5 ms·

Someone works long hours sometimes and therefore they're probably bipolar? What?

wayoutthere 7y ago
I don't know if that was the case with this guy, just that the schedule OP described is the kind of schedule that a bipolar person might end up with. But the main point is that building a work culture that can handle this kind of schedule from people who really need it (for whatever reason) is a good thing, and there are good reasons beyond mere convenience that a person would work a schedule like this.
- heyflyguy 7y ago
  Oddly enough he did confide in me that he was bipolar.
ebiester 7y ago
Considering that I had the same thought, no. However, most people cannot regularly work 48 hour shifts except under duress. (IE, their life, job, or crisis depends on it.) Many can do it once, but need a significant break afterwards. If someone is regularly cycling like that, it very well could be a coping mechanism for bipolar.
- oarabbus_ 7y ago
  Spoiler alert: the guy was taking amphetamines.
  - partyboat1586 7y ago
    Seems like the only way to regularly work 48hr shifts.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
morelisp 7y ago
Long hours is like 10, maybe 16 for a serious emergency (like building-catches-fire level stuff, not like "oh the API is down" stuff - it should happen less than once a year). 48 hours, even once, is a serious problem.
- alexis_fr 7y ago
  I often work from 9 am to 3am. The problem is when I start something interesting at 5pm. Between 5 and 3am, a box of cookies (Prince, they’re quite addictive). Total 16-17hrs, plus a good lunch break. I think being sugar-high has an amphetamines-like effect. I know it’s not healthy, but I have unresolved issues that remain unresolved after 10 years trying to get help. At least it’s not alcohol. But that’s also perhaps why people don’t see the distress. I work to forget.
- somebodythere 7y ago
  I'm confused, what is a SWE going to do during a 16 hour shift about their building being on fire?
  - morelisp 7y ago
    "Back in the day" we used to have physical machines places. A DC catching fire (or flooding, getting hit by lightning, or etc. etc.) meant "manual failover" and a day of restoring backups. (And that was best case, if your infrastructure and deployment scripts were up-to-date. Most people's weren't; probably the ratio is only slightly better today.)
- wizzard 7y ago
  I assumed it was an exaggeration, like 48 hours with a break to sleep, because how could OP even know for sure that it was truly 48 hours without break if the guy was at home? I'm still suspicious whether it was actually 48 hours straight with no rest because -- no matter how brilliant someone is -- I would be extremely leery of the code written toward the end of that session.
  - morelisp 7y ago
partyboat1586 7y ago
Unless you are using drugs it's very unnatural for your body to allow you to stay awake for 48hrs. It is however common in people with bipolar.

I don't know if that was the case with this guy, just that the schedule OP described is the kind of schedule that a bipolar person might end up with. But the main point is that building a work culture that can handle this kind of schedule from people who really need it (for whatever reason) is a good thing, and there are good reasons beyond mere convenience that a person would work a schedule like this.

heyflyguy 7y ago
Oddly enough he did confide in me that he was bipolar.

ebiester 7y ago

Considering that I had the same thought, no. However, most people cannot regularly work 48 hour shifts except under duress. (IE, their life, job, or crisis depends on it.) Many can do it once, but need a significant break afterwards. If someone is regularly cycling like that, it very well could be a coping mechanism for bipolar.

oarabbus_ 7y ago
Spoiler alert: the guy was taking amphetamines.
- partyboat1586 7y ago
  Seems like the only way to regularly work 48hr shifts.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

morelisp 7y ago

Long hours is like 10, maybe 16 for a serious emergency (like building-catches-fire level stuff, not like "oh the API is down" stuff - it should happen less than once a year). 48 hours, even once, is a serious problem.

alexis_fr 7y ago
I often work from 9 am to 3am. The problem is when I start something interesting at 5pm. Between 5 and 3am, a box of cookies (Prince, they’re quite addictive). Total 16-17hrs, plus a good lunch break. I think being sugar-high has an amphetamines-like effect. I know it’s not healthy, but I have unresolved issues that remain unresolved after 10 years trying to get help. At least it’s not alcohol. But that’s also perhaps why people don’t see the distress. I work to forget.
somebodythere 7y ago
I'm confused, what is a SWE going to do during a 16 hour shift about their building being on fire?
- morelisp 7y ago
  "Back in the day" we used to have physical machines places. A DC catching fire (or flooding, getting hit by lightning, or etc. etc.) meant "manual failover" and a day of restoring backups. (And that was best case, if your infrastructure and deployment scripts were up-to-date. Most people's weren't; probably the ratio is only slightly better today.)
wizzard 7y ago
I assumed it was an exaggeration, like 48 hours with a break to sleep, because how could OP even know for sure that it was truly 48 hours without break if the guy was at home? I'm still suspicious whether it was actually 48 hours straight with no rest because -- no matter how brilliant someone is -- I would be extremely leery of the code written toward the end of that session.
- morelisp 7y ago

partyboat1586 7y ago

Unless you are using drugs it's very unnatural for your body to allow you to stay awake for 48hrs. It is however common in people with bipolar.