Live data from Hacker News

Cutting your salary by 40%

codewithoutrules.com

401–410 of 451 posts

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#401

I often think about Arthur Rubenstein, the phenom mid-century pianist, for whom a lot has been written about his mission in early life to "practice as little as possible." There's a lot of hyped up romanticism in these quotes and anyone who plays at his level has spent a lifetime playing piano, period. Regardless, his guidance about spontaneity, creativity, and the relationship to practicing too much, which I equate…

You need to get really good at something to arrive at this level. This is the equivalent of saying somebody who scales a Mt Everest regularly, can scale Mt Everest regularly without excessive practice.

Conveniently forgetting all the previous effort that went into it.

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#402
post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really agree. Practice is important for building skills, and for knowing the piece. The point is that you should be able to play the piece like you know how to walk. Imagine: if you had do 'think' about walking, about every step, you would walk unnaturally. You'd certainly not be able to swatter. When you can play as you walk - then - you can loosen up, and focus on having fun, making it creative i.e. have sw…

A programmer can usually average ~4 hours of focused highly productive work where they are not on Hacker News etc per day. Fewer people can do that kind of focused effort for ~8 hours a day regularly. I have never met someone that can do that kind of highly focused effort for ~12 hour days. That does not mean highly focused effort is the only valid type of work. But, it is very valuable for most programming jobs. Fur…

Modern day programming is so much more than just opening up your IDE and churning out code. You have to collaborate, talk, review other people's work etc. There is also a meta aspect to it to improve you productivity at work by looking at your own work from a level above.

You also have to keep learning new bleeding edge stuff to not be out of business in a few years.

Plus doing a lot of side projects and extra work, always opens up avenues for new opportunities and helps you to meet with other smart people who often have something new for you.

All of this is work. And there is no way you can be good at this if you only work for 4 hrs a day.

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as a lifelong, professional classical and jazz musician, I can tell you that the current state of both very closely mirrors the current state for swe, it is just that swe's seem to have to go through what we have been through, just faster. There was a time in classical music and jazz, and even pop, when creativity was sought after. this time is no more. Classical/jazz has become a robotic craft in search of technical…

good post. its funny, im a musician too. i decided the conservatory could fuck off after 1 year. ive found gypsy jazz a breath of fresh air personally... wonderful people and spirit, tons of gigs, technical virtuosity to the extreme, AND even some truly creative players. i do agree the paralells are strong esp between jazz people and swe. i dont know, you probably are further on your musical journey, but, i feel like…

> i decided the conservatory could fuck off after 1 year.

Yes and no. Remember Picasso: "It took me four years to paint like Rafael, but a lifetime to paint like a child". Being patient enough to acquire the mountains of knowledge, the sound bases achieved by generations before yours, pays great dividends later in life, no matter the field. It's truer for some fields than others, of course.

There are some surprising examples: Mika used to be a classically trained lieder singer, and won a scholarship (if I recall) to the Royal College of Music, which he promptly used to "learn to sing like a pop star" with the results we know today.

Now this is not to say you should do hours of figured bass if you want to be a blues singer (and FWIW, Arnold Schoenberg says in Harmonielehre that he thinks this is a silly way to learn harmony). But there is value in learning common practice harmony and understanding both Beethoven and Richter even if you are going to do blues.

> complaining that creativity isnt present in music just means your hanging with the wrong people

Yes and further, in order to have something interesting to say you must have lived, which is why high school concerts can be so tedious even with very talented students (mine had note-perfect Rachmaninov Paganini variations! what hope have we mere mortals... yet the pianist is now a doctor). Globalisation is also reducing the variance between artists, both because concert halls are standardising star power cross-border, and because people are becoming more alike all over the world. On the demand side, I'd whine about the Instagram generation falling short on the pathos side of things but I'd start sounding like an old man; really variance is the problem, not depth.

The only exception I can think of is of Amy Kobayashi as a tiny child doing Mozart's 26th concerto [1] in a really fresh and interesting manner (this lent truth to something a pianist who had lived through WWII told me, that Mozart could be understood only by children and those on their death beds).

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32gsiqbjbk8 - note also the technique, such as the relaxed, freely rotating wrists that Neuhaus says are the hallmark of the best.

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#404
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't Rubinstein humbly then revisit technique and practise religiously in his 40s? (Not to detract from your point, which I think has value). I think that the middle way is key. I've met people who think work for the sake of work is valuable. Others who wouldn't touch hard work with a barge pole. If you cherish success, both are required. Having met virtuoso pianists, I'd say the context which Rubinstein talks from…

>> Reaching the level of mastery where one can sightread any of the Beethoven concerti or a Liszt etude requires a lifetime of years/decades of dedicated practice, but it is true that once you're at that level, you can find diminishing returns on hard work which encroach upon your creativity. I would argue that looking at sheet music and playing it requires very little creativity, if any at all. It is in that arena t…

>>Most of the time they don't write anything interesting.

But they write a lot of thing. And by the law averages something interesting eventually emerges.

They just shift the quantitative process to the non saturated elements in the process.

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#405
A lot of wanting in the comments in this thread. People really want to believe that one's productivity drops off a cliff after 40 hrs. Whenever I read these types of threads, which so often bubble up to the top of HN, I wonder why people are so energized in trying to convince _others_ that they ought to work less (actually, I don't).

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#406

I enforce a militant "40 hours only" policy for my employees, and it's incredible for productivity. When you work longer hours defect rates increase, code quality drops, and things are on fire all the time. You also lose really good people due to burnout. Sustainable pace is super important for creating and maintaining high performance teams. Crassly, it's just a more profitable way of doing business. I wish more man…

My employer has traditionally been very good about 40 hour weeks. However, recently everyone on the team has been doing 55-80 hours per week. On about week 4, I pointed out to my manager that the last time we were on an extended stretch of OT, the company put in place a policy to pay us at an hourly rate equal to our annual salary / 2080 for all OT hours worked. He responded "Yeah, but [project x] was on OT for over…

I think at the point a company reaches a state like that. Management better expect every single employee to be looking for a way out...

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"requires" is an interesting word. i think you can get away with being a robot, but you are basically saying that no classical musicians are creative, which is laughable. you can improvise dynamics, tone, articulation, phrasing, tempo... its not just the pitches man!

as a lifelong, professional classical and jazz musician, I can tell you that the current state of both very closely mirrors the current state for swe, it is just that swe's seem to have to go through what we have been through, just faster. There was a time in classical music and jazz, and even pop, when creativity was sought after. this time is no more. Classical/jazz has become a robotic craft in search of technical…

Undoubtedly!

I play harmonica for fun. I tried to learn sheet music, and gave up in two weeks.

It felt wrong to even begin with. Music is mostly about hearing and feeling. I saw no point in turning myself into sight to music converting meat robot.

After several weeks of tinkering, I was finally able to learn how to play by ear, and I've never enjoyed music more than then.

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#408
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you determine that 40 hours is optimal? Why not 30? Or 50?

I'm not convinced it's optimal! However, it's a "known good" number that's easy to convince people to follow along with. Running experiments is hard and expensive, so we just haven't tackled that yet. My personal suspicion is that optimal is probably in the 35-45 range, but I'd love to have more data.

My suspicion is it's somewhere in the 30 - 40 range. For me personally my productivity starts declining after 30, but I'm fairly certain some of my coworkers can do it longer.

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's what most of the English speaking societies have centred on over time. Other places say Scandinavia might put it at 37 and some Asian companies might be closer to 45. But around 40 hours pr week is where most modern societies tend to think work/life balance is reasonable both for the economy and the individual. The old union slogan used to be 8 hours of work 8 hours of sleep and 8 hours of leisure. And in many w…

That's linked to the question of "how many hours can we extract from these human widgets before they revolt?" It doesn't hold true in times of crisis, such as war. When the US ramped up for WWII, people were happily working around the clock. And I'm not sure that it applies to the knowledge workers. My own view is that knowledge workers are productive in bursts.

People were happily working around the clock, but I'm fairly certain the people breaking Enigma didn't try doing that more than a fair number of hours a day (fuck if I know what it is, but it's not equatable to making bombs or tanks).

Re: Cutting your salary by 40%

#410
post #405

A lot of wanting in the comments in this thread. People really want to believe that one's productivity drops off a cliff after 40 hrs. Whenever I read these types of threads, which so often bubble up to the top of HN, I wonder why people are so energized in trying to convince _others_ that they ought to work less (actually, I don't).

Its for one simple reason. If there is a sizable(but not majority) chunk of people who work above average hours, they will very likely produce above average quantity and quality of work. By that very virtue they will be more competitive, better and well ranked above the remaining majority. And it will eventually lead to having an effect on things like compensation and long term career viability. If you as a young person want to work less, your older self will want to work lesser, and it keeps getting harder to catch up, to a point you will eventually have to give up.

This will eventually create a lot of long term problems for non-participants in this crazy work hours work life. There fore they ask for some sanity as a overall work culture.

This is nothing new to software. My dad was a bus driver at a factory, he used to tell me that people who picked up over time work were routinely hated, by the remainder who didn't want to or couldn't.

Nobody likes to watch themselves being at an disadvantage due to their own actions.

Post reply on HN