> Force startups to aspire to create an actual product rather
I'm getting on to 10 years in the software industry as an engineer at the moment and in my view this is one of its most disappointing and frustrating aspects.
The whole software start-up scene just feels saturated with FIRE-obsessed individuals who prefer just about anything (money, vacation, travel, fame, ...) over company, product, real building, craftsmanship, etc.
I legitimately hear phrases like "5th time's the charm for an exit and payout!" way too often. It frequently just exacerbates the consolidation of technology, knowledge, wealth, and often hurts innovation, let alone can result in the solid team(s) of engineers left out to dry (although some can be also gunning for the payout in the end too).
In my view, there are just too many sell-outs pawning off solid products and teams to the highest bidder. I wish it wasn't that way.
I taught myself to code in high school, and I like what I work on (robotics); it used to be a weekend hobby in college before it became my real job. I also like Michelin star dinners, travelling, live music, skiing, etc.
Expecting people in our industry to prefer "company, product, real building, craftsmanship" over getting paid is how we end up getting paid like nonprofit employees, EMTs, and other professions where people's desire to do good is exploited to drive down salaries.
Would you rather use a product that somebody treats as a vehicle to "Michelin star dinners, travelling, live music, skiing, etc.", or a product that somebody deeply cares about more than those things?
My point is not "care 100% about your job/company/product/idea and 0% about everything else", but rather striking a better balance.
To bring it back to the OP, selling Figma to Adobe was, in my view, part of an epidemic of SaaS companies valuing payout above creating a long-term sustaining business.
This, in my view, is quite a utilitarian (dare I say brutal) look on work and the world.
You are technically correct, in the same way "following the letter of the law" can be technically correct whilst missing the spirit.
For what it's worth, the engineers I have worked with in the past who take this utilitarian view of work often produce the poorer quality work and sometimes be really quite difficult to work with. This is because, with this view, "documentation", "design", "planning", "quality", and all those sorts of things tend to take a back seat in their mind as they become totally engrossed by "MVP", "well it works, so?", etc.
Personally, I think nuance is important here - I agree, there's a time for keeping the lights on, getting something to show, appeasing shareholders, and so on. However, there's also a time for taking a step back and taking some time to design, plan, optimize, ensuring quality, long-term stability, and hell, dare I say a bit of craftsmanship; life is short, might as well enjoy what you are doing for 1/3 of it and lavish in the art.
> Software engineers are mercenaries hired to create value for shareholders, and anything else is just delusion.
Value is a sustainable product, not some shovelware piece of crap. If the shareholders don't see that then that's their problem, and it's probably best to part ways and warn everyone you know from working with them.
I'm getting on to 10 years in the software industry as an engineer at the moment and in my view this is one of its most disappointing and frustrating aspects.
The whole software start-up scene just feels saturated with FIRE-obsessed individuals who prefer just about anything (money, vacation, travel, fame, ...) over company, product, real building, craftsmanship, etc.
I legitimately hear phrases like "5th time's the charm for an exit and payout!" way too often. It frequently just exacerbates the consolidation of technology, knowledge, wealth, and often hurts innovation, let alone can result in the solid team(s) of engineers left out to dry (although some can be also gunning for the payout in the end too).
In my view, there are just too many sell-outs pawning off solid products and teams to the highest bidder. I wish it wasn't that way.