3 ms·
If you're going to play a pointless game of semantics, you should at least take a second to check your definitions: "pro·duc·tion: (Economics) the creation of
by rkon 15y ago
If you're going to play a pointless game of semantics, you should at least take a second to check your definitions:
"pro·duc·tion: (Economics) the creation of value; the producing of articles having exchange value."
100,000 lines of generated code would have no value and, therefore, your productivity would not be "incredible" at all, it would be zero. You knew what he was asking for, no need to try to rewrite his question.
- edw519 15y agoWhat you call "semantics", I call "a critical distinction" that needed to be pointed out. In my early years, I wasted a lot of energy trying to be more productive, efficient, effective, (call it whatever you want), until I learned one of the most valuable and counter-intuitive lessons of my career: it really doesn't matter how "good" you are, how "well" you work, or how good you "feel". All that really matters is whether or not your cumulative contributions keep increasing. Take care of that and you won't have much else to worry about. Don't do that and you'll end up worrying about all the wrong things.
- orijing 15y agoThe word was productivity, not production. "Productivity is a measure of output from a production process, per unit of input." "the ratio of the quantity and quality of units produced to the labor per unit of time" [1] http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=productivity http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=productivity [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity