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

Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

thecodist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#51

Post by donebizkit »

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #47
donebizkit wrote: post #29

Yesterday's post was closer to the actuality of a programmer than this one. To reiterate what I said yesterday, when you are coding professionally, you don't choose what technologies to use, you don't pick projects that itch your creative side. You're just part of a production steam roll. Passion is irrelevant in this discussion. What matters is how fast you can deliver and whether you are more billable than the next…

>you don't choose what technologies to use I do, at least some of the time. >you don't pick projects that itch your creative side Right I'm doing contract work, so actually I do tend to pick the interesting projects. Before that I had a job where I specified the technology that I was using -- and that everyone else had to use. Before that I picked a job that used technology I wanted to be using. And so on...I haven't…

A contract worker with a luxury of selecting which client's projects to work on and get paid $125/hour. You realize your are the 1%. The 99% have more constraints and hardships.

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#52

Post by mattm »

ken wrote: post #22
henrik_w wrote: post #4

On the subject of working a lot of hours, this article argues that a 40-hour work week is optimal (you don't get more done even if you work longer hours) http://www.alternet.org/story/154518/why_we_have_to_go_back_...

I only skimmed that article, but I don't see anywhere it says 40 hours is optimal. I only see where it says every hour beyond 40 is harmful: "By the eighth hour of the day, people's best work is usually already behind them (typically turned in between hours 2 and 6)." It sounds like 30 hours might well be optimal, but has simply never been tested.

Actually it has. See Kellogg's 6 hour day

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#54

Post by happywolf »

I am curious which area the OP has been working on. I would say the work pressure is a function of the management, the requirements, and the sector where you work on. For example, mobile applications tend to have shorter release cycles, and therefore a much hectic schedule.

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#56

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

donebizkit wrote: post #51
SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>you don't choose what technologies to use I do, at least some of the time. >you don't pick projects that itch your creative side Right I'm doing contract work, so actually I do tend to pick the interesting projects. Before that I had a job where I specified the technology that I was using -- and that everyone else had to use. Before that I picked a job that used technology I wanted to be using. And so on...I haven't…

A contract worker with a luxury of selecting which client's projects to work on and get paid $125/hour. You realize your are the 1%. The 99% have more constraints and hardships.

I am "the 1%"? Not nearly, if you mean "THE 1%," which starts at around $350k per year.

If you just mean the top 1% of developers? Well, maybe I AM in the top 1% of developers, though I don't know how anyone could measure that. But the point is I got here through passion. And the point of my reply is that passion IS relevant to this discussion.

And that it's only not relevant to people who don't experience it with regard to programming. Honestly, I don't know if someone who doesn't experience passion can CHANGE that; you're passionate about what you're passionate about, and telling yourself to obsess about something seems like it just wouldn't work.

So don't take this as any kind of criticism; I'm not saying you're Doing It Wrong. Just that passion DOES make a difference; when you have it, you have no reason to listen to people who tell you that you'll be irrelevant and no one will hire you when you're 45, because you'll be keeping yourself relevant out of habit. Just don't claim that it's not relevant in general, because it is. Climbing to the top of ANY profession or other endeavor really requires it; the most obvious example being Olympic athletes, who typically don't start out at the top of their sport, but achieve the top by being more passionate (and therefore obsessive) about practicing.

It makes me want more terms for "programmer" or "developer" (and not including "rock star", which has connotations that annoy people). There's such a range of skill encompassed by those terms that they're practically useless, and they spawn debates like the above where people have 15 different ideas what a "programmer" is (in yours, I'm in the top 1%, and in mine, I hang out with "typical" developers, and yet a lot of people I know work on interesting projects with an option to contract). Heck, pretty much everyone at Google is in a similar situation, in that they can (typically) switch projects easily if they get bored. And there are far too many developers at Google for all of them to be in the top 1%, I think.

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#57

Post by cunac »

happywolf wrote: post #54

I am curious which area the OP has been working on. I would say the work pressure is a function of the management, the requirements, and the sector where you work on. For example, mobile applications tend to have shorter release cycles, and therefore a much hectic schedule.

shorter release cycle doesn't have to be hectic; what makes it hectic is unreasonable number of features which is poor planing. You will end up coding 24/7 in cycle of any length if workload to deliver all in given time frame is greater than what you can deliver working only regular hours. That is poor planing regardless of sector and length of release cycle

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#58

Post by donebizkit »

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #56
donebizkit wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A contract worker with a luxury of selecting which client's projects to work on and get paid $125/hour. You realize your are the 1%. The 99% have more constraints and hardships.

I am "the 1%"? Not nearly, if you mean "THE 1%," which starts at around $350k per year. If you just mean the top 1% of developers? Well, maybe I AM in the top 1% of developers, though I don't know how anyone could measure that. But the point is I got here through passion. And the point of my reply is that passion IS relevant to this discussion. And that it's only not relevant to people who don't experience it with re…

I understand where you're coming from. PASSION (with capital letters) is important. PASSION for programming is what got me to get a BA and MA in computer science. It's what makes me sit in front of my computer working on side projects whenever I have a chance to. However, the point of this article and the original one is not that. These articles speak of the day to day stress loaded routine job of a regular* developer. And this is where passion (with lower case letters) is not important. My point about the 1% vs the 99% is that not everyone works for Google, Facebook ... In fact, all the contract workers I know struggle a great deal to make ends meet. We need to broaden our analysis to the sate of programming in the whole world. I am not talking about silicon valley or the bay area, which I consider to be the 1%. I had the chance of working in mid-west USA and in a foreign country and I have friends working in other countries. All I can say is that the majority of them don't want to be programming when they are 50.

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#59

Post by ken »

mattm wrote: post #52
ken wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only skimmed that article, but I don't see anywhere it says 40 hours is optimal. I only see where it says every hour beyond 40 is harmful: "By the eighth hour of the day, people's best work is usually already behind them (typically turned in between hours 2 and 6)." It sounds like 30 hours might well be optimal, but has simply never been tested.

Actually it has. See Kellogg's 6 hour day

That looks like it's about round-the-clock shifts for factory workers. I can think of a lot of differences between that and, say, computer programmers that might render the conclusion less relevant.

For example, I don't know any software companies in the world that build software with 3 8-hour shifts of workers.

Re: Yes I Still Want To Be Doing This at 56

#60

Post by Aron »

saraid216 wrote: post #23
Tomis02 wrote: post #11

Here we go again. Conversation through HN submissions.

I wouldn't call it a conversation. He doesn't remotely address a single point in the original post. We could call it a presidential debate, maybe?

I probably should just upvote you but I chuckled aloud.
Post reply on HN