4 ms·
Your induction is nonsense, as the OP is talking about being a 9-5'er. It's not all that hard to outwork a 9-5'er and most names that we have heard, from any fi
by glangdale 10y ago
Your induction is nonsense, as the OP is talking about being a 9-5'er. It's not all that hard to outwork a 9-5'er and most names that we have heard, from any field of endeavor at all (math, cs, science, engineering, creative fields), would have done so.
Also, some of those people who put in those extra two hours of work go on to get promoted faster and/or wind up getting their names on Big Important Things.
Either way is a perfectly fine choice, but there's no call to have a hissy fit at the idea that there are people who are just as smart as you (or smarter) who are out-working you, and possibly not even having a particularly bad time doing it. Way back in this thread, the original guy was talking about enjoying tinkering with computers...
- warcher 10y agoWhoever said I was a 9 to 5'er?
- warcher 10y agoMoreover, the presumption that you're outworking me is... well, it's certainly possible, some do. I certainly know a few. Fewer than you seem to think though. It's possible that my disdain for recreational programming is a byproduct of my workload, rather than the other way around. Either way, my server is back up, so I'm gonna go play my guitar.
- glangdale 10y agoAt no point did I ever suggest I am outworking you. I'm pretty squarely in the "work and go home" camp, although I have been known to spend more time pondering algorithms problems and SIMD programming than is entirely reasonable. However, I have done you a similar reading comprehension fail by suggesting you are a 9-5'er, which is a idea introduced by the other guy (the one who imagines that elite programmers snort Dennis Ritchie's ashes) to the thread.