HN user

troels

3,051 karma

I'm a hacker. Working mostly with web applications. I live in Copenhagen, Denmark.

http://troelskn.com

mail: troels@knak-nielsen.dk twitter: @troelskn linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/troelskn mastodon: @troelskn@mastodon.social

[ my public key: https://keybase.io/troelskn; my proof: https://keybase.io/troelskn/sigs/HxfbJZIc0caMOKSsSacc1IitAgRFOj3q9vH_gGJz3jc ]

Posts13
Comments1,409
View on HN

I wonder if that might backfire. I've been using Chromium for a while now, but whenever I need to see video, I copy paste the url over to Firefox. At some point, I'm going to be bothered enough to just switch permanently to Firefox.

This is the "common knowledge" thing to do, but I don't think it's always applicable. If you have an advantage in the market (e.g. are sought after), you can simply present a high figure and either they accept or you move on to the next. By playing the let-them-go-first game, you're implicitly signalling that you don't know where the ceiling is. On the other hand, if you say a high figure with confidence, they may accept it even if they weren't really prepared for that to begin with. Information asymmetry can also go the other way.

This is very accurate. I think it might be somewhat true for the majority of the workforce though. For specialised roles such as developers, management etc. I think the spread is bigger.

If I were to guess, I would say that the lower bound is higher, giving a skewed distribution with a big bloc of salaries around the same avg. range. Couple this with a reluctance for high earners to speak openly about it and you have the illusion of everybody getting roughly the same.

A very clear sign that wages are kept superficially low, is that as a contractor I can get away with asking 3x what I would as a perm developer. In theory I get less job security this way, but in reality there is so much demand that this is a non-issue.

Somewhat related. I wonder how often someone would plant false information that would cause a panic sell-off, then buy on the dip, before everyone realise that it was a lie? It's like the opposite of inside information. (Does this particular scheme have a name?)

* Edit:

A quick googling suggests this is fairly prevalent. Must be keeping the SEC busy.

It probably makes me rather pedantic, but if you write about programming style, I expect you to format your code consistently. It's either `if(record == null) {` or `if (result != null) {`. Make up your mind (I know which one I prefer, but at least be consistent)