5 ms·

Serves you right. I'm sick of this fake humble passionate developer persona. There are some of us who actually have families and better things to do with our

Serves you right. I'm sick of this fake humble passionate developer persona. There are some of us who actually have families and better things to do with our free time than faking passion via putting hours on somebody else's product or those useless Github projects that we all know are nothing but publicity stunts to appeal to recruiters. You are all damaging the industry. Signed: 9to5 developer.

parennoob 11y ago
Though the body of your comment is a bit snarky, I agree with its substance. I think the programming industry as a whole is in dire need of jointly rebranding ourselves as working professionals (such as doctors or lawyers) rather than the popular "tech guy in the basement who will fix my computer and can code up something real quick if we give him free pizza" image that we are often all too glad to slip into on account of our fondness for playing with technology. Thinking a bit further on that angle, I wonder if there's a market for a Github-with-payments ("here's a working snapshot of my code -- it's open-source but in order to open an issue that I will look into, you need to pay me $X"). After all, it is the same way doctors or lawyers work – they aren't expected to spend their weekends doing law cases or practicing for free. [This is part of why I also oppose the widespread "Everyone should learn to code" movements. In principle, I would like to teach people how to code, but I don't necessarily want to do this work for free. Without this nuance being addressed, the "learn to code" movements strongly devalue our industry in my opinion. Have you ever heard lawyers say "Everyone should learn basic civil law" and then offer free classes for the same? It probably happens a bit, but nowhere near the scale that happens for code.]
- hire_charts 11y ago
  I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." Neither of these statements claims that by learning the skill you are suddenly a qualified industry professional. It's about having a basic working knowledge. Simply put, knowing how to write (in, say, English) won't make you a published author in the same way that knowing how to code (in, say, Javascript) won't make you a software engineer. Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. Sure, you're no programmer, but at least you can hack an analysis together with a few basic tools and pass your findings around via email. These skills are not the focus of your job, but they do help you get your job done.
  - parennoob 11y ago
    In your initial analysis, you say this: > I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." And later on: > Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. I posit that these are two very different statements, and the latter comes much closer to the reality than the former. There is no reason, say, chefs or plumbers or doctors need to learn how to code. Proficiency at using computer tools need not equate to building those tools, and people who build those tools should definitely not be expected to pass on that knowledge for free. Given your second example, aren't the "Learn to Code" movements today equivalent to (nonexistent) "Everyone should learn the basics of Excel macros" movements in the 90s?
    - hire_charts 11y ago
      Fair point. That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. It's a narrow view of the world to assume that the only problems you can solve with code are the problems you'd hire a software engineer to solve. Much like the ability to communicate with words, or the ability to manipulate spreadsheets, coding is just another skill in a long list of skills that help individuals approach problems in new ways. Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools?
      - parennoob 11y ago
        > That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. Oh, absolutely. And I'd love to learn anatomy and basic medical diagnosis in order to evaluate my posture, bloodwork and vitals every quarter, but you won't find many doctors willing to participate in movements that are going to teach me that. My point is that we should be more like them if we want to obtain ideal compensation and respect from society. > Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools? Not at all. And I'd even encourage the teaching of code in schools, if qualified teachers willing to teach code at the salaries commonly offered in schools can be found. My opposition is to volunteer-based "Teach Everyone to Code" movements that often expect programmers to shoulder the vast amount of unpaid labor that goes into these events in order to pass on their in-demand skillset. In my opinion, the more we participate in these events, the more normalized that participation will become, until programmers are ultimately being paid the same as teachers are today (which is not very much, in the US anyway).
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  'Everyone' is a lot of people. I've taught youth (Boy Scouts) for 20 years. There are more than one kind of people. Some are not ever going to program. Smart, well-adjusted, ambitious, but a different kind of mind and not at all suited to programming. Its obvious really. Some people like dominoes and word games and tetris. Others would rather die than play those games. People are very very different.
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    Everyone is welcome to be technically illiterate, just as they are welcome to be illiterate in the traditional sense. Neither case is conducive to navigating society, regardless of personal desire or explanation why that desire should be met.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Nothing to do with being illiterate. Just different mental models. There are those that don't get design; aren't as empathetic, or emotional, or logical. Some combinations mean, they aren't going to find that computer programming makes any sense at all.
- snowwrestler 11y ago
  > Have you ever heard lawyers say "Everyone should learn basic civil law" and then offer free classes for the same? Really, the foundation skill in the law is to read and write. Lawyers are the most technical users of language, but we teach everyone to read and write on the taxpayer dime. And we teach everyone mathematics through at least algebra, even though it is mostly used by technical professionals. So we need to teach everyone to code. Not everyone will end up being a professional coder, just like most people don't become lawyers. But if everyone has experience reading and writing code, they will be more informed and productive in a society that is increasingly computerized.
morgante 11y ago
Here's a crazy notion: maybe some of us actually like programming. I was doing it long before I was paid for it, and would continue to do it even if there was absolutely no market for my skill. My open source contributions are for fun, not for recruiters. I don't think they've ever had any impact on getting me a job. Go back to your 9 to 5. Why are you wasting time on HN if you don't care about programming?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- TurboHaskal 11y ago
  I used to compete on archery events. Not having time for that anymore doesn't mean I don't care about it.
  - morgante 11y ago
    Does that lead you to conclude that those who still do compete in archery events are "faking passion?" If you don't have time to code outside work, that's fine. Just don't accuse the rest of us of faking it.
    - parennoob 11y ago
      Both your and the grandparent comments have an imperfect analogy. No one gets paid for doing professional archery as a daily wage-earning job in the modern world. I would say our position is more akin to professional car mechanic setting up shop on weekends and offering something like "I'll fix your car for free and teach you how to do it, but no guarantees!" Would professional mechanics accuse him of devaluing their industry? Probably. Could he say "I like to fix cars in my spare time, and I'm doing what I love. Buzz off!" Sure. Here's the thing though -- auto mechanics, they have unions and certification, and therefore are probably more aware about downward pressure on wages and such. Which is why you won't find many qualified hobbyist auto mechanics on the weekend like I described. (On the flip side, their flexibility is far more limited than programmers'. So I'' still take the programmer job.)
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jacquesm 11y ago
Well, I'm still passionate about my work. But now I know what it's worth. So no faking passion, putting hours on someone else's products or github projects because I couldn't care less about recruiters. I'm not sure what the 'serves you right' is about, but fwiw it took me 10 years to wake up to this give or take a couple, and I'm terribly sorry if that caused others to not be able to charge their market value but it's not as if I was doing that on purpose, it's just that nobody took the hour or so that it took me to write this blog post and pass the message.
pnathan 11y ago
> There are some of us who actually have families and better things to do with our free time than faking passion via putting hours on somebody else's product or those useless Github projects that we all know are nothing but publicity stunts to appeal to recruiters. Yow. The "9to5 developer" movement shows its true emotional colors: jealousy and envy, apparently. You also misread his post. It had nothing to do with offhours work, but everything to do with his day job employers taking advantage of him. Me, I will generally prefer the candidate with great open source records over the one with only a resume. The one, I already have a deep signal on how they work with others and the quality of their work- the other is a black box.
dang 11y ago
Please don't spew bile, and please don't depict people you disagree with in the worst possible light ("faking passion", "nothing but publicity stunts"). It degrades the community, regardless of how right you are.

parennoob 11y ago

Though the body of your comment is a bit snarky, I agree with its substance. I think the programming industry as a whole is in dire need of jointly rebranding ourselves as working professionals (such as doctors or lawyers) rather than the popular "tech guy in the basement who will fix my computer and can code up something real quick if we give him free pizza" image that we are often all too glad to slip into on account of our fondness for playing with technology. Thinking a bit further on that angle, I wonder if there's a market for a Github-with-payments ("here's a working snapshot of my code -- it's open-source but in order to open an issue that I will look into, you need to pay me $X"). After all, it is the same way doctors or lawyers work – they aren't expected to spend their weekends doing law cases or practicing for free. [This is part of why I also oppose the widespread "Everyone should learn to code" movements. In principle, I would like to teach people how to code, but I don't necessarily want to do this work for free. Without this nuance being addressed, the "learn to code" movements strongly devalue our industry in my opinion. Have you ever heard lawyers say "Everyone should learn basic civil law" and then offer free classes for the same? It probably happens a bit, but nowhere near the scale that happens for code.]

hire_charts 11y ago
I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." Neither of these statements claims that by learning the skill you are suddenly a qualified industry professional. It's about having a basic working knowledge. Simply put, knowing how to write (in, say, English) won't make you a published author in the same way that knowing how to code (in, say, Javascript) won't make you a software engineer. Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. Sure, you're no programmer, but at least you can hack an analysis together with a few basic tools and pass your findings around via email. These skills are not the focus of your job, but they do help you get your job done.
- parennoob 11y ago
  In your initial analysis, you say this: > I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." And later on: > Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. I posit that these are two very different statements, and the latter comes much closer to the reality than the former. There is no reason, say, chefs or plumbers or doctors need to learn how to code. Proficiency at using computer tools need not equate to building those tools, and people who build those tools should definitely not be expected to pass on that knowledge for free. Given your second example, aren't the "Learn to Code" movements today equivalent to (nonexistent) "Everyone should learn the basics of Excel macros" movements in the 90s?
  - hire_charts 11y ago
    Fair point. That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. It's a narrow view of the world to assume that the only problems you can solve with code are the problems you'd hire a software engineer to solve. Much like the ability to communicate with words, or the ability to manipulate spreadsheets, coding is just another skill in a long list of skills that help individuals approach problems in new ways. Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools?
    - parennoob 11y ago
      > That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. Oh, absolutely. And I'd love to learn anatomy and basic medical diagnosis in order to evaluate my posture, bloodwork and vitals every quarter, but you won't find many doctors willing to participate in movements that are going to teach me that. My point is that we should be more like them if we want to obtain ideal compensation and respect from society. > Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools? Not at all. And I'd even encourage the teaching of code in schools, if qualified teachers willing to teach code at the salaries commonly offered in schools can be found. My opposition is to volunteer-based "Teach Everyone to Code" movements that often expect programmers to shoulder the vast amount of unpaid labor that goes into these events in order to pass on their in-demand skillset. In my opinion, the more we participate in these events, the more normalized that participation will become, until programmers are ultimately being paid the same as teachers are today (which is not very much, in the US anyway).
JoeAltmaier 11y ago
'Everyone' is a lot of people. I've taught youth (Boy Scouts) for 20 years. There are more than one kind of people. Some are not ever going to program. Smart, well-adjusted, ambitious, but a different kind of mind and not at all suited to programming. Its obvious really. Some people like dominoes and word games and tetris. Others would rather die than play those games. People are very very different.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  Everyone is welcome to be technically illiterate, just as they are welcome to be illiterate in the traditional sense. Neither case is conducive to navigating society, regardless of personal desire or explanation why that desire should be met.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Nothing to do with being illiterate. Just different mental models. There are those that don't get design; aren't as empathetic, or emotional, or logical. Some combinations mean, they aren't going to find that computer programming makes any sense at all.
snowwrestler 11y ago
> Have you ever heard lawyers say "Everyone should learn basic civil law" and then offer free classes for the same? Really, the foundation skill in the law is to read and write. Lawyers are the most technical users of language, but we teach everyone to read and write on the taxpayer dime. And we teach everyone mathematics through at least algebra, even though it is mostly used by technical professionals. So we need to teach everyone to code. Not everyone will end up being a professional coder, just like most people don't become lawyers. But if everyone has experience reading and writing code, they will be more informed and productive in a society that is increasingly computerized.

morgante 11y ago

Here's a crazy notion: maybe some of us actually like programming. I was doing it long before I was paid for it, and would continue to do it even if there was absolutely no market for my skill. My open source contributions are for fun, not for recruiters. I don't think they've ever had any impact on getting me a job. Go back to your 9 to 5. Why are you wasting time on HN if you don't care about programming?

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
TurboHaskal 11y ago
I used to compete on archery events. Not having time for that anymore doesn't mean I don't care about it.
- morgante 11y ago
  Does that lead you to conclude that those who still do compete in archery events are "faking passion?" If you don't have time to code outside work, that's fine. Just don't accuse the rest of us of faking it.
  - parennoob 11y ago
    Both your and the grandparent comments have an imperfect analogy. No one gets paid for doing professional archery as a daily wage-earning job in the modern world. I would say our position is more akin to professional car mechanic setting up shop on weekends and offering something like "I'll fix your car for free and teach you how to do it, but no guarantees!" Would professional mechanics accuse him of devaluing their industry? Probably. Could he say "I like to fix cars in my spare time, and I'm doing what I love. Buzz off!" Sure. Here's the thing though -- auto mechanics, they have unions and certification, and therefore are probably more aware about downward pressure on wages and such. Which is why you won't find many qualified hobbyist auto mechanics on the weekend like I described. (On the flip side, their flexibility is far more limited than programmers'. So I'' still take the programmer job.)

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

jacquesm 11y ago

Well, I'm still passionate about my work. But now I know what it's worth. So no faking passion, putting hours on someone else's products or github projects because I couldn't care less about recruiters. I'm not sure what the 'serves you right' is about, but fwiw it took me 10 years to wake up to this give or take a couple, and I'm terribly sorry if that caused others to not be able to charge their market value but it's not as if I was doing that on purpose, it's just that nobody took the hour or so that it took me to write this blog post and pass the message.

pnathan 11y ago

> There are some of us who actually have families and better things to do with our free time than faking passion via putting hours on somebody else's product or those useless Github projects that we all know are nothing but publicity stunts to appeal to recruiters. Yow. The "9to5 developer" movement shows its true emotional colors: jealousy and envy, apparently. You also misread his post. It had nothing to do with offhours work, but everything to do with his day job employers taking advantage of him. Me, I will generally prefer the candidate with great open source records over the one with only a resume. The one, I already have a deep signal on how they work with others and the quality of their work- the other is a black box.

dang 11y ago

Please don't spew bile, and please don't depict people you disagree with in the worst possible light ("faking passion", "nothing but publicity stunts"). It degrades the community, regardless of how right you are.