I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane • Hacker News Board

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#161

Post by crusso » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 2:47 PM UTC

UK-AL wrote: post #142

olivier1664 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, if the guy can not manage to have a raise for himself, he will probably not be a good sales/leaders/foounders.

I don't think that's true. A lot successful founders I know started their own companies because of frustration at their current company. Ironically they pull the shit that annoyed them with their own staff. Even people with a lot of charisma will have a lot problems if they have no official company authority.

Ironically they pull the shit that annoyed them with their own staff.

Often, this is because they've been drenched from the cold bucket of reality. The nonsense ideas they once had about how easy it was to be the boss and how they would have the time, money, and energy to treat each employee as a special little extremely well paid but not-too-overworked snowflake was completely unachievable.

They realized that being the boss is difficult, because no matter how well their little startup is doing, there are always other bosses (customers, the IRS, life) to whom they are responsible.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#162

Post by crusso » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 2:51 PM UTC

ludoo wrote: post #114

I knew a .* that went completely insane. Ok, so what?

That's what I thought as well. I expected some dire circumstance that the guy was put in, or some special lesson besides the weekly slacker "don't work to hard for the man" meme.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#163

Post by flyinRyan » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 2:51 PM UTC

yen223 wrote: post #47

oyvindeh wrote: post #13

This is sad, but it's also plain old human psychology. If you help someone out, you put yourself in an inferior position. If you're always the one sacrificing yourself, people around you will feel more and more superior to you. At some point, they will start expecting that you sacrifice yourself whenever shit hits the fan. This doesn't mean it's bad to help out, or to sacrifice yourself once in a while. But in order…

> If you help someone out, you put yourself in an inferior position. What? This doesn't make sense. When you help someone out, you are putting that person in an inferior position. Does a beggar feel superior to you because you tossed him a quarter?

It does make sense. I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said you should try to get someone to do you a favor because they'll be more likely to do you more favors in future.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#164

Post by dclowd9901 » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 2:56 PM UTC

konstruktor wrote: post #105

edw519 wrote: post #84

Although this is an extreme example, I sympathize and often have feelings like this. But it's not about the amount of work; it's about the constant internal struggle. Let me explain. I have never had a problem about the volume or difficulty of work in any job I've ever had. In fact, some of my favorite memories of work have been sprints to finish something, whether in software, retail/distribution, or food service. I…

When you work in a company you don't own, there are a lot of things you will encounter that not under your control (1). Personally, I find the Stoics' attitude very helpful when dealing with that fact. They advocate distinguishing between what is in our control and what isn't, suggesting to focus on acting honorably oneself, but always with reservation, i.e. aware that others can always stop us from reaching our goal…

> (1) Of course, if you start your own company, you will be dealing with things you can't control as well.

You are technically correct.

When you run your own company, the things that are "out of your control" don't feel that way, because at the end of the day, you decide how you want to act on them.

If a customer insists on butting his head in malevolent ways into a user experience I've created for their product because they think they know better, I have a few options. Of its an especially unruly customer, I have two: fire them or work with them. I will, in my mind, piece together the pros and cons of both, and will come to what I believe is the best decision. You are still deciding your fate and can live with the consequences because they're per your terms.

This is why, if I had a small team working on projects, every big decision would require unanimous vote. It's easy for someone to whine about having to work on something they don't believe in, but when you make them part of that decision process, and they consider the factors thoughtfully (like an owner), you give them that peace of mind of knowing they decided their own fate. They tend to come to the same conclusions you do, but aren't bothered by it because they're not doing it "only because you said so."

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#165

Post by obviouslygreen » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 3:01 PM UTC

michaelochurch wrote: post #160

pkteison wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The beginning was good, but when you claimed that smart people are certain to not get along with authority you went way out on an unsupported limb. I personally think passion and drive correlate to conflict a lot stronger than intelligence does; plenty of smart people know how to choose their battles and bite their tongues, and the suggestion that if they do they must not be super smart is just outrageous.

Around 130, you start to question and dislike authority, but you can still hold back. At 150, authority comes to you looking for fights (even if you don't do anything to it) because you make it insecure about its inherent illegitimacy and moral emptiness. Actual 150s are pretty rare: about 43 per 100,000 people. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3.333+sigma

I'm interested to know whether this IQ conflict theory is actually based on something or whether it's coming from your posterior.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#166

Post by obviouslygreen » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 3:07 PM UTC

philbarr wrote: post #118

mduerksen wrote: post #57

(Generalisation Warning) This is the dark side of the (otherwise desirable) trait of "getting things done" as employee. I you don't actively manage your working hours and hold yourself back , somebody else will suck you out until you have nothing left. At the end, you will be very unsatisfied for some obscure reason: You did everything you was asked for, yet somehow noone appreciates you and you still earn entry-leve…

Some of the best advice I've ever had was, "when you start at a company, it's tempting to try and work your arse off to prove how worthy you are. Don't - you're not proving anything, you're just establishing precedent. Instead, quickly determine what the absolute minimum you can get away with is and do slightly above that. Then work harder for the month before review time so you can justify a raise. The extra effort…

That may be good advice in the sense of being effective, but encouraging people to actively deceive their employers and intentionally do as little as possible is disingenuous and dishonest.

If you don't think that reflects on your integrity, or if you don't consider your integrity worth maintaining, then this really is advice that you could consider good. But telling this to impressionable people who are inexperienced and new to Real Life in general would do them and everyone they'll ever work for a huge disservice.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#167

Post by abc_lisper » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 3:08 PM UTC

PakG1 wrote: post #75

corwinstephen wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is going to sound insulting and I don't mean it that way, but does anyone ever wonder about the fact that managers are frequently considerably less intelligent than the people they manage? I think that's what drives the frustration a lot of the time. The thing is, just because they're less intelligent doesn't mean they're not good managers, but it think it certainly makes it a lot harder for programmers, who are…

The fact of the matter is that a lot of technical people who are geniuses technically do not have the qualities necessary to be good managers. Good managing requires ability to communicate up, down, and across the corporate hierarchy and the political minefield that comes with it. Good managers will balance out good technical people in terms of skillset, and help their team to do their job, while also coaching them i…

Right, you are talking about ideal managers. Which, if we had, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#168

Post by vonmoltke » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 3:11 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #44

derefr wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was assuming a context of "you become aware that your company has this problem, and yet you persist in wanting (or needing ) to work there." For example, you might you need the money, live somewhere crap for jobs, and your mortgage is underwater so you can't move somewhere better. If that's the case, then you should, in all pragmatic cynicism, think about your "real job" at the company. Actually, perhaps I need to…

Ah, pragmatic cynicism. Never was a fan of that, always more of a fan of unpragmatically changing things for the better. Especially these days when the global unemployment rate for programmers is ~3%, you will get a different job and you will get it quickly. I'm told life looks very different if you have done anything resembling settling down. But I haven't been there yet and my glasses have rose coloured lenses.

I was in a highly political and highly toxic situation prior to my current engagement. It took me over two years to get out of it. If you are not already in one of a handful of major tech hubs, it can be extremely difficult to get out such a situation. Granted, the pragmatic cynicism doesn't help, but if you can stomach it you can stay in a somewhat better frame of mind than I let myself devolve into.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#169

Post by revskill » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 3:14 PM UTC

Maybe he didn't know the best way to do something vs the hardest way to do it. Just relax your mind, think the best in you to produce the best thought and we have the best product as we can. It's the boss's job to decide if we do the good job or not. Please, the boss is not our enemy, ourself is our enemy.

Re: I Knew a Programmer Who Went Completely Insane

#170

Post by peterkelly » Fri, Apr 19, 2013, 3:15 PM UTC

obviouslygreen wrote: post #166

philbarr wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the best advice I've ever had was, "when you start at a company, it's tempting to try and work your arse off to prove how worthy you are. Don't - you're not proving anything, you're just establishing precedent. Instead, quickly determine what the absolute minimum you can get away with is and do slightly above that. Then work harder for the month before review time so you can justify a raise. The extra effort…

That may be good advice in the sense of being effective, but encouraging people to actively deceive their employers and intentionally do as little as possible is disingenuous and dishonest. If you don't think that reflects on your integrity, or if you don't consider your integrity worth maintaining, then this really is advice that you could consider good. But telling this to impressionable people who are inexperience…

I think a better version of the parent comment's advice would be figure out what is a reasonable, healthy, sustainable level of productivity and try to work as close to that as possible - and no more.