Just some anecdata, I’m in ml not in faang and make more than the top end of the survey in the OP.

If I were to give some guidance, I’d suggest skipping on faang as they top out where they top out, and go downstream to smaller public companies who are growing and where you can deliver real value. Companies like snapchat doubled in 1 year, square doubled in 1 year, etc etc. If you’re already joining a trillion dollar company you need to enter as a leader to earn the top end.

You’ll never see these stats because 1) you don’t gain anything from sharing and 2) it’s easy to find who you are at smaller companies.

I have this issue talking to people on HN all the time. Fundamentally it boils down to this: The people making mid six digits or higher don't want to share exactly how much they make because there is very little upside, and people vote based on their own perspective of "what's true" which slants towards average.

The other thing that I don't like is the money-worship around here. I don't want someone else to feel bad that they're "only" making $120k a year. I want more people to help their communities and get involved with our democracies to help craft better legislation to protect ourselves from an ever more technological world. It really, really doesn't matter what type of car you drive.

But I've noticed something over the years: The people that go out of their way to give back never hurt for money. Doesn't work both ways (I know plenty of wealthy people that are self-centred) but if you give back it's a happier, more fulfilled life and as a side bonus you get a lot of intros with great upside.

I'm curious to know how you got into ML? Did you go the degree route? PhD? I'm guessing that's where the top end of the salary range goes to but would be interested to know your personal path and if you have any advice on how to start.

PhD. From what I found, the most successful people are the ones that marry the technical with the business and consistently deliver value. So it’s not talk/hype, but real value and competitive advantage and ability to communicate and effectuate change.

And how does one deliver value, in detail?

Interesting, as per my comment below, this is something I tried and failed to do well. Would you consider getting in touch for a brief chat? You can reach me on mr475 [at] cantab [dot] net - thanks!

Spot on

I don't know... Glassdoor's system seems to work pretty well for collecting this kind of data. Sure the number of reported salaries is maybe too small to say anything specific about individual companies, but in aggregate places like Glassdoor and LinkedIn could probably tell us with high certainty what the distribution looks like.

In a world where (A) compensation is typically mostly in the form of liquid equity grants and (B) compensation amounts change rapidly year-on-year, Glassdoor's system vastly understates compensation in the field.

But you have to recognize that this system is very atypical outside of FAANGs. Most large companies have very modest stock incentive programs.

> FAANGs

Do we just use FAANGs to mean every West coast software company? Because otherwise it is very typical of non-FAANGs as well.