4 ms·

I've done 84/wk for the better part of a year. With commuting it was well over 90. Didn't bother me too bad at the time, but took a toll on my health and pret

by bm3719 5y ago

I've done 84/wk for the better part of a year. With commuting it was well over 90. Didn't bother me too bad at the time, but took a toll on my health and pretty much everything else in life. I wouldn't recommend it just for the health reasons if nothing else, but those other things that just didn't get done were important too. I'll also say that jobs are ephemeral, and there's really not much benefit to going all-in like that on any of them. Apart from larger amounts of cash in a shorter amount of time (and much higher tax burden), I have nothing to show now for that kind of dedication to my employer's cause. It's not like you'll learn more, you'll just work more and the job becomes your life.

quickthrower2 5y ago
I'm not sure how anyone does 84 hours a week of one thing. I mean 42 hours of programming plus 42 hours of physical work I could understand. Even then it's got to be tough. There must be something in the brain chemistry of people who can pull it off.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  I've met a couple of people who worked like that and they seemed to be deluded about their own contribution. They were putting in the hours but they weren't productive.
barry-cotter 5y ago
> It's not like you'll learn more, you'll just work more and the job becomes your life. I wouldn't do what you did but if you were doing any kind of intelectually demanding work it would be astonishing if you didn't learn more than people working 40 hours a week do. Double the hours is unlikely to lead to double the learning but 1.2x? 1.5x? Perhaps as an upper bound 1.7x?
- bm3719 5y ago
  I will say I was 100% dialed into the job. I could answer just about any question related to what I was working on and I knew the languages/platforms/domain better than anything I've worked with since. That could be a positive if something out of your control doesn't take it away from you and leave you hanging. However, the law of diminishing returns definitely applied and my energy reserves were depleted within a few months, never having a chance to recharge. I recall towards the end I would catch myself sometimes just staring at the monitor for an hour or more, doing nothing. I also think this was a one-time shot for me—I lost something I can't get back and wouldn't have it in me to do this again. In some video games you can deplete stamina, but permanent debuffs can drain max stamina. I like to think of it as the first happening, then eventually the latter.
  - barry-cotter 5y ago
    Sounds like it wasn't worth it but you learned a lot. Can't believe it took more than three months to reach "Am I depressed or is this burnout? Why not both?"
cascom 5y ago
Putting in more hours is key in jobs where you need experiential learning / want to get proficiency. e.g. doctors become good at their jobs after their schooling by seeing as many patients as possible / doing as many procedures This becomes less important once you become proficient / put in your 10,000 hours.
- asdff 5y ago
  There's also a national reckoning going on with sleep deprived early career people working their long hour residency hell too. Just because one field does it doesn't mean its a good practice at all.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

by bm3719 5y ago

quickthrower2 5y ago

I'm not sure how anyone does 84 hours a week of one thing. I mean 42 hours of programming plus 42 hours of physical work I could understand. Even then it's got to be tough. There must be something in the brain chemistry of people who can pull it off.

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
I've met a couple of people who worked like that and they seemed to be deluded about their own contribution. They were putting in the hours but they weren't productive.

barry-cotter 5y ago

> It's not like you'll learn more, you'll just work more and the job becomes your life. I wouldn't do what you did but if you were doing any kind of intelectually demanding work it would be astonishing if you didn't learn more than people working 40 hours a week do. Double the hours is unlikely to lead to double the learning but 1.2x? 1.5x? Perhaps as an upper bound 1.7x?

bm3719 5y ago
I will say I was 100% dialed into the job. I could answer just about any question related to what I was working on and I knew the languages/platforms/domain better than anything I've worked with since. That could be a positive if something out of your control doesn't take it away from you and leave you hanging. However, the law of diminishing returns definitely applied and my energy reserves were depleted within a few months, never having a chance to recharge. I recall towards the end I would catch myself sometimes just staring at the monitor for an hour or more, doing nothing. I also think this was a one-time shot for me—I lost something I can't get back and wouldn't have it in me to do this again. In some video games you can deplete stamina, but permanent debuffs can drain max stamina. I like to think of it as the first happening, then eventually the latter.
- barry-cotter 5y ago
  Sounds like it wasn't worth it but you learned a lot. Can't believe it took more than three months to reach "Am I depressed or is this burnout? Why not both?"

cascom 5y ago

Putting in more hours is key in jobs where you need experiential learning / want to get proficiency. e.g. doctors become good at their jobs after their schooling by seeing as many patients as possible / doing as many procedures This becomes less important once you become proficient / put in your 10,000 hours.

asdff 5y ago
There's also a national reckoning going on with sleep deprived early career people working their long hour residency hell too. Just because one field does it doesn't mean its a good practice at all.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]