this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
220 points (95.8% liked)
Technology
71457 readers
3322 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not trying to be a dick but the Executive Director can take a fucking pay cut.
I found a reddit thread from 4 months ago where he said his salary was $170k/year. I'm not saying he is making obscene money, but if that's nearly 15% of all operating costs he can shave that down to $80k-$100k and still live comfortably if he's willing to accept a more austere standard of living.
I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be paid well, but he's getting a damn sight better pay than moderators and community managers who seem to make up 50% of the budget for multiple people: the trust and safety team as well as the other employees at the foundation.
To be fair, that's the lowest executive salary I've seen in a looong time.
170k for running a company? Shit. I wouldn't do that. You can make just as much being a halfway competent developer, and it's way less stress.
I guess you live in the USA? No one makes this amount of money
A Senior Developer in any major city makes that amount of money.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/senior-developer-salary-SRCH_KO0,16.htm
Funnily enough, it shows the localised amount.
For me in France it shows 50k€ to 69k€, so $58k to $80k at current exchange rates
It just confirms that this is USA only haha
Btw glassdoor sucks. Forces you to have an account and register work shit
You can't just look at the exchange rate. You have to look at cost and standard of living.
Someone in the US making 100k is not doing as well as someone in France making 70k€
Doing better until you happen to incur a medical emergency, then bankrupt.
80k plus all of society's trappings of France. Dude, it's not even a comparison. Worker's rights, healthcare, public transit, safety, security...
Listed salaries are almost always what the employee pays, not what it costs the company. In the US, this includes the payroll tax, and cost of "benefits," like healthcare and unemployment insurance, and is referred to as the burdened rate. This is separate from the income tax the employee has to pay to the government, mind you.
The burdened rate for most employees at the companies I've worked for in the US is like 20-50% higher than the salary paid. Not sure exactly how it works in France, but I do know there's a pretty complex payroll tax companies have to pay. I think it's something like 40% at the salary you quoted.
Plus you have to add in the amortized cost of legal, HR, etc for employees.
Not a big deal for 1-2 employees, but as you scale you need support employees
And a 80k$ salary in France amounts to around 125k$ cost for the employer. So 170k$ isn't that much - I actually know French developers and network engineers that make similar money. The French ITsec architect I interviewed last year would have cost me (converted) around 150k$.
So 170k$ is absolutely not out of the normal range here.
Talking about France: The French government could start to properly support matrix.org as they use it for tChap. The same goes for Germany with the "Behördenmessenger"
Just looked on that link for the UK. The average is listed as £63k, which is $85k.
So you're not exactly disproving the point that that type of high salary is a US thing.
You can't at all compare unless you reference cost and standard of living. I've managed and hired people in multiple countries. It's not as simple as salary X exchange rate.
Cost of living in the UK is about 12% lower than the US, including housing costs. But the average salary is about half of the US salary. So you can see that that doesn't really cover it.
Source: https://livingcost.org/cost/united-kingdom/united-states
I hate that people treat the US like a country. It's bad for statistics.
The cost of living in New Jersey is 50% higher than Alabama, for example, using the site you linked. Averages across the US are near meaningless.
Since I'm talking about tech jobs, we should compare to states with lots of tech jobs, and we might get a better comparison.
Sure, but that applies to the UK too. London has a higher cost of living than Los Angeles; averages being averages, this is weighed against lots of cheaper places to live (with massive unemployment and stagnated economics).
It must not be that stressful if you have $170k leftover to pay yourself.
Most people work more stressful jobs for considerably less. We should stop giving CEOs a pass.
This shouldn't need to be said, but most people are useful idiots so here we are.
You're missing the point. There are easier jobs in the same industry for the same pay.
We're not comparing tech CEO to roofers. We're comparing them to other people in tech.
Uhh, no.
This is directly the point: Most people work more stressful jobs for considerably less. We should stop giving CEOs a pass.
Oh, and don't forget about this one!
Still not getting it I think.
Why would someone choose a more stressful job for the same pay?
This does not imply a lack of more stressful jobs that pay less. Obviously every idiot would take an easier job that pays more if they could.
I didn't forget. I chose to ignore it because it makes you look tacky and I'm being polite. But if you insist on pressing the point, there you go.
Because they don't have a choice? Holy shit, you people are so disconnected from reality it's not even funny.
People work significantly harder than this CEO for significantly less. If the CEO was forced to make less money, he could still do the job without an issue. But why would he when useful idiots will defend him making more?
If he's not willing to do the job for less, then someone else would be willing to take over his role considering how many people already work way harder for way less.
Thanks for proving my last point right, again.
I'm sure a roofer would gladly be willing to take over my job as well.
Do you think there are no requirements to being a CEO? Do you think you could do it? I'm wondering how deep this justice fantasy goes. Do you think we'd get a competent CEO at minimum wage?
Yeah, it's all grifts for morons by scumbags.
Some idiots were really trying to peddle the lie that infosec.exchange costs $5000/month to host while of course providing no verifiable evidence, just "trust them bro." It's sad watching suckers lap it up without a second thought.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Depends on what that title actually means. Viewing it as a pie chart skews it so you don't realize that $170k in USD is pretty mediocre for a Director of Engineering role. If the project dies without this person, and that's what they need in salary to make it worth it to keep them there, then that's what they get paid.
It's not like they're even making an obscene amount of money ffs. That's a middling engineering salary, and this person is running the whole show. You should see what other "director" jobs at much shittier companies get paid. I think twice this amount would be a weak guess. If this person was a prick, they'd be milking that goat and taking all the free money.
This is an open source project backed by a non-profit foundation, granted, but this person is taking a massive pay cut just by working this job. Think about how that might impact their life to make that choice while trying to have a family.
$170k salary still won't you a fucking house in this country unless you live in the middle of nowhere, and this person is almost certainly in a major tech hub city, so that money means diddly when trying to pay the bills. It's barely above the poverty line in Silicon Valley after taxes for reference.
Everyone in here complaining because they make half this and think it's a lot of money because they live in Bumfuck, Idaho has no idea what it costs to live in the larger tech hubs around the world.
Exactly. I’m nowhere close to the top of the tech ladder, but I make more than that and still have to rent and will be renting for several more years. To buy an average house in this city, it would be like 7k/month without a 20% down payment. And household debt needs to be 30% of your total income so I would need to make $250k to even get approved for a loan for an average house in the city.
That's probably because I live in another country which works very differently, so what I'll say is not a judgement about the veracity of your comment, but I find incredible that $14'000 a month could be in any capacity considered a mediocre salary… the French president earns that in euros!
You don’t have to buy a house every year
No, but you do have to make enough to convince the bank to loan you the money to buy it. Houses in major cities cost WAY more than $170k.
if it's a matter of years and not centuries then in fairly alright. In many countries nowadays, new borns will never have ownership of a house or flat.
Even in europe, $50k yearly would be considered a good pay, and house in major cities would also cost way more than $170k
If they have to pay their Executive Director that much as a non-profit and are failing to meet their funding goals as a non-profit the amount he gets paid has fuck-all to do with where he lives, and has everything to do with him failing at his job to secure funding.
So we're supposed to fund this guys lifestyle as people who donate to the project while the project itself twists in the wind? Give me a fucking break, dude. This is how you set your organization up for failure.
It's not like a bunch of his work couldn't be done remotely. Maybe he should move to bumfuck Idaho so he can afford to run this god damned foundation. But nooooo, he needs to live in some obscenely expensive area, right? Bull. Shit.
Is this thread not about a new attempt to secure funding?
Please don't be that person that runs in here, didn't read the thing, and writes multiple paragraphs of stupidity. Just don't do it.
You're not "funding this guy's lifestyle" (love how you assume it's a guy). You're paying a person a less than fair wage when they can be getting twice the money elsewhere for the same role.
This person is taking a drastic pay cut to run things AS THEIR JOB. It's how they pay for things, and have kids, and a life. You're making the assumption they are somehow bilking money out of this, and that's not the case from that dollar amount.
You also didn't seem to understand that because it's a non-profit custodial arm of the project, that they are the ones keeping it alive for people like to bitch about this person making a salary ffs. Jeebus, some people, how dare they.
To be fair, Joshua R. Simmons has since changed their name to Robin Riley and now goes by they/them pronouns which I did not notice noted anywhere on the matrix.org website. They're still the same person who has been running the foundation for a long time, so I hope I can be forgiven for not realizing their updated pronoun status. So, you're correct that they are no longer going by he/him pronouns, but I really don't know much past that.
I mentioned in the original post that I found a reddit thread where they talked about their pay and the breakdown of finances. They pull in roughly a million a year for the whole foundation, and 50% roughly goes to staffing, which means with 8 other people in the organization, everyone else is making about $60k a year if we're going to talk about underpaying people for their jobs. That's all the other executives and the entire trust and safety team.
Once again, if they're failing at their job to keep the project funded, that's when you make sacrifices to make it work.
That dollar amount is higher than what several presidents of European countries earn. I'm sorry but if a project is based on donations from around the globe, you can't then think of a salary that's one of the highest in the world.
I read all of the comment chain and I perfectly understand that in San Francisco or LA the rent is huge and that people earn those numbers. If I'll ever consider donating part of my Spanish salary, looking at that stupidly high number heavily disincentives me because what the fuck, living in one of the world's most expensive places and expecting for people that live with a third of that money (with a salary that's considered high!!) to donate is super entitled.
unconfortable but true
Maybe. But $170K isn’t what it used to be, even 5 years ago. Especially if you have kids.
Does that matter if he is failing to secure enough funding to run the non-profit? If they're risking shutting down major portions of what they do as the guiding foundation for the Matrix protocol, isn't that literally his fault since he's in charge? If the non-profit fails are all the people who donated their fucking money in hopes of it succeeding going to be happy that instead of being willing to take a haircut on pay to save the damn organization he was instead using their donated funds to fund his fucking lifestyle instead of, I don't know, living in a more modest area and doing more of the foundation business remotely?
Maybe someone shouldn't be taking on this kind of major risk and asking people for donations for the project if his kids are so fucking expensive. Nobody forced them to have those kids or live in a high cost of living area. Christ.
Not trying to be rude but they are not meeting their funding goals, which is his job. That's the entire point of the foundation existing, is to meet funding goals so they can continue to develop the protocol. If they aren't making enough money, should he take a paycut, or should they shut the whole thing down? It seems to me like they want to save the project he could take a modest pay cut, but that's just me.
Now 9 wonder if there's a similar report for Mozilla
You can pull the form 990 for any non-profit in the US pretty easily. Here's Mozilla's: https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200097189
Then I am: he is making obscene money. Converted that's like 125k GBP, you can buy a house for cash every 3 years in the UK from that much money O.o (Ok, every 6 years if you spend half of it one living costs.) It's almost 7 times the minimum wage here.
Employees have to pay for basically everything in the US, so salaries have to be a lot higher here. School, childcare, healthcare, retirement, you name it. Also, all those things are more expensive here because they're provided by companies that need to make a profit. It sucks.
yeah every 3 years is too much!
… well, tax so
every 5 years then!
… oh right rent he’d pay in the interim
fine every 7 years!
… ahhhh food costs money too!
okay okay every 8 years!
… i guess people do tend to pay bills
every 9 years!
… it’s not reasonable to be a shut in for those 6 years and being social costs money
every 10 years!
I make only slightly less than that in American dollars and I’m not at all close to running a company. I’m very solidly lower middle class I will also not be buying a hour for another 5-6 years.
That is a very modest amount of money for his role.