In your value estimation, a UIUC CS dropout-turned-founder has about the same EV as a UIUC CS grad, but with significantly higher variance. To what extent is this view the consensus among those responsible for evaluating software talent? Would many of your colleagues instead see the dropout-turned-founder as lower-EV (or maybe even higher-EV), but don’t give much consideration to variance?
You’ve got it backwards. You want hiring folk thinking deeply on variance, because variance means there is a sizable upside tail. Finding overlooked young developers in the upside tail is How We Win. Admittedly, the variance also means we also end up looking at folk in the downside tail, and your circumstances mean that we have to be even more careful than usual about those risks. These risks include beauties like “has he ever coded at all?” (Yes, we get applications for 100K junior developer jobs from people who have never opened a text editor), “Does she think this job is beneath her?” (good lord, you’d be surprised how often that happens, particularly from new grads “from Boston”), “Have they ever shown any capacity to ship production software?” (This one can catch academics, who may very well be geniuses but have trouble shipping at tempo and with quality.), and “Is there any chance they will stay for two years?” (That’s about the break-even point for new-fledged junior developers. It’s also where I would personally be most concerned about you, given your dialog above.) People looking to hire junior software developers have to start by filtering downside tails, with the knowledge that if they miss one that’s a six-figure mistake. But, if your hiring process is good enough to filter those downside risks, then you reallywant variance, because it gives you a chance to find overlooked alpha in the form of excellent young’uns. If you do represent overlooked alpha, trust me when I say we are very primed (and very often incented) to notice it. We call it “moneyball” for a reason.
To someone who knows that universities operate upon selection effects, getting into a selective college is almost as impressive as graduating from it, but most people subscribe to the mythos that the degree is what matters (as illustrated by the sheepskin effect), which might mean that talent evaluators that read LW favor the dropout more than those who don’t
I’m a fan of this community, but they haven’t cornered the market on seeing past the common wisdom. My fallback way back when I was in your position was to go start coding in the bond pits on LaSalle Street. You talk about Immoral Mazes at FAANG, but that ain’t nothing. Those traders were about one step more pleasant than mafioso, and I wasn’t doing anything but making some numbers bigger for them. That said, they were extremely good at seeing talent and paying it exactly as much as necessary to keep it. Good software startup folk (not just developers and managers but HR as well) know this as well. If they don’t see “two-year UIUC dropout + founder” as someone they might be interested in, then you really don’t want to work for them.
(Disclosure: at no point in this have I indicated that I am not interested in recruiting you. I may read as weird-but-benign-and-maybe-even-wise greybeard, but do not assume complete altruism on my part.)
“Is there any chance they will stay for two years?”
Ahh, so that’s why companies want you to be “aligned with their mission” so badly.
My fallback way back when I was in your position was to go start coding in the bond pits on LaSalle Street. Those traders were about one step more pleasant than mafioso, and I wasn’t doing anything but making some numbers bigger for them. That said, they were extremely good at seeing talent and paying it exactly as much as necessary to keep it.
I like making positive impact, and I like making money. Both would be optimal, but either one is leagues better than neither, so under my value system, I would count your move as a very positive one.
If they don’t see “two-year UIUC dropout + founder” as someone they might be interested in, then you really don’t want to work for them.
I’ve heard this sentiment on Hacker News often, and always chalked it up to sour grapes. Glad to hear that there’s some truth to it. Also, I’d be a one-year dropout, not a two-year one, if that changes your evaluation significantly. However, I’m technically a junior, since I took a bunch of classes at UMaine during high school (including DS&A, Linear Algebra, and “ML”).
(Disclosure: at no point in this have I indicated that I am not interested in recruiting you. I may read as weird-but-benign-and-maybe-even-wise greybeard, but do not assume complete altruism on my part.)
That’s perfectly fine by me. If you see me as a potential source of alpha, I’d be willing to help you test that hypothesis :)
Ahh, so that’s why companies want you to be “aligned with their mission” so badly.
Right. Between search costs, orientation time on the codebase and business, mentor/team lead time spent teaching, inevitable moderate fuck-ups, and general odds and sods, a good junior developer at a pure software company is accruing negative value their first year, and is net negative until nearly their second. A bad junior developer is negative EV until you can figure that out and fire him, which can easily take over a year. Additionally, junior developers will, more often than not, leave around year four, due to desire to learn something best learned elsewhere, vesting cliffs, or just life’s inevitable changes. If this sounds like a horrible investment, the upside is senior developers. In the right business they’re pure money-spinning machines, and they need junior developers around. The most valuable thing a junior developer can produce is their future selves as a senior.
The difference between a one-year and a two-year dropout is material (decreasing the flight risk), but diligent and productive time spent as founder will certainly fix that. Don’t half-ass that. Even if your startup fails (which as you note is likely), you need to end up with connections, skills, and stories.
Do ace your Calculus III, though. If the pandemic has taught us anything it’s that most of humanity fundamentally doesn’t get differential equations and as such can barely think about a large range of situations. You certainly don’t want to be one of those folk.
Do ace your Calculus III, though. If the pandemic has taught us anything it’s that most of humanity fundamentally doesn’t get differential equations and as such can barely think about a large range of situations.
I want to highlight this extremely good object-level advice. There are a number of topics that are much easier to learn with the structure of college-level classes than on your own. I don’t know current curricula well enough to know if “ace the class” is a good proxy for “internalize the topic”, but make sure you do the latter. As long as you’re there, get the best value you can from it.
You’ve got it backwards. You want hiring folk thinking deeply on variance, because variance means there is a sizable upside tail. Finding overlooked young developers in the upside tail is How We Win. Admittedly, the variance also means we also end up looking at folk in the downside tail, and your circumstances mean that we have to be even more careful than usual about those risks. These risks include beauties like “has he ever coded at all?” (Yes, we get applications for 100K junior developer jobs from people who have never opened a text editor), “Does she think this job is beneath her?” (good lord, you’d be surprised how often that happens, particularly from new grads “from Boston”), “Have they ever shown any capacity to ship production software?” (This one can catch academics, who may very well be geniuses but have trouble shipping at tempo and with quality.), and “Is there any chance they will stay for two years?” (That’s about the break-even point for new-fledged junior developers. It’s also where I would personally be most concerned about you, given your dialog above.) People looking to hire junior software developers have to start by filtering downside tails, with the knowledge that if they miss one that’s a six-figure mistake. But, if your hiring process is good enough to filter those downside risks, then you really want variance, because it gives you a chance to find overlooked alpha in the form of excellent young’uns. If you do represent overlooked alpha, trust me when I say we are very primed (and very often incented) to notice it. We call it “moneyball” for a reason.
I’m a fan of this community, but they haven’t cornered the market on seeing past the common wisdom. My fallback way back when I was in your position was to go start coding in the bond pits on LaSalle Street. You talk about Immoral Mazes at FAANG, but that ain’t nothing. Those traders were about one step more pleasant than mafioso, and I wasn’t doing anything but making some numbers bigger for them. That said, they were extremely good at seeing talent and paying it exactly as much as necessary to keep it. Good software startup folk (not just developers and managers but HR as well) know this as well. If they don’t see “two-year UIUC dropout + founder” as someone they might be interested in, then you really don’t want to work for them.
(Disclosure: at no point in this have I indicated that I am not interested in recruiting you. I may read as weird-but-benign-and-maybe-even-wise greybeard, but do not assume complete altruism on my part.)
More good stuff, thank you again.
Ahh, so that’s why companies want you to be “aligned with their mission” so badly.
I like making positive impact, and I like making money. Both would be optimal, but either one is leagues better than neither, so under my value system, I would count your move as a very positive one.
I’ve heard this sentiment on Hacker News often, and always chalked it up to sour grapes. Glad to hear that there’s some truth to it. Also, I’d be a one-year dropout, not a two-year one, if that changes your evaluation significantly. However, I’m technically a junior, since I took a bunch of classes at UMaine during high school (including DS&A, Linear Algebra, and “ML”).
That’s perfectly fine by me. If you see me as a potential source of alpha, I’d be willing to help you test that hypothesis :)
Right. Between search costs, orientation time on the codebase and business, mentor/team lead time spent teaching, inevitable moderate fuck-ups, and general odds and sods, a good junior developer at a pure software company is accruing negative value their first year, and is net negative until nearly their second. A bad junior developer is negative EV until you can figure that out and fire him, which can easily take over a year. Additionally, junior developers will, more often than not, leave around year four, due to desire to learn something best learned elsewhere, vesting cliffs, or just life’s inevitable changes. If this sounds like a horrible investment, the upside is senior developers. In the right business they’re pure money-spinning machines, and they need junior developers around. The most valuable thing a junior developer can produce is their future selves as a senior.
The difference between a one-year and a two-year dropout is material (decreasing the flight risk), but diligent and productive time spent as founder will certainly fix that. Don’t half-ass that. Even if your startup fails (which as you note is likely), you need to end up with connections, skills, and stories.
Do ace your Calculus III, though. If the pandemic has taught us anything it’s that most of humanity fundamentally doesn’t get differential equations and as such can barely think about a large range of situations. You certainly don’t want to be one of those folk.
I want to highlight this extremely good object-level advice. There are a number of topics that are much easier to learn with the structure of college-level classes than on your own. I don’t know current curricula well enough to know if “ace the class” is a good proxy for “internalize the topic”, but make sure you do the latter. As long as you’re there, get the best value you can from it.