Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Work Hard (2007)

terrytao.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 203 posts

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#161

Post by metafunctor »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #45
albatross13 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of a double edged sword- I've worked with a few people that "work hard" and "get things done", only to find out once they leave (or go on vacation) that now we have to untangle a 600 line bash script that's integral to production. I'm being a bit hyperbolic here, but the gist of my point is: not everyone who works hard is worth keeping around, especially if their hard work leads to an un-managable mess in t…

I used to think like this too, but now-a-days, it's more like "What a luxury to be in a position where you get paid to untangle a 600 line bash script" That is, usually these few hard workers are typically the ones responsible for getting a company to profitability precisely because of their GSD attitude. Now that the company has some runway, the architecture and refactoring can proceed.

What perverted sense of luxury is this?

There is no shortage of software jobs. There are plenty of opportunities to work with a relatively clean codebase, capable and experiences colleagues, unencumbered by the VC runway bullshit.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#162

Post by mrmage »

superlopuh wrote: post #121
ralmeida wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Timing for macOS, pretty good: https://timingapp.com/ (available also from Setapp)

I've had it pretty negatively affect my experience of using macOS due to hyperlinks taking seconds to open throughout the OS. Uninstalling it fixed the issue. I still haven't found a good alternative and am a bit sad about it.

Hey, Daniel here, the founder of Timing. I haven't had reports from other customers about Timing slowing down URL opening. In fact, as an engineer myself, I spent a _lot_ of time optimizing Timing's tracking to be as efficient and unobtrusive as possible.

If you'd like to give Timing another shot, would you mind reaching out via https://timingapp.com/contact with details on the OS version and Timing version you used, as well as the apps the problems occurred with? If you need a new trial to reproduce the issue, just let me know and I'll set you up with one.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#163

Post by arvinsim »

herodoturtle wrote: post #4

> there is an important distinction between “working hard” and “maximising the number of hours during which one works”. In particular, forcing oneself to work even when one is tired, unmotivated, unprepared, or distracted with other tasks can end up being counterproductive to one’s long-term work productivity, and there is a saturation point beyond which pushing oneself to work even longer will actually reduce the to…

I think this point is obvious.

What's not obvious is to find the line between doing too little and doo too much. There are just too many variables and a lot of nuance to consider.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#164

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

TameAntelope wrote: post #24

I've held for a long time that you must know the rules quite well before you're "allowed" to break them, and I think this reinforces my opinion on that. Additionally, I think the obsession over "intelligence" and "natural ability" is vastly overstated, in general. It absolutely helps, and it compounds, to be smart, but a person who "works hard" is infinitely more valuable to their colleagues than a smart person who d…

> I've held for a long time that you must know the rules quite well before you're "allowed" to break them, and I think this reinforces my opinion on that.

I had an art teacher that pointed this out about Picasso. He got famous for his Cubist/Abstract work, but he was actually an excellent realist.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#165

Post by raman162 »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #144
dimitrios1 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think like this too, but now-a-days, it's more like "What a luxury to be in a position where you get paid to untangle a 600 line bash script" That is, usually these few hard workers are typically the ones responsible for getting a company to profitability precisely because of their GSD attitude. Now that the company has some runway, the architecture and refactoring can proceed.

I never felt luxury when our service didn’t scale to meet the goals of higher-ups because the code was over engineered with hacks piled on top. It doesn’t matter how good of an MVP you built if it is so inflexible that it has to be thrown away and rebuilt to meet tomorrow’s needs. Managers tend to reward those who complete tasks today as minimally as possible at the expense of the product tomorrow.

I think scrappy MVPs have their place,it's just knowing when to use one. If you're a very early stage start-up and you're trying to validate your idea, the quicker you can see if that idea is valuable is better than risking time building a clean code architecture.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#166

Post by hutzlibu »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #61
herodoturtle wrote: post #4

> there is an important distinction between “working hard” and “maximising the number of hours during which one works”. In particular, forcing oneself to work even when one is tired, unmotivated, unprepared, or distracted with other tasks can end up being counterproductive to one’s long-term work productivity, and there is a saturation point beyond which pushing oneself to work even longer will actually reduce the to…

Great point. I like to compare work capacity to exercise capacity. Too much exercise will actually harm your fitness rather than improve it. However, reasonable exertions, combined with appropriate rest, will improve your fitness over time. Like exercise capacity, one's ability to work hard can also be improved through practice. This doesn't mean pulling all-nighters and chugging caffeine to override the sleepiness,…

"However, if you set a goal to spend 3.5 hours in your code editor every day"

I would be careful trying to set up such metrics for yourself.

I can stare for hours at code and not getting anything done. Then away from the screen on a walk or sitting down with pen and paper I solve the problem and implement it in 15 min in code.

My point is, I would focus on a tasklist. Clear things to do at once. (Or in parallel if they are trivial.) Getting things done, not spending time doing things.

Otherwise I agree to your post.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#167

Post by ZephyrBlu »

joelbluminator wrote: post #145
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not a problem. The problem I see is touting the value of hard work to people who may not have the requisite IQ to go along with it for their desired outcome (Best in the world in their field, for example). You said, Additionally, I think the obsession over "intelligence" and "natural ability" is vastly overstated, in general" . I think it's actually understated in general. Telling people who don't have the me…

While I agree there is a certain threshold of skills below which one can't really function as a lawyer/software dev, after passing that threshold your IQ matters less. There is the top 1% or even 0.01% of performers out there and then there is the rest of us. The difference between a software dev with an IQ of 115 or 125 doesn't sound that big to me. A lot in their careers will depend on their people skills and work…

Yes, I agree. If we're talking about a normal career then having 115 vs 125 IQ probably won't make much of a difference compared to being diligent.

However, I think that if you want to be a very high performer IQ might be a hindrance. For someone like Musk or Jobs I think it definitely is.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#168

Post by yesenadam »

yesenadam wrote: post #110
spenczar5 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Richard Hamming wrote a book, "The Art of Doing Science and Engineering", which - despite its name - is more or less a memoir of his own scientific career. It's a fun read if you're interested in that culture.

From the preface, "After many years of pressure and encouragement from friends, I decided to write up the graduate course in engineering I teach at the U.S.Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. ...In this series of lectures I try to communicate to students what cannot be said in words—the essence of style in science and engineering. ...I have found that the personal story is far, far more effective than…

Sorry, this version of the same lectures has better video quality:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLctkxgWNSR89bl7hTOS3F...

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#169

Post by mindentropy »

mattnewton wrote: post #34
giantg2 wrote: post #25

It's probably good advice, and maybe my dissent is just due to my burn out, but... I'm tired of hearing "work hard". Very often, working hard does not lead to success. It sure as shit didn't work out that way for me. There are many people who do not work hard and make tons of money in things like NFT, crypto, securities, office politics, scams, etc. It seems like luck is the shared variable... of which I have none.

The way I look at it, luck is a very important variable, but it's one outside your control almost by definition, so it's not worth writing about how to change it. So if you can't load the dice what can you do to get those high rolls? Well, maybe you can roll the dice more often (try more avenues, work harder), maybe the dice aren't all equal and you can observe many dice and pick the ones that happen to be paying out…

I have come to the conclusion that working hard is basically rolling the dice. You can roll your dice in a single game or change games or even multiple games simultaneously.

The thing is it is impossible to know if will be lucky or not. So the only way to know the truth is to roll the dice.

Re: Work Hard (2007)

#170

Post by mindentropy »

didibus wrote: post #116
spoonjim wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if you take that all as “luck” then certainly your predisposition to hard work is also “luck,” at which point you’ve denied free will, which might actually be true but isn’t very actionable.

What if looking for actionable things related to working harder is a useless waste of time? It might be better then to look into medical, genetic and environmental aspects, and focus on that instead of trying to find tricks to work harder. For example, trying to change your environment might help more than busting your a$$. Can you move to a place with better access to education, books, or people with expertise? Can…

All what you describe requires the precursor of you throwing the dice to see what happens.

>You can achieve that by finding something you have a natural aptitude for, or for which you have the right environment to succeed at.

Again to explore this requires you to throw the dice and you will stumble upon it. Also aptitudes change with time and to explore the next aptitude requires you to throw the dice. You should also be lucky that you will get to throw the dice.

Post reply on HN