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

The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

cs.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#31

Post by skydhash »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #5

I think a lot of this is down to too much choice. There are many papers on this in psychology, but for example, from [1]: "Findings from 3 experimental studies starkly challenge this implicit assumption that having more choices is necessarily more intrinsically motivating than having fewer. These experiments, which were conducted in both field and laboratory settings, show that people are more likely to purchase gour…

A toolset is always a personal thing. You’ve adapted things to your need and worklfow, and with that can go with your day without worying about what to use. I believe computing should be customized to the individual or the company. Generic solutions will always feel generic and the current trend of either minimal customization or overcomplication is not helping. I think that’s why some people are pinning for old OS as they fullfilled their role of disapearing in the background and let you do your thing. Now you spend more time interacting with the OS than the applications.

Computers can do great, but I think it required some thinking about what you want to accomplish and how a computer can help. Then tailor your computer usage to that. For writing, you may want something like nano/notepad or the full word processor experience. But don’t use one when what you need is the other.

Choosing may be difficult, but a period of reflection will help tremendously.

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#32

Post by intelVISA »

xandrius wrote: post #24
intelVISA wrote: post #12

The main curse as an IC is that your productivity is heavily dependent on outside forces - more so than many other industries imo (or, at least, would be more easily recognized as a management level problem elsewhere) Like an artist who gets a contract to paint a house for a client but when (s)he arrives half the canvas is already wrecked by an offshore team... this is why teams have to put SWE candidates through 9 i…

The "9 interviews" quote irks me so badly: you're telling me that a modern company can have a "bad hire" actually causing any damage? What are code reviews, retros, and standups for? I think current tech interviews (with unpaid take home exercises, live coding, tech quizzes, etc.), are just a really inefficient and ironically lazy way to decide who to hire. A company could temp-hire 3 different people (anyone who app…

I agree, and 9 was a bit hyperbole, still that is the perception a potential candidate is up against. Not a fan of big timesinks like take homes at all, unpaid work has no place in a hiring pipeline.

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#33

Post by detourdog »

tvanantwerp wrote: post #25

Not sure if its a sufficient explanation, but I like what I've heard from Cal Newport about this. More and more self-service IT systems were able to replace a lot of jobs. But the result is that now you are responsible for doing things via IT systems that were previously outsourced to somebody else. E.g., you're booking your own travel instead of using a travel agent. In some sense, things are more efficient because…

With centralized IT there was a chance that technical support could be managed. If services are outsourced nobody really understnads the big pircture or what is going on.

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#34

Post by vundercind »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #5

I think a lot of this is down to too much choice. There are many papers on this in psychology, but for example, from [1]: "Findings from 3 experimental studies starkly challenge this implicit assumption that having more choices is necessarily more intrinsically motivating than having fewer. These experiments, which were conducted in both field and laboratory settings, show that people are more likely to purchase gour…

> Computers aren't really giving us too many benefits.

I suspect if we were any good at accounting for this stuff, we’d find that 95% of applications of computers have a 0.1x-1.1x multiplier on whatever we’re applying them to, once you factor in the extra costs, but the other 5% is like 5x-500x.

Beneficial overall and yet harmful a majority of the time one encounters it.

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#36

Post by xboxnolifes »

Scarblac wrote: post #29
xandrius wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "9 interviews" quote irks me so badly: you're telling me that a modern company can have a "bad hire" actually causing any damage? What are code reviews, retros, and standups for? I think current tech interviews (with unpaid take home exercises, live coding, tech quizzes, etc.), are just a really inefficient and ironically lazy way to decide who to hire. A company could temp-hire 3 different people (anyone who app…

> A company could temp-hire 3 different people (anyone who applied and could talk about their past projects), pay them for 1 month and you evaluate them then. At the end of the month, you decide who to keep But who would agree to join a company that has a procedure like that? Most people looking for a job are either already in one, or have several ongoing job applications, or both.

> But who would agree to join a company that has a procedure like that?

Juniors. I certainly would with my current situation.

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#37

Post by baxtr »

tvanantwerp wrote: post #25

Not sure if its a sufficient explanation, but I like what I've heard from Cal Newport about this. More and more self-service IT systems were able to replace a lot of jobs. But the result is that now you are responsible for doing things via IT systems that were previously outsourced to somebody else. E.g., you're booking your own travel instead of using a travel agent. In some sense, things are more efficient because…

But AI agents will solve this! /s

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#38

Post by xandrius »

Scarblac wrote: post #29
xandrius wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "9 interviews" quote irks me so badly: you're telling me that a modern company can have a "bad hire" actually causing any damage? What are code reviews, retros, and standups for? I think current tech interviews (with unpaid take home exercises, live coding, tech quizzes, etc.), are just a really inefficient and ironically lazy way to decide who to hire. A company could temp-hire 3 different people (anyone who app…

> A company could temp-hire 3 different people (anyone who applied and could talk about their past projects), pay them for 1 month and you evaluate them then. At the end of the month, you decide who to keep But who would agree to join a company that has a procedure like that? Most people looking for a job are either already in one, or have several ongoing job applications, or both.

Some of the people who got laid off might disagree.

I would at least I get some cash during my job hunt, get to make new connections and have a chance to get a new job. Also allows me to evaluate the company and not accept the full time offer after the probation time has expired. Win win.

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#39

Post by Jtsummers »

The Nicholas Carr "IT Doesn't Matter" responses link 404s, the correct link is: https://www.nicholascarr.com/?page_id=99. It looks like the original link used to redirect to this, but at some point the redirect was removed.

Archive link just in case that one ever goes away: https://web.archive.org/web/20150213164505/http://www.nichol...

Re: The IT Productivity Paradox (2015)

#40

Post by ukuina »

baxtr wrote: post #37
tvanantwerp wrote: post #25

Not sure if its a sufficient explanation, but I like what I've heard from Cal Newport about this. More and more self-service IT systems were able to replace a lot of jobs. But the result is that now you are responsible for doing things via IT systems that were previously outsourced to somebody else. E.g., you're booking your own travel instead of using a travel agent. In some sense, things are more efficient because…

But AI agents will solve this! /s

Why the sarcasm?
Post reply on HN