Conversation

Andy Matuschak
@andy_matuschak
This question's gauche, but: given the prevalence of $400k++ comp packages for ~30-year-olds in Big Tech, why aren't there lots more "gentle[wo]man scholars"? i.e. people quitting to do non-remunerative creative projects I can think of some, but shouldn't there be thousands?
207
110
1,059
@nelhage
@nelhage
(a) Are you sure there _aren't_ thousands? How would we know? It seems plausible to me there are. (b) Speculatively, we lack good non-employment institutions/vehicles/structures for them to work on projects collaboratively over extended periods, which they often crave.
1
3
25
@nelhage
@nelhage
As I think about this, I don't have an answer, but I think it's kind of oddly related to (a). In that, part of the reason we wouldn't necessarily know is that we don't have institutions that such individuals would persistently identify as members of.
1
5
@nelhage
@nelhage
Not exactly this, but you could imagine a "RC, but full-time" that is an option as a ~"professional identity" in the same way a job is, but without the … job … parts.
2
3
@nelhage
@nelhage
Not sure that's actually a good idea or the right paradigm, but that's the analogy that jumps to mind. That would also create just, visibility and legibility, in a way that "I'm unemployed and publish software on the internet" doesn't quite.
1
1
Avi Bryant
@avibryant
I think that's right, yes, and I think the RC analogy is interesting because it suggests (loose) mentorship and a range of career stages. If I were going to set up this kind of structure I'd want "fellowships" for people who need the income, funded by those involved who don't.
1
4
Geoffrey Litt
@geoffreylitt
Both are great but the latter is obviously more attractive to funders. Hard part is to make it legible without overly constraining, and to keep incentives/timescales aligned
2
5
Show replies