faro1975's comments

Papers that question Einstein are just science. That is the core of the scientific method - to keep refining the models, improving our knowledge and question everything. And yes, even Einstein. Those papers might turn out to be wrong, but not because they were trying to disprove Einstein.

Those "scientist" who believe that Einstein's theories are infallible, cannot call themselves scientists. They are just believers in a different kind of a religion.

Not sure somebody who worked in only two companies for short periods should be giving such "life experience" talks, making some broad generalizations and giving advice.

How about a PoV from somebody with 30 years of experience, 6 countries, 14 companies which includes 5 startups (3 very profitable exits and 2 failures) as well as big corporates?

Sure, working for a Global 2000 sometimes sucks. In 9 out of 10 times your impact on a product might be lower, you might be spending too much time in meetings and you might have a PHB.

But you know what? 9 out of 10 times your startup work will suck too. You might still end up with a PHB. Your amazing product ideas might be rejected. You might end up working 100h weeks and not get paid at all for weeks.

Even after all my startup experience I prefer working for large corporations. Number of times I was able to build and justify a business case for using latest and coolest technology. I got to envision and develop products which were backed by up to 100M in funding. I got to wear more hats than in a startup. I get paid 400K+ per year + an occasional nice surprise of a full year bonus.

There's many more people you have to deal with in a large corporation and many times those people will be close minded, selfish and not interested in your ideas. It did frustrate me for a while, but then I started approaching it like any other technology problem, learned more about applied psychology, negotiations, facilitation and now I enjoy the combination of dealing with people problems, policies and technology problems at the same time.

This needs repeating - interviewing is a skill you have to, and you can learn.

Like lsc below, I'm also a "mercenary". But probably much less competent and maybe even better in interviewing.

My background is in humint which gives me some skills to "read" people, figure out exactly how to build the trust with the interviewer, get them to like me and even manipulate the conversation towards the questions I want them to ask me... In my 17y IT contracting career, I didn't have a single interview that didn't end up in an offer despite my significant lack of algorithms or programming knowledge. Luckily, I didn't have 5h pair-programming interviews.

You can make it "click" with the company and you can manipulate their "gut feel" to tell them that you would be the ideal candidate for the position.

It's not fair and it's irrational that people like me can get the job instead of some much more capable developers, but that's what humans are - irrational.