>It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too That short life-affirming quote structured like a pithy aphorism is hiding the true debate that motivates it. The real discussion before that quote is this: Some employers prefer programmers that like programming outside of work. For the other programmers that would rather constrain coding work to 40 hours a week, they feel that employer preference is…
It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
41–50 of 91 posts
Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#42Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#43If you don't have the desire to do this after work you probably shouldn't even be in the field is how I look at it.
If you're not good enough to do your job competently (or not trying to actively get there) after experience doing this only at work, then I wouldn't hire you is how I look at it.
Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#44>It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too That short life-affirming quote structured like a pithy aphorism is hiding the true debate that motivates it. The real discussion before that quote is this: Some employers prefer programmers that like programming outside of work. For the other programmers that would rather constrain coding work to 40 hours a week, they feel that employer preference is…
Gonna bet that for whatever reasons they do it, people who code on their own time are on average better coders and will on average have an easier time gettinv employment. Isn't this true for any skill (except maybe neurosurgery)?
I'm not sure why it would hold that, if you do something for 40 hours a week, you'll necessarily improve if you do it for an even greater amount of time. And, besides, effectiveness as a developer is not just about coding anyway. A lot more goes into creating products and services than lines of code.
Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#45Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#46>It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too That short life-affirming quote structured like a pithy aphorism is hiding the true debate that motivates it. The real discussion before that quote is this: Some employers prefer programmers that like programming outside of work. For the other programmers that would rather constrain coding work to 40 hours a week, they feel that employer preference is…
I don't know if I agree with your premises or conclusions. I think employers prefer engineers who are effective and have a past track record of success. For some companies, some of these are going to have a "can't rip my keyboard out of my hands" characteristic, but I've mostly found that working on software outside of work has minimal correlation with productivity. Engineers that are steadily growing and continuing…
I have talked to startup founders who were very explicit that they only hired developers who coded obsessively outside of work. One was very clear: If you didn't have a public Github profile showing a track record of frequent commits on personal project outside of work hours, you would not be hired at his firm.
> I've mostly found that working on software outside of work has minimal correlation with productivity.
Same. That doesn't mean everyone is hiring based on that.
Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe hiring decisions are employers perogative. What I do appreciate is them being honest and upfront about it so that I don't waste time pursuing a job that might not fit me.
That works until their cumulative prerogatives shut you out of your chosen career because they're discriminating against you. Discrimination is simply avoiding the thing you don't prefer because you have a preference for something else. If you discriminate against enough people, it becomes a problem for people who don't fit into your prerogative.
Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#48Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#49>It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too That short life-affirming quote structured like a pithy aphorism is hiding the true debate that motivates it. The real discussion before that quote is this: Some employers prefer programmers that like programming outside of work. For the other programmers that would rather constrain coding work to 40 hours a week, they feel that employer preference is…
Gonna bet that for whatever reasons they do it, people who code on their own time are on average better coders and will on average have an easier time gettinv employment. Isn't this true for any skill (except maybe neurosurgery)?
And as for things like programming or any mental/intellectual skill like that? I highly doubt it.
As a general rule, you're going to see heavy diminishing returns on time invested. By the time you've spent 40 hours doing it, a few more hours on the weekend is unlikely to have any real benefit, and to the extent it causes burn out or takes the place of something that helps you stay healthy, it's likely to be a net negative.
Re: It is perfectly OK to only code at work, you can have a life too
#50If you don't have the desire to do this after work you probably shouldn't even be in the field is how I look at it.
If you're serious, the way I look at it is that people like you are one of the problems with tech culture. Way too many people in tech have this attitude that there's something exceptional and unique about it that requires participants to be all-in 24 hours a day. It's not. And this sort of attitude discourages a large swath of the population from bringing their talents to the field.
And that's any kind of way to talk to someone?! I don't think so.
I was very surprised that the only downvoted comments on this page currently are by people who apparently don't understand how if you love programming, you never do it outside work. On Hacker News! Repeatedly on this page I've seen the total straw man response like yours of "requires participants to be all-in 24 hours a day". No-one's suggesting that. I don't understand how that seems an appropriate or adequate reply.
>And this sort of attitude discourages a large swath of the population from bringing their talents to the field.
I don't know what you mean there.