"The total annual cost for road maintenance in the U.S. is in the hundreds of billions of dollars, with estimates showing over $200 billion spent yearly".

That's before you consider how it takes 2-4x as long to get somewhere by public transit outside of peak hours and/or well-covered areas. A 20 minute trip from a bar in Queens to Brooklyn by car takes an hour by train after 2300, not including walking time. I made that trip many, many times, and hated it each time.

I also hope you like golf! And drinking!

There can be UNREAL amounts of drinking as an AE.

You'll also be on a plane A LOT. The folks in suits and sneakers waiting first in line to board with their roller bags? Almost all of them are AEs.

Most of your customers will see you as a walking credit card.

You can also make 6+-figure commission checks and deep friendships if the deals are right, so there's that.

This is a long post, but SEs are underrepresented here despite us being a big part of the sky high valuations that many companies on here have gotten, and it's a job that is still somehow not well known or understood.

I LOVE the travel. As someone whose happy place is seat 20F on a United 738 and a rental EV waiting on the other side, the random travel requests give me so much life. I enjoyed the 4 on, 3 off travel life as a consultant as well, but being asked to fly in for a meeting or two and get time to myself the day before is so much better. In fact, this is probably THE reason why I haven't gone back into the FTE world. Travel budgets for engineers are generally pithy.

I LOVE not having to answer to a Jira backlog. I can (and do) still ship PRs back to product if it makes sense for the customers I'm supporting, but my performance comp isn't tied to that. Interestingly enough, we are also not forced to use AI when coding for the same reason (though using it to understand what our customers are being increasingly asked to use is important, so I do sometimes).

Speaking of comp, I LOVE how transparent our comp packages are. The base salary is usually competitive with a high Senior/low Staff SWE, but unlike these roles, we don't get very many RSUs. What we do get is commission. The more we sell, the more we make. No black box bonus pool allocation nonsense. Some SEs can take in Staff+ total comp some years if they and their AE close a whale of a deal because of this. What's better about comp as an SE is that it's usually not regional. This makes the position super lucrative for engineers in LCOL/MCOL cities who don't mind getting on a plane every so often.

We also get a lot of time and space to tinker with the products we're selling when we're not out in the field (since we usually have to know them front to back; it's not uncommon for SEs to know more about a product than engineering or even Product). Most good SE managers will absolutely support you blocking off time to build, which is awesome!

Interviews are also WAY more than chill than those for SWE. No LC grinds. The hardest part is usually the tech panel (which is easy if you're good at presenting and explaining technical things in an accessible way).

So now onto the not so fun parts.

You are usually tied to a non-technical account executive (salesperson). The nature of that role attracts lots of...interesting people. Your entire existence as an SE hinges on how well you get along with your AE. A great relationship makes SE the best job in the world. Anything else makes it somewhere between a slog and hell on earth.

This is also a sales job at the end of the day. There's lots of talking and socializing involved. Not nearly as much as an AE, but doing happy hours and dinners sometimes comes with the job. As a massive introvert who often wants nothing more than to read Hacker News over a nice beer in sweet solitude at the end of an intense workday, you can probably imagine how draining these events can be.

Then there are the demos and POCs: the bread and butter of the role. Depending on where you are, you might be giving the same demo handfuls of times per day. These can be made more fun by working in investigative questions about the customer you're presenting to to learn more about them and why they need what you're selling (also called "discovery"), but some AEs won't give you that space. Feeling like your job is replaceable isn't great (even though it's not replaceable at all!)

There also isn't much upward mobility in this vertical. You can go a lot of places OUTSIDE the SE track given the cross-cutting nature of the job (Product, CTO, AE, and even back into engineering are common paths), but scope as an SE is narrower than the SWE path, as, again, its a sales job. (That said, getting into the Principal SE track usually involves talking at big shows and brand building like writing books, skills that are very useful if you want a heavy hitting job elsewhere or want to be the kind of person that gets paid to keynote conferences).

Many of the thought leaders in the SE space are technical but have lost their edge. Many of them are closer to sales than engineering. Some literally sell their presales methodologies and don't do technical stuff anymore. Great if you want to move away from that career; less so if you don't. More engineering-biased people might feel out of place initially.

Skill atrophy is also very real, counter to OPs observations. You can get away with minimal learning once you know what you're doing and have your demos locked in. It takes a while to get to this point, but once you're there, you can give a demo point blank a any time and are familiar enough with your product to lead a POC start to finish without blinking. This combined with not having time to "deep" learn due to meetings, demos and POCs can lead to skills slipping away.

Finally, that time to tinker can be hard to get if you're in a patch of heavy sales activity. This is felt the hardest when you join a new org and are sent into the field straightaway. This is often why so many SEs are usually former consultants of that product or ex-customers: shorter ramp-up time.

This can make it difficult to get back into a pure engineering role if SE doesn't work out. You won't have enough day to day experience to make hiring managers feel comfortable in bringing you on, which is a massive disadvantage in this market.

All in all, it's an awesome and somewhat safe career path that is a front row seat to how the money comes in, but it's heavily situational and probably not a fit for more introverted folks.

I forgot one more thing. Your technical aptitude carries less weight as an SE. Getting the technical win at a customer is what you're evaluated on.

Since you're almost always working with engineers and technical stakeholders at the customers you're selling to, you need to be able to talk the talk to fit in, gain their trust and help them see the value of what you're selling.

But those skillets alone won't get the technical win. This is where the sales part of sales engineering matters, and it matters a lot.

A quick example: a common mistake many new SEs coming from consulting make while giving demos is showing customers everything about a product step-by-step instead of showing them only what the customer said they care about (which you, hopefully, learned in the initial discovery call) and/or what they need to see (because other similar customers usually care about those things).

The former comes very naturally to consultants, as that's a big part of the job, but giving demos this way makes it much easier to NOT show what the customer needs to see AND increases the likelihood of you showing a deficiency in the product that can reduce interest or, if it's bad enough, kill the deal.

You won't come across those kind of skills unless you (a) founded a company and try hard to build business or (b) work in sales. But these skills make or break SEs.

Unlike rail and fiber, these models will continue to threaten multiple industries simultaneously while yielding power back to the GiganticCos.

FSD is very very good most of the time. It's so good (well, v14 is, anyway), it makes it easy to get lulled into thinking that it works all the time. So you check your watch here, check your phone there, and attend to other things, and it's all good until the car decides to turn into a curb (which almost happened to me the other day) or swerve hard into a tree (which happened to someone else).

Funny enough, much like AI, Tesla is shoving FSD down people's throats by gating Autopilot 2, a lane keeping solution that worked extremely well and is much friendlier to people who want limited autonomy here and there, behind the $99/mo FSD sub (and removing the option to pay for the package out of pocket).

I suspect those using the tools in the best way are thinking harder than ever for this reason.

Not inherently, no. Reading it and getting a cursory understanding is easy, truly understanding what it does well, what it does poorly, what the unintended side effects might be, that's the difficult part.

In real life I've witnessed quite a few intelligent and experienced people who truly believe that they're thinking "really hard" and putting out work that's just as good as their previous, pre-AI work, and they're just not. In my experience it roughly correlates to how much time they think they're saving, those who think they're saving the most time are in fact cutting corners and putting out the sloppiest quality work.

  The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that.

  - Feynman

My work’s codebase is 30 years of never-refactored C++. It takes an exceptional amount of focus and thinking to get even a cursory understanding of anything a particular method or class does or why it’s there.

But for languages like C, I agree with you (as long as function pointers aren’t used abused).