I'm a developer because I want to develop software, and by working for someone else, I'm paying them (with my time) to deal with all the nonsense I don't want to do. Things like marketing, infrastructure, support, etc... I'm employing my employer to let me focus on exactly what I want to.
I'm pretty early in my career and I'm certainly open to the idea of working for myself. However, there are advantages to having a job and working a little part-time contracting on the side.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It was enacted following Enron and Worldcom to prevent corporate malfeasance. Sadly it gave a lot of auditors a lot of power which translated to 'controls' placed on the work environment. Some make sense (e.g. no read/write access to production for development). Others make no sense (e.g. no access to log files from production for developers troubleshooting issues). It really depends on the company and the audit process.
I tried to hack out my ideas for the last three years with zero development experience.
Eventually I hit a wall of ability, because I was working alone, completley self taught. I felt like my options were 1) work with other developers, or 2) back to school.
So last month I got a development job. I'm learning a ton everyday, but it's leaving me with almost no energy to pursue my own ideas. I hope to save some money this next year to kickstart my own projects.
I was in nearly the same position as you around this time last year. It was tough and exhausting for a while until I wasn't learning as much throughout the day. You'll get back to a point where you have the energy to come home at the end of the day and spend a few hours working on your own projects.
Hacking out your idea is more resistance than genius. I would say, 99% persistence.
I got my first job a few month ago doing programming, and I learn a lot. However, how I learn is mostly banging my head day after day. When I am at work, I have no choice but to bang my head against the code, trying to figure out why it is not working.
Some people have signed contracts that assign the copyright of anything they create to their employer, so starting a business on the side isn't possible.
Been there, done that. Being a developer is a small fraction of what you need in order to create a successful product. If you are the kind of person who can do it, you don't need to read posts like these.
I don't know about this guy, but it looks like he hasn't done it, and he has little idea of what lies ahead. Best of luck to him.
This is only true if you're 100% unwilling/unable to do anything except code.
This is not true of all "developers." Being able to code does not disqualify you from being an intelligent, versatile human being capable of all sorts of things. And, failing that, it certainly does not prevent you from taking a holistic look at your business and outsourcing the things you can't handle.
The funny thing you realize is how many designers can't design, how many salespeople can't sell, etc. By being committed and flexible, it's amazing the edge you can have, even if you have to pay other people sometimes.
Contrary to popular belief, the first time you code something, the computer does not shoot beams out to alter your DNA and devolve you into a developer sapiens/developer-o-saurus. What you choose to spend your time on and prioritize is up to you, and being able to code only makes you more capable, not less.
You could also be hiring a guy who does marketing to help you get more customers, give some other guy a sales commission for sending work your way, and so forth.
These things don't always require formal structures. You have more power as one who is self-employed rather than an employee.
The fact is there is nothing limiting this advice to developers. If you know how to do bookkeeping, for example, you can become self-employed and rent out your services to customers rather than having them hire an employee.
Depends. Being a developer means you can also iterate lots of different ideas before finding the one that works. In that case development is 80% of the time. With today's tools (social, advertising, job outsourcing) the rest of the work can become trivial. I am now a believer that developers can be entrepreneurs and try to motivate former colleagues to do the same. Remember that recent article from M. Andreesen about software eating the world[1]? It's true.
"If you are the kind of person who can do it, you don't need to read posts like these."
If you are the kind of person who can do it you don't even need to be a developer either. Entrepreneurs can hire developers. Even if you need some cash for that, it's not hard to find it.
You should really read patio11's comment on the Google 250K thread...individual developer productivity is indeed through the roof!
We would not actually mind working for a company but companies seem to be lowballing us heavily and also giving us shit work...Going and making our own thing can not only be infinitely satisfying but it can also make sense financially!
What I can achieve by myself is so much smaller than what I can help achieve as part of a team. I worked independently for 4 years in electrical engineering and now that I'm with a team of 10 other engineers the quality, variety, and magnitude of the projects I am working on has increased 20x. Working independently all that time had a huge opportunity cost but did afford a great lifestyle.
I generally take this attitude - work for yourself - sure gentle plug - that was part of the motivation behind http://indieconf.com ;)
BUT... I think we see a large amount of survivorship bias in the tech porn we read daily.
-----
Think about the biggest websites you visit or use on a regular basis: Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Foursquare, or even Google for that matter -- all of them were created by developers who created something from little more than an idea in their head. Was it easy for them? Heck no. But it could only have been done in today's day and age. So why in the world are you sitting there day after day working for someone else?
-----
Wow... so because some people could do it, you can too? Yeah... well... call me negative, but I don't suspect we're going to see another Google or Facebook or Apple or Microsoft any time soon, and it's not because people don't try, or it's not hard.
In fact, I'm a bit dismayed by many entrepreneurs I find that "shoot for the stars", thinking that they'll be the next Gates or Jobs or Zuck, encouraged by these sorts of articles. Many of the success stories we look at today weren't started by someone who had the goal of conquering the world - they set out to solve a problem for themselves (I'm thinking more especially of the web-based services, not so much the hardware ones).
Working on lifestyle businesses - contracting yourself out on a project basis - yeah, that's more achievable for more people. This may lead to the ability to earn more, save up a runway, and work on product - sure. But... this "swing for the fences" mentality seems like it may be causing problems for people who follow the party line, but truly aren't ready/capable to execute.
Self taught programmer learning the ropes. Just because your title qualifies you as a 'developer' doesn't mean you shouldn't have a realistic understanding of your own abilities.
2. My team is great
I have the enviable position of working for some really talented, extremely successful entrepreneurs. There is so much I (or anyone) could learn here, that giving that up would be stupid.
3. I'm doing exactly what I want to do.
The problems we are working on (biologically inspired machine intelligence) are hard, fascinating, revolutionary, and just plain cool. Every time I think of starting something else I end up with the conclusion that my ideal startup exists and someone just happened to start it before I did. Fine with me!
Any one of these is sufficient, together they make up few really good reasons to stay.
thirdcoastworkers.coop is a Texas based group that might be helpful.
http://usworker.coop/front is also good. Mondragon is cool; another group with the same name operates in Quebec. Worker coops can be flat structures or simply be companies where the board is elected. Either way, the members control profits and mission.
Where corporations are necessary, some sort of worker cooperative is the way to go. It prevents the division between labor and capital from developing and so it empowers workers. Anything that empowers workers is likely to improve productivity too.
I believe start up advice is not necessarily 'one size fits all', especially for someone relatively inexperienced and which is something I expected from the article. I've read way too many "just do it" articles.
This is advice I've been giving myself and living before I attempt to jump in:
1. Get really good at your craft, in this case, programming. You don't want to spend time learning how you need to configure your server when you'd rather prepare for your meeting with that client.And importantly, you have something to fall back on if it doesn't work out.
2. Get enough people to take you seriously. I mean really, work on open source, maintain a blog, attend hackathons etc. Build a decent enough profile that another developer would recommend to someone.
3. If possible, get paid while you pick up these and many other vital skills. You'll learn a lot on the job and clear your bills. Of course, make sure you're sincere enough to focus on 1 and 2.
Young and relatively inexperienced programmer here. Been working for someone else since about a year now (soon after graduating) and plan to continue to do so for at least another year. I've been living this advice for a while now and I feel I'm coming along ok. Would love to hear thoughts from much more experienced programmers/entrepreneurs.
Guy doesn't mention Internet Marketing at all. If you are not on Google, you don't exist. That's why most coders / projects fail - because nobody / not enough people know about them. This is because event the coders that grasp internet marketing find it deplorable to use spamming techniques to compete with search engine spammers.
I bet for a lot of people, you don't have to look much further than the current #1 story on HN for the answer: Programmers Salaries at Google $250k (and up)
Working on a side project for yourself is easy and as he says, it's possible to find the time.
However, having my own founded and co-founded companies for the last 20 years, I must say unless you have enough money to really work on what you want, you're always working for someone else. As a consultant, you're always working for clients and if business isn't too bad, you can at some point be picky and chose your clients. But, your still working for someone else.
Then, as a pure startup that gets funded, you are working for your investors. Usually, you try to have the best fit and keep enough ownership to make your own decisions, but you're still accountable, which is ok with me. It's sometimes good to have someone to check a bit over your decisions.
But, unless your are extremely fortunate, you are still usually working for someone else. Still, you gain more autonomy and flexibility as opposed to purely being employed.
This said, working for myself works for me and I would never go back to being employed by someone else.
Just know that you'll still be accountable to someone else. The difference is if you screw up, you cannot blame the company. You can only blame yourself. If this happens, it will be a good learning experience.
The difference is that as a self-employed consultant, you can fire bosses (we call them customers) that cause you too much trouble. It's a question of balance of power, and one should not underestimate that difference.
Similarly with startups and investors. If you have the ability to walk away and find another job, that gives you power. This is a big reason CEO's make obscene amounts of money in this country while floor workers don't.
I agree. As long as you can afford to. But even when you think you can't afford to, you're probably better off firing the client that gives you to much trouble.
As for having a startup with investors, if the fun isn't there anymore you always have the option of walking away.
Walking away isn't for everyone, though. Getting to the point where it's an option in your arsenal, having the confidence and experience of knowing you'll find something else to make a living by yourself is what separate entrepreneurs and employees.
"Walking away isn't for everyone, though. Getting to the point where it's an option in your arsenal, having the confidence and experience of knowing you'll find something else to make a living by yourself is what separate entrepreneurs and employees."
And this is exactly why telling people that this is not for everyone is harmful to everyone. If all the applicants for a job can walk away and find something else, the company has to be far better at keeping them and the companies which add too much BS end up dying rather quickly.
Try an experiment, grab a piece of paper and write out the top ten programmers that first come to your mind. Now next to their names write out which company they work for.
There was a time when I was tossing around the idea of starting my own business, something just wasn't clicking for me. Then I did this experiment, and I realized that most the programmers who inspired me to be a programmer worked for someone else (with pg being a major exception). I thought "It can't just be because they didn't have the courage to start there own company". And then I realized what was making me uncomfortable with starting my own business.
I enjoy the myopia I can have being paid to work reasonable hours as a developer. I have other passions in life, but I love that I can spend the vast majority of my spare time studying code, cs, math etc without worrying about business, marketing etc. Design I like (I'm not as passionate about it), but business I really just don't get excited about.
As has been discussed over and over on hn, true expertise is only going to be achieved by putting lots of time into something. For me personally, I can't help that thing be programming and CS, maybe one day that will change (it honestly wouldn't surprise me). Now if you do that same experiment with the top 10 wealthiest people you respect, you will probably come up with a bunch of entrepreneurs. The question really only comes does to which top 10 is the one you strive to be in.
Very true, but there's no need to assign developers as "inspiring experts" and entrepreneurs as "wealthy people."
10/10 of the wealthiest people are not successful because they wanted to be rich, they're successful because they enjoy business and entrepreneurship. These people aren't any different than you; they just have different interests.
It ultimately comes down to your personal interests. Like business? Be an entrepreneur. Like programming and computer science? Be a developer. The only thing not to be is in it only for the money.
You're very right, I didn't mean to imply such a dichotomy. I was thinking more along the lines off come up with your personal top 10 at X, where X can be even as simple as people who inspire/influenced you, and look for patterns.
This would include people who are inspired by autonomy and self-determination (read: congenitally unable to work for someone else) - the "E-Myth" claims not working for someone else is the main reason people start a business.
I agree completely about money. We all want money but the system is rigged and wealth is something most of us won't get. I'm still very young but I believe it's enough to have enough money to live comfortably, get married, raise some kids, and all that first and foremost. I aspire to be really wealthy but I'm not deluding myself into thinking this is an achievement that anyone can get. It feels like the best we can do is strive for wealth with a healthy respect and understanding of the odds of achieving it and being satisfied with regular step-wise progress over large leaps from poor house to rich.
I've also found that doing anything for the money is a sure path to unhappiness regardless of whether you get it or not. I strongly believe that if you do what youre passionate about the money will come. It won't come magically but it's kind of like that book, "The Secret" except with a realistic attitude because wishful thinking and envisioning where you want to be isn't enough, actions trump thoughts any day.
Big props to you. I mean it. Seriously 100% genuine. Because these days most people don't think the way you do. You are a rare breed.
I think the biggest winner in our society are those who can ignore money (to some degree) and enjoy their life to the fullest by doing things that matters for themselves and other people.
It is a very extremely hard mindset to achieve. Harder than working hard because that mindset requires faith that things will be okay if one can enjoy life and accept things with positive attitude regardless the situation.
I think that the ideal position for anyone would be to be able to quit their jobs, still be able to live a healthy life without being forced to work again.
Of course, there´s each one of us definition of "healthy life". For some this must include a yatch or a huge house. For some others, being with friends and being able to fullfill their basic needs is enough.
Me, I'd go for something in between. I don´t need a yatch, but I need nature. I don´t need an iPhone, but I need the Internet.
I have the opposite problem. I'm an entrepreneur first, and a developer fifth ;) But getting dev's to see their own potential as a partner is like pulling teeth.
That's because developers hear a TON of ideas, and it's very difficult to get excited about anything when you get pitched so much. Sure, your idea sounds amazing, groundbreaking and world-changing to you, but to us? We've heard it all, a hundred times before.
I run a software development company, and whenever someone offers me to work for %, in most cases the answer is an automatic "no". In order to even consider doing something like that, we'd have to put in a ton of research into .. well, YOU mostly.
Whether your idea is good enough or not is secondary. The most important thing is whether you are qualified enough to take this business to the stars if we put in work for equity, so that equity becomes worth our time. And we, as developers, are not qualified for that work. We know code, we don't know researching potential investment decisions - that's angels' and VC's job.
I don't know your story, but usually, when someone does a similar complaint, that's my answer to them.
Of course taking on a business partner is almost exactly like getting married without the sex. So it really pays to get to know potential business partners first.
Some people just aren't interested in running a business, which is fine. However, I see things in a different light. I love developing web software. It's been a passion of mine since I was 13.
I've been working as a developer for the past 10 years and I've come to a point where I'm tired of working for other people. Your path is in their hands and many times, you will be forced down a path you don't want to take. I've seen many companies go down the toilet because of decisions that were beyond my control. It has made me despise my passion.
I would rather toil my life away on something that will make me rich rather than someone else.
This would be true, if not for co-founders. There are people who enjoy writing code, and there are people who enjoy selling and marketing. The marriage of the two can be ideal. Example: Id Software. ( Please add more ).
I work for someone else because today, my expertise is in software development, not in
* sales & marketing
* graphic design
* finance
* business law
All of the above can be obtained and I plan to obtain enough expertise in those over time so that I could start my own software shop. But today, I assess my risk of total failure to be very high, with no soft landing.
You can also ask lawyers legal questions, pay graphic designers where you need to, and hire marketing firms......
The finance you'd need to learn enough to do, but you could hire a bookkeeper for day to day stuff, and learn enough to make sure you aren't being robbed.
I can't believe that the top comments in a thread on hacker news boil down to: most developers should probably just stick to working 40 hours a week, because most developers don't have the other skills required to run a company.
Yes it's true running a business takes more than just tech skills, and not every developer is capable of running a multi million dollar company.
However, I think that most developers are capable of running a successful small business.
Most people can't run facebook, but most intelligent people can run a small web business.
You may not want to run your own business, but that doesn't mean you don't have the ability.
I tried starting a business with a few friends. We made a pretty good go of it for a year or so. We didn't get rich, but we broke even compared to having regular jobs, which ain't bad. But, even though I wasn't really one of the business people in the group, I still had to be aware of and keep up to date with a whole lot of "running the business"/"schmoozing customers" crap that I had absolutely no interest in. I don't care. It's not interesting, or rewarding, or fun. I just want to build stuff. I'm not that bothered who decides what I'm building, so long as it's not an obviously complete waste of time.
So I work for someone else. It's a small company, and I'm a big cog in it, but I don't have to worry about any of the crap I don't want to worry about. I just build stuff that our clients want.
Yeah, I'm not raking in mad coin. Big fscking deal.
I wrote and submitted this article to HN about a year ago. I've since moved it from a self-hosted Wordpress site to Posterous, which is probably why the dupe-checker didn't catch it (slightly different URL). A lot has happened since then. I'm still working toward my goal of doing my own thing (ironically, still working for someone else myself). When you're trying to create and market a bootstrapped business, its pretty easy to get distracted unless you have the ability to go full-time.
When I wrote the article, it was essentially me expressing my thoughts about how anyone if they want to (because not everyone does) CAN build something and start their own business, even without substantial capital. The barrier to entry is so low (comparatively speaking) that if you want to go out on your own as a developer, it is entirely possible. The post was meant to be encouragement to those who are interested, not sensational (although I did make some generalizations) :)
I actually built the original thing I discussed in the article (a service to manage Boy Scouts), and it got some great reviews and initial interest, but then the Boy Scouts wanted me to pay huge fees to license the term "Boy Scout" or use anything even resembling any of their trademarks. I decided to let that go and build something that does not piggyback on any other organization. That's what I'm working on now.
A year "lost" is a long time, but I haven't given up. I haven't lost anything other than time, since I was bootstrapping it and building it on my own time in the evenings. I won't be happy until I am doing my own thing. I'll post a follow-up with what I've learned and what has happened over the past year to anyone who is interested.
Seriously? Why don't you make the system generic enough (a service to manage "youth organizations") while still marketing it to Boy Scouts chapters? I'm sure there's more to it, but I can't imagine how you could have a system that is sellable to a client that somehow ceases to be sellable when you remove literal mentions of the client's trademarks.
I suppose I could have re-branded it and generalized it a bit. I decided to move on partially because I was so turned off by the attitude of the Boy Scouts organization at the corporate level. At a local level, they all rock (I'm an Eagle Scout myself), but at the top corporate level, its a different story.
Perhaps I gave up too soon, but I've moved on. I'm well into my new project, which is certainly not sexy, but I'm excited about it.
Great article and don't give up. One thing you missed was that you could do contract work for part of the year and then work the rest of the year on your idea. In the UK (where I am) contract rates are two or three times permanent rates so with a one year contract you can spend nearly all of the following year on your idea.
So you actually wrote the article at the same time you started your first side project, and expect people to follow your @#$% goldmine example?
As any software developer knows, projects fail. And 90% of the time they do not fail from technical reasons, as you found out (the hard way). Any developer worth his salt can make a project work from the technical point of view, but only few have a great idea that they can actually market. It's not the programming that matters, it's what you sell with that program. And you have to know how and what to sell more than you know how to program.
I agree with the article in principal. It's goal is to inspire people to work on their projects and stop making up excuses. I think it does a pretty good job of that. As long as you're a developer, you can pretty much build whatever you want with little to no funds. All you need is time. I have done this myself and its making me a few thousand per month. (check my submissions if interested, I'm not going to spam)
What I've learned is that not everyone is up for the uphill battle that they will face.
I think everyone should at least try to start their own little project. Whether they invest a weekend in it, or an entire summer. There is nothing quite like minimizing bullshit and stupid decisions while having complete control.
Another thing I've learned is that most people in start-ups that make the decisions don't know what they are doing. They just piss away money and people's time.
People may never know whats a good or bad decision unless you've tried your own start-up.
This guy finds 20 hours week. This means he is spending 60 hours a week working. Its not healthy.
He names 5 tech companies. How many developers are there in the world? So what hundreds of thousands of developers have the potential to make a Google? I think not.
In reality you will probably be happier sticking to employment and working on and launching a side project as and when inspiration strikes. Burning 20 hours a week of your free time will likely lead to - in this guys case - divorce and for other people burnout.
"In reality you will probably be happier sticking to employment and working on and launching a side project as and when inspiration strikes. Burning 20 hours a week of your free time will likely lead to - in this guys case - divorce and for other people burnout."
That will work until your employer makes the wrong business decision and the company goes out of business or there are budget cuts and you get laid off.
Oh yeah, and if you work for any technology company and have a side project, you better check any contract you signed. Most say that anything you work in your off time is company property.
"That will work until your employer makes the wrong business decision and the company goes out of business or there are budget cuts and you get laid off."
That doesn't matter. This is no different from being self employed and making bad decisions yourself.
When you are employed you typically know if you job is safe enough as you have a fair idea of how the company is doing and have a feeling about how important you are to the company.
If you know you are dispensable and your company just lost a big contract you would worry. Otherwise you wouldn't. Self employment is very similar.
Regarding contracts, this is why it is very important to read your contract before signing. I have turned down a number of jobs due to unrealistic non-compete agreements and the potential employer owning discoveries I make in my own time.
"That doesn't matter. This is no different from being self employed and making bad decisions yourself."
The difference is that you have control over your own path. There were many bad decisions at my previous job that I warned my managers and bosses against. They wouldn't listen to me and the company ended up losing money or the idea was a complete failure. I could see the company on a path of failure and the only thing I had the power to do was ride it out. Every good idea was squashed.
"When you are employed you typically know if you job is safe enough as you have a fair idea of how the company is doing and have a feeling about how important you are to the company."
This is sometimes true and it sometimes isn't. I've been in the dark about how well the company is actually doing. It happened at my last job: They kept assuring us that the company was still profitable and everything was fine. Two weeks later, I got laid off.
In the end, it was actually positive, because I used it as an opportunity to start my own company. I was always on the treadmill of a 9-5 and it was tough to really get anywhere.
"Regarding contracts, this is why it is very important to read your contract before signing. I have turned down a number of jobs due to unrealistic non-compete agreements and the potential employer owning discoveries I make in my own time."
Very true. However, most of the big tech companies require this (Microsoft, Google, Facebook).
I disagree. Most small business owners in fact work at least 60 hrs/wk.
There's a tremendous difference between work that is well integrated with family life (as self-employment can be) and work that's away from everyone else. Indeed if he is lucky he'd have his spouse helping with business administration.....
I think the chances are that if you are working 60hrs a week you are doing it wrong.
Working that amount of time for a month to power through a launch or get something done is fine.
However if you are working that amount of time week in, week out and have a family which you actually want to spend time with then it doesn't really matter where you work. You could work in your families living room. You would still be turned off to them for 8-12 hours a day.
If your single, this may be the life for you. If you work with your partner it may doable at times.
Realistically though, most people will not need to put in this much time. If they are there are a number of things they can do to reduce this time. You really do not need to work yourself into the ground to make a good living.
The first thing is "defining work." When you work for someone else, a lot of things you do on personal time are entirely separate from work. When you work for yourself, there are opportunities for more integration.
Maybe that time blogging ends up being an extra way you spend promoting your business? Maybe that time spent on facebook ends up at least in part being marketing time? Certainly that time spent reading industry magazines is work time.
If your spouse is helping with the financial management, you have time that you'd talk about household budgets and stuff that will often bleed over into impromptu family business meetings.
And so forth.
I don't think you can entirely compare 40 hrs in a cube with 60 hrs for yourself. They are in fact two entirely different things.
For example, I generally try to spend about 20 hrs per week in heavy engineering and development, no more (usually in 4 hr chunks if possible). Maybe 10-15 hrs per week doing light development and tech support in small doses scattered throughout the rest of the day.
On my afternoon breaks I play with the kids. Sure I probably work 60 hrs/wk but I can do a lot of it when it is most convenient for everyone else, and so ensure that it isn't as you describe.
117 comments
[ 334 ms ] story [ 544 ms ] threadI'm pretty early in my career and I'm certainly open to the idea of working for myself. However, there are advantages to having a job and working a little part-time contracting on the side.
Eventually I hit a wall of ability, because I was working alone, completley self taught. I felt like my options were 1) work with other developers, or 2) back to school.
So last month I got a development job. I'm learning a ton everyday, but it's leaving me with almost no energy to pursue my own ideas. I hope to save some money this next year to kickstart my own projects.
I got my first job a few month ago doing programming, and I learn a lot. However, how I learn is mostly banging my head day after day. When I am at work, I have no choice but to bang my head against the code, trying to figure out why it is not working.
http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422/if-im-working-...
I don't know about this guy, but it looks like he hasn't done it, and he has little idea of what lies ahead. Best of luck to him.
This article is based a lot on sheer effort and force-of-will in order to succeed. So is this:
http://www.despair.com/incompetence.html
I agree with the author's overall message of "just try it", but recognize what that is and how far it gets you. Turns out, generally not very far.
Not to pick on the author, as he does sound a bit bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, but anyone reading this who doesn't find it naive is, well, naive.
This is not true of all "developers." Being able to code does not disqualify you from being an intelligent, versatile human being capable of all sorts of things. And, failing that, it certainly does not prevent you from taking a holistic look at your business and outsourcing the things you can't handle.
The funny thing you realize is how many designers can't design, how many salespeople can't sell, etc. By being committed and flexible, it's amazing the edge you can have, even if you have to pay other people sometimes.
Contrary to popular belief, the first time you code something, the computer does not shoot beams out to alter your DNA and devolve you into a developer sapiens/developer-o-saurus. What you choose to spend your time on and prioritize is up to you, and being able to code only makes you more capable, not less.
What is... a company!
What'd I win?
You could also be hiring a guy who does marketing to help you get more customers, give some other guy a sales commission for sending work your way, and so forth.
These things don't always require formal structures. You have more power as one who is self-employed rather than an employee.
The fact is there is nothing limiting this advice to developers. If you know how to do bookkeeping, for example, you can become self-employed and rent out your services to customers rather than having them hire an employee.
On the contrary, most people I know assume competency in one discipline automatically grants them competency in others.
[1] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405311190348090457651...
If you are the kind of person who can do it you don't even need to be a developer either. Entrepreneurs can hire developers. Even if you need some cash for that, it's not hard to find it.
So I agree the blog post is quite useless.
You should really read patio11's comment on the Google 250K thread...individual developer productivity is indeed through the roof!
We would not actually mind working for a company but companies seem to be lowballing us heavily and also giving us shit work...Going and making our own thing can not only be infinitely satisfying but it can also make sense financially!
BUT... I think we see a large amount of survivorship bias in the tech porn we read daily.
-----
Think about the biggest websites you visit or use on a regular basis: Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Foursquare, or even Google for that matter -- all of them were created by developers who created something from little more than an idea in their head. Was it easy for them? Heck no. But it could only have been done in today's day and age. So why in the world are you sitting there day after day working for someone else?
-----
Wow... so because some people could do it, you can too? Yeah... well... call me negative, but I don't suspect we're going to see another Google or Facebook or Apple or Microsoft any time soon, and it's not because people don't try, or it's not hard.
In fact, I'm a bit dismayed by many entrepreneurs I find that "shoot for the stars", thinking that they'll be the next Gates or Jobs or Zuck, encouraged by these sorts of articles. Many of the success stories we look at today weren't started by someone who had the goal of conquering the world - they set out to solve a problem for themselves (I'm thinking more especially of the web-based services, not so much the hardware ones).
Working on lifestyle businesses - contracting yourself out on a project basis - yeah, that's more achievable for more people. This may lead to the ability to earn more, save up a runway, and work on product - sure. But... this "swing for the fences" mentality seems like it may be causing problems for people who follow the party line, but truly aren't ready/capable to execute.
Self taught programmer learning the ropes. Just because your title qualifies you as a 'developer' doesn't mean you shouldn't have a realistic understanding of your own abilities.
2. My team is great
I have the enviable position of working for some really talented, extremely successful entrepreneurs. There is so much I (or anyone) could learn here, that giving that up would be stupid.
3. I'm doing exactly what I want to do.
The problems we are working on (biologically inspired machine intelligence) are hard, fascinating, revolutionary, and just plain cool. Every time I think of starting something else I end up with the conclusion that my ideal startup exists and someone just happened to start it before I did. Fine with me!
Any one of these is sufficient, together they make up few really good reasons to stay.
Where would you recommend looking for help and information on doing this in the US?
http://usworker.coop/front is also good. Mondragon is cool; another group with the same name operates in Quebec. Worker coops can be flat structures or simply be companies where the board is elected. Either way, the members control profits and mission.
I've been thinking for a while now that I would be able to find much more work by teaming up with some web/frontend devs.
This is advice I've been giving myself and living before I attempt to jump in:
1. Get really good at your craft, in this case, programming. You don't want to spend time learning how you need to configure your server when you'd rather prepare for your meeting with that client.And importantly, you have something to fall back on if it doesn't work out.
2. Get enough people to take you seriously. I mean really, work on open source, maintain a blog, attend hackathons etc. Build a decent enough profile that another developer would recommend to someone.
3. If possible, get paid while you pick up these and many other vital skills. You'll learn a lot on the job and clear your bills. Of course, make sure you're sincere enough to focus on 1 and 2.
Young and relatively inexperienced programmer here. Been working for someone else since about a year now (soon after graduating) and plan to continue to do so for at least another year. I've been living this advice for a while now and I feel I'm coming along ok. Would love to hear thoughts from much more experienced programmers/entrepreneurs.
OK, just kidding. This post is a year old. Naive? Sure. Doesn't mean the sentiments aren't correct. I wonder how he's doing one year on.
The "just do it" theme is good to hear once in a while for those of us who have shelved their startup dream temporarily.
However, having my own founded and co-founded companies for the last 20 years, I must say unless you have enough money to really work on what you want, you're always working for someone else. As a consultant, you're always working for clients and if business isn't too bad, you can at some point be picky and chose your clients. But, your still working for someone else.
Then, as a pure startup that gets funded, you are working for your investors. Usually, you try to have the best fit and keep enough ownership to make your own decisions, but you're still accountable, which is ok with me. It's sometimes good to have someone to check a bit over your decisions.
But, unless your are extremely fortunate, you are still usually working for someone else. Still, you gain more autonomy and flexibility as opposed to purely being employed.
This said, working for myself works for me and I would never go back to being employed by someone else.
Just know that you'll still be accountable to someone else. The difference is if you screw up, you cannot blame the company. You can only blame yourself. If this happens, it will be a good learning experience.
Similarly with startups and investors. If you have the ability to walk away and find another job, that gives you power. This is a big reason CEO's make obscene amounts of money in this country while floor workers don't.
As for having a startup with investors, if the fun isn't there anymore you always have the option of walking away.
Walking away isn't for everyone, though. Getting to the point where it's an option in your arsenal, having the confidence and experience of knowing you'll find something else to make a living by yourself is what separate entrepreneurs and employees.
And this is exactly why telling people that this is not for everyone is harmful to everyone. If all the applicants for a job can walk away and find something else, the company has to be far better at keeping them and the companies which add too much BS end up dying rather quickly.
There was a time when I was tossing around the idea of starting my own business, something just wasn't clicking for me. Then I did this experiment, and I realized that most the programmers who inspired me to be a programmer worked for someone else (with pg being a major exception). I thought "It can't just be because they didn't have the courage to start there own company". And then I realized what was making me uncomfortable with starting my own business.
I enjoy the myopia I can have being paid to work reasonable hours as a developer. I have other passions in life, but I love that I can spend the vast majority of my spare time studying code, cs, math etc without worrying about business, marketing etc. Design I like (I'm not as passionate about it), but business I really just don't get excited about.
As has been discussed over and over on hn, true expertise is only going to be achieved by putting lots of time into something. For me personally, I can't help that thing be programming and CS, maybe one day that will change (it honestly wouldn't surprise me). Now if you do that same experiment with the top 10 wealthiest people you respect, you will probably come up with a bunch of entrepreneurs. The question really only comes does to which top 10 is the one you strive to be in.
10/10 of the wealthiest people are not successful because they wanted to be rich, they're successful because they enjoy business and entrepreneurship. These people aren't any different than you; they just have different interests.
It ultimately comes down to your personal interests. Like business? Be an entrepreneur. Like programming and computer science? Be a developer. The only thing not to be is in it only for the money.
This would include people who are inspired by autonomy and self-determination (read: congenitally unable to work for someone else) - the "E-Myth" claims not working for someone else is the main reason people start a business.
I've also found that doing anything for the money is a sure path to unhappiness regardless of whether you get it or not. I strongly believe that if you do what youre passionate about the money will come. It won't come magically but it's kind of like that book, "The Secret" except with a realistic attitude because wishful thinking and envisioning where you want to be isn't enough, actions trump thoughts any day.
I think the biggest winner in our society are those who can ignore money (to some degree) and enjoy their life to the fullest by doing things that matters for themselves and other people.
It is a very extremely hard mindset to achieve. Harder than working hard because that mindset requires faith that things will be okay if one can enjoy life and accept things with positive attitude regardless the situation.
Of course, there´s each one of us definition of "healthy life". For some this must include a yatch or a huge house. For some others, being with friends and being able to fullfill their basic needs is enough.
Me, I'd go for something in between. I don´t need a yatch, but I need nature. I don´t need an iPhone, but I need the Internet.
Neither do I. But, I'm willing to put up with it if other alternatives piss me off real bad.
I run a software development company, and whenever someone offers me to work for %, in most cases the answer is an automatic "no". In order to even consider doing something like that, we'd have to put in a ton of research into .. well, YOU mostly.
Whether your idea is good enough or not is secondary. The most important thing is whether you are qualified enough to take this business to the stars if we put in work for equity, so that equity becomes worth our time. And we, as developers, are not qualified for that work. We know code, we don't know researching potential investment decisions - that's angels' and VC's job.
I don't know your story, but usually, when someone does a similar complaint, that's my answer to them.
I've been working as a developer for the past 10 years and I've come to a point where I'm tired of working for other people. Your path is in their hands and many times, you will be forced down a path you don't want to take. I've seen many companies go down the toilet because of decisions that were beyond my control. It has made me despise my passion.
I would rather toil my life away on something that will make me rich rather than someone else.
* sales & marketing
* graphic design
* finance
* business law
All of the above can be obtained and I plan to obtain enough expertise in those over time so that I could start my own software shop. But today, I assess my risk of total failure to be very high, with no soft landing.
The finance you'd need to learn enough to do, but you could hire a bookkeeper for day to day stuff, and learn enough to make sure you aren't being robbed.
Yes it's true running a business takes more than just tech skills, and not every developer is capable of running a multi million dollar company.
However, I think that most developers are capable of running a successful small business.
Most people can't run facebook, but most intelligent people can run a small web business.
You may not want to run your own business, but that doesn't mean you don't have the ability.
So I work for someone else. It's a small company, and I'm a big cog in it, but I don't have to worry about any of the crap I don't want to worry about. I just build stuff that our clients want.
Yeah, I'm not raking in mad coin. Big fscking deal.
When I wrote the article, it was essentially me expressing my thoughts about how anyone if they want to (because not everyone does) CAN build something and start their own business, even without substantial capital. The barrier to entry is so low (comparatively speaking) that if you want to go out on your own as a developer, it is entirely possible. The post was meant to be encouragement to those who are interested, not sensational (although I did make some generalizations) :)
I actually built the original thing I discussed in the article (a service to manage Boy Scouts), and it got some great reviews and initial interest, but then the Boy Scouts wanted me to pay huge fees to license the term "Boy Scout" or use anything even resembling any of their trademarks. I decided to let that go and build something that does not piggyback on any other organization. That's what I'm working on now.
A year "lost" is a long time, but I haven't given up. I haven't lost anything other than time, since I was bootstrapping it and building it on my own time in the evenings. I won't be happy until I am doing my own thing. I'll post a follow-up with what I've learned and what has happened over the past year to anyone who is interested.
Perhaps I gave up too soon, but I've moved on. I'm well into my new project, which is certainly not sexy, but I'm excited about it.
As any software developer knows, projects fail. And 90% of the time they do not fail from technical reasons, as you found out (the hard way). Any developer worth his salt can make a project work from the technical point of view, but only few have a great idea that they can actually market. It's not the programming that matters, it's what you sell with that program. And you have to know how and what to sell more than you know how to program.
What I've learned is that not everyone is up for the uphill battle that they will face.
I think everyone should at least try to start their own little project. Whether they invest a weekend in it, or an entire summer. There is nothing quite like minimizing bullshit and stupid decisions while having complete control.
Another thing I've learned is that most people in start-ups that make the decisions don't know what they are doing. They just piss away money and people's time.
People may never know whats a good or bad decision unless you've tried your own start-up.
He names 5 tech companies. How many developers are there in the world? So what hundreds of thousands of developers have the potential to make a Google? I think not.
In reality you will probably be happier sticking to employment and working on and launching a side project as and when inspiration strikes. Burning 20 hours a week of your free time will likely lead to - in this guys case - divorce and for other people burnout.
That will work until your employer makes the wrong business decision and the company goes out of business or there are budget cuts and you get laid off.
Oh yeah, and if you work for any technology company and have a side project, you better check any contract you signed. Most say that anything you work in your off time is company property.
That doesn't matter. This is no different from being self employed and making bad decisions yourself.
When you are employed you typically know if you job is safe enough as you have a fair idea of how the company is doing and have a feeling about how important you are to the company.
If you know you are dispensable and your company just lost a big contract you would worry. Otherwise you wouldn't. Self employment is very similar.
Regarding contracts, this is why it is very important to read your contract before signing. I have turned down a number of jobs due to unrealistic non-compete agreements and the potential employer owning discoveries I make in my own time.
The difference is that you have control over your own path. There were many bad decisions at my previous job that I warned my managers and bosses against. They wouldn't listen to me and the company ended up losing money or the idea was a complete failure. I could see the company on a path of failure and the only thing I had the power to do was ride it out. Every good idea was squashed.
"When you are employed you typically know if you job is safe enough as you have a fair idea of how the company is doing and have a feeling about how important you are to the company."
This is sometimes true and it sometimes isn't. I've been in the dark about how well the company is actually doing. It happened at my last job: They kept assuring us that the company was still profitable and everything was fine. Two weeks later, I got laid off.
In the end, it was actually positive, because I used it as an opportunity to start my own company. I was always on the treadmill of a 9-5 and it was tough to really get anywhere.
"Regarding contracts, this is why it is very important to read your contract before signing. I have turned down a number of jobs due to unrealistic non-compete agreements and the potential employer owning discoveries I make in my own time."
Very true. However, most of the big tech companies require this (Microsoft, Google, Facebook).
There's a tremendous difference between work that is well integrated with family life (as self-employment can be) and work that's away from everyone else. Indeed if he is lucky he'd have his spouse helping with business administration.....
Working that amount of time for a month to power through a launch or get something done is fine.
However if you are working that amount of time week in, week out and have a family which you actually want to spend time with then it doesn't really matter where you work. You could work in your families living room. You would still be turned off to them for 8-12 hours a day.
If your single, this may be the life for you. If you work with your partner it may doable at times.
Realistically though, most people will not need to put in this much time. If they are there are a number of things they can do to reduce this time. You really do not need to work yourself into the ground to make a good living.
The first thing is "defining work." When you work for someone else, a lot of things you do on personal time are entirely separate from work. When you work for yourself, there are opportunities for more integration.
Maybe that time blogging ends up being an extra way you spend promoting your business? Maybe that time spent on facebook ends up at least in part being marketing time? Certainly that time spent reading industry magazines is work time.
If your spouse is helping with the financial management, you have time that you'd talk about household budgets and stuff that will often bleed over into impromptu family business meetings.
And so forth.
I don't think you can entirely compare 40 hrs in a cube with 60 hrs for yourself. They are in fact two entirely different things.
For example, I generally try to spend about 20 hrs per week in heavy engineering and development, no more (usually in 4 hr chunks if possible). Maybe 10-15 hrs per week doing light development and tech support in small doses scattered throughout the rest of the day.
On my afternoon breaks I play with the kids. Sure I probably work 60 hrs/wk but I can do a lot of it when it is most convenient for everyone else, and so ensure that it isn't as you describe.