5 ms·
I disagree. If you want to be the best and be highly successful, then you have to work hard. If you don't, someone else will. There are plenty of companies and
by kinkdr 10y ago
I disagree. If you want to be the best and be highly successful, then you have to work hard. If you don't, someone else will.
There are plenty of companies and positions where you can have a great work/life balance, but if you want to be the best, just as in everything else in life, you have to work harder than everybody else.
- jcrawfordor 10y agoI take great pride in the quality of my work. That's exactly why I stop working when I go home. That's why I demand an excellent work-life balance from my employers. If what being "the best" gets you is no life outside of work, then I'd rather be bad at my craft and retain the ability to pursue multiple interests.
- kinkdr 10y agoJust to clarify that I didn't imply that being good at your job and having a life are mutually exclusive. What I meant is that if you want to be the best in your field or you want your startup to succeed, then you do have to sacrifice some other things. (The article mentioned "Top", not just good)
- jesserayadkins2 10y agoI have the same sentiment: I take great pride in what I do, and I love doing programming. For the same reason, I also want a work-life balance. But for me, it's not about actually having a life. It's about having time for my own side projects, because I want to grow both professionally (where the project may have code that I can't talk about) and personally (where I can completely gush about everything that I've done).
- stevetrewick 10y agoHow so? If I'm 'the best' surely I can do my thang quicker and be off to some enriching theatre production while everyone else is still scratching their heads. It's those poor non best suckers who have to work hard to keep up. It's an odd definition of a winning state that includes "must work harder than everyone else"
- partycoder 10y agoWorking harder doesn't necessarily mean more productivity.