6 ms·

What if I don't want to improve my productivity ? Just take time. After working for years on some projects I know that I'm writing the more efficient and concis

• thquad 7y ago
  Improve productivity so that we achieve more in less time so that we have more time for leisure on a daily basis.
  • edhelas 7y ago
    Yes :) The time saved should not be used to squeeze in more "code done". On my side I've saved lots of time by simplifying the tools I used, reducing the number of dependencies, frameworks and other stuff and writing simple, "childish" code. I'm a web developer. I prefer to do simple Ajax, HTML, pure JS and simple CSS and a good framework such as Laravel. For 80% of the projects its enough to "do the job". If the client wants a "nice looking date picker" just go for the default HTML one, saves hours/days and the difference is minimal. I've stopped looking for "new shiny" tools. In the end people are just looking for simple stuff that works. Look at Hacker News for example. Minimalist. But "the job is done".
  • adrianN 7y ago
    This hasn't worked out very well in the past.
  • CaptArmchair 7y ago
    Parkinson's law says: "work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law Completing tickets, issues or burning story points means next to nothing if the work you do is detached from reality. And that reality consists of an irrational humans with complex, contradicting demands and needs and an unpredictable future. Moreover, if you work as an employee, you will spend 40-50 hours a week at the office regardless of how fast or slow you're grinding through the workload. Why? Because that's how salaried work is legally organized. Then there's limited agency. The article assumes that programmers are free to arrange their schedule. But that's only true if you're an independent contractor who's not deeply embedded in a team. Most programmers - and workers in general - are subjugated to the authority of managers and specific workplace culture. Trying to rally workers around the battle cry "let's improve productivity" without questioning to what end, well, that's just a bad take on Taylorism.
    • edhelas 7y ago
      ^ This
    • celticmusic 7y ago
      > The article assumes that programmers are free to arrange their schedule. But that's only true if you're an independent contractor who's not deeply embedded in a team. Then you take what you can do and leave the rest.
  • mbeex 7y ago
    This is naive, but many - especially young people fall for it, their enthusiasm is exploited. All progress is priced in immediately, this is the lection everyone learns - or should learn - after a few years at least. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamster_wheel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamster_wheel
  • avindroth 7y ago
    This ends poorly I feel. Having the intent to improve often destroys the process itself. It's very subtle and case-by-case, but a bit of leisure and leeway with work is good. I do like monitoring myself, but only if I am kind of just enjoying it? Not really trying to "improve" per se.
  • Hamuko 7y ago
    Doesn't really work when my contract says 37.5 hours a week.
  • commandlinefan 7y ago
    Well, that's a charitable take, but he literally starts with "stop reading slashdot/hacker news", so it's clear he means keeping your nose to the grindstone while you're "working".
• ak39 7y ago
  Wu wei of programming.
  • kilroy_jones 7y ago
    How does that work?
    • mr__y 7y ago
      you ignore the bugs and let them be, and if anyone questions that, you give them some vaguely related Confucius quote
      • ak39 7y ago
        I think this sounds about right too.
    • ak39 7y ago
      I don't know, my friend. What I'm about to type will sound a lot like Dudism ... here goes: It's impossible to explain Wu Wei in instructional format. This paradox alone is its appeal and weakness. The concept is this: never force anything. But then also: do not slack off. Be keenly aware of what is desired but don't attempt at it directly, forcefully. Rather be content that "it (whatever you are seeking to achieve) will happen when you are ready to let it happen" by you doing something quite orthogonal/oblique to the objective. It's an Eastern philosophical principle but I think there's a nugget of science that could be distilled out of this if studied for factors influencing success and failure in personal endeavours (that is, if any study were to be conducted - I know of none, btw). From a personal experience I have great moments where I don't chase deadlines or impose mental pressure to conform to explicit design objectives. In these cases I would openly admit that what I am about to do may NOT be the thing I should be doing but I'm doing it anyway to see what might come of it (always keeping in sight the original premise or objective). I've noticed too that if I force a design too literally, I soon develop neurotic anxiety about handling exceptions my forcefully created universe of abstract correctness (abstractions are gon leak!). You cannot force Wu Wei ... that will be both ironic and paradoxical.
  • 7y ago
• TomMarius 7y ago
  >This article seems to be written from someone that is addicted to work. Maybe he's just addicted to coding. I am and I like it. Making money with it is a nice side effect.
  • test1235 7y ago
    I don't think so - if you were addicted, you wouldn't have any issues with distractions
• Tenoke 7y ago
  This is a very unhelpful take. Some of us want to be more productive. Many of us want to be more productive so we can do more and still have more leisure time. "Code should not be about productivity. Life should not be about productivity." does not help anyone. It's just empty platitudes. And even if it was true that people only seek productivity so they can devote themselves more to their job (it's not), why are you judging them and telling them your way is better? Looking at your reply bellow you do seem capable of understanding the general question - you were coaxed into giving some productivity tips so why this empty response here?
  • kilroy_jones 7y ago
    I think you read way too much into that person's reply. They are questioning to basis of the article, which is something that should be encouraged, whether you agree it disagree.
• avindroth 7y ago
  I generally agree with this, but also disagree with this. I think being forceful ("you are addicted") about how someone spends their time is the exact opposite of the approach you want to take. Yes, I regret many hours I spent on optimization, trying to do the best thing, trying to improve my productivity. I know that those things prevented me from focusing on what was really important - the so-called yak-shaving can dig you a hole of trying to do things really well. But at the same time, I genuinely enjoy yak-shaving now. It's pretty fun. I'd say people are more obsessive over stuff than not, but it doesn't seem helpful to call them addicted. For some people, programming is really fun and good. For others, balance is important. Nobody really can tell you what's important and what's not, except for that very question of importance. I see people into spirituality and the like trying to force not-forcing on themselves. Being obsessed with work is not the best way forward (and a bit rigid), but also you sometimes have to do it. Sometimes being obsessed is fun and useful and actually gets things done. I feel like I have toned down my disagreements as I write this comment, because life should really not be about productivity. But sometimes it should be. I in part do regret times that I spent optimizing stuff, but because I went through that, I now appreciate having less intent. Who knows, maybe someone telling you you're addicted is what gets people to change afterall.
• levosmetalo 7y ago
  I agree with you 100%. Improving my productivity for 20% will not give me a 20% salary raise, since those two don't actually correlate. It would just make me more worn down and exhausted when I leave the office, and require would longer recovery time afterwards, thus eating my free time. If the corporates don't want to compensate fairly for the extra productivity, then the optimal solution is to do a bare minimum of productive work and minimize own efforts to be able to focus on things that really matter to yourself.
  • MaxBarraclough 7y ago
    > It would just make me more worn down and exhausted when I leave the office Only if you're working harder. Generally when people talk about productivity-boosts they mean working smarter. That may mean stopping doing things that are just making things needlessly difficult. The example in the article is a good one: > I would write all my code for a new feature up front and then test all of the code collectively Knowing that this is a bad approach is an important lesson - doing things that way creates frustration and wasted effort, and likely harms quality, with no upside. Another example might be with organisation skill: if you're working in self-made chaos, it's more tiring, more frustrating, and it's less productive and harms quality.
• afarrell 7y ago
  > We should organize our life to improve our reading, playing, resting time. Yes. Strongly agree. > Life is about surprises, unplanned things, meeting new people and breaking some habits. Life is a balance. You need spontaneity. You also need stability. How much of each is up to you. > Why should we force ourselves to organize our days to improve our coding time? Because for some people, it is really very important to know where they'll be living in 3 months or if they'll be kicked out of the country. Getting fired sucks.
  • that_jojo 7y ago
    If you're getting fired for not being the perfectly optimal worker automaton, then I'm very sorry you ever had to work for such a business in the first place.
    • afarrell 7y ago
      You say > I'm very sorry after saying > perfectly optimal worker automaton I don't know if your intent is to come across as sarcastic or as genuinely sympathetic here. If you were going for genuine sympathy, I'd like to explain why your words sound dismissive: Taken literally, words like "perfectly" or "optimal" refer to an absolute. Human life is very rarely absolute. We deal with ambiguous information and must make choices which are trade-offs among competing values we simultaneously genuinely hold. This is such a recurring fact of human life that people sometimes use absolute words as an exaggeration, as I think you did here. That exaggeration expresses emotions like exasperation and incredulity. It says, "it is utterly ridiculous that your job even had those unrealistic expectations of you." That is the literal meaning of what you want to say with the words "If you're getting fired for not being the perfectly optimal worker automaton", right? If I was talking about how my workplace had ridiculous expectations of my output, that would be an expression of sympathy. But I am not, so it is not. The other thing that exaggeration does is refuse any thought about magnitudes. Without a sense of magnitudes, you can't hold the information you'd use to decide on a balance. Exaggeration is a refusal to acknowledge problems of balance. True sympathy acknowledges the realness and difficulty of the problems faced by another. Incredulity sounds more like, "I don't believe that your problem is real." ---- Maybe you think I'm incorrect. Maybe you think there isn't a balance to be struck. Maybe your life experience has shown that this balance is obvious and easy for you. Thats fine. You're free to disagree. But if you do and sarcasm was your intent, please know that it is both less clear and less kind.
• Confusion 7y ago
  You are improving your productivity by 'doing something else', such as 'walking for several hours in the forest'. Banging your head against a problem for several hours while not making any progress is frustrating. Not because you are 'unproductive' in the sense of producing value for your employer or customers, but because you are 'unproductive' in the sense of not achieving the progress you desire. Thus we want to improve our productivity. Not because we need to be productive in a capitalist sense, but because we want to be productive to have the feeling of achieving something. Whether increasing your productivity comes in the form of going for a walk or getting rid of distractions doesn't change that.
• jasode 7y ago
  >What if I don't want to improve my productivity ? I think you're reacting to the word "productivity" because it has negative connotations to some readers. To others, "productivity" has neutral to positive connotations. I think we all universally desire "less effort for more output" across work and leisure activities. We just don't like to label it "productivity". (I made previous comment.[0]) E.g. if a gardener wants to plant a row of flowers for pleasure, she might put all 10 flower pots into a wagon and then drag the wagon to the final location. This is more productive than hand carrying only 1 flower pot at a time and walking back & forth 10 times. People inherently like to be "productive" even for play and leisure! >Why should we force ourselves to organize our days to improve our coding time ? We should organize our life to improve our reading, playing, resting time. I think you're being uncharitable in interpreting the blog essay. The scope of his tips is about being productive while in the office. (Ctrl+F search article for "office".) Therefore, finding bugs faster between 9-to-5 isn't going to detract from "playing" time on the weekend. In fact, it may even let the programmer leave earlier on Friday. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19592404 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19592404
  • that_jojo 7y ago
    Except for that part where they were spending free time watching play-by-plays of their own work.
    • jasode 7y ago
      >Except for that part where they were spending free time watching play-by-plays of their own work. About that, I only notice the article says this: - "At the end of the week, I’ll watch a few segments from the previous week. " I don't see why "end of the week" must be interpreted to mean "free time" instead of "end of the day on Friday before I go home for the weekend." It still seems like some of us are determined to find reasons to dismiss the essay as detrimental advice because he used the word "productivity" as opposed to just charitably engaging the underlying concept of productivity as a universal positive.