5 ms·

I agree but then you must acknowledge that by chosing to restrict yourself, you may lose competitive edge againts those who have no such restriction.

by matz1 7y ago

victorhooi 7y ago
It proobably depends on the company, and the type of role. Also, the fact that you describe it as a restriction probably reveals a bit about your age =). (I don't meant that in a bad way). I think a lot of it comes down to life stage. If you're 24, with no family or commitments, life is easy and you can stay at work late, or code till 3am if you want to - the worst is your room-mate (or parents) might complain about the noise. Hypothetically, if you're older, and have a wife and 3 kids...well, those things are going to take priority (and they should). Of course, they can provide an immense amount of joy and fulfilment - at least for me, far more than my work can (although I do really enjoy my work as well). I have worked in IB, algo-trading, and now in tech - and none of them compared to the pure ecstatic joy I get from coming home, and making dinner for the kids, or reading to them, or helping them brush their teeth. I do still code in my spare time - but honestly, with a family, there may not be that much free time (assuming you still want to keep other hobbies and pursuits as well).
- mustacheemperor 7y ago
  What if you're 24 years old with a two person family and limited commitments, except for your drive to see the mountains on the weekends, to watch the sunsets during the week, to keep up with your old friends online and read history in the evenings? I've seen the hypothetical comparison above made elsewhere, and it seems to imply choosing one category of "ephemeral stuff that has no bigger meaning to you" (the kids and the family) over another (work til 3am). Not to denigrate anyone's joy of parenthood at all, much less the notion that people feel as though they're driven by it! I just wish our culture could foster more appreciation for the ecstatic joy of sipping a cup of tea at 6:30PM on the patio. As it is, I frequently wrestle with self-doubt that my mindset is out to lunch and I may inadvertently restrict myself from the greatest joys available in the future, including the joy of personal professional success, by not spending more evenings coding til 3 in the morning. But that's just a couple hours away from brewing the morning coffee to watch the sunrise! That's the time I have to read about the longitude problem!
Gibbon1 7y ago
There is the small matter that you do real and permanent damage to yourself if you keep an unsustainable pace for too long.
neuronic 7y ago
Yes! I'd just be careful to assume that people who are smart enough to program aren't smart enough to knowingly do so. Competitions in modern times are nearly always an artificial construct. Who cares if you coast at your job as long as you do what you are paid for? There is no award ceremony at your funeral for having achieved a manager position higher than your neighbors. A competition only exists if you agree to take part in it and I am willing to bet that's usually a conscious choice. If you can provide for yourself and your family to enjoy the things you like - why introduce competition if all it does is annoy you? Some people just don't care about being able to afford luxury products because other things already give them fulfillment. Others need more money and/or more power to get a maxed out Tesla or a house in their dream area (or simply to stroke their ego). All is fine. There just isn't some sort of obligation to anything other than maybe the people directly around you (SO, kids, parents, friends...). Invest time in what you like. Life doesn't allow that to always be the same as your job.
- matz1 7y ago
  Not even tesla or dream house, sometimes to just coast and provide minimum for your self and your family require you to compete with other.
AllegedAlec 7y ago
> I agree but then you must acknowledge that by chosing to restrict yourself, you may lose competitive edge againts those who have no such restriction. And by choosing to restrict yourself by only focussing on your job, you're losing out on other areas of life.
- matz1 7y ago
  Yes, whatever you choose there is always trade off.
TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
Do you really want to work for a company which values that "competitive edge" as a social signal over humane hours and relaxed professional competence? Reality is you will probably burn out by your late 20s. And so will most of the off-hours coders.
- matz1 7y ago
  Sure, but for you to get hired in such company you may still have to compete with other for the position. You may have to code outside work in your current job in order for you to have that competitive edge over other applicant when you apply for such company that value "humane" hour.
  - tomatotomato37 7y ago
    9-to-5 coders don't need to aim for passion companies though, a job maintaining a logistics program for a pharmacy chain is good enough for them. The pay isn't amazing but if it sustains your life passion of raising a family or becoming an award-winning ice sculptor or whatever then who cares?
    - matz1 7y ago
      Yes, even for such non passion company you still have to compete. It doesn't matter if the job if "easy", if there are 2 applicant which both are sufficiently qualified, the one which have that extra edge is the one who will get hired.
      - tomatotomato37 7y ago
        The point is you have to compete a lot less though. With passion companies you have to compete with Stanford graduates who have a +1000 commits in the Linux distro, whereas at your local supermarket headquarters you're just competing with people who need a desk to park themselves at for 8 hours while they daydream about fishing. It's a lot easier to compensate for lack of experience with soft skills/connections in the latter types of jobs than it is for the former.
BoiledCabbage 7y ago
By design nobody is trying to maximize their competitive edge. Since people just think they are. What everyone is doing is finding the right balance for them. By not sabotaging your competitive peer's cars, or sectetely breaking up their marriages, or deciding not to have a family of your own you're giving up a competitive edge. Again that doesn't mean you should do those things to improve your chances for advancement at work. Nobody is maximizing their competitive edge - everyone is just looking to find the right balance. The fact that something doesn't maximize an edge doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. Often times you should.

I agree but then you must acknowledge that by chosing to restrict yourself, you may lose competitive edge againts those who have no such restriction.

by matz1 7y ago

I agree but then you must acknowledge that by chosing to restrict yourself, you may lose competitive edge againts those who have no such restriction.

victorhooi 7y ago

It proobably depends on the company, and the type of role. Also, the fact that you describe it as a restriction probably reveals a bit about your age =). (I don't meant that in a bad way). I think a lot of it comes down to life stage. If you're 24, with no family or commitments, life is easy and you can stay at work late, or code till 3am if you want to - the worst is your room-mate (or parents) might complain about the noise. Hypothetically, if you're older, and have a wife and 3 kids...well, those things are going to take priority (and they should). Of course, they can provide an immense amount of joy and fulfilment - at least for me, far more than my work can (although I do really enjoy my work as well). I have worked in IB, algo-trading, and now in tech - and none of them compared to the pure ecstatic joy I get from coming home, and making dinner for the kids, or reading to them, or helping them brush their teeth. I do still code in my spare time - but honestly, with a family, there may not be that much free time (assuming you still want to keep other hobbies and pursuits as well).

mustacheemperor 7y ago
What if you're 24 years old with a two person family and limited commitments, except for your drive to see the mountains on the weekends, to watch the sunsets during the week, to keep up with your old friends online and read history in the evenings? I've seen the hypothetical comparison above made elsewhere, and it seems to imply choosing one category of "ephemeral stuff that has no bigger meaning to you" (the kids and the family) over another (work til 3am). Not to denigrate anyone's joy of parenthood at all, much less the notion that people feel as though they're driven by it! I just wish our culture could foster more appreciation for the ecstatic joy of sipping a cup of tea at 6:30PM on the patio. As it is, I frequently wrestle with self-doubt that my mindset is out to lunch and I may inadvertently restrict myself from the greatest joys available in the future, including the joy of personal professional success, by not spending more evenings coding til 3 in the morning. But that's just a couple hours away from brewing the morning coffee to watch the sunrise! That's the time I have to read about the longitude problem!

Gibbon1 7y ago

There is the small matter that you do real and permanent damage to yourself if you keep an unsustainable pace for too long.

neuronic 7y ago

Yes! I'd just be careful to assume that people who are smart enough to program aren't smart enough to knowingly do so. Competitions in modern times are nearly always an artificial construct. Who cares if you coast at your job as long as you do what you are paid for? There is no award ceremony at your funeral for having achieved a manager position higher than your neighbors. A competition only exists if you agree to take part in it and I am willing to bet that's usually a conscious choice. If you can provide for yourself and your family to enjoy the things you like - why introduce competition if all it does is annoy you? Some people just don't care about being able to afford luxury products because other things already give them fulfillment. Others need more money and/or more power to get a maxed out Tesla or a house in their dream area (or simply to stroke their ego). All is fine. There just isn't some sort of obligation to anything other than maybe the people directly around you (SO, kids, parents, friends...). Invest time in what you like. Life doesn't allow that to always be the same as your job.

matz1 7y ago
Not even tesla or dream house, sometimes to just coast and provide minimum for your self and your family require you to compete with other.

AllegedAlec 7y ago

> I agree but then you must acknowledge that by chosing to restrict yourself, you may lose competitive edge againts those who have no such restriction. And by choosing to restrict yourself by only focussing on your job, you're losing out on other areas of life.

matz1 7y ago
Yes, whatever you choose there is always trade off.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago

Do you really want to work for a company which values that "competitive edge" as a social signal over humane hours and relaxed professional competence? Reality is you will probably burn out by your late 20s. And so will most of the off-hours coders.

matz1 7y ago
Sure, but for you to get hired in such company you may still have to compete with other for the position. You may have to code outside work in your current job in order for you to have that competitive edge over other applicant when you apply for such company that value "humane" hour.
- tomatotomato37 7y ago
  9-to-5 coders don't need to aim for passion companies though, a job maintaining a logistics program for a pharmacy chain is good enough for them. The pay isn't amazing but if it sustains your life passion of raising a family or becoming an award-winning ice sculptor or whatever then who cares?
  - matz1 7y ago
    Yes, even for such non passion company you still have to compete. It doesn't matter if the job if "easy", if there are 2 applicant which both are sufficiently qualified, the one which have that extra edge is the one who will get hired.
    - tomatotomato37 7y ago
      The point is you have to compete a lot less though. With passion companies you have to compete with Stanford graduates who have a +1000 commits in the Linux distro, whereas at your local supermarket headquarters you're just competing with people who need a desk to park themselves at for 8 hours while they daydream about fishing. It's a lot easier to compensate for lack of experience with soft skills/connections in the latter types of jobs than it is for the former.

BoiledCabbage 7y ago

By design nobody is trying to maximize their competitive edge. Since people just think they are. What everyone is doing is finding the right balance for them. By not sabotaging your competitive peer's cars, or sectetely breaking up their marriages, or deciding not to have a family of your own you're giving up a competitive edge. Again that doesn't mean you should do those things to improve your chances for advancement at work. Nobody is maximizing their competitive edge - everyone is just looking to find the right balance. The fact that something doesn't maximize an edge doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. Often times you should.