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

If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

ayende.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 105 posts

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#81

Post by prodigal_erik »

sunkencity wrote: post #30
hvs wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sad that you associate "passion" with "hipster". I can't think of a more inaccurate characterization of a highly motivated developer. I also didn't get the impression that he was looking for a "hipster".

I am myself a passionate developer, that doesn't mean I have the time to make massive open-source projects just to get a better resume, because I'm neck deep in writing code for the company I have been running for the last 7 years. Not all people have the luxury to figure out something worthwhile do do and put on github. I hate hiring people and putting a price tag on them, it's a cruel world but not every job interv…

Running a company for seven years would exempt you from any questions I could have about your passion.

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#83

Post by kkowalczyk »

pyohio2 wrote: post #71
adbge wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be clear: it's only discriminatory against people that don't have pet projects. Having a family or other hobbies and having pet projects are not mutually exclusive.

Really? Try having a 18 month old & a 3.5 year old and single parenting.

And yet here you are, demonstrating that you have time to read Hacker News and participate in the discussion.

I'm not saying that parenting isn't time consuming but it's not as good an excuse when it's so obvious that your lack of time for more programming is also caused by much less noble activities than parenting.

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#84

Post by kkowalczyk »

tzs wrote: post #39

The obvious question: if I take a job with you, will you guarantee that work will not take up too much of my time, nor demand too much of my creative energy, so that I can continue to have my pet projects?

He can't. But I can guarantee this: an employer can't force you to work more than you're willing to work. They can try but you're not their slave.

Employment is a two-way street.

If the employer isn't happy with your work, for whatever reason, they can fire you.

If you're not happy with your employer, for whatever reason, you can quit.

If an employer is making unreasonable demands on your time, you quit. And to be clear: there is no universal of what's reasonable, so I'm talking about your personal standard.

Employment is a risk for both parties. You risk that the job will be boring, or demanding more time than you're willing to give but you're not the only one taking the risk. Employer risks that you'll be unable to do the work or slack off etc.

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#85

Post by 0x12 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #63
spacemanaki wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought those contracts were not enforceable in CA? I'm most definitely not a lawyer tho, so I have little to back that up, but it's what I read in Joel Spolsky's answer here: http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422/if-im-working-...

Generally they are not enforcable, but it doesn't stop folks like Google and Cisco from having them. And they are written with big letters in the front "THIS IS AN AT WILL ARRANGEMENT ..." which basically says they can fire you at any time for any reason and later "We own everything you do while you work for us." Basically the message is "Sure work on your own projects and we will decide it's no longer in our best in…

> I have heard stories of course but only have first hand knowledge of one person with whom Google decided to fire because they did some open source work they didn't like.

Wow. That's quite a statement, I'm pretty sure there would be quite a few people that would like to see a bit more on that. Both from the perspective of having google as a future employer as well as to make sure you didn't make it up, it's quite a statement.

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#86

Post by notJim »

kkowalczyk wrote: post #84
tzs wrote: post #39

The obvious question: if I take a job with you, will you guarantee that work will not take up too much of my time, nor demand too much of my creative energy, so that I can continue to have my pet projects?

He can't. But I can guarantee this: an employer can't force you to work more than you're willing to work. They can try but you're not their slave. Employment is a two-way street. If the employer isn't happy with your work, for whatever reason, they can fire you. If you're not happy with your employer, for whatever reason, you can quit. If an employer is making unreasonable demands on your time, you quit. And to be cl…

What you say is true, but it's important to realize that the nature of the risk is disproportionate. The programmer quitting his job has a lot more at stake than the company firing the programmer. For the programmer, it means a stressful job search, likely financial stress (even if s/he saved up a lot of money, it's not fun to be living on a finite supply), and all the feelings that go along with losing a job (wounded pride, fear of judgement from others, etc.)

For the employer, it means what? They now have payroll that's significantly lighter, and true, they're down a person, but realistically that just means they have to pressure their other employees to pick up the slack while they find someone new, and those programmers, not wanting to lose their jobs, probably do it.

Now, of course the important thing as a programmer is to have an attitude like yours, which mitigates the downsides of leaving a job. But not everyone has that attitude.

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#87

Post by shabble »

noidi wrote: post #54
quinedstatement wrote: post #5

I consider myself very passionate about programming. I do a lot of research and learn about programming in my spare time, but have hardly any personal programming projects to show. After work, instead of grinding away coding like I do every day, I'm learning how to draw, and paint, and play music. Does this mean I'm not qualified for this .NET position?

> I do a lot of research and learn about programming in my spare time, but have hardly any personal programming projects to show. I think this point is not stressed enough whenever this subject comes up. A person who spends all his free time reading CS research papers and experimenting with different solutions to problems he encounters in his field is not passionate by this standard if he doesn't have a pet _project_…

In that case, you could probably knock together a quick page or two summary of what you've been reading and playing about with. It might take a little time, but it's easily transferable to any other job applications, and you might even find something interesting to add to your cover letter.

I'd treat that at least as well as a pet project, and possibly more so.

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#88

Post by anthonyb »

0x12 wrote: post #24

If you have a life, I don't want you. If you have a family, I don't want you. If you have enough energy to do your work but not enough energy that after work you can work some more, I don't want you. What is it that makes employers so enamored of people with 'pet projects'? Are they easier to take advantage of? Do they work long hours without expecting compensation? Does not having dependents mean that it's easier to…

This is bullshit. I have a full time job, a family and I've written a book in the past two years, and I still have time for side projects. Normally while commuting on the train or in the evenings, but still...

Pet projects are a good proxy for determining whether a developer can actually, you know, develop. Much better than asking trivial algorithm questions or getting someone to figure out a puzzle. They're also good fodder for interviews:

* "Why did you go with this architecture/data structure/library instead of Y?"

* "What's the next step in your roadmap?"

* "Why would I use this?" / "Why did you start it?" / "What's different about this and project Y?".

My fallback is to get them to provide a code sample "that they're proud of", which is not quite as good, but still indicative that they're still thinking about their craft. Hiring based purely on an in-person interview and a CV is incredibly risky - I've seen people who can talk a pretty good line, but write really obnoxious, poorly structured code.

Perhaps think of it this way: A critical part of any developer's job is figuring out what tech is coming in the next couple of years, or which is available now and not being used, pushing the envelope of what's possible. Hence why the OP says "When you tell me that your only projects outside of work are 5+ years old, that is a bad indication..."

Re: If you don’t have pet projects, I don’t think I want you

#90

Post by chokolad »

mirkules wrote: post #44

First off, some of us have lives and families. Some of us work more than just 9-5 and commute for more than one hour each way. Secondly, none of my pet projects are OSS. I have a lot of pet projects, some in their infant stages, some pretty far along. And they are not for public viewing, but for my pleasure, which is why they are not OSS. [edit: and some are a collaboration with other people who would prefer that cod…

> Thirdly, is there such a thing as a passionate .NET programmer!? (half-joking)

Blog author is definitely the one. He is one of the core NHibernate committers, prolific blogger with a lot of very interesting posts, developed Rhino Mocks mocking library, created RavenDB http://www.ravendb.net/ and did a lot of other neat things. So yes, there is such a thing.

Post reply on HN