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

You are not your job

jry.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 443 posts

Re: You are not your job

#81

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

QuantumFunnel wrote: post #80
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #13

There’s an old aphorism: “Do what you love, and you’ll never work a day in your life.” I worked in tech, because I love tech . No other reason, really. I accepted a job, making maybe half of what I could make, elsewhere, because of the personal satisfaction I got from it, and the relationships I made, there. When I retired, I have continued to develop software, and am currently “leaning into” AI-assisted development.…

That's a very privileged thing to say about a career where the tools to replace developers did not exist

Thanks. I needed to be put in my place.

Re: You are not your job

#83

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

vrganj wrote: post #17
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #13

There’s an old aphorism: “Do what you love, and you’ll never work a day in your life.” I worked in tech, because I love tech . No other reason, really. I accepted a job, making maybe half of what I could make, elsewhere, because of the personal satisfaction I got from it, and the relationships I made, there. When I retired, I have continued to develop software, and am currently “leaning into” AI-assisted development.…

I have found that aphorism does not ring true for me. “Do what you love for work, and you'll stop loving it" seems more true to me. It always eventually turns into a chore once it is a thing you need to do.

Yes and no.

I'm really glad that I left the rodent rally, but I did not want to leave tech. I just wanted to be in a place, where my work doesn't get fed into a wood-chipper, by terrible managers.

Once they were taken out of the equation, happiness ensued.

I deliberately turn down jobs that pay. Once someone pays me for my work, I'm duty-bound to give them what they pay for; even if that sucks, and I don't like doing bad work.

Re: You are not your job

#84

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

Bender wrote: post #21
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #13

There’s an old aphorism: “Do what you love, and you’ll never work a day in your life.” I worked in tech, because I love tech . No other reason, really. I accepted a job, making maybe half of what I could make, elsewhere, because of the personal satisfaction I got from it, and the relationships I made, there. When I retired, I have continued to develop software, and am currently “leaning into” AI-assisted development.…

This was the same for me. The only things I did not like about tech were not really related to tech but rather bad leadership or the wrong kinds of leadership. Early in my career I worked for one of the worst and literally most criminal managed hosting organizations and it was the best boon for my career making me fearless. I learned how to remove all emotion from my experiences and off-board bad leaders. Everything…

Exactly.

I am "privileged," but pretty much every other vocation has been in a place where people are getting squeezed by others or tools. Nothing new here, folks.

It's just that now, the bell tolls for tech workers, and they are suddenly getting to understand what other fields have been dealing with, for decades -centuries, in some cases.

Re: You are not your job

#85

Post by testing22321 »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #66
testing22321 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also helps me keep my job during layoffs because I can assure you the managers have noticed. Sounds like you’re young and early in your career. Wait till you’re part of a layoff where an entire division or arm of the company is axed in a 750 person headcount reduction. Doesn’t matter how good you are, how many years of service you have or even if the CEO loves you. You’ll be out.

It does matter because it's your network that gets you your next job and colleagues remember who was doing a good job and helping meet goals and those who didn't.

We were talking about keeping a job, not finding a new one.

Re: You are not your job

#86

Post by Arainach »

KellyCriterion wrote: post #54
garciasn wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am arguably a successful employee in a tech-focused role. I enjoy my job and others seem to feel I'm good at what I do. That said: I am NOT at all interested in identifying myself in social situations by my job. When someone asks what I do, I respond that I work in tech. I am not interested in giving more details nor talking in-depth about what I do to others I have just met. Why? Because that's not at all what mak…

So you are saying that your job does not have any impact on your personality, despite you are there for 8+h a day? The environment you are in for hours (even if its great, you are forced) does not shapre who you are? And regarding social interactions: Its no difference for you interacting with people from your mind-liked crowd in opposion to someone who runs a gun-shop-chain? For sure, a constructed example, but Id s…

> So you are saying that your job does not have any impact on your personality, despite you are there for 8+h a day

(Not OP) It's not a core part of it, no. I'm a person who likes solving problems and has an attention to detail. If I see that something is wrong I have a desire to fix it regardless of it's my responsibility or not. This could be finding an outdated piece of documentation at work or finding a piece of litter on the street.

These traits make me an effective software engineer (up to the senior level, then I have to fight against those parts of my personality and focus on specific high-impact things if I want to succeed at Staff+), but they are a part of who I am totally independent from my career.

Software engineering is a field that I am good at and that pays exceptionally well, but I could be happy utilizing these traits in any number of careers. Were I financially independent, my dream career would probably be something closer to the people who design and build elaborate contraptions for stage shows such as Cirque du Soleil.

Re: You are not your job

#87

Post by alpha_squared »

cj wrote: post #44
alpha_squared wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something tells me you haven't been laid off before. I think the overconfidence you're displaying here will be shattered if that were to happen. I hope it doesn't happen to you, but if it does I hope you remember that you are not your job.

I think it has a lot to do with the size of the organization. If you're at a relatively small company, it's not that hard to identify and retain the top performers. If you're at a faceless megacorp, that's a different story.

You can be laid off at small companies too. For example, a company may be running out of runway and it's looking increasingly likely the next round of funding will not materialize in time. It needs to control expenses and extend runway an extra 6 months, but everyone's a "top-performer". Who gets laid off? It's likely going to be those adding features (e.g. product folks), not those maintaining the business (accounting, devops). We can get into whether it's a good idea to kick off the death spiral for a company in that way, but my point is that no one is immune to layoffs, not at any scale, except maybe the founders.

Re: You are not your job

#88

Post by cj »

alpha_squared wrote: post #87
cj wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it has a lot to do with the size of the organization. If you're at a relatively small company, it's not that hard to identify and retain the top performers. If you're at a faceless megacorp, that's a different story.

You can be laid off at small companies too. For example, a company may be running out of runway and it's looking increasingly likely the next round of funding will not materialize in time. It needs to control expenses and extend runway an extra 6 months, but everyone's a "top-performer". Who gets laid off? It's likely going to be those adding features (e.g. product folks), not those maintaining the business (accounti…

> everyone's a "top-performer"

Except, that’s very rarely the case IME.

We’re talking about improving, not guaranteeing, your odds long term employment.

Re: You are not your job

#89

Post by amunozo »

weatherlite wrote: post #52

Some people indeed identify too much with their jobs, but for many others getting replaced by A.I means on very practical terms - a huge hit in salary, it means possibly retraining - maybe for years, means stress to the family (mortgage, bills etc) perhaps even stress to the marriage. I disagree that the people near you only love you or need you for your presence; they also rely on your paycheck. Your daugher may lov…

I know it's hard, but I guess it's a good idea to live below your means in case something happens, and also save considerably to face moments of uncertainty. People with tech salaries can do it. Most of the world (and country, independently of where you live) live with much less.

Re: You are not your job

#90

Post by senordevnyc »

block_dagger wrote: post #64
cedws wrote: post #26

>My technical skills are being disrupted by machines - that's fine I'll go do other things. [links to long bike trip] Ok that's cool and all but many of us have bills to pay. Bike trips don't pay the bills. Software people have been economically advantaged up until now that they can go and do stuff like that.

Within a few years I think UBI or UBS will be required for people to continue living, in which case basic needs (bills) won't be a concern. There's just no way for us to transition fast enough to avoid high unemployment as AI replaces large swaths of jobs. I do worry about the ~10 year transition it will take for societal governments to react.

Within a few years I think UBI or UBS will be required for people to continue living, in which case basic needs (bills) won't be a concern. There's just no way for us to transition fast enough to avoid high unemployment as AI replaces large swaths of jobs. I do worry about the ~10 year transition it will take for societal governments to react.

This strikes me as wildly optimistic. People aren't going to be able to live on UBI at a level where massive political and social unrest is averted unless it's like $2k per person per month, minimum. And I'm skeptical that the US government is going to start printing $8.5 trillion dollars of UBI in the next decade.

Post reply on HN