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

Not a full timer

mohamedhayibor.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 42 posts

Re: Not a full timer

#2

Post by weeksie »

I feel like I'm reading half of an argument here. Is this a response to something? Who in the world works for free when they're doing contract work?

Re: Not a full timer

#3

Post by mrosett »

weeksie wrote: post #2

I feel like I'm reading half of an argument here. Is this a response to something? Who in the world works for free when they're doing contract work?

Yeah I couldn’t really follow the argument.

Re: Not a full timer

#4

Post by Jedd »

I find the term 'full time' unnecessarily ambiguous.

Certainly 'employee' suggests something contra to 'contractor', but there's no reason someone working 40 hours a week can't or shouldn't be considered full-time regardless of their permanent / contractor status.

I can't tell if this is irony, in the context of being 'precise in your communications' and advice to 'edit ruthlessly':

> You must ruflessly cut out bullshit, bloat, ...

Re: Not a full timer

#5

Post by EliRivers »

80% of my clothes are sportwears for a long time. It gives the feeling that you are a pro. A professional athlete, and a professional at your career, your performance totally relies on you.

Nothing looks more professional than someone sitting at a desk in yoga pants or a tracksuit. Yes indeed.

You know what else looks professional? A military or public services uniform. This guy should get a firefighter outfit to wear while sitting at a desk typing code. Then he'll feel really professional.

Re: Not a full timer

#6

Post by botto »

It never feels like the contractor is an "expert" in a field, is any more efficient than another employee and is nothing more than another person that has been hired to do programming with less HR/employment overhead.

So not sure which audience this article is aimed at.

Maybe my experience in London doesn't reflect other places but as a contract and as someone who has looked for contractors it never felt like we got anyone special. They were another person and they took just as long to on board and become efficient.

Re: Not a full timer

#8

Post by madamelic »

newshorts wrote: post #7

I had to stop reading at “ruflessly”, I can’t trust someone’s opinion if they can’t take the time.

I am assuming the author has English as a non-primary language, which is totally fine almost all the time...

Except the author talked about making sure communication is succinct and the article has a lot of unnecessary fluff and indirectness.

This article could be really great with more polish.

Re: Not a full timer

#9

Post by soneca »

Jedd wrote: post #4

I find the term 'full time' unnecessarily ambiguous. Certainly 'employee' suggests something contra to 'contractor', but there's no reason someone working 40 hours a week can't or shouldn't be considered full-time regardless of their permanent / contractor status. I can't tell if this is irony, in the context of being 'precise in your communications' and advice to 'edit ruthlessly': > You must ruflessly cut out bulls…

I believe it is just an unimportant mistake from someone that might not be a native English speaker. I do those all the time, something like a "phonetic typo"; I write things as they sound in my native language and don't realize it.
Post reply on HN