5 ms·

We hired a guy who 'made cool games'. They weren't really fun, they were buggy, and they were all made with Unity. We also hired a guy who made simpler Javascr

We hired a guy who 'made cool games'. They weren't really fun, they were buggy, and they were all made with Unity. We also hired a guy who made simpler Javascript games, but his code looked great an he understood how it all worked. One is still here, and isn't very useful, the other left for greener pastures as management wanted him to work on only the boring stuff.

ewidar 7y ago
What's your take-away?
- Psyladine 7y ago
  People who can work will be put to work.
- rb808 7y ago
  To me its: If you do a good job with simple tools you'll be given boring work. If you work in cool technology you get to work with cool technology even if you're producing junk.
  - Tcepsa 7y ago
    I rather interpret it as "If you do a good job with simple tools you'll be given opportunities." (I'm interpreting the parent post to be implying that the simpler, solid hire is the one who is no longer there because they were able to leave for a better place). Also, as cautionary tale for managers: "If you give folks who write solid code boring work, they will find something that suits them better."
- 1996 7y ago
  A-level players won't stay in C-level companies C-level companies will prefer B-level players
- username90 7y ago
  Never hire programmers who demonstrated that they don't care about the boring stuff. Also don't hire programmers who demonstrated that they don't care about the fun stuff unless you have no other options.
  - tstrimple 7y ago
    > Never hire programmers who demonstrated that they don't care about the boring stuff. This is why I feel like I'm a bad programmer and no longer look for work in that capacity. I enjoy the edge cases and challenging problems, but I am almost incapable of creating CRUD apis and user interfaces at this point. I'm amazing in a hackathon, but contribute poorly to regular sprint style work. I can pick up and integrate new technology extremely quickly and can refactor a spaghettified mess of code into something maintainable, but I am completely miserable doing maintenance level work after things are smoothed out.
    - badfrog 7y ago
      > contribute poorly to regular sprint style work > I am completely miserable doing maintenance level work Sounds like something you might want to work on even if you don't get a job in programming. It seems unlikely you'll find any line of work where everything you do every day is new and exciting.
      - tstrimple 7y ago
        So far I've been able to find positions that work within these constraints. At this point I'm more comfortable working with my ADHD than fighting against it (I tried that for years too). For the last seven years I've helped companies move into the cloud. I'm always working with new code bases and finding new challenges to adoption. I'm sure this will eventually become routine as well and I'll have to find some other way to stay engaged. I'll probably be one of those people who completely change careers at some point.
      - errantspark 7y ago
        I'm not sure I'd agree. Sometimes it really pays to play to your strengths. I've had jobs that were odd-work and putting out fires for a few years now and I've never been happier. I'm good at that Programming-wise it isn't as hard to find as you might think. Maybe not working FAAMG or similar, but it's quite doable. If you don't compromise on the desire to work only on interesting* stuff when a big paycheck comes along, you'll eventually end up in a position where you only work on interesting stuff. The gamut of work is wide. To be honest such work isn't even that rare. Most people would rather make $200k and complain about how boring their job is than have an interesting one. I think for many people "interesting work" is often the same as "stressful work" and so the interesting positions are not as easily filled. [*] Interesting as defined by me, and probably the parent poster as well. Obviously this is subjective.
clarry 7y ago
Well, I've held my breath for three hours already. Which one stayed?
gazelle21 7y ago
but they both got hired?

ewidar 7y ago

What's your take-away?

Psyladine 7y ago
People who can work will be put to work.
rb808 7y ago
To me its: If you do a good job with simple tools you'll be given boring work. If you work in cool technology you get to work with cool technology even if you're producing junk.
- Tcepsa 7y ago
  I rather interpret it as "If you do a good job with simple tools you'll be given opportunities." (I'm interpreting the parent post to be implying that the simpler, solid hire is the one who is no longer there because they were able to leave for a better place). Also, as cautionary tale for managers: "If you give folks who write solid code boring work, they will find something that suits them better."
1996 7y ago
A-level players won't stay in C-level companies C-level companies will prefer B-level players
username90 7y ago
Never hire programmers who demonstrated that they don't care about the boring stuff. Also don't hire programmers who demonstrated that they don't care about the fun stuff unless you have no other options.
- tstrimple 7y ago
  > Never hire programmers who demonstrated that they don't care about the boring stuff. This is why I feel like I'm a bad programmer and no longer look for work in that capacity. I enjoy the edge cases and challenging problems, but I am almost incapable of creating CRUD apis and user interfaces at this point. I'm amazing in a hackathon, but contribute poorly to regular sprint style work. I can pick up and integrate new technology extremely quickly and can refactor a spaghettified mess of code into something maintainable, but I am completely miserable doing maintenance level work after things are smoothed out.
  - badfrog 7y ago
    > contribute poorly to regular sprint style work > I am completely miserable doing maintenance level work Sounds like something you might want to work on even if you don't get a job in programming. It seems unlikely you'll find any line of work where everything you do every day is new and exciting.
    - tstrimple 7y ago
      So far I've been able to find positions that work within these constraints. At this point I'm more comfortable working with my ADHD than fighting against it (I tried that for years too). For the last seven years I've helped companies move into the cloud. I'm always working with new code bases and finding new challenges to adoption. I'm sure this will eventually become routine as well and I'll have to find some other way to stay engaged. I'll probably be one of those people who completely change careers at some point.
    - errantspark 7y ago
      I'm not sure I'd agree. Sometimes it really pays to play to your strengths. I've had jobs that were odd-work and putting out fires for a few years now and I've never been happier. I'm good at that Programming-wise it isn't as hard to find as you might think. Maybe not working FAAMG or similar, but it's quite doable. If you don't compromise on the desire to work only on interesting* stuff when a big paycheck comes along, you'll eventually end up in a position where you only work on interesting stuff. The gamut of work is wide. To be honest such work isn't even that rare. Most people would rather make $200k and complain about how boring their job is than have an interesting one. I think for many people "interesting work" is often the same as "stressful work" and so the interesting positions are not as easily filled. [*] Interesting as defined by me, and probably the parent poster as well. Obviously this is subjective.

clarry 7y ago

Well, I've held my breath for three hours already. Which one stayed?

gazelle21 7y ago

but they both got hired?