I believe it’s simply easier to manipulate younger devs into taking lower salaries, in general. So the tech companies (and apparently in China as well), reinforce this ageism.
> I believe it’s simply easier to manipulate younger devs into taking lower salaries
I agree with this, but just wanted to add how interesting it is that it occurs in a country ostensibly run by a system which is ostensibly about the power of labour.
E.G. shallow perks as ping-pong table, snacks, videogame, beers in the office but totally disfunctional management and work-life balance.
Using the latest shiny tech just because it makes it easier to target these groups and replace the burned out ones.
I see this happening a lot on finance and consulting jobs outside of tech too:
- Offer a reasonable salary for interns/trainees (not reasonable relative to the responsibilities though)
- Promise a huge corporate salary with benefits for the ones that are able to remain more than x years
- Burn all of them out, working overtime, abusing from young inexperienced people
- Promote a couple from dozens of people to serve as an example of successful cases
- Fire or continue abusing the rest
- Rinse and repeat
In the end you acquired a couple of indoctrinated corporate zombies as well as years of cheap hours from the other ones.
Just take a look at every year's trainee program and the mind washing process from banks and corporate consultancies. Do the candidates really believe that the company needs so many trainees each year? The turnover is a feature, not a bug...
Edit: Just noticed my point is not related to your argument, and I actually agree with you.
Replying to ataturk, who make a comment that is accurate (it doesn't deserve to be flagged, and I've 'vouched' for it), yet missed something:
> Communism is not about the "power of labor." Communism is about taking the individual and beating him into the mud until they are a bloody pulp, unable and unwilling to ever resist again.
Yes, that's why I used the word 'ostensibly'. As in they're not even paying lip service to the supposed goal.
Please don't vouch for ideological rant comments; they're off topic here and break the site guidelines every which way. And please don't use HN for ideological battle in general.
I've been on HN for 10 years and am familiar with the guidelines. I don't think "communism directly killed a bunch of people" is much of an ideology as a fact (some sources argue it was 64 rather than 100M people). But I won't reply to s73v3r_ since you've asked me not to.
In that case you know that the value of this site is intellectual curiosity. There's no intellectual curiosity in people bludgeoning each other re 100M vs. 64M mass murders for the umpteenth time on an internet forum. Ditto for "communism vs. capitalism". This simply isn't a medium where anything new can be done with it.
Because it's all so predictable, it's all off topic here. If this is what you want to do, you'll need to do it elsewhere. That's a plural "you", not just you personally.
> There's no intellectual curiosity in people bludgeoning each other re 100M vs. 64M mass murders for the umpteenth time on an internet forum
People aren't arguing each other re 100M vs. 64M mass murders - that's the different sources just for communist uprisings. The same doesn't exist for capitalism because the introduction of capitalism does not coincide with mass murder.
> If this is what you want to do, you'll need to do it elsewhere. That's a plural "you", not just you personally.
Understood. Better yet, can we simply just ban advocates for communism, nazism, genocide, etc?
That's a ridiculous comparison, and probably a better example of a comment worth flagging. Capitalism has many faults, but hasn't directly led to the deaths of 100M people.
I would beg to differ on that. Capitalism has brought us many, many harmful things. Oil companies using might to muscle into developing countries, polluting them, and not doing anything to clean up, for one.
If you're going to blame the deaths of 100 million people on Communism, you have to attribute to Capitalism the same deaths caused by companies flouting the law, releasing dangerous products, and market based providing of services. Communism isn't to blame when someone dies because they can't afford healthcare.
