's going to unplug the machine. What possible failure modes are there, and which do you think are acceptable? e.g. You could have the ticket count as "spent" without giving out a reward OR you could have the ticket pay out but unplug before "spent" is communicated to the server depending on the implementation. The problem statement isn't complete enough to know which of those is more desirable (are rewards meaningful or 1/20th of a penny coupons and the machine was just to get someone in the building?) so most candidates pick one and can defend it with their conception of the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
muon posted:executive review at Google
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
I can guarantee they're having conversations about how they can't find any good devs and at no point will the homework, and it's worthless judging criteria, be implicated at fault.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Coca Koala posted:they've got around ~220 employees You won't be talking about "points" or percentages, that late in a startup you're probably getting equity offers that are priced at their present value and don't rely on the future magic kaboom.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
Coca Koala posted:Crunchbase says they've gone through three rounds of fundraising to get $XM, with the most recent being the Y Series for $ZM back in 20XX. That's enough for a unique hit, if you mind things like that, and on angellist they're advertising "0.005% – 0.04%" equity for SWEs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS posted:It sounds to me like you're being pretty picky and reading too much into weak signals. But ultimately only you can decide what's right for you. Along this line, the interviewer for my current job who raked me over the coals is probably my closest colleague now. It genuinely stung in the interview but as a coworker he's really helpful. You absolutely can detect toxic folks you wouldn't want to work with in an interview, but the antagonism built into the process might color things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Since the next place isn't rushing you, there's always the option of giving more than 2 weeks notice to help the company's transition plan and assuage the survivor guilt.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
lifg posted:I'd sooner say yes to an interviewee who had read Dale Carnegie (and Crucial Conversations and such) and tried and failed to convince their bosses to do better, than one who didn't try. In my experience, folks poo poo talking their previous management tend to have giant blind spots to their own faults. Think how!!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:It's not outlandish for the majority of employees, but it's one of only a handful of places where you can manage a seven-figure income as a non-management-track engineer if you've got the skills and productivity to warrant it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
On the technical side, that sounds fine. I can't speak to the particulars of distributed but the geneal approach doesn't raise any red flags. I'm kinda curious what you think the differences in entry-/mid-/senior-level are? There's slightly more to it than being able to take on bigger chunks of technical work. At your day job, you want to keep an eye out for situations that will fit into behavioral questions. Right now, if you were prompted with "Describe a time that you disagreed with management's approach to a technical problem, how you reacted, and the eventual resolution." How would you answer? You should have a few anecdotes about difficult situations ready to go. Preferably where you're the magnanimous hero. In any case aim higher than "i dunno the AD WIZARDS who came up with using MongoDB *snort* but I switched it over to postgres without telling anyone and because a STUPID linux bug deleted the production data they fired me"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:I've been here 3 weeks and have done basically nothing on a project that is still in early planning phases, how can I evaluate someone's ability to succeed in a job on this team or even a tangentially related team that I know hardly nothing about? You don't see a problem in that? Sure, I can interview someone and ask them some problem solving bullshit white boarding or about their last job but uhhhh yeah. I'm not even a "Senior" engineer by any means of the word. "In the absence of top-down direction, are you able to suss out what the business needs are for your role and start to execute on them?" I've never had formal training on how to conduct interviews. Like at a certain point they just throw you in there and assume you can come out with a thumbs up / thumbs down. Bonus points if HR bothers telling you what can't be asked. TooMuchAbstraction posted:this way you get to help pick your teammates.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
lifg posted:I'm with you. But if you're not satisfied, you can totally go to management and whine that you're unqualified and unable to do the one concrete thing they've asked you to do. That could work out well.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:If you spent a few hours doing a take home assignment, how would you feel if the person who reviewed it had spent maybe a cumulative 5 hours (writing incredibly simple automation scripts) with the language you chose to use and would be the person assessing you? Sure I can see how it runs, if he did the features adhering to the spec, did anything obviously boneheaded, etc. and I will without whining or saying anything to anyone. Anyway, management is my boss, he's the VP of engineering on our side. But it feels unfair to the candidate. At what point did you woefully internalize the concept that "interviews are fair"? That's going to cause problems. Best get rid of it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
csammis posted:It's not an urban legend: sometimes the copy you sent to the company is mysteriously different when it makes it to the interviewer's hands. Thanks recruiters!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:Anyone have a salary range for a SE2 doing devops in Boston? What's a SE2 in "years of experience"? Like midlevel 3~5 years?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Getting laid off seems lit tho Having done both, it's definitely the better option. Less storytelling.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
csammis posted:Well I earned my "got laid off" badge last Friday. Hooray.  csammis posted:My wife and I have been considering a move to the Pacific NW - we're in Kansas City currently. Does anyone have experience with hunting for relocation-type jobs while laid off? Is it wiser to find a stable position locally and then do the larger move planning or am I right in figuring that now's as good a time as any for a moonshot? The "stable position" would ideally be some contracting thing where you can sling code for a few hours a day and bounce out to the coast when necessary both short and long-term. I couldn't walk into a salaried job knowing I was on the way out, but I suspect this principle would falter if my health care depended on it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
When I graduated, ML was called "AI," neural nets were somewhere between a joke and a toy. 3 years into my career the App Store was released. Aiming for what's hot/interesting *right now* by running out to exactly one of those jobs doesn't seem like a solid plan.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
oliveoil posted:That's just an example. You might legitimately be in danger of the "one year four times" but I sincerely doubt it. At the very least, you're more aware of the business needs surrounding the coding tasks. Higher level folks spend a lot of time working those things out and translating needs up and down. Well ok this captures it: Destroyenator posted:Unless it's a really niche position the attitude and process experience is worth way more than being a 9/10 over a 6/10 in a given technology.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 20:35
|
|