4 ms·

>I think this dynamic is built into the business models of some companies, especially consultancies. You feel guilty if you go home to sleep while your friends

by lsc 16y ago

>I think this dynamic is built into the business models of some companies, especially consultancies. You feel guilty if you go home to sleep while your friends are coding 'til their eyes bleed, even when the overwork is brought about by extrinsic factors (see above). why do programmers allow this tactic to work? This is the problem; if you give me better work when I pressure you and treat you like shit than when I treat you respectfully and let you set your own hours, what do you think the result will be?

jacquesm 16y ago
I think that tactic only works on the inexperienced (with people), as I was. If you tried such a trick on me today I'd catch on in 5 seconds flat. Part of it lies in that programmers are fascinated by technology, which means that if you give us shiny toys to play with and the occasional interesting puzzle to solve we'll take a good bit of abuse before throwing in the towel. We're also much too eager to show that we can do stuff. Another part is that you have - as an inexperienced froggie - too little feeling to sense that the temperature in the pot is rising and that if you don't jump out now you may lose your ability to jump at all. Finally, and perhaps crucially, the more you have invested in a project like this the harder it becomes to walk away.
jodrellblank 16y ago
If you work harder when I put a gun to your head, why shouldn't I do that all the time? We aren't nice to people because it makes them work better, instead we "aren't nasty" to people because it's nasty.
- lsc 16y ago
  If people can maintain a sustainable advantage through being nasty, those that are willing to be nasty will rise to the top. I think that relying on feelings of "don't be nasty" to keep businesspeople in check in the face of nastiness that confers sustainable advantages is... not so sustainable. Some people /enjoy/ being nasty. So yeah, we have to build the world we want, and social mores are strong things. One thought, from a market efficiency perspective, is that when I see an apparent sustainable advantage to being nasty, when there are successful people not being nasty in that way, is that maybe it's not as much of a sustainable advantage as it seems? In this case, I think that jacquesm nailed it when he pointed out that this can happen, at most, one time for each programmer, and relying on only fresh programmers is difficult, just because without past experience, it's very difficult to judge the quality of a programmer.

by lsc 16y ago

jacquesm 16y ago

I think that tactic only works on the inexperienced (with people), as I was. If you tried such a trick on me today I'd catch on in 5 seconds flat. Part of it lies in that programmers are fascinated by technology, which means that if you give us shiny toys to play with and the occasional interesting puzzle to solve we'll take a good bit of abuse before throwing in the towel. We're also much too eager to show that we can do stuff. Another part is that you have - as an inexperienced froggie - too little feeling to sense that the temperature in the pot is rising and that if you don't jump out now you may lose your ability to jump at all. Finally, and perhaps crucially, the more you have invested in a project like this the harder it becomes to walk away.

jodrellblank 16y ago

If you work harder when I put a gun to your head, why shouldn't I do that all the time? We aren't nice to people because it makes them work better, instead we "aren't nasty" to people because it's nasty.

lsc 16y ago
If people can maintain a sustainable advantage through being nasty, those that are willing to be nasty will rise to the top. I think that relying on feelings of "don't be nasty" to keep businesspeople in check in the face of nastiness that confers sustainable advantages is... not so sustainable. Some people /enjoy/ being nasty. So yeah, we have to build the world we want, and social mores are strong things. One thought, from a market efficiency perspective, is that when I see an apparent sustainable advantage to being nasty, when there are successful people not being nasty in that way, is that maybe it's not as much of a sustainable advantage as it seems? In this case, I think that jacquesm nailed it when he pointed out that this can happen, at most, one time for each programmer, and relying on only fresh programmers is difficult, just because without past experience, it's very difficult to judge the quality of a programmer.