3 ms·
> Not exactly, because someone who explores other technologies unrelated to his/her "work" field will inevitably pick up experience and knowledge - which the em
by vonmoltke 10y ago
> Not exactly, because someone who explores other technologies unrelated to his/her "work" field will inevitably pick up experience and knowledge - which the employer can grab for free without sending the employee to expensive courses or having to hire highly specialized freelancers.
I don't think there is any debate that, in general, someone who tinkers, explores, and codes outside of work will be relatively better than someone who doesn't. That is not the same as saying the former is above some absolute line while the latter is below it. This is the characterization that people here, including me, take issue with. You can easily be competent and effective while not spending time outside of work writing code.
- fecak 10y ago>I don't think there is any debate that, in general, someone who tinkers, explores, and codes outside of work will be relatively better than someone who doesn't. I've found that the truth of this depends almost entirely on the type of coding one is doing at work. If you're doing challenging work all day and then do some challenging work after hours, you'll likely be better than most based on the sheer amount of practice. If your day job is mostly a joke and you are maintaining systems that you don't really understand, coding all night won't make you better than someone who is doing challenging work all day and logging off entirely at closing time.
- vonmoltke 10y agoHence why I said "in general", though after considering what you wrote here there may be more exceptions than I thought.