If you're having trouble with the idea that there is a real human behind this article, someone with feelings and motivations for writing what she did and not just some anonymous internet commenter who "takes a long time to get to the point" or "has a boring writing style", I recommend watching this video she published on Youtube in which she responds to questions people had about her article:
Like the article, it's very honest and personal. It takes guts to broadcast or publish something like that about yourself on the internet and face the music, as is apparent by some of the responses here and on Youtube. Consider thinking about it next time you decide to post a snarky comment or a TL;DR.
I think the primary reason that people here are so negative about it is that they personally aren't living authentically, that is to say true to themselves. If you're not living authentically yourself, an encounter with authenticity in someone else will bring up bad feelings, and so the default response will be to come up with all sorts of reasons to shame the other person.
This was one of the best things I've read on Medium. I liked the writing, I liked the emotion, I liked the imagery, and I liked the self-reflection. It's true that stories of angst over leaving the corporate world are nothing new, but the execution was good. It was particularly interesting to hear about her experience at Google in that light, given their cachet as the be-all and end-all of big corporate tech employers.
She's lucky she's able to listen and respond to her intuition about what's right for her personally. One of the great tragedies of Western society is that consumerism is encouraged over the pursuit of meaningful work.
> I think the primary reason that people here are so negative about it is that they personally aren't living authentically, that is to say true to themselves. If you're not living authentically yourself, an encounter with authenticity in someone else will bring up bad feelings, and so the default response will be to come up with all sorts of reasons to shame the other person.
Not really. I didn't read as far to get to the part about authenticity. It's just not the kind of content I expect to find at the top of Hacker News. Many others probably feel the same way.
And please don't bring up the guideline about what is appropriate content for this site. That guideline can be used to encompass pretty much anything.
> Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.
I honestly hoped it was something about leaving Google as a customer. For example, in the past week, there was an article about Google stating that email stored on Google's servers isn't "private". I hoped there would be other, relatively technical, reasons behind a "break-up" with Google.
That's why I clicked the link. I still think it belongs on HN because it's something readers here would probably be interested in (not me though).
I wasn't expecting anything specific, I clicked it because it was at the top. There have been many "Why I left [Big Corp]" in the past, subconsciously I was expecting something like that, or at least not a motivational speech.
Uh, no. I think they're identifying her for what she is. Immature. She's coming from a perspective where the world owes her a fulfilling career. Mature people think about changing themselves, not blaming their situation.
Actually, mature people think about bringing themselves into harmony with their situation. That usually involves both changing yourself and your situation. And I think that's what she's doing here.
Simply changing yourself is a stop-gap measure: most people find out that it doesn't actually work long-term, because you can't actually change your true self. You can change your surface behavior, but if those conflict with your deeply-held values, those are going to leak through in times of stress, and you won't be able to do your job effectively. It's better to put yourself in a position where your values and your actions are in harmony: that's why they call it living with "integrity".
No, quite the opposite - she feels that the world/everyone around her said that she needs to make the most of her talents by working hard and then getting the most high-paying job. This is a fairly common feeling among "high-achievers", and sooner or later they all have an epiphany that what the world thinks is good for them is not necessarily what makes them happy. That epiphany is itself a fairly standard cultural trope which crops up (in other guises) in many a superhero movie.
I think you're right. Lots of that kind of resistance amongst us humans. (Climate-change denying e.g.) As my sainted grandmother's graduation card put it:
More simply, the only ones that should care about this post are the people who knows her. I don't see here any depth, any earth shattering conclusions or space for parallels with the tragedies of society in the first world.
Again, simply, she matured over time the decision that that place was not right for her, she didn't care about having a career in a big corporation. Just build an alternative and move on, you are not the only one going through this, don't over think/over analyse it. That's what i would have told her.
Very well-written article. I was half-dreading that this would be a humblebrag about how they're achieved so much more since leaving Google.
Anyway the campfire incident resonated with me, and I completely believe it. I recently finished the book "Autopilot" by Andrew Smart, in which he describes a brain center called the "default mode network" (which was new to me). http://www.orbooks.com/catalog/autopilot/
The default mode network works when nothing else is occupying the brain. Hence to "listen" to "yourself" aka DMN, you have to literally be silent and in silence etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_mode_network
I bet if she threw in some awkward Homeric references (instead of the boyfriend one), and wrote it a bit overly analytical and detached, then HN would be satisfied.
My educational background is heavy on Classics, but that's not it at all. I really thought about what she was saying before commenting, and for me it has nothing to do with the incidental that the author is a woman.
The problem here is the millenial-style privilege. It's all so shallow, first-world-problem-ish and child-like in its naivete. So she bought into the lie that having a job is a mystical road to self-fulfillment, discovered it's not fulfilling and set out to live, strangely enough, a lot like a housewife, except without the husband.
It's curious to me that it's so often bankers, techies, and other members of the 1% who find the courage to "strike out on their own."
The thing is, once you're financially secure and rising up Maslow's hierarchy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs), these first-world problems are your main concerns: what am I doing with my life, and why am I doing it? Of course it is a luxury to be able to worry about self-actualization and finding a comfortable identity/purpose, but so what? Should she not worry about these things? Should she not question her trajectory?
I understand that injustice is happening all over the world, but isn't it still important to examine your own life? Isn't that basically the goal of being alive: to figure out what you really want to do with your time on this planet?
I don't consider that Millennial privilege. I consider it a good idea.
The goal of doing something "more important" like solving world hunger or whatever should be to get more people able to concentrate on 1st world problems.
It is good both for people to help others get up to first world, and for people to deal with first world problems too.
If I was a hard working immigrant laborer perhaps I would say she was lazy and shallow. If I was a psychologist I would diagnose her with anxiety and possibly depression.
The vagueness is strange. This doesn't feel right -- well people can be manipulated in to making the wrong decision by making that decision feel right and the right decision feel wrong (sales people do this all day.)
However, if you have spent all of your life with tunnel focus on education & then your job, there is a good possibility that you have missed out on a lot of the periphery parts to living. These small things matter a lot more once you reach a higher level of personal achievement. They also allow you to comprehend the rest of the world.
High performance environments, whether in a city like Manhattan or in a 100-hour work week company, breed a whole new set of problems. You don't need to run away from them, but, I do believe some times you need to take a good step or two back. When you return, the actions you take which impact your lifestyle will be more well intended and thought out.
> If I was a psychologist I would diagnose her with anxiety and possibly depression.
> The vagueness is strange.
I agree. On my first reading, even I wondered, "why is she trying to solve by quitting a problem that need to be solved with anti-depressants?". But then I realized that her only fault was not articulating her problem properly. I'm sure there are some strong feelings going on there, but I can't seem to make out the reasons.
I'll ignore the inflammatory parts and focus on the 1% thing.
Why is it that someone who is privileged isn't allowed to want something more? True, they have a lot, but that's the way of life at this point, people move up, people's position gets better, that's the story of human history. However, this person is SO well off, that they're not allowed to question or look for something better?
Just because there is suffering in the world doesn't mean I can't want for more for myself and family.
Edit: Nope I lied, I'm not going to ignore the inflammatory bit, fuck you for saying it.
Well said. All this "first world problem", "1%", "privilege" bullshit is, well, bullshit. A person's problems are their problems, regardless of what me, you, John Doe, Kevin Mitnick, Paul Graham, Barak Obama, Kevin Spacey, Kevin Bacon, Tom Selleck, or the sterno bum at the corner of 3rd and Main, think about them.
Sure, it would be nice if everybody spent their energy worrying about poverty in Africa or South America, or human rights in China or whatever, but no one is under any particular obligation to devote their energy to those problems, or to prioritize them over their own favorite issues, whatever they may be.
But everyone should learn to put their problems into perspective while growing up (and between first world problems and Africa there are a few shades in between).
In other comments i've seen often the word "maturity", well, not to be excessively critic, but that's not the first word that came to mind while reading that article.
But everyone should learn to put their problems into perspective while growing up
Perspective is important no doubt. And don't get me wrong, my own take certainly includes a large degree of concern about "big picture" issues. But as somebody who is admittedly a radical individualist whose interest in philosophy tends towards Existentialism, and who realizes that we are all living very short lives in a brutal and uncaring world... I don't have much of a problem with people who choose to focus on their own problems, needs and concerns.
Like I said, it would be nice if everybody willingly chose to focus on poverty, clean water, vaccinations, clean energy, pollution, etc. But if someone chooses not to focus much (or at all) on that, I can understand and respect their stance.
To further the point, $370k is like ~5pc of 8-9 million. Which is to say that if you are <working> for wages, even at 370k your not that well off. If you had $9mm in the bank/investment portofolio, you wouldn't be "working", you'd be counting your passive investment income of ~$370k.
Personally I wasn't a fan of the article because it used an attention grabbing title which had nothing to do with the article. I get it, she decided that there was an alternative path to self fulfilment, more power to her. This could have been a great read if set in the correct context, but what on earth does this article have to do with Google?
What are you talking about? The article explains why she left Google, the company she was working for, to do something else. It's pretty accurate as titles go.
Within the context of the article, it's pretty clear that it could have been _any_ company of size, and she would have had the same response. When you title something 'Why I left Google' but your actually point has nothing to do with Google (or any large well known brand) the most reasonable term is 'Link Bait'.
I disagree. Not every company is Google -- both internally, as an employee, and externally, in people's minds. If your thought process goes, "I am a software engineer; I want to be the best software engineer I can be; Google does the best software engineering on the planet; QED," then it intensely matters that her story involved Google.
The point about Google in particular is that it regularly tops the lists of big companies to work at when it comes to people in our field: workplace perks, project choices, flexibility, quality of engineers, and probably more reasons that have been gone over ad nauseam. There is a lot of status associated with being a Googler, and she talks a bit about that.
I'd be genuinely interested in reading the motivations for writing it, imho personal articles pertains to more private venues. And definitely not on HN, especially when light on content (but that's not her fault).
HN is a pretty negative place these days. Ellen Huerta, if you're reading this, I applaud that you decided not to accept the path that was laid out for you.
Also, I suspect that most HN readers won't understand the maturity & security in one's own self-worth it takes to walk away from that level of career success, and particularly a company like Google.
Aside from the article having no real connection to hacking or the startup world; the prevalent self absorption is what I assume to be the biggest factor in the negative reviews this article is receiving here on HN.
Was it well written? Absolutely. Could someone take away something beneficial from it? Most likely. But is it worthy of being on the front page of hacker news? I'd guess not.
Again, though I've seen a drastic decline in the quality of posts in the short time I've been here, which is most likely indicative of the overall decline in quality since combining hacker news and startup news.
I'm in the "hacker and startup world" and find the article absolutely worthy. It resonates with me. It's deeper and more interesting than most of what I've read here for the past weeks.
If something doesn't interest you, save your upvote, move on. This comment you just made is a perfect example of the decline in quality of posts here - and please don't take this as a personal attack, one of the reasons discussions get poorer everyday is going 'meta' about HN and the thread itself, like what we're doing right now :/
I'm going to disagree. I've reading HN a for a while now; over 5 years. This article reminds me of Paul Graham's post, "You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss" from 2008 which was one of the things I read on the site early on that I particularly liked and identified strongly with. Though the focus of this article is different I think the underlying themes are the same and I also identify with some of the things here as well. I think it is a decent article, certainly worthy of consideration for up-votes, and strongly in the tradition of the type of material that has been posted here for some time.
I am frustrated with HN these days too, although I can't seem to break the habit.
But for sites which rely on community moderation like this, the articles that rise to the top are by definition the right articles. We have a different set of people now, that's all. I will say that my tastes, and that of the HN community, have diverged.
Personally I'd rather avoid a judgment mindset, where we debate about whether articles 'deserve' to be on the front page or not. HN isn't some star chamber where you get to say what is and isn't worthy of appreciation by the hacker community, whatever that is.
Mostly, it's just an algorithm. And it's designed to encourage variety, not uniformity - this is why most can upvote, but only a few can downvote.
Lastly - I don't know how you can legitimately accuse her of self-absorption. This article is about a difficult personal decision, so no kidding, it's about her thoughts and feelings. This isn't the totality of everything she's ever done in her life (a life which, by her account, was more about achievement than reflection).
And even if she was a little self-absorbed (unlike everyone else in their twenties), so what? Do you want a gold star for putting her in her place? Criticism is good, but real criticism has analysis. Not just labelling.
"though I've seen a drastic decline in the quality of posts in the short time I've been here"
Far more likely that it is just the novelty wearing off. A variation of this opinion is actually so common that it is in the rules [0]. A general rule for a "happy stay" at HN is to read and comment on the things that interest you. Partly out of self interest, but also out of respect for those who might like a given story and don't want it filled with vague complaints.
People complain all the time about the quality of stories, but as indicated by the low scores on the new page (at least for anything without a popular keyword) they aren't doing anything about it other than complaining. By that ruining the comments for everyone else.
[0] "If your account is less than a year old, please don't submit comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. (It's a common semi-noob illusion.)"
Why is it not worthy of being on the front page of HN? While I acknowledge that this is a tech forum and a thousand posts about Javscript alternatives do probably belong on the front page, but we're all human and this offers a good lesson on internal reflection for a situation that we're all probable to experience down the road.
> this offers a good lesson on internal reflection for a situation that we're all probable to experience down the road.
Really? All of us?
Honestly though I didn't mean any disrespect to the author or anyone who got something out of this article.
I was simply pointing out why I thought the majority of the comments were critical of the piece, which the parent seemed to attribute to HNer's [not] understading "the maturity & security in one's own self-worth it takes to walk away from that level of career success" to which I would have to strongly disagree.
I don't know of what level of "success" are we talking here, but most HN readers won't understand? I'm sure instead that they understand what it means to leave a safe career path to embrace the "unknown".
I don't really feel like I ought be a critic of anyone's writing (given that I am not one myself) but college boyfriends, wandering away from the campfire to look at the stars... it seems like the author takes a really long route to get to the point.
If it feels like she took too long to get to the point, maybe it's because you missed it.
Her point (as I took it) was that she had such a strong habit of living her life entirely in terms of her accomplishments that she was living her life inauthentically without even realizing it. And it took a whole lot of space away from her life just to become aware of it.
Not everything can be reduced down to a three-word "TL;DR."
It's the same cliche that gets repeated ad-naseum in HN. "Why I left X to build Y". Yes. YOLO. We know. You're pitching your startup. Is it not ok to offer critique? Taking too long to get to the point is a cardinal sin in writing and it's kinda lame to just label it as "haters gonna hate".
Again, the experience she described cannot be reduced to "YOLO." YOLO could just as easily mean "I left Google to do something bigger and more successful." But that's the opposite of what she did. She learned to figure out what she actually wanted instead of what she would get praised for, even if it was an overall less ambitious life path.
"She learned to figure out what she actually <strong>wanted</strong> instead of what she would get praised for, even if it was an overall less ambitious life path". YOLO.
Why waste your life doing what doesn't fulfill you? You only live once. Is that not applicable as well? This is precisely my argument. I'm just saying we should be ok with offering critique on style and content, not silencing it around here.
> Why waste your life doing what doesn't fulfill you?
Because it can be extremely difficult to distinguish your own needs/wants from the desires and expectations of the people around you.
No one wakes up in the morning thinking "I'm going to ignore what I want for no reason, and instead do what everyone else thinks I should want." And yet it's an easy trap to fall into, like the author did.
To the extent that "YOLO" can be applied to a variety of things, it does not make a good summary of anything.
On critiquing: something has gone very wrong when you're making dismissive and snarky remarks about someone's long, personal thought piece. You could do a number of interesting things, like, say, disagree with it or suggest improvements. But if you're idea of a critique is "this is long and boring and I know this stuff", I suggest simply finding other reading material instead.
Was this a pitch for her startup? She named it once, without a link. And it's a name that isn't easy to search for. If this is pitching, she's not very good at it.
Edit: It's http://letsmend.com/ - you can find a domain registration page if you search her name and the name of the startup.
That's what I got out of it. It's all pretty vague, so maybe it's just a post about how you should eschew the rat-race, go do your own thing, build your startup, and find happiness. Which is even more meh, honestly. Another key of good writing is to leave your reader with just one point in mind, one that never occurred to them before.
PG also has many essays that are regarding doing your own thing, and about life. Admittedly, I find PG much better in providing insight, however this article also does a pretty decent, (albeit with many platitudes) of giving us insight on living life. Something that apparently many people on HN think is not meh.
Haberman was complaining about the tendency to summarize a long piece of writing in a few words (here, only 3). Haberman's summary was more than three words, and more importantly, did not dismissively imply that such a summary was an appropriate stand-in for reading the article and/or encapsulated the article in its entirety. There was a difference of purpose/context. I didn't find it to be too ironic.
The Internet is great at the rapid dissemination of micro-communications. But let's not forget that there's merit in taking your time as well.
Try reading 1800s literature. It'll awaken a certain appreciation for modern writing in you.
But the point is that there's a certain box smart people today in the 1975-1990 generation are put in.
* Get good grades
* Go to college
* Get job at company (alternatively, start your own company. That's pretty trendy today.)
* Find spouse
* Buy house
* Have kids
...etc.
Why bother? That's a good question. Why not simply drop out and go surfing? What's the point of the job? What's the point of having the money to buy stuff? Why use your intelligence, this intelligence that so many people have complimented, in the same way every other person like you has been doing?
It's a variant on the age old question - who are you, really? Why bother being you as you are now?
Maybe that explains it better. But the article really resonated with me.
"We must do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living." --Bucky Fuller
Do you agree that we need to do more school? Lots of people indicate that much of American school really isn't about learning to think, it's more about passing the class, fitting in, mixed in with a heap of credentialism.
Having been kicked out of school himself he probably did mean more about learning than about formal education. Though (IIRC) he did attribute much of the post-WWII technological innovation to soldiers going to university after the war.
Honestly, I can't speak to non-US schools. They might be better, worse, etc. I hear both. I do know about American - well, USA - schools. So I circumscribe my speech to ensure correctness.
Can you write a bit about what makes Asia far worse?
I think the majority of schools have two ways for students to get through schools.
One would be to skirt the system, prepare for exams, and basically retain hardly anything.(This happens extremely often now, especially because of the number of smart yet not-so-determined kids who can get away with coasting, but they don't realize that it'll cost them later.
American schools tend to be lenient on the amount of time required to be spent on school work which allows them leeway to pursue things interesting projects if they are so motivated.
The second is to actually learn the material and work your way through it, thus being able to handle the exams well, and getting something out of your education.
The large part of why students pick the first option is most of the time the material is not very challenging and students find it much easier to slack off than take an initiative to go above and beyond the standard curricula.
The flipside occurs in Asian schools, where while the material is not challenging, it does take a lot of time and effort (not mental, but just constant work) to do well, and survive. This albeit crushes the innovative side that students should nurture at a high school level.
If you're interested in education systems in other countries, then you may find this post, by an ex-lecture/prof from the UK talking about why he's not a lecturer any more, interesting:
I can't speak for all countries either, but I live in Japan and study in general is very test-oriented (see Juku aka cram school, etc.) Students graduate university with little applied skills, so companies recruit with mostly little regard for the major (just a general separation humanities/science) then spend 1-2 years training them. University is in many regards a place where students learn how to fit in society. Getting in a good university, i.e. passing the very difficult admission test, mostly guarantees that you'll get a degree.
When I was a student here I had a class where you could get an A for submitting a copy of your notes, no test, no homework. A lot more had tests with "fill in the blanks" questions. Then there was the rare few classes which actually made you think, but in my experience these were at the graduate level.
Some of the most gripping literature I've ever encountered - thank you :-).
But seriously, why be dismissive (perhaps too strong a word - but mildly derisive at least) of such a wide swath of human culture that many admittedly find interesting to make a point that has nothing to with literature or writing style for that matter?
The grandfather post was whining about the length of the article. It's a completely specious complaint, made with fatuous disdain. Supposing that the grandfather post had read much of works pre-Hemingway, they would have realized that their callous dismissal of "tl;dr" was tremendously ignorant when compared to, e.g., War and Peace, Three Musketeers, or some of Sir Walter Scott's lesser-known works. In other words, primelens, I was preferring to be dismissive and deprecative of the grandfather's twitter-length reading abilities.
edit: Of course, coming out of Victorian works and then reading modern works feels like a breath air of simplicity and prose without a hint of purple... perhaps to the detriment of the moderns.
It's a completely specious complaint, made with fatuous disdain.
Hi, I wrote that post. I'd appreciate it if you didn't attribute factors like "fatuous disdain" and "twitter-length reading abilities" to me.
My point was not that long passages of writing are a bad thing in every context, ever. That you've extracted that from what I said speaks more about you than it does me. Pretty much every length of prose is appropriate somewhere. My point was that this length of text was not warranted for this story. The extra passages do not add to the story, they detract from it.
"World famous, highly regarded literature of the 1800s was long, therefore no passage of text can ever be too long" seems like a spectacularly self-defeating argument to me.
As a general rule replying to people who insult you is a status lowering move unless your response lowers their status. Do not engage with the enemy, it suggests you care, and if you don't care you can't lose.
Internet points are indeed worthless. Understanding that reacting to insults is usually a losing move socially and then failing to modify your behaviour is not just a losing move, it is a decision to lose. This is more true in real life than on the internet where it is much safer to read an attack on your ideas or positions as a direct personal attack.
It's really not OK to say, "tl;dr - dull, pointless". That's the critique of a particularly young child. If you want to critique - fine, go ahead. Explain why corporate life can be fulfilling. Explain why the stable career is good; point out philosophical flaws in the argument for going off and doing a start-up based on personal angst. I'm quite sure that to the thoughtful critic, there are quite a few more ways to break down and point out issues.
But it's really not a story about "why I left X to start Y". Sure, that's the narrative. But the point of the story - that so timeworn story so fresh for each person who takes that journey - it's about "why Z at all".
Here's why I think it's such a frustrating article... It's ultimately an immature sentiment expressed by an immature person enclosed in a veneer of maturity.
The subtle thing here is that she's blaming being at Google for her lack of fulfillment when a mature person would look inward first. I'd bet dollars to donuts that a similar thing happened to her ex-boyfriend. No rationale, vague sentiments, very little actual introspection, except what might make her happy.
Real maturity is about character, finding how to be a better person and not what the world can do for you.
That said, I'm sure she'll go far in life. I sincerely hope she lerans to improve herself as a person in order that she can be a fulfilled human being.
Changing environments can help immensely with changing your state of mind. I didn't get the feeling that she blames Google; she blames being at a place in life that doesn't fulfill her, coincidentally she works at Google. It's pretty clear from the text that she has goals in mind other than a good 9-5 job.
That's why I said "being at Google" not Google itself.
Again, she's looking at things from a very immature perspective, that of life owing her a fulfilling career without actually doing what she's claiming to be doing. Introspecting.
I'm really curious, how did you get that impression? I see her realizing she is unhappy, that the reasons keeping her in place weren't relevant (status, etc), and taking action to correct that. We don't even know the details of what she decided to do, or her goals, to make any judgements.
Yeah, for somebody so bright and talented (she can't help mentioning her spotless cursus honorum), her writing is incredibly dull.
I expected useful insights in what Google was doing wrong, losing such acclaimed talent, but... nothing. It's all about her wanting to fuck up for once, after a life of unmitigated success. I guess this means Google is actually doing something right by losing her, lest she fucks up the company just because.
You're disappointed because you expected the article to be about X, but it was actually about Y, where both X and Y are words in the article's title. (X=Google, Y=I)
I probably resent the fact that she leveraged the Google brand in order to make me read lots of words about a perfectly-normal midlife crisis I had no interest in. I clearly put too much trust in the upvoting masses on HN to weed out this sort of stuff.
I apologize if her (or anyone's) feelings were hurt by my comments.
There's a certain irony between your comment and her article.
Her article was about how you shouldn't care what other people desire, you should figure out what you desire and go after that. After all, they're not the one living your life.
Your comment is about how you read the article because of the Google brand, and that you trusted the upvoting masses on HN to weed this out. Notice the language. "Google brand" - why does the fact that this has the word "Google" in it make you want to read it? "upvoting masses" - you trust the masses of HN more than your own judgment?
Perhaps there was something in this article that's worth reading after all, and you glossed over it?
(FWIW, it was my upvote that put this article on the front page - it had 2 upvotes on the New page and was 10 minutes old when I saw it, and I liked it, and so gave it the 3rd upvote.)
> you trust the masses of HN more than your own judgment?
I trust the HN hivemind to do (most of) the filtering for me, absolutely. Otherwise I wouldn't read HN, I'd just subscribe to the gazillion feeds out there and read through each and every headline. Despite evidence to the contrary (the number of replies I've written in this thread clearly show that I don't have a highly-driven, high-achieving life similar to TFA's author), I can't dedicate an infinite amount of time to reading stuff on the internet.
Past that, I trust my own judgement in defining what is actually interesting to me by skimming headlines. Finally, once I've read an article, I'm not doubting my inner-self's ability to judge whether the material is actually interesting or not.
This is one of those few times where the two-level filter (HN + me skimming headlines) failed to weed out uninteresting material, and I assign part of the responsibility to the linkbaiting title. I don't think that's unreasonable on my part.
I can see where you're coming from. The people who are upvoting it are probably doing so because they can relate to her struggles and her journey. But for you it's a disappointment because you expected insight about Google and this article does not deliver any.
We've all read and re-read all the reasons why corporate work can be unfulfilling. In my opinion this short essay wasn't about that, it was about the personal implications of this unfulfillment. Lacking confidence in social interactions, feeling the overburdening need to belong, the realization that it gets harder to steer your life as you age, and the strong will required to turn the wheel.
That's a silly argument. She's not looking to maliciously screw something up. She's looking to take a risk—to make a decision that, for once, doesn't lead her down the "safe" path to success of good grades, good college, good internship, good job.
From TFA: If I wanted to do nothing, I should. If I wanted to fuck up for once, I should.
Wanted means conscious will: she craves the freedom to do everything she wants, including fucking up. I guess an account manager at Google doesn't get that sort of freedom, which might be a good thing after all.
The writing is pretty dull, but I think that's because of the nature of the situation.
She had a vague dissatisfaction with her time at the company, and she tried to walk people through how she gradually discovered what it was she didn't like.
The whole point of it is that there wasn't any specific thing about Google she didn't really like; that's what makes it interesting (yet also boring and confusing) to read about.
The real bottom line here is that the author doesn't really know why she left Google yet. She is still discovering this.
I really strongly believe as a left-coast culture put a lot of emphasis on amazing out of the ordinary experiences as THE ONLY WAY to get "perspective". But the reality is if we learned more about how our brains work, we'd be able to get that sense of perspective in daily life on a regular basis.
This is why I'm more impressed by people who meditate every day while maintaining their previous life, over people who attend a yearly meditation retreat but don't do anything different. The hardest part is changing your daily life without going highly radical.
Because to make society better, having everyone defect and leave to a monastery is not going to be a good idea. We still need people doing their "normal" jobs and getting things done. I need lunch damnit!
You talk about this like if it was easy. I don't think it is. For a single person which choose to resign from his / her benefits to pursue a distant dream, how many will not have this courage ?
Of course we're on hn, so there is here a lot more people prepared to this than anywere else but still. I like this kind of post, which reminds us that we should be able to focus on what really motivates us.
Of course I'm still pretty young, it could seems obvious to you or others, but if it's in frontpage I assume that I'm not the only one inspired by these posts.
It actually doesn't take all that much courage for a single person with no other responsibilities to quit her job. What's the worst that could happen? She has to get a job again eventually.
Note the overloaded use of "courage". It isn't so much the lack of responsibilities as it is overcoming the inner voices that judge your every action much more than any outsider does.
That's because she wanted you to get a feel of the process she went through. The frustrations that she felt and how exactly the AHA moment happened. Even the 'Staring at the stars' story you scoffed at has a message. When you are stuck and having trouble figuring things out, stop for a moment, get a change of scenery, that just might do the trick. Clearing out your head like this, as cliched as it sounds, is a remarkably effective way of figuring out the tangled web of choices ahead of you. I guess you just got bored and missed the point entirely. Pity !
Agreed, the conclusion was somewhat nebulous to me (and I'm probably a bit dense as well) but the tl;dr I got was that the author left to "[build] a start up that is risky and deeply personal (Mend)". We all have to subsist, and how she chooses to do it is a large part of how many of us will define her identity.
I feel like the authenticity she refers to is very much a 1st world problem (though I'm sure she's worked hard for her success). Most of us work to pay the bills and don't feel like charlatans if our industry doesn't happen to be our life's dream if we even have one.
BTW, anyone have a link to this authentic startup she's referring to?
>...breaking up with my college boyfriend. He was brilliant, good looking, respected, and everyone loved him — I even loved him — but he wasn’t the one.
I'm not even thirty yet, but I feel like most people within my generation are just spoiled children. It's like we need another world war so people can learn to properly appreciate what they have, again.
What struck me more is how somebody can get that far in life without properly examining themselves and their relationship with the world. Isn't she aware of the stereotype that corporations are full of drones that will suddenly realize that they've wasted their life when they're forty? Hasn't she picked up a copy of Be Here Now on a coffee table somewhere? Was that really the first time that she's gazed at the stars and felt like she could do anything – doesn't everybody do that when they're 15? I suppose not everybody has hippy parents, not everybody is allowed to go to bonfire parties in their teens, not everybody takes LSD before their first corporate job.
It's like we need another world war and then another 60's and 70's, but then no 80's to erase all the lessons we learned.
Most people that I know who are in my generation (millennial) are incredibly self-aware and make life choices according to what they want out of life first and foremost. Sadly that often leaves them stuck without the skills to make a significant impact on the world and on the lives of those around them.
It's not hard to reason yourself into that situation... part it is that as a software dev in a corporation, you have a "better" life than 99+% of humans currently alive, or who have ever lived. You are unfathomably lucky. To even be in a position to contemplate "Oh, this career isn't spiritually fulfilling enough" necessitates an unbelievable amount of privilege (not using the word with any negative connotation). We are having this discussion right now between a bunch of other incredibly lucky and privileged people. If we included an average spectrum of 100 people in this discussion, we would have 50 starving people begging for an apple, 40 McDonalds workers pulling extra shifts to pay for their food tonight, etc. and our complaints would be absolutely ridiculous. Our discussion here within the HN community is like people in the yacht club lamenting that their yacht is aging and isn't made from the most prestigious woods. That is the kind of perspective your favorite drug can impart...
Yeah it kind of depends on what the root cause of the feeling that he wasn't The One is. Would she have felt that way about him now, after throwing away all that was causing her feelings of inauthenticity? Did she misinterpret some other problem in her life and project it on her relationship and then talk herself into thinking she "opened doors" by leaving that relationship? Etc.
It feels like she has made the first genuine choice about her life. Most people seldom, if ever, make a genuine choice, but follow the obvious path in front of them. In this case, top of class, great college, fantastic job then career and so forth.
This site is rightly focussed around people who have made or are thinking about making genuine choices, founding or being part of a start-up.
It took me until I was 29 to make my first real choice, and then, and ever since then, I've gone about in the same way.
The key is to create real options that are all desirable, and to make a real choice that is for yourself, your family, and for the societal right reasons, not (just) for others' expectations.
So what I did, and advise people to do, is to prioritise three completely different options areas, such as travel, starting a company and going corporate. Next, work on each of them as hard as you can to make them as compelling as possible.
If you've done a great job, then the three options will be equally good, yet very different, and the choice will be incredibly hard. At this stage it's about refining your criteria and choosing the one that opens the most doors and leaves the least closed.
Set a date to decide by, maximize the value of each option by pushing hard, and then pick one.
And I recommend always having a plan B and C, no matter what you are doing.
I'm all for personal fulfillment, but this seems like it could apply to anyone working any job they don't like/love. There is nothing specific to Google in this. Actually, there's very little specific in this at all. I guess somebody found it helpful though because it's at thirty points right now and it was at three ten minutes ago.
The difference here is that a software engineering job at Google is widely considered one of the best corporate software engineering jobs in the world. There are thousands who'd love to be in her place; as she notes, the external pressure to like your job at Google is tremendous.
That she had the courage to uproot her entire life, despite the pressure, is impressive.
(Granted, you could replace "engineer at Google" with "position X at a top company in field.")
Edit: As noted below, Elle wasn't a software engineer at Google, but an account manager in the media/marketing department. The point stands, I think.
The technology may be great, but at the end of the day, you're still working for a company whose main business is selling ad space. Definitely not a surprise that many people find this less than fulfilling. The amazing thing is that Google has managed to sell an employment experience whose most outstanding feature is creature comforts to a host of smart people.
The vast majority of Google engineers don't work on ads. The guys working on Google Maps, feel they are working for a mapping company. The guys working on Android feel they're working on mobile. The people working on search feel they're working on machine intelligence issues.
Frankly, as a Google employee, I like that the ads business subsidizes research into other areas that are not economical yet or which people won't pay for. The fact that Google culture overall aligns my my views on intellectual property, progressive ideals, and just not being a douche-bag cancels out any "taint" that the money is made on (IMHO, tasteful) ads.
I used to work at IBM T.J. Watson research. I had no love for the IBM consulting or mainframe business, but I never had to deal with it.
Google's main business might be advertising, but that business is mostly automated, it doesn't take 20,000 engineers to run AdWords.
Agreed. Getting to 'the top' corporate job in your particular field, is quite the achievement.
Finding yourself in that position ... realizing it's not what you want out of life. Then taking the leap of faith, to turn your entire life upside in an attempt to find the fulfillment you're looking for takes a lot of courage.
Writing is cathartic, of course, but I also didn't walk away with any better understanding of why she specifically quit her job at Google (or her college boyfriend, for that matter). I can read between the lines that Google has become a place that's finally lost that nebulous feeling of individual fulfillment. That I could easily imagine, but the article is really about "finding herself" and not really about Google.
Agreed. I'm very happy the OP is taking a risk, because, damnit, now is the time! I think the lesson is we all should be willing to ask "Are we truly happy with our lives?" and take the chance to answer without all of the external signals. There is more to life than a title! And, in my humble experience, titles only correlate with years working and not competence.
If it weren't at Google, then...
... she'd be complaining about the sociopathic politics and "endless email" at Microsoft.
... she'd be thankful to have only 3 conference calls, all within normal working hours, at IBM.
... she'd be fearing the pager (dev) or Wednesday business reviews (non-dev in Retail) and admiring Jeff at Amazon.
... she'd be tired of the arrogance at Facebook (caveat: MANY great people at fb, but there are a few PMs who think they are the second coming...)
... she'd be cursing the exploitation of VC-istan at _[your name here]_ startup.
(This post is from personal experience -- yes, I've worked at each company)
I think its relevance to google is that a position at google is perceived to be a peak in achievement and fulfillment, which the author obviously didn't find.
Where does this expectation come from, that work should be about personal fulfillment? That you have to love your job, or it's not the right one? Maybe it's just me, but if I leave my job, it'll be because I'd like more money, or a shorter commute, the opportunity to own a home, or better future career prospects. I'm not going to have an existential crisis over it.
I think that expectation is a common product of the modern convenient life. If you have the genetic gift of intellect coupled with that, then it becomes more prominent. It also is due to a generation which is more independent/scattered with lesser ties (or familial/societal pressures, depending on how you look upon it). The above factors contribute to the third which makes this generation, more "sensitive". Combine all and the perspective of the article is quite expected. That probably also explains the resonation with the readers resulting in upvotes.
This is the definition of angst. Quite a good example in fact. The most important line though is:
"The caveat here is that studying hard my whole life and saving for almost 5 years afforded me the opportunity to have this time completely off payroll[.]"
except that a lot of smart people in other industries also study hard but can't save enough for those opportunities. the key is that she also picked a good industry to be in, which is basically down to luck and the opportunities offered by where she grew up
Well, there's some degree of conscious choice involved. When I graduated from college, I didn't know exactly what industry I wanted to be in either, but I knew I liked working with computers and I just took the highest-paying offer that wasn't terrible.
I'm of the opinion that if you know what you want to do, you should do that. If you don't know what to do, you should take whatever opportunity will expose you to more opportunities in the future. Saving up money is a part of that.
Salary numbers are not much of a guess - they're stated right there in the offer letter. Neither are expenses - you know exactly how money will be going out and can make choices to limit that. What will make you happy is a guess, and it didn't actually work out the first - or second, or third - time that I tried. I'm still evaluating whether my fourth choice works on a happiness level, but if it doesn't, I've got the resources and professional reputation to try again.
But in the absence of any useful information about that, why not take the choice that gives you the biggest chance of being able to make more choices later? Picking a job that gives you savings gives you a bunch of options later, should you decide that you hate it, and it also gives you information about what sort of work you like to do. So if your guess works, great, if it doesn't, you have the resources to try again.
Great write up, I really want to learn what the next chapter brings.
Ultimately, living an authentic life is the only thing that ends up mattering. There are many ways to do this, and you don't have to make grand moves to get there, although it can certainly help.
A think a lot of academically gifted folks ultimately can have this problem... you become so focused on what you DO you forget that you're a Human BEING not a Human DOING. (props to my friend who gave me that one)
I've never understood what it means to live an "authentic" life. I really wish I did, because it sounds nice.
Is it slowing down to enjoy life? Is it finding the things that make you happy and pursuing them? Is it doing what your inner voice tells you to do?
Maybe my inner voice is more confused than most, because mine is simultaneously telling me to get a degree and to drop out of college, to start a company in the hopes of being wildly successful and to find a nice, stable job somewhere so I can spend my free time relaxing.
If you haven't even finished college then you don't have enough data to work from. Keep listening to the voice, but be prepared to be confused a lot in your 20s. That's normal.
That's part of the problem, living an authentic life is an entirely internal process. People end up paying attention to the external things of what this "seems" to mean, and how people got there.
But an authentic life is doing things that accomplish your values in life. A lot of living like this is wanting to communicate in a clear and "authentic" way so you end up with little communities of this stuff.
As for your problem - the problem is you don't really know what your values are in life. You are letting external requirements drive what you are doing, and you aren't thinking strategically, or agent-y.
I'd suggest checking out the book "Focusing". You will be able to help yourself a lot better after you learn how to what the book describes. Also consider http://rationality.org as well
This is a fairly standard story with a modern twist. Taking the story at face value she seems as though she was academically very bright from an early age. With that comes a full set of expectations. "Oh, she'll be really successful at whatever she does because she's so bright!" comes in a bunch of variations from teachers, family and friends. Many children want to please their parents and so follow that path and get oddles of social approval. (good grades/schools/careers) Google is the West Coast flavor but it could be a great law firm, Goldman Sachs, medical field etc. At around 30 the majority of these folks don't have too many more hurdles to clear and they start to question the "Why" of what they're doing for the first time.
The modern twist is the fact that the author is a little self absorbed and many people are reacting to that. 8 minute YouTube follow up videos etc. A very long winded story that could be tightened up.
What's most interesting is how little she's really challenging herself by changing her environment. Same field (tech) and same state (SoCal vs NorCal) She saw how a single weekend with people not from her field impacted her life. Why not take that weekend and stretch it into a year! Imagine what could happen then? Right now with this path I'd say 50%+ chance "relative" poverty will set it in 12 - 18 months and she'll be back in the womb of a large technology company again.
I don't understand all the negative people. I truly don't.
You weren't forced to read about her problems. You weren't forced to upvote this post to the front page. Yet all you people do is complain.
The post made it to the frontpage because maybe it hit home for a lot of people here? Perhaps people are fascinated by her very personal story? There could be a number of reasons.
HN gets very tiring very fast because of all the negativity. It's terrible. Stop and reflect and realize that HUMAN BEINGS are on the other side of the words written here.
I think it's fear. This essay questions the motivation and premises of the biggest life choices of many people on Hacker News. Be smart, be ambitious, study hard, be successful, make a lot of money.
I've seen people recoil very hard when they are reminded about very deeply buried insecurities. When someone suffers from depression or anxiety, you'll sometimes see the most incredible mental gymnastics to avoid going into therapy and doing a bit of introspection. "I don't like the therapist". "It's boring". "This is pseudoscience". To me this looks like an instance of the same phenomenon; it's more comfortable to reject this premise entirely than to consider that it could also be relevant to your own life.
I rarely comment on HN or post stuff here and the response to this post is a reminder of exactly why. The negativity is mind boggling. Here is someone with an exceptionally told, brilliantly written, truly moving story of why she left a secure, outwardly perfect life to pursue something she personally found actually fulfilling.For everyone sitting pretty on their comfy couches, know this is not easy. Staring at your bank account and seeing it getting close zero to everyday, while dealing with the all the shit that comes with pursuing your dreams is truly gut wrenching.You know the lights are about to go off, and you are giving up everything for it, and you are desperately trying to keep going. THAT is not easy. It takes guts.
I honestly think HN needs a 'Be Nice' Policy like Quora. I love writing, sharing and commenting on Quora because people are genuinely warm, cordial, friendly and very very constructive in their feedback. On HN however it seems there is a race to see who can post a more Snarky comment. Sad !
I appreciate the author's transparency. The past 200 years of innovation have created a world that is hard to connect with sometimes. You used to wake up every day looking for food ... hand to mouth ... build a fire or freeze to death. The most joyous times were found simply being with friends and family with no presumptions of better-ness because you knew how much their horse cost. There were times to be alone too.
Today its hyper-information, hyper-jobs, hyper-success, hyper-sugary foods.
And what is success? What is living? Why is there one ice-cream stop in every town instead of every town having its own ice-cream shop? This new generation wants to understand themselves and how they fit within the spaces they frequent. They don't want to live inside a commercial anymore.
This is an introspective essay describing a difficult mental process, involving a complete questioning of one's motivation in life.
Rather than condemn the author for being a narcissist, people should take the opportunity to study this excellent example of human introspection. I think a lot of people would benefit from having a close look at their goals and motivations. Seems like every other week I see a post on Hacker News about depression or burnout which could have been avoided if the author was able to look at him/herself from a distance.
The entire narrative is intensely self-focused. You have to keep in mind that she is basically writing in the same dialect that driven careerists think with. Having so freshly made this decision, you can't expect her to relate the transforming experience in any other way.
Well, since this seems to be really more of a personal meditation on what is effectively aimlessness in life amidst a world of endless career building, I don't think the focus on herself is unjustified here. This wasn't really about Google, even though the name featured prominently in the article.
Finally, a "Why I Left Google" post that doesn't focus on the company. A lot of people are saying, "This girl has a lot of angst"...well, at least for once she talks about herself and her reasons for leaving, rather than the reasons a company failed her. It's a nice change.
This makes me wonder, we have seen in polls earlier that most people active on HN are in late 20s or thereabouts. Now, such decisions are very important and many concur but is it possible most people who agree with her are more or less in the same age bracket and similar mindsets. Can anyone tell me honestly, how such decisions play out in the long run? I mean, in about 15-20 years from now, after taking such a decision, would one be extremely satisfied with his/her life or will one look back at this as a young person's decision that gave up on comfortable retirements plans, insurances, mortgages, holidays, life style etc. I am guessing there should be both kinds but which has higher odds?
That was good writing. The people that complain about it being too long are probably young and don't appreciate a good personal story. This is not about google, but about author's personal choice to leave something seemingly good behind in order to do something more meaningful/fulfilling; and how she made that choice.
I love this post, I really do and it's because it resonates so deeply with me. Ellen is really able to put into words what I could only babble on about in nonsensical conversations with people over the past 6 months. I left Google this year too as have many others (if only you could see the internal epitaph). There were many reasons why I left but none are noteworthy. Many have found themselves in similar situations, facing adversity in their lives, achieving the dream and then wondering what next, the quarter life crisis. Google is the dream but what happens when the dream becomes a reality? Does the reality live up to what you had imagined it to be? Now what? Do you spend 10 years at Google trying to level up? Do you work on complex problems at Google scale? Do you even get that opportunity?
I kind of saved myself lots of frustration, by not reading this article. As soon as I read, "i will have to leave my boyfriend" and I assume, this is one narcissistic article, trying to get people listen her babbling because she has used "google".
Sometimes it's a blessing to be in a job that you can't tolerate, or even despise, as opposed to a job that feels prestigious, but still doesn't feel right.
With the former, at least you don't feel the pressure to stay because everyone wants to work there.
Am I the only one who somewhere along the article expected the feminism bomb to go off? "Right after this sentence! Camp fire, this is a trigger! High school boyfriend, oh boy here we go!"
Quite surprising it wasn't even remotely refered to at least once.
For the good of the world, let us pray this woman never has any real problems. Let's examine her "problems" thus far:
-- Left her wonderful boyfriend. Boo hoo hoo
-- Left her wonderful job Boo hoo hoo
Jesus Christ. The insulation is a thousand miles thick around this person. Is she really not aware that the universe is full of genuine horrors that don't involve her silly quest towards self-actualization or what-the-fuck-ever she's trying to express? Absolutely pathetic.
Seriously get over it. You are the one that has the problem here. The wish to become a better individual and not what everyone else thinks you should be is not a crime. Your response doesn't belong on this site. Grow up.
That was like a perfect storm of self-obsession, self-indulgence, self-aggrandizement and self-pity.
Then again, kudos to her for making a tough decision that made her life better. Now I sincerely hope that her increased freedom will allow her to develop a less unhealthy perspective on life than what transpires from her blog post.
(Not sure why I'm taking the time to react in what is obviously not a constructive way; maybe I'm just trying to make the nausea go away.)
This link now has 200 comments. 49 of them are pure, vitriolic negativity of the sort I expect to see when my local small-town newspaper posts an online story about first-year students getting drunk. Apparently it was flagged off the front page. Get the fuck over yourselves. If it hurts so much to read a story about a life crisis, you should probably take a few steps back and examine your own life.
I commend the author on her decision to strike out on her own, as there's nothing better than being your own boss, being responsible for your own failures & successes.
Congratulations, and I wish you all the best!
The comment regarding a recurring dream was something I also experienced.
"recurring dream that I was being chased, jumping through windows and doors, but never getting further away from my chaser"
After quite some time having this dream, one night the dream ended with my realization that my pursuer was none other than myself!
I had been running from myself.
This realization had the effect of me going into business for myself, leaving a high paying job, and struggling for quite awhile before I began to be successful.
Today I work longer hours than I ever did for that high paying employer, but the difference is that I enjoy what I do, and I get to choose the projects that I pour my efforts into.
Too many are content to remain in their respective comfort zones, and this stifles innovation...
The coast takes a sharp turn straight west just north of Santa Monica so from Venice looking north west you see Malibu and the Santa Monica mountains. Therefore during the summer the sun does in fact set behind the Santa Monica mountains as can be seen in this photo. http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7369/9267881002_dc30589ab0_o.j...
The moutains go far to the west from the vantage point of SM or Venice. In the middle of Summer the sun sets in the north west, so over the mountains just above Malibu.
Over 8 minutes long! I stopped watching when she talked about feeling alone in her personal struggle. Some young people really don't have a clue. She's among the worlds royalty, "The Princess and the Pea," and doesn't realize it. She's pretty clueless to not even acknowledge that people all around her are dealing with much more serious personal struggles. That would be the polite thing to do and might mitigate some of the cringe factor. Wow, talk about a life of luxury of time, youth, health and choice, that many can only dream about. She's pretty too. I'd trade lives with her in a New York minute. I'm sure she'll be fine.
> I stopped watching when she talked about feeling alone in her personal struggle. Some young people really don't have a clue.
I've never understood this weird form of condescension. So because there are many people in the world facing extremely serious personal struggles, we're not allowed to discuss our own, less serious personal struggles without being accused of marginalizing everyone else? What, is "feeling alone" somehow not a valid emotional response unless you're impoverished?
And really, WTF does youth have to do with this? I see people in all walks of life talking about their personal struggles.
I feel you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Some of my small problems become ludicrously important to me. We all do that from time to time. I don't broadcast these struggles to the world because I know they are ludicrous. I have a modicum of self-awareness. It seems to me she hasn't developed that sensitivity towards others yet. I have no hard feelings towards her. She represents the best and brightest and I wish her well on her journey of self-discovery.
I referenced youth in two senses. First, young people have the luxury of time, and two, this lack of self-awareness is more prevalent in younger people.
I think I see what happened here. Her family and friends are astonished that she left Google so she wants to explain herself. It's unfortunate she broadcast it to the world, because she opened herself up to critique by people who don't get the context.
No, someone posted it on Hacker News with the title "Why I Left Google," which drew me in. She broadcast it to the world where it reached me and piqued my interest. She could have made it a facebook posting for friends and family only. She probably knew what she was doing and is enjoying the attention. A lot of people would. I'm allowed to make my observations. I also don't have you trapped in a corner reading them. Edit: All I'm saying is that if she had acknowledged her first world problems and made a little joke about them it would have been more attractive. That's it.
Reading that makes me angry. As a former ditch-digger, construction laborer, retail associate, airline baggage handler, and furniture mover, I had to scratch and claw my way for 10 years to finally get an engineering position at Google.
This woman seems to have every life opportunity handed to her in a silver plate since the day she was born that all she had to do is work hard and not fuck it up. I know people who are brilliant and work immensely hard but just do not have the socioeconomic status and/or luck to even get an interview.
She just threw away something that millions of people would literally kill for. Something that I, as recently as 4 years ago, would literally kill for.
I'm sure if a starving child in Africa read your post they would be angry that someone went out of their way to get angry over another person making very personal decision. There are greater things in life to angry over than another person making a decision which they believe will make them happier.
Just because you can't seem to fathom how someone might leave behind a cushy job does not give you the right to be judgemental. World is a suckier place when people can't seem to see the world without their tunnel vision.
This is exactly why making decisions like she did is so difficult. Because people judge you and are angry at you just because you are different and you don't want what they want.
I am sure that you had some big difficulties in your life and you achieved your goal anyway - it must have been very hard and I admire you for that. But you should try to understand her - her problems are very different than yours but I can imagine that those might be even harder to deal with.
And let me (just for fun) go even farther and provide unsolicited interpretation. Does your anger have anything to do with the possibility that you have the same issue that she had, value (subconsciously) your successes based on how others perceive them and her article 'devalued' what you achieved and triggered defensive reaction?
it seems like she never took the time to find herself. It sounds like she was always involved in something and she was able to shoot strait too the top without thinking about it much. I think a lot of people people just need some time to get it figured out and sometimes some fun years at college isn't enough. I know that was super involved as a undergrad and i thought I had life figured out by the time i was done, but it wasn't until i was an unemployed, relatively unknown person in a different area for my graduate studies that I was able to find out how i wanted i really wanted to do with my own life.
This really hits home for me, and I haven't even finished my degree yet. I should probably delete this comment so my prospective employers won't find it when they start trawling through my social networking history.
" I could hear old school hip hop from our camp in the distance, but I was surrounded by absolutely nothing and no one, and I felt free in the universe."
Please stay away from Joshua Tree and other wilderness areas.
"It also meant making a physical move to Venice (the one in CA, not Italy) so that I could fulfill my dreams of a spacious 1br apartment to myself (which I couldn’t shell out $3k for in SF),"
are you fucking kidding me? rich princess complaining about something most people would kill to have - a comfortable life.
Title can easily substitute 'Google' with 'a large & successful company'. This would not change anything about the story but the title would be more honest (as most who clicked on it here likely expected something Google-specific).
The post is not about Google but author's personal life.
She realized she was just following a path that was full of social approval but didn't feel fulfilling. You could removed Google and add a large financial/media/law firm and it would be the same article.
"It was that moment that I realized I was truly free to do whatever I wanted in this world"
I've been there. One tends to have such 'realizations' after working at a job like hers and banking 100k or 2. This type of freedom is not the general condition for human beings, is usually fleeting, and is almost always bought with a lot of money.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qeyt2Mw4sK4
Like the article, it's very honest and personal. It takes guts to broadcast or publish something like that about yourself on the internet and face the music, as is apparent by some of the responses here and on Youtube. Consider thinking about it next time you decide to post a snarky comment or a TL;DR.