As an amateur programmer and a part-time freelancer, I didn't have a slightest clue about the value of my work. It was only 5-6 years back when I gladly did small gigs on Want-to-Hire forums for tens of dollars.
One particular gig was about scrapping data from a car sales website which I completed for $30 (should have cost at least 10x). The client discussed about the possibility of converting the phone numbers, which were obfuscated as plain images, to plain text. Without ado, I fired up my editor to explore the problem. It proved to atrociously difficult as I didn't have any background in anything similar but with the help from my brother, I was able to make a scrappy algorithm that worked.
I reported back my progress and asked for additional $25 for it but the client refused, saying that he hadn't given his final say. I was dejected but felt foolish more than anything else. Looking back, I can't help think how anyone would pain in giving something as meagre as $25 (at least, for someone in United States) for a someone's hard work.
If there is one thing I can glean from my story and author's is that businesses, at least most of them, are ruthless. It doesn't matter who runs them, it's just an unspoken rule that you don't give what you don't owe. You don't shower sympathy or, do things that aren't in business' best interest (long term / short term). The only thing you can—and should—do is be ruthless yourself. Negotiate for more confidently. Move on if you're undervalued. Never think of owing anything to any entity.
Whilst I've probably been in a similar situation at some point or another in my past (albeit in the UK), and can very much sympathise with your story, I can't possibly agree with your final premise.
Ruthlessness is not what makes for a happy work life.
You absolutely should call out the thankless and unappreciative! Perhaps they really are just poorly informed about how long things take or the knowledge that makes it possible (however unlikely)... that's still no excuse.
And to "treat others as they treat you" is a slippery slope that can quickly get you a bad reputation.
Don't be afraid to do things differently, you will be happier for it.
I think understanding the value you're giving is key but it's somewhat of a black art. Freelance bidding sites that have something like 'build complete Facebook clone for $29.99' are a huge red flag to me. The client obviously has no clue what goes into something like that, even if you paid someone $0.99 an hour it would blow past their 'budget' almost immediately. On the backend when what you delivered was functional if it was Facebook scale with ad networks would likely rake in far far more than their budget. As a developer I can't expect to charge the expected revenue stream but there is an art to finding the happy medium.
I find myself in this even in a salaried position. If I'm constantly solving problems that brings the company I work for millions in revenue, my paltry salary that is lower than market rate starts to seem like a liability. I know there's a risk I'm not taking but in an ideal world I would be adequately compensated for any increase I'm directly involved with. I know we don't live in that ideal world but it would be nice to be somewhere close to it.
Yeah, I'll agree as an American that $55 for code which can do primitive OCR is probably really, really cheap. Your client should have treated you better.
> The only thing you can—and should—do is be ruthless yourself. Negotiate for more confidently. Move on if you're undervalued.
Well, try not to think of it as being ruthless. Plenty of businesses do well by helping others do well, too. But, at the end of the day, you have bills to pay and a lifestyle to support: you have to preserve that.
Just like in sports, you get paid more for what you have done vs what you could do.
Having a few really good pieces of work to show off is no guarantee that you'll consistently pump out good work, or that you haven't left clients high and dry before. Since a third party has no real way of gauging that except by your track record, they're taking more of a chance on someone with less of a track record. More risk means they need more reward, which means you get paid less.
Most of us COULD run a Fortune 500 company as well as the average CEO but we won't get the chance, nor compensation, until we have the experience.
I hand out with three groups of people: geeks, hacks and lawyers. All of them often easily think they could easily do any other job. This includes the lawyers and journalists thinking that making software is easy. Based on that, I think we're as deluded as they are.
> Most of us COULD run a Fortune 500 company as well as the average CEO
I appreciate your optimism; at the same time, I think it is somewhat unwarranted.
Running a 10-person company is challenging enough to have your shrink on the speed dial. As for Fortune 500 CEOs, those are superhumans on steroids (or cocaine and alcohol), who bend reality by their very presence. You have about the same chance of approaching their attitude as becoming an Olympic athlete.
Thankfully, there are other ways to achieve happiness (or make money, if you want something more quantitative) without becoming a big company CEO. One thing I know for sure: I don't envy them.
I've experienced this too, not the discrimination in work, but the realisation that on the internet no one cares about anything but your work.
I've been a part of a lot of different communities. Hell, when I was a kid in a MW2 clan on the internet, no one there cared about anything but skill in the game. In programming and hacking communities, no one cared about anything but skill either.
It's a brilliant place you know. On the internet, you can be whoever you want to be and it doesn't matter.
The flip side is that as soon as you become more than just pixels on a screen it can change in an instant. Just ask anyone who ever experienced being dox'd. As long as all you are is pixels on a screen it's great. As soon as you become more than pixels on a screen the story can change really fast. It turns out the pixels only influence people opinion of you when there is nothing else to base it on. I'm not so sure that's necessarily something to celebrate.
To me, this is the main argument for privacy. When I hear people say "I've got nothing to hide, so I've got nothing to fear", I immediately think "Well aren't you lucky?"
Having nothing to hide is a privilege, but the weird thing about that mentality is that I think very few people actually have that privilege. How many people, for example, would not be negatively impacted if the text conversations around their last relationship breakup were made public?
We all have vulnerabilities, and privacy is about choosing who we trust to know them. So anyone who believes that they have nothing to hide is either unaware of how dangerous the world is, or hasn't properly taken stock of what could be used against them, and how. Discrimination is one of the most common ways that your vulnerabilities can used against you, but it's not the only one.
Talent and experience aren't the same thing, and they both affect compensation.
Talent can produce a better result than experience, but experience is almost always more consistent. There's added value in consistency for companies. That's not discrimination (ugh), it's a business reality.
Good for him. I had a similar experience. Had to slog it out at low wages long enough to have a real work history with recognizable clients.
He seems a little more bitter about it than I was. Trust is part of the game, and people just naturally, and subconsciously look for signals that you're the real deal.
I think he would benefit from putting a little more thought in to why people might judge someone very young as being responsible enough/capable enough/etc. It is not just, or even mostly, prejudice.
This reminds me of my early years - I started doing in web dev work in High School and was excited to be making more than minimum wage!
I started freelancing about halfway through college and quickly learned to hide the fact that I was a student, and my age in general. I recall one of my early clients that had a very distinct negative change in how he treated me after he learned that I was still in college.
I can't complain too much, though, most clients treated me well and I charged enough that I was able to graduate debt free.
The author feels that his height counted against him, but did anyone actually say "sorry you're too short?". It would be strange client or employer who insisted on a tall developer while age I can accept is a factor for people out there, rightly or wrongly. I'm suggesting that it could be possible to project an inherent sensitivity about one's height onto a separate experience.
That may well be a factor in what's going on, but for whatever reason, there is evidence [1] of a height-based pay gap in hiring and compensation. We're seldom aware of our subconscious biases, but they still influence our actions all the time.
Pixels don't care, but businesses care a lot about who their vendors are. Specifically, business owners want to buy from companies that can provide more than a result.
They need to mitigate business risk so they look for vendors that will:
1. Exist as long as their solution is being used
2. Provide adequate support
3. Are legally accountable for their products and services
4. Have the proper processes in place for things like billing and invoices
Having raw talent is just part of the business puzzle. There are a lot of start-ups or freelancers that can "fake it until they make it" but it's because they really understand how a small business or corporation makes buying decisions.
Sometimes I want to take interns from minorities and teach them both technical skills and the network to get a job through the Internet.
Them I remember taking them as interns is part of the discrimination; and they'll be better promoted in physical companies where they can invoke anti-discrimination laws, rather than being only promoted by their skills.
Then remains those who are really discriminated against: Those who are neither protected by being good-looking nor by the laws, like the (short) author.
Pixels don't care, but next time you read statistics about how white people are paid more than average, remember which side this guy falls on, now that he succeeded. The strange world of statistics.
And this is why I think fulltime employment is the wrong way to go for many people today.
In fact the whole "we are an institution and you are a peon" mentality needs to be disrupted.
More companies should hire on a project basis and share the revenues. More companies should try holacracy and abolish a top down chain of command for everything.
Then people can really will be compensated on their merit, ie their contributions.
In our own company, I laid out how we do it https://qbix.com/blog ... would welcome your thoughts.
To be honest, I don't like the Qbix Compensation Model. One reason to work for someone else is that they are taking the risk. Within reason, no matter what I do at work, I'll get paid the same at the end of the month. Yes, there is the risk the company could go out of business (a form of job security I guess), and yes, I would expect a fair annual review, but ultimately, I'm able to plan in the medium term for a consistent income.
> More companies should hire on a project basis and share the revenues.
The problem with this is employees being unwilling to take on risk. In general they want to get paid a good amount whether the project succeeds or not.
While privacy is important, and a meritocracy is, well, meritocratic, these systems weren't formed overnight, and aren't even necessarily accepted as 'right' in many parts of the world. Historically, social barriers (e.g. discrimination against short people) are changed through exposure, discussion and sometimes fighting. Writing a post like this is only part of the answer. Taking the opportunity to understand the bias and discussing it with those who hold opposing viewpoints is another part of the answer.
I don't understand what your point is. Is it that Kyle Neath should take a stronger role in the fight against (height/age/gender/race/....) discrimination? It is probably hard because if you are working full-time as a software dev, you don't have much time to also lead a social struggle.
[+] [-] shubhamjain|9 years ago|reply
One particular gig was about scrapping data from a car sales website which I completed for $30 (should have cost at least 10x). The client discussed about the possibility of converting the phone numbers, which were obfuscated as plain images, to plain text. Without ado, I fired up my editor to explore the problem. It proved to atrociously difficult as I didn't have any background in anything similar but with the help from my brother, I was able to make a scrappy algorithm that worked.
I reported back my progress and asked for additional $25 for it but the client refused, saying that he hadn't given his final say. I was dejected but felt foolish more than anything else. Looking back, I can't help think how anyone would pain in giving something as meagre as $25 (at least, for someone in United States) for a someone's hard work.
If there is one thing I can glean from my story and author's is that businesses, at least most of them, are ruthless. It doesn't matter who runs them, it's just an unspoken rule that you don't give what you don't owe. You don't shower sympathy or, do things that aren't in business' best interest (long term / short term). The only thing you can—and should—do is be ruthless yourself. Negotiate for more confidently. Move on if you're undervalued. Never think of owing anything to any entity.
[+] [-] simonhamp|9 years ago|reply
Ruthlessness is not what makes for a happy work life.
You absolutely should call out the thankless and unappreciative! Perhaps they really are just poorly informed about how long things take or the knowledge that makes it possible (however unlikely)... that's still no excuse.
And to "treat others as they treat you" is a slippery slope that can quickly get you a bad reputation.
Don't be afraid to do things differently, you will be happier for it.
[+] [-] w0rd-driven|9 years ago|reply
I find myself in this even in a salaried position. If I'm constantly solving problems that brings the company I work for millions in revenue, my paltry salary that is lower than market rate starts to seem like a liability. I know there's a risk I'm not taking but in an ideal world I would be adequately compensated for any increase I'm directly involved with. I know we don't live in that ideal world but it would be nice to be somewhere close to it.
[+] [-] wtbob|9 years ago|reply
> The only thing you can—and should—do is be ruthless yourself. Negotiate for more confidently. Move on if you're undervalued.
Well, try not to think of it as being ruthless. Plenty of businesses do well by helping others do well, too. But, at the end of the day, you have bills to pay and a lifestyle to support: you have to preserve that.
[+] [-] devoply|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] janwillemb|9 years ago|reply
[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/kneath
[+] [-] galfarragem|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gnrlist|9 years ago|reply
Having a few really good pieces of work to show off is no guarantee that you'll consistently pump out good work, or that you haven't left clients high and dry before. Since a third party has no real way of gauging that except by your track record, they're taking more of a chance on someone with less of a track record. More risk means they need more reward, which means you get paid less.
Most of us COULD run a Fortune 500 company as well as the average CEO but we won't get the chance, nor compensation, until we have the experience.
[+] [-] nailer|9 years ago|reply
I hand out with three groups of people: geeks, hacks and lawyers. All of them often easily think they could easily do any other job. This includes the lawyers and journalists thinking that making software is easy. Based on that, I think we're as deluded as they are.
[+] [-] atemerev|9 years ago|reply
I appreciate your optimism; at the same time, I think it is somewhat unwarranted.
Running a 10-person company is challenging enough to have your shrink on the speed dial. As for Fortune 500 CEOs, those are superhumans on steroids (or cocaine and alcohol), who bend reality by their very presence. You have about the same chance of approaching their attitude as becoming an Olympic athlete.
Thankfully, there are other ways to achieve happiness (or make money, if you want something more quantitative) without becoming a big company CEO. One thing I know for sure: I don't envy them.
[+] [-] aj7|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kenji|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gspetr|9 years ago|reply
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirk_Nowitzki
[+] [-] akvadrako|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HenryBemis|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] libeclipse|9 years ago|reply
I've been a part of a lot of different communities. Hell, when I was a kid in a MW2 clan on the internet, no one there cared about anything but skill in the game. In programming and hacking communities, no one cared about anything but skill either.
It's a brilliant place you know. On the internet, you can be whoever you want to be and it doesn't matter.
[+] [-] zaphar|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pasta|9 years ago|reply
Those are good arguments for privacy.
Sometimes you got something to hide. Not a crime but because you don't want to be discriminated.
Sad that it has to be this way.
[+] [-] mistercow|9 years ago|reply
Having nothing to hide is a privilege, but the weird thing about that mentality is that I think very few people actually have that privilege. How many people, for example, would not be negatively impacted if the text conversations around their last relationship breakup were made public?
We all have vulnerabilities, and privacy is about choosing who we trust to know them. So anyone who believes that they have nothing to hide is either unaware of how dangerous the world is, or hasn't properly taken stock of what could be used against them, and how. Discrimination is one of the most common ways that your vulnerabilities can used against you, but it's not the only one.
[+] [-] erdojo|9 years ago|reply
Talent can produce a better result than experience, but experience is almost always more consistent. There's added value in consistency for companies. That's not discrimination (ugh), it's a business reality.
[+] [-] Radle|9 years ago|reply
It's just a lack of experience, if Kyle would man up and accept her place it would all work out.
BULLSHIT
[+] [-] tyingq|9 years ago|reply
He seems a little more bitter about it than I was. Trust is part of the game, and people just naturally, and subconsciously look for signals that you're the real deal.
[+] [-] Baeocystin|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mxfh|9 years ago|reply
Like anonymous works can't exist in the physical space?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_work
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Anonymous_artists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anonymously_published_...
[+] [-] nfriedly|9 years ago|reply
I started freelancing about halfway through college and quickly learned to hide the fact that I was a student, and my age in general. I recall one of my early clients that had a very distinct negative change in how he treated me after he learned that I was still in college.
I can't complain too much, though, most clients treated me well and I charged enough that I was able to graduate debt free.
[+] [-] dzamo_norton|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] josecastillo|9 years ago|reply
[1] http://www.apa.org/monitor/julaug04/standing.aspx
[+] [-] ess3|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Markoff|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] emilioolivares|9 years ago|reply
They need to mitigate business risk so they look for vendors that will: 1. Exist as long as their solution is being used 2. Provide adequate support 3. Are legally accountable for their products and services 4. Have the proper processes in place for things like billing and invoices
Having raw talent is just part of the business puzzle. There are a lot of start-ups or freelancers that can "fake it until they make it" but it's because they really understand how a small business or corporation makes buying decisions.
[+] [-] tajen|9 years ago|reply
Them I remember taking them as interns is part of the discrimination; and they'll be better promoted in physical companies where they can invoke anti-discrimination laws, rather than being only promoted by their skills.
Then remains those who are really discriminated against: Those who are neither protected by being good-looking nor by the laws, like the (short) author.
Pixels don't care, but next time you read statistics about how white people are paid more than average, remember which side this guy falls on, now that he succeeded. The strange world of statistics.
[+] [-] EGreg|9 years ago|reply
In fact the whole "we are an institution and you are a peon" mentality needs to be disrupted.
More companies should hire on a project basis and share the revenues. More companies should try holacracy and abolish a top down chain of command for everything.
Then people can really will be compensated on their merit, ie their contributions.
In our own company, I laid out how we do it https://qbix.com/blog ... would welcome your thoughts.
[+] [-] alexchamberlain|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jstanley|9 years ago|reply
The problem with this is employees being unwilling to take on risk. In general they want to get paid a good amount whether the project succeeds or not.
[+] [-] xamuel|9 years ago|reply
Kiss goodbye to any kind of code hygiene.
>abolish a top down chain of command
You now have a squeaky wheel company. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
[+] [-] pnathan|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pitaj|9 years ago|reply
Can a mod change the title to read (2013) since this article is fairly old, though?
[+] [-] dang|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dhruvkar|9 years ago|reply
While privacy is important, and a meritocracy is, well, meritocratic, these systems weren't formed overnight, and aren't even necessarily accepted as 'right' in many parts of the world. Historically, social barriers (e.g. discrimination against short people) are changed through exposure, discussion and sometimes fighting. Writing a post like this is only part of the answer. Taking the opportunity to understand the bias and discussing it with those who hold opposing viewpoints is another part of the answer.
Privacy is a right, don't use it as a crutch.
[+] [-] bjourne|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] carrot|9 years ago|reply