>Except paying the bills and achieving something are only weakly correlated concepts in many cases, especially when salaried.
This seems like an extremely short-sighted view. If you have a string of successful projects, your salary will go up over time (you may have to switch jobs a few times though).
>If you don't care about the particular ethics/concerns for humanity, what OP wants is definitely possible.
If someone has no concern for ethics or humanity, I want to avoid working with that person. I also want to make sure that they do not get into a position of power.
>A lot of it also comes down to incentives. What percentage of employees have any stake whatsoever in whether their own project succeeds or fails? Or even the company they are with?
So many projects/companies are essentially relying on individual altruism to choose to take action rather than not.
I agree here and I think over time there should be a shift towards making it harder to keep such a disproportionate amount of equity for being a founder. Of course they should get the most, but the balance doesn't seem optimal for the long term progress of our industry and would benefit from some regulatory limits.
> This seems like an extremely short-sighted view. If you have a string of successful projects, your salary will go up over time (you may have to switch jobs a few times though).
People like OP are happy on level though. They do not want a big raise and probably would prefer to not switch companies.
> If someone has no concern for ethics or humanity, I want to avoid working with that person. I also want to make sure that they do not get into a position of power.
I completely understand not hiring people like them.
> If you have a string of successful projects, your salary will go up over time (you may have to switch jobs a few times though).
Lot to unpack here. Switching jobs doesn't require successful projects, only self-marketing to make projects seem successful and important. You're basically suggesting we have a merit-based industry, when in reality it's just as much subject to social networking as any other.
This seems like an extremely short-sighted view. If you have a string of successful projects, your salary will go up over time (you may have to switch jobs a few times though).
>If you don't care about the particular ethics/concerns for humanity, what OP wants is definitely possible.
If someone has no concern for ethics or humanity, I want to avoid working with that person. I also want to make sure that they do not get into a position of power.
>A lot of it also comes down to incentives. What percentage of employees have any stake whatsoever in whether their own project succeeds or fails? Or even the company they are with?
So many projects/companies are essentially relying on individual altruism to choose to take action rather than not.
I agree here and I think over time there should be a shift towards making it harder to keep such a disproportionate amount of equity for being a founder. Of course they should get the most, but the balance doesn't seem optimal for the long term progress of our industry and would benefit from some regulatory limits.