For the record: that's not a "strong work ethic."
That's exploiting young unattached engineers and spinning it as "team culture."

Toxic 💀💀

That's not something to aspire to. That's not good management. If you're working sustained 70+ hrweeks, somebody is taking advantage of you.
We have fetishized the overworked engineer. It's toxic but so pervasive that Mr. Ng (and others) feel it's ok to advertise as a positive.
Having this as "culture" breeds a monoculture of unattached, young engineers. Not good for them & not good for your company long term.
It's not good for them because their first job burns them out and physically wears them down. This happened to me and many of my coworkers.
And I don't mean "I got tired, but then slept." I took almost a year off from working (privilege!) & still had wrist pain and lack of "go."
It wrecks you. Not just me; to everyone around me.
If your company is asking for sustained 70+ hrs they're hurting you & they know it.
It's bad for the company too. Breeds a monoculture, and deifies lack of experience. What veteran programmer wants to work 70+hrs sustained?
What person with a family can or would want to spend 70+ hrs most weeks on something they own so little of.
What person with outside responsibilities can make time for literally almost two jobs worth of work?
When you're requiring 70+ hrs most weeks, you're not saying "have a strong work ethic" you're saying "I don't want to pay for this work."
Your "culture" dooms your infrastructure, reliability, & product to underpaid, overworked, unseasoned engineers who you'll burn & discard.
To be very clear: it's not the employees. They're doing their best. It's the
CEO/C-team & the short-gain-at-long-expense tactic they chose.
If you can, if you have the choice, when you see this in a job rec. run the other direction. Fast.
They want to burn you up for their gain.
In the end, your employment in this culture is trading your time, your youth, and the wellbeing of your body & mind for their gain.
Beware.

More from All

You May Also Like

Funny, before the election I recall lefties muttering the caravan must have been a Trump setup because it made the open borders crowd look so bad. Why would the pro-migrant crowd engineer a crisis that played into Trump's hands? THIS is why. THESE are the "optics" they wanted.


This media manipulation effort was inspired by the success of the "kids in cages" freakout, a 100% Stalinist propaganda drive that required people to forget about Obama putting migrant children in cells. It worked, so now they want pics of Trump "gassing children on the border."

There's a heavy air of Pallywood around the whole thing as well. If the Palestinians can stage huge theatrical performances of victimhood with the willing cooperation of Western media, why shouldn't the migrant caravan organizers expect the same?

It's business as usual for Anarchy, Inc. - the worldwide shredding of national sovereignty to increase the power of transnational organizations and left-wing ideology. Many in the media are true believers. Others just cannot resist the narrative of "change" and "social justice."

The product sold by Anarchy, Inc. is victimhood. It always boils down to the same formula: once the existing order can be painted as oppressors and children as their victims, chaos wins and order loses. Look at the lefties shrieking in unison about "Trump gassing children" today.
Ivor Cummins has been wrong (or lying) almost entirely throughout this pandemic and got paid handsomly for it.

He has been wrong (or lying) so often that it will be nearly impossible for me to track every grift, lie, deceit, manipulation he has pulled. I will use...


... other sources who have been trying to shine on light on this grifter (as I have tried to do, time and again:


Example #1: "Still not seeing Sweden signal versus Denmark really"... There it was (Images attached).
19 to 80 is an over 300% difference.

Tweet: https://t.co/36FnYnsRT9


Example #2 - "Yes, I'm comparing the Noridcs / No, you cannot compare the Nordics."

I wonder why...

Tweets: https://t.co/XLfoX4rpck / https://t.co/vjE1ctLU5x


Example #3 - "I'm only looking at what makes the data fit in my favour" a.k.a moving the goalposts.

Tweets: https://t.co/vcDpTu3qyj / https://t.co/CA3N6hC2Lq