21–30 of 51 posts
I can’t help but think this is a result of capitalism gone awry, the need to never let any time be wasted, to the point of scheduling time with ones kids. And I’m not far left of center, but yeesh. If you enjoy living life this way, more power to you. When I was younger I might have thought this sounded great. Now that I’m touching 40, it sounds like a self-made prison.
I can’t help but think this is a result of capitalism gone awry, the need to never let any time be wasted, to the point of scheduling time with ones kids. And I’m not far left of center, but yeesh. If you enjoy living life this way, more power to you. When I was younger I might have thought this sounded great. Now that I’m touching 40, it sounds like a self-made prison.
My guess as to how Elon Musk can run the two companies at once is that it's not difficult, and therefore, he doesn't do very much. But if anyone has more information on what, precisely, these jobs consist of. I'd love to hear about it.
The funny part about "working 100 hours a week and still having time to tweet" just sounds like a living death to me.
One thing I have learned about compulsive/addictive behaviour on that scale is that, at some point, the amount of time spent doing something is little more than a reflection of one's inability to derive enjoyment or satisfaction from it any more.
If this were just one sad man's personal problem then I might say "more power to you", but since our entire society is oriented around maintaining the lives of these billionaires, I do wonder whether the entire planet is sacrificing itself for the enjoyment of people who are constitutionally unable to experience enjoyment. And whether that is a planetary-scale human dysfunction.
I can’t help but think this is a result of capitalism gone awry, the need to never let any time be wasted, to the point of scheduling time with ones kids. And I’m not far left of center, but yeesh. If you enjoy living life this way, more power to you. When I was younger I might have thought this sounded great. Now that I’m touching 40, it sounds like a self-made prison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And yet, every single time I've been involved in scrum, specific goals have been assigned to every cycle, and people expect those goals to be met. I don't doubt that's true, but it's not how things are supposed to work in scrum: https://www.scrum.org/resources/commitment-vs-forecast
If Scrum is X, but everyone saying "Scrum" is referring to Y, is Scrum X or Y? The answer is it doesn't matter. The problem here is that people are doing Y not X, and discussing semantics is only useful as an appeal to authority (which to be fair can be pretty darn useful sometimes).
But I'm now about 8 weeks into a massive code change in a 600k LOC C++ codebase. Roughly 3000 files that need to be manually inspected to change every instance of a forced compiler error report so that the code at that point uses a replacement datatype, or doesn't. The task is not automatable, requires a fairly deep understanding of both the problem domain and the specifics of each line, and isn't testable until every single file has been modified.
Granted, situations like this don't come up particularly often (thankfully). But things not so distant to this come up more often than one might guess, especially in open source contexts where avoidance of technical debt is allowed to be a major development priority.
When faced with tasks like this, there's no time management process that can help. You just have to start, and then keep going until its done. Every minute you get distracted or for any reason switch to another task just delays the intended eventual merge back into the main branch.
Articles like this are so ridiculously tone-deaf. As a working stiff, I can't reasonably shove all communications into one day and spend another writing code. I suspect the overwhelming majority of readers of this site are in a similar position.
I can’t help but think this is a result of capitalism gone awry, the need to never let any time be wasted, to the point of scheduling time with ones kids. And I’m not far left of center, but yeesh. If you enjoy living life this way, more power to you. When I was younger I might have thought this sounded great. Now that I’m touching 40, it sounds like a self-made prison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And yet, every single time I've been involved in scrum, specific goals have been assigned to every cycle, and people expect those goals to be met. I don't doubt that's true, but it's not how things are supposed to work in scrum: https://www.scrum.org/resources/commitment-vs-forecast
If Scrum is X, but everyone saying "Scrum" is referring to Y, is Scrum X or Y? The answer is it doesn't matter. The problem here is that people are doing Y not X, and discussing semantics is only useful as an appeal to authority (which to be fair can be pretty darn useful sometimes).
This totally misses the point of timeboxing. Timeboxing is an alternative method to goal-setting. The classic case is diets: instead of saying "I will lose 10kg in a month", timeboxing says "I will eat healthier and take some exercise every day for 2 weeks and see what happens". The difference is to do something different for a set period of time, and then see what the result was, rather than set a goal and a deadlin…
And yet, every single time I've been involved in scrum, specific goals have been assigned to every cycle, and people expect those goals to be met. > Scrum uses timeboxing for all of the Scrum events and as a tool for concretely defining open-ended or ambiguous tasks.
Articles like this are so ridiculously tone-deaf. As a working stiff, I can't reasonably shove all communications into one day and spend another writing code. I suspect the overwhelming majority of readers of this site are in a similar position.