62 pointsby speckx10 hours ago18 comments
  • aniou7 hours ago
    I feel Your pain. And I have a advice: take a deep breath and leave. Because burn-out is real, because there is nothing that can compensate damages of Your mental health.

    You are still a human. You are intelligent. Yes - you are, this is demonstrated by the ability to think critically and independence of your views. So - You are capable to adapt into new environment and into new tech. Search for anything and switch job. Don't wait for a toxic environment to destroy your confidence.

  • hyperhello8 hours ago
    Your company is laying people off because they need something to do. They’re goalless in the extreme and relying on big talk and big action about the latest fad. You don’t have leaders, you have owners.

    You must look around and see the lack of men, and force yourself to become one.

    • BigTTYGothGF6 hours ago
      > You must look around and see the lack of men, and force yourself to become one.

      As a man I need you to expand on this because I'm trying to imagine what concrete actions you think "a man" would do in this circumstance, and of the things I've come up with the only one I think I'm allowed to say on this forum is "quit and find a new job."

      • happytoexplain5 hours ago
        Why complicate this? It's a well defined, harmless phrase. We don't have to pretend it's a touchy gender-related issue.
      • hyperhello5 hours ago
        What do you mean, allowed to say on this forum? Who is around to stop you from saying what you mean? Is this some kind of dramatic display of your secondary status? What responsibility for you are you asking me to take?
    • bossyTeacher7 hours ago
      > You must look around and see the lack of men, and force yourself to become one.

      What exactly does this mean?

      • DonaldPShimoda7 hours ago
        I think parent commenter is using "men" in a manner similar to mensch, as in "a person of integrity and honor" [1]. In other words, "look around and notice nobody is taking responsibility, and choose to be the person who lifts others up." Or something.

        It's a weird way to phrase it, in my opinion, especially in this era where we are generally avoiding ambiguously gendered collective nouns... but I'm pretty sure that's the gist. Or, at least, it's how I read it.

        [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensch

      • happytoexplain7 hours ago
        "Men" is colloquially used here to mean "decent people", "strong people", "principled people", etc. It's a generic positive description ("Be a man", "Man up").

        Younger generations might bristle at this use of the word, and that's fine, but try to give the benefit of the doubt (in fact, it's a rule on HN).

      • isoprophlex6 hours ago
        I'm giggling a little, imagining a company run almost entirely by raccoons... and the OP sitting there as the sole human, lamenting the lack of men.
        • miltonlost6 hours ago
          Raccoons at least have some sort of intelligence. Leeches are a better animal comparison IMO
      • shimman7 hours ago
        It means you need to become a good wage slave and do more work without increases in pay or equity. Why should you get the rewards of your boss when you are given the ownership of their workload?

        Apparently equal in value according to some fools.

  • conartist66 hours ago
    Look, it sucks and nothing I say will fix it, but know this: it's never been easier to spot people WHO ARE DOING THE ACTUAL WORK, and never so easy to spot the impostors who care most about looking productive.

    The world is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    There are precious few of us left who even still know how to write in our own voice, who have a will to grow ourselves and faith left in human ability. I urge you beyond all urging not underestimate yourself, for you have never been more rare and valuable!!!

  • Quarrelsome6 hours ago
    fear is a reaction, courage is a choice.

    You don't have to quit to start looking for another job, just start looking. You have 10 years experience, how can you say that you have no marketable skills? You could network, go to events, get involved in your local dev communities, show someone else your enthusiasm.

  • 827a7 hours ago
    How do you know your skills aren't marketable if you don't go out and market them? Go apply around. You don't necessarily need to leave to do it.
  • SoftTalker6 hours ago
    If the pay is OK and you're not being asked to do anything unethical, just ride it out. AI is the technology du-jour but one day it will just be a part of the landscape and its role will have stabilized. Certainly worth interviewing and seeing what else you might find, but pretty much every dev organization is in chaos right now.
  • internet20006 hours ago
    Your company never had humanity. Thinking it did is mistake number 1.
  • lordkrandel7 hours ago
    Anywhere! Just leave! :)
  • wseqyrku5 hours ago
    There's nothing but sand at the end of that road, start building something that you own.
  • egypturnash7 hours ago
    Unionize.
  • Imustaskforhelp6 hours ago
    Sometimes I wonder about even if you are the owners of such companies[0], then there would simply be issues arising in the near future about profitability at one or the other time.

    The only thing that I can realistically think through is the fact that because such owners were able to get the personal income and expenses sorted out for a few years and maybe got a bigger house.

    But if things change, which realistically speaking, it would. they might get so accustomed to the way of doing things and the shock would be too much in too short period of time.

    It doesn't atleast in the moment, seem worth it to me to try to create or chase trends for investors or anything.

    I also sympathize with the workers working in said companies like OP. Not sure what realistic solution is out there, the job-market is terrible at the moment for many people and IMO business-making is a hard thing to do and some of us might like to over-estimate ourselves in it too (& side note on under-estimating yourself too)

    Accurate estimations of if you should do business or not seems to me to always contain some inaccuracies and you might have to decide your own decision in that and in that sense, job seems better.

    You also can't go live without money if one has to exist within society.

    I don't know if there is a catharsis to such problem. To me, it seems like an authenticity/trust issue on if you can trust the founders or not but trust by definition is a bit weird and immeasurable and it can always have blind-spots. Maybe the investors investing into such a company trusted the wrong guy but what if the company somehow sells to more people (Ahem SpaceX) and ends up making incredible amounts of money. You would never know and thus you have to just trust the system but the system doesn't work sometimes in a good fashion.

    [0]: (We need a better term for such companies which are just trend-chasing and mostly are just built to impress investors rather than try to generate actual profits)

  • dddddaviddddd6 hours ago
    > I don't have any other marketable skills. My coding skills were barely marketable to begin with.

    Hot take: moving is more about interview skills than coding skills. Whether you leave or not, start interviewing now. You might end up finding a better place sooner than you hoped.

    • watershawl6 hours ago
      Yes, it's about how you think about yourself. Identity matters just as much as experience, sometimes moreso.
  • homeonthemtn8 hours ago
    If you have been coding for 8 years and don't have marketable skills you are either naive/insecure or doing something very very wrong.

    In either case, this job is clearly not healthy for you in several different ways

    • Induane7 hours ago
      I've been doing full-stack Dev (mostly Django though I foolishly had a brief moment where I kinda thought Flask was okay then fell for the same dumb thing briefly with FastAPI) for 20+ years and don't feel marketable.

      I went from jQuery to a brief dalliance with Angular to HTMX+_HyperScript. Everyone wants full stack Devs to use react and struggle eternally with insane dependency trees and challenging client side state management.

      I like to build things that can be maintained in perpetuity by small teams.

      So I'm not very marketable.

      • wccrawford7 hours ago
        I'm full stack for 19 years and I love React, and I've been laid off for 1.5 years now. This is a terrible job market right now.

        That doesn't mean you don't have good skills, it just means that too many people have them. It happens from time to time in every industrial, for all skills.

        Obviously, I don't have any good advice about how to deal with it.

        • altern87 hours ago
          You mean you haven't been working for 1 1/2 years? How do you buy food?
          • Sohcahtoa825 hours ago
            > I'm full stack for 19 years

            That's the key.

            I've been an AppSec engineer for about 12 years, but it wasn't until about 5 years ago I started working somewhere that actually paid a market rate. I wasn't living paycheck to paycheck for the first 7 years, but certainly wasn't putting much away.

            Now, I've got nearly a full year of after-tax paychecks in savings. I could easily go ~18 months without pay without a change in lifestyle. I could stretch it out to 3 years with some belt tightening.

            In about 6 more years, the house will be paid off and any savings I have could last even longer.

            • altern85 hours ago
              Got it. I need to start saving some money.

              Hope you find another job soon!

          • vkou7 hours ago
            Presumably they haven't been living paycheck to paycheck for the past 19. It's not that difficult for a SWE in North America.
            • happytoexplain5 hours ago
              That's not rare for a SWE in NA. Difficult is another matter. Plenty of SWE's in NA are now staring down the barrel of not being able to afford their own home for much longer (or to afford their first home).
              • vkou2 hours ago
                If you've been working for three years as a junior and just put down a big down payment on a house you can barely afford, yes, you're going to have problems.

                If in 19 years as a SWE, you haven't saved up a lot of money, you are one or more of:

                1. Incredibly unfortunate in the jobs you've been taking.

                2. Have made some incredibly bad investments.

                3. Are spending like a sailor, burning every dollar as it comes in.

                4. Have gone through one or more absolute life catastrophes.

                ... Then yes, you are also likely to have financial problems if you're out of work for two years.

                I don't mean to say that these are incredibly uncommon. They aren't, especially in people chasing the startup carrot and ending up with nothing but the brown, sticky bit.

                But I think it's fair to say that a large number of people in the profession should have managed to avoid all four. (With #3 being the main 'avoidable' culprit, and with #4 being largely unavoidable.)

                Consider that somehow, people making less than a quarter of our prevailing wages manage to live... Fairly comfortably.

            • altern86 hours ago
              Yes, I guess investments, etc., but 1.5 years is a long time.

              I don't think I could go more than 2-3 months. Maybe I should start saving some money.

              • Sohcahtoa825 hours ago
                Location matters a LOT.

                The parent comment mentioned North America. This is huge. Tech salaries in Europe are half what they are in NA. In India, they're like 1/4 to 1/3.

                Saving is absolutely important, especially in such a layoff-ridden industry. You should really strive to get at least 6 months of living expenses into savings.

                • happytoexplain3 hours ago
                  >In India, they're like 1/4 to 1/3.

                  My company pays 10k a year for an Indian contractor, full time. I don't know what their agency pays them, but it can't be even 1/4 of a typical NA SWE salary. More like 1/12th.

                • altern85 hours ago
                  I know but there's always something shiny that keeps me away from that goal.

                  But I keep reading about people getting fired because of AI and every time I do I get progressively more anxious and closer to getting start on that.

      • joss827 hours ago
        Dude. You are marketable as fuck.

        Don’t live in the hype. Not everyone is drinking the ai cool-aid bottoms up.

        What do you mean by fastapi being a mistake ?

      • hyperhello7 hours ago
        Write a script that tidies up and fixes everything in a repo.
  • josefritzishere6 hours ago
    I look forward to the day that AI slop is embarrassing for executives. We're at an inflection point for the herd mentality moment where they're dreaming of mass layoffs. When AI proves incapable of delivering ROI the wave will roll back.
  • benjiro30007 hours ago
    [dead]
  • andrewstuart8 hours ago
    It’s just business.

    If you’re new to it, it might be a shock.

    If it’s not to your taste you might look for work in an industry that matches your values such as social services or environment.

    • TylerE7 hours ago
      That's no panacea. I worked for a social service non-profit for years. Yes, some stuff was better, there were still tons of issues.
    • pebble7 hours ago
      No, it’s capitalism. You don’t have to do business in a specific industry to do it in a humane manner.
      • rdbl277 hours ago
        "Humane" treatment of workers under socialism is far worse.

        Repeatedly, around the world.

        No, this time will not be different.

        • Henchman217 hours ago
          The problem is the existence of money and hierarchy to reinforce class strata
      • altern87 hours ago
        You haven't lived in a communist country nor visited any communist country, I see...
        • magguzu7 hours ago
          It's too bad those are the only two sides to the binary of political ideology!
          • altern86 hours ago
            What are other economic systems..?
        • antonvs6 hours ago
          You haven't ever studied logic, I see. Look up "false dichotomy" to start with.
          • altern86 hours ago
            I'm a high school dropout.

            What are other economic systems..? Nobody seems to be able to answer, I would be happy to look them up to learn more about them.

            • Henchman214 hours ago
              Capitalism brooks no competition. You won’t find another economic system to study that isn’t markedly worse.

              Look into what the Blackfoot Indians were doing. Their lifestyle inspired Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs — though he gets it pretty wrong IMO.

              But here’s the thing: the Blackfoot didn’t really have an economic system divorced from other systems. It was all part of a whole that valued people and made sure everyone had what they needed.

              Now here’s the kicker: Its my belief their society was based on spreading abundance. Whereas Capitalism is based on spreading scarcity.

              • altern84 hours ago
                OK, so there's capitalism, socialism, communism can't really exist, and then the Blackfoot Indians..?
                • Henchman212 hours ago
                  You asked for a thing to research. So go do that and report back. Maybe it’s bullshit. Maybe you’ll do some research, be inspired, and change the whole world.

                  I dunno. I’m not an economist… have you asked an economist?

                  Edited to add: hey I found a use for AI; here’s a prompt for your favorite model:

                  “What economic systems have humans devised over the course of recorded history?”

                  :)

        • DonaldPShimoda7 hours ago
          You haven't looked up what "capitalism" or "communism" is nor considered the possibility of other alternative economic systems, I see...
          • altern86 hours ago
            I have. What are other options?

            Capitalism, socialism (what people refer to as communism), and then communism which will never exist because it always stops with the government stealing everything and not wanting to give up power to move on to communism.

            What are other economic systems? Not saying there aren't any other ones, I just don't know.

          • shimman7 hours ago
            No, it's communism when you hurt a capitalists feeling. That has always been the definition, especially when it comes to enforcement.
        • pebble7 hours ago
          I grew up in ESSR or as it was known locally ENSV. Replying to any criticism of capitalism with an immediate “so you want communism” without even a stopover in complaining about socialism is quite something.
          • altern86 hours ago
            What do you want, then?

            Isn't there capitalism, socialism--which is what people are actually talking about when they talk about communism, and then communism which will never exist?

            What were you referring to?

            • pebble6 hours ago
              Not to sound like a hippie but we could just try to be a bit kinder to each other and not put money as the single most important thing above all else. You can run a business to make money AND do it in a way that leaves our world in a slightly better state than you found it.

              It’s not a black and white choice of either we jump hardcore into capitalism or all the other way into socialism.

              Similarly to OP I work at a company that has a certain set of core values and the moment they have changed irreversibly I am gone out the door.

              • internet20006 hours ago
                So you're talking about a set of values, not the economic system. The "capitalism" mention was bit of a non-sequitur, then.
                • altern86 hours ago
                  Yes, exactly.

                  Which is good, I can't figure out how anybody can see the government owning everything as a good thing for anyone.

                  If you just look at postal services across the world, as an example, or anything else run by government, they're 100 times less efficient then competitors and their workers always look like they're super-miserable. Imagine if that was the only option.

                  • pebble5 hours ago
                    Less efficient or less profitable? Also I'm gonna need to see some references for those claims in your last paragraph.

                    Funnily enough it's the couriers working for the private companies that I see looking more and more dead inside recently.

                    So, yknow, anecdote for an anecdote.

                    • altern85 hours ago
                      I would say both less efficient and less profitable.

                      If you're saying FedEx people are also depressed, then maybe it's just delivering boxes that's the problem?

                      But I think it's pretty safe to say that there is nobody more pissed off than post office workers. Are they nice in Estonia? Luckily I do most stuff online nowadays but when I have to go to the post office it's always an awful experience.

                      • pebble5 hours ago
                        I would say it's more likely that the hours and wages are the problem.

                        A few grumpy delivery workers aside, most people in Estonia are nice in general. You should come visit :)

                        I don't know where you are but consider that the reasons your postal workers are pissed of may go deeper than simply being government employed. Could it be your state-owned services are being managed in way that makes their workers unhappy because they are run by people who think that government services even need to be profitable in the first place?

                        • altern85 hours ago
                          I'm in Poland, but I'm from Italy and I've lived in the U.S. for a few years. Worst post offices in Italy by far, but Poland and U.S. pretty similar.

                          Other low-paying jobs don't seem to generate the same amount of unhappiness.

                          I have no idea what the reason is, to me it's just that governments can't do anything right because they're too big with no oversight.

                          That's why I was complaining about socialism, anywhere I've been where the government runs more than just post offices it was hell.

                          In Poland, all these Soviet buildings and if you look at old pictures of people standing for hours in queues for bread. Truly horrific. I was recently in Cuba and even if they can't talk about it many people told me they would flee right away if they could, but the government doesn't give them passports. Socialism destroys everything.

                          • TylerEan hour ago
                            Source on 'poorly paid'? In the US starting salary for a USPS carrier is $24/hr. FexEx starting pay is $17/hr.
                      • TylerEan hour ago
                        If you're talking about the US, you're glossing over a couple of really important points. The USPS is required to provide universal service. I'm sure providing service to NYC and SF is extremely profitable, and providing service to rural Iowa where the cows outnumber the humans 100:1 isn't. USPS doesn't get to pick and choose.

                        FedEx and UPS do... and in fact in those rural communities often uses the USPS for last mile service.

                • pebble6 hours ago
                  Well all the things OP complained about are inherently caused by capitalism but I think it’s probably possible to engage in capitalism in a way that is cognizant of those issues and actively trying to avoid them instead of treating them as eh that’s just how business is done
                  • internet20006 hours ago
                    Then I'd suggest, in good faith, avoiding the "Ugh, capitalism" framing in the future. That just comes across as lazy, which doesn't help your point. As exemplified by the replies you got, all arguing about words.

                    https://www.persuasion.community/p/ugh-capitalism

                    • pebble6 hours ago
                      I admit I could've probably used more words but when someone says "it's just business" that is a clear example of how the particular flavor of capitalism we live under has enabled and indeed encourages brushing away any moral and ethical qualms as "it's just business" and as you say, it was quite interesting to see how many people immediately jumped to dictionaries, communism, and whatever else the moment capitalism was criticized.
                • krapp6 hours ago
                  Capitalism is a moral framework as much as it is an economic system, especially in the US where it is deeply entangled in the Protestant work ethic and prosperity gospel ideals.
                  • altern86 hours ago
                    Is that in any dictionary, though? Capitalism means capitalism, free market with citizens owning companies.

                    If it's deeply entangled in the Protestant work ethic and prosperity gospel ideals in the U.S., then what's bad is the Protestant work ethic and prosperity gospel--whatever that might be.

                    • krapp6 hours ago
                      Capitalism is what capitalism does. Name one "capitalist" economy strictly and exclusively defined by a "free market with citizens owning companies." None. There are no free markets. Governments always own some interest in companies, regulate and interfere in markets. Culture and morality always influence class and power hierarchies, and by extension economic systems. The real world is more complex than dictionary definitions allow.
                      • altern85 hours ago
                        Right, I agree that governments should stay out of people's business.

                        If you're saying that governments always mess with the free market, then I guess we're in socialist-capitalist economic systems..? Still better than just socialist.

                        • krapp5 hours ago
                          If your definition of capitalism requires pure free markets, and you consider any regulation of markets by government to be socialism, then yes all existing economic systems are socialist and no capitalist systems exist.

                          Personally I don't find a framework so reductionist that it considers the USSR and the US to be equivalent to be very useful.

              • 6 hours ago
                undefined
              • altern86 hours ago
                I'm not following you. Capitalism just means free market. Private individuals own the companies instead of the government, and they do that with the main goal of making money.

                I can't figure out why that must necessarily mean that those companies can't leave the world in a slightly better place. A LOT of them do, specially small businesses.

                I've seen the destruction that socialist governments left even after decades and I went to Cuba and other socialist countries and the government treats them like literal slaves and life is shit over there, with no way out.

                Anyways, I know of capitalism, socialism, and communism. I just wanted to see if you meant another form that I wasn't aware of.

                • pebble6 hours ago
                  Sure, as a theory capitalism is just a free market but I obviously mean capitalism as it exists today and shapes our entire world. And socialism has it's own can of worms, sure.

                  But what I was responding to in particular with my original comment was the parent commenters claim that "It’s just business" and that engaging in capitalism means you must inherently engage in the practices the OP was complaining about.

                  • altern86 hours ago
                    They didn't mention capitalism, "it's just business" just means that's how it goes.

                    If the government owned the company OP works at, it would still be "just business" according to the commenter.

                    • pebble5 hours ago
                      Sure, because that's not all it means. "It's just business" is the excuse people tell themselves to justify the things they do.
  • nh23423fefe7 hours ago
    These are just category errors masquerading as morality.
  • appreciatorBus7 hours ago
    > They're taking away our perks bit by bit, like remote office and working without having to clock in and out.

    So tired of elites complaining about totally normal working practices in every other workplace on earth. Oh no you have to come to the office and you have to clock in. Join the club with the rest of us. Your McDonald's fry cook has to come to work & clock in, so should you.

    • pesus7 hours ago
      I think we should improve working conditions for everyone, not make them worse for everyone.
      • appreciatorBus6 hours ago
        How is being asked to show up and clock in making things worse?
        • mjamesaustin6 hours ago
          At a minimum any commute is extra unpaid time you have to spend for no benefit. For many people where I live, commutes can be an hour or more each way.
          • appreciatorBus5 hours ago
            We should abolish zoning so that people can live closer to work.
        • reaperducer6 hours ago
          Full-time, white collar workers generally are not expected to "clock in" in the United States. It's why certain employees are legally exempt from overtime pay.

          To ask exempt employees to clock in and out demonstrates that management doesn't trust its employees, which is a failure on the part of hiring/management, not the workers.

          • appreciatorBus5 hours ago
            Individuals making 3x the national median income are not "workers" by any definition. They are a part of the elite, top 10% of society. They will survive!
    • happytoexplain7 hours ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

      This is the poison that kills entire societies.

    • NDlurker7 hours ago
      Yeah, the other complaints are valid but complaining about punching in? I don't see how that's an issue.
      • wl6 hours ago
        Clocking in and out serves little purpose if you're salaried.
        • SoftTalker6 hours ago
          Might be needed if your salary expense has to be charged back to various internal accounts or to external clients. My first job was salaried, but I had to fill out a time sheet so clients could be billed.
          • reaperducer6 hours ago
            Filling out a time sheet and clocking in and out are two different things.

            I have to fill in a time sheet, but I never ever clock in and out.

            If someone clocks in and out, they don't need a timesheet. It's automatically recorded.

            • NDlurker2 hours ago
              I don't even fill out a timesheet; they just pay me. It was kind of shocking at first when my manager told me there wouldn't be any sort of time tracking.
    • sublinear6 hours ago
      A remote worker who hates McDonald's in 2026 is an "elite"?
      • krapp6 hours ago
        If they're on Hacker News, there's a good chance they've never made less than a six figure salary in their entire life, which would certainly place them in the upper 5% of wealth globally. So while it isn't a certain bet it is a safe bet.

        And if it doesn't apply to you, it doesn't apply to you. There are plenty of people here it does apply to.

        • sublinear6 hours ago
          Yeah... that's 1 in 20? The smart kid in the back of the class grew up? I'm not sure who you were expecting that person to become.

          If the barrier to becoming an "elite" is that low and you still consider 6-figures a meaningful benchmark in a world that sells big macs for 10 bucks, are you also calling anyone running even a modestly successful small business "elite"?

          I'm not even sure I'm engaging with a meaningful political statement here. The barriers to this level of "success" are more reliably psychological, not systemic. You're basically upset at anyone with a career. There are definitely things we need to do to help those struggling, but yelling here is slacktivism.

          • krapp6 hours ago
            Yes. Having more wealth than the vast majority of people makes you an elite.

            I don't know why you think making a 100k or higher salary is just "Big Mac money," but you're either larping or exactly the kind of out of touch I'm talking about.

            • appreciatorBus5 hours ago
              Exactly. Median income in the US like 50k. For the HN folk (including me) who make more than that, I'm very happy for you, but please stop pretending you are part of the downtrodden, oppressed proletariat. Be happy for your lot in life, but for the love of god find a way to be humble. Consider yourself lucky, enjoy your time in the sun, but no one is oppressing you by asking you to come to the office.
    • plastic-enjoyer7 hours ago
      Ressentiment is a deep-seated state of impotence and people like you aren't even worth a shred of pity.
      • appreciatorBus6 hours ago
        > Ressentiment: A chronic, festering state of mind. It is a lasting mental attitude where the suppressed emotions of envy and spite continually replay in the mind, leading to a general, cynical worldview.

        lol not even close. I have a positive outlook and think the world can be a better place. I just think that world will involve most people working together in workspaces and clocking in. There will always be some professions & situations where that's not the right call but I have no reason to believe SW dev will always be one of them.

    • antonvs6 hours ago
      > Your McDonald's fry cook has to come to work & clock in, so should you.

      Haha fuck you, no. That's your choice, don't put it on the rest of us.