It was not meant to be a comment on how it feels today, or to suggest that we shouldn't feel empathy for them because of their future position.
I just meant that in a few years they'll look back on this and laugh, which makes it story much less sad. Do you disagree with that?
Look, I'm coming from the perspective of an outsider. OP seemed to suggest it is heartbreaking to read about Zynga, which is what I was responding to. If one of my close friends was working there, I would absolutely feel a different way.
Similarly, if I read about a kid's cat dying on the internet, it might just make me feel a bit down. When my dog died, heartbroken was exactly how I felt.
Well, okay, maybe some of them might have been under a lot of stress and that might affect their personal life and even health or life expectancy.
Maybe some of the talented people who might have a fantastic career ahead of them won't recover and become jaded or leave the industry altogether.
Maybe none of that is heartbreaking, strictly said. It's "highly unfortunate" or "really sad", perhaps.
What really grates is your decision to nitpick about the choice of words because you saw something that was even sadder on TV.
>some Silicon Valley developers, one of the highest paid professions in one of the highest paid areas of the world, only made a decent salary instead of a fantastic total compensation package?
The relevance of the integrity of the managers to the ways people make decisions that determine the course of their lives is not something to be taken lightly. This applies even if the consequences themselves do not appear to be so dire. There is a distinctly painful feeling that comes along with devoting your life to someone who abuses that. For those familiar with this perception, the idea that you could ignore it is preposterous. From your perspective, whatever it may be, it could beyond your imagination and experience.
You might say this:
>Is it really 'heartbreaking' when someone's 17-year-old cat dies? It's a normal and expected outcome; plus, not only were they lucky enough to afford a pet and keep it in good health, the animal itself hasn't lost much, considering it's limited cognitive capacity.
And yet anyone who has been through or even near this situation would find the argument to be incredibly callous, because the formation of human emotion has so much more to it than simply evaluating one's present situation.
I understand the sentiment that perhaps nobody is entitled to a fantastically large amount of money and that people living what we call the good life are a small minority in the world. However, that just isn't the story here.
Connections between humans are what make society possible. It's reasonable to care when they are abused.