12 ms·

Honestly, I do feel somewhat similar. I work a normal 8-hour day and I am not obsessed with productivity nor I am some kind of anti-work activist, but it just f

Honestly, I do feel somewhat similar. I work a normal 8-hour day and I am not obsessed with productivity nor I am some kind of anti-work activist, but it just feels like such a waste of time. The only reason I go to work is for money. I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?), nor the technologies used (each of which brings its own challenges and frustrations). If I didn't need to go to work, I could dedicate more time to reading, writing, learning new skills, working on my own side projects, getting enough sleep, exercising, cooking, etc. Work just sucks the very soul out of me, and at the end of the day, I don't really want to do anything. Only on weekends and holidays do I feel much more energetic and motivated to do the things I listed previously, which evaporates by Monday.

88913527 3y ago
If you care about the products, the emotional investment in your work might propel your income, which is the reason why you're working in the first place, so ostensibly a follow-on goal of that might be to raise your income.
- thatfrenchguy 3y ago
  Eh, there's quick diminishing returns in making more income, especially in software engineering. Being interested in the products you're building is a better path to work contentment in my opinion.
- cool_dude85 3y ago
  This is an interesting theory. My experience has been quite the opposite, in that typically jobs that people care about and connect with on an emotional level are those which pay relatively little. Teaching, social work, caring, and so on.
  - notaimbot 3y ago
    a huge part of the gaming industry basically
  - rbancroft 3y ago
    It's not guaranteed, but caring and working hard can pay off over time and can give longevity to what you do. If you are working with the right people, they tend to notice and reward this. The result of not caring shows over time and companies that operate like this tend to fall behind and become obsolete.
  - kortilla 3y ago
    If you think people don’t care and connect with other industries on an emotional level, you are wrong.
  - escapedmoose 3y ago
    This has been my experience so far. It seems employers/supervisors can sniff out when you really care about something, so they use that as leverage to take advantage: heap on more responsibilities without accompanying pay increase, cut benefits, delay raises and promotions, etc. I really wish that weren’t the case, but as a person who’s passionate about my work, I’ve encountered it at every employer so far :( I’m not in SV so maybe the situation is different there
    - zentwoo 3y ago
      It is not.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- briffle 3y ago
  Like all those Microsoft developers, who worked long hours, made their company $15B in profit last quarter (and $5B in stock buybacks) and are now not getting any raises?
  - 88913527 3y ago
    At-will employment isn't a valid reason to not care about what you do. The armchair theory is the emotional investment would still lead to promotions, higher raises, etc than someone who otherwise wouldn't be. The macroeconomic climate is orthogonal. For example, suppose that by caring, they got promoted to a new job that will make them a more competitive candidate in the job market. Now that person can more easily leave Microsoft for a non-pay freeze company, so the advantage remains.
    - escapedmoose 3y ago
      I posted this elsewhere but it’s relevant here: It seems employers/supervisors can sniff out when you really care about something, so they use that as leverage to take advantage: heap on more responsibilities without accompanying pay increase, cut benefits, delay raises and promotions, etc. I really wish that weren’t the case, but as a person who’s passionate about my work, I’ve encountered it at every employer so far. Because of that, my career mobility has come entirely from job-hopping (which I’m not a fan of, but I need to pay the bills). I’m not in SV so maybe the situation is different there
- notabee 3y ago
  Caring just as often leads to burnout, since many people wind up dealing with organizational dysfunction. If you truly care and the resultant product gets butchered due to politics or simply killed on an executive's whim despite having promise, that's going to affect you longer term and could make you less efficient or unable to dedicate good effort in the future, especially if that cycle is repeated several times. Getting too invested in something that you only have marginal control over is a two edged sword.
  - overgrownzygote 3y ago
    I’m surprised I had to scroll this far to see this. I think most folks want to care about their jobs and the default is having a healthy level of investment. But especially in larger companies, it’s so easy to get burned by workplace politics or leaders just not seeing things the same way you do — just as you said. Emotional disinvestment in work is a defensive mechanism. Honestly, it feels like the two camps in this thread are almost talking past each other. Yes, it’s good to be invested in your work — it’s better for your emotional/existential health and good for your career. On the other hand, investment being a net good for an employee is hugely dependent on your work environment. While one could argue that the right thing to do if you feel you can’t be invested is to leave, and I generally agree that leaving is the only real long-term solution, there are also a million reasons why it might not in the short term.
    - notabee 3y ago
      Yes, I think that the folks who haven't been burned like that before have either not been in the industry for very long, or they have been very, very fortunate in their work environments. Having a supportive work environment that rewards passion is something that everyone who puts in solid work effort deserves, but unfortunately much of the industry works like slash and burn agriculture: exploiting, exhausting, and then moving on.
xenocratus 3y ago
> I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?) I mean, this obviously depends on the kind of product - is it some biotech to make someone's life better, or is it a gambling website tuned to suck the most out of whales? As engineers we're much better placed than most people to do something meaningful with our work, and sticking with a job where you don't see that value is a pity. But if you just don't care about building something for someone else... maybe you should change that? As you say, there's little choice in whether you have to do it (unless you win the lottery or something), why not make a goal out of it and get some enjoyment out.
- badpun 3y ago
  > As you say, there's little choice in whether you have to do it (unless you win the lottery or something) With some frugality and smart money management, you can retire in 5-10 years if you're on a dev salary.
  - nly 3y ago
    Frugality is an understatement on that timeline. To retire in 10 years you're going to have to be able to live comfortably on something like 1/3rd of your take home pay. No employer is going to pay you 3x what your nearest peer is willing to live on.
    - Jach 3y ago
      It's relatively easy for software devs to live comfortably on $50k and make $150k+.
      - jacobyoder 3y ago
        Can confirm. Have done this for the last several years. Wife stopped working a few years back due to an injury (but no disability or other income for better or worse), so I've been the sole breadwinner the last few years. I've typically been bringing in between $150k and $220k (gross), and we've spent most of the last ... 7-8 years not doing or buying much. Min obligations each month are now around $3000/month (mortgage, utilities, food, insurance), so there's been a bunch of savings. I can't retire and never have to work again, but I'm slowing down a bit, and spending more time not earning money (gym, reading, travel, etc). On second though, if I absolutely needed to, we could probably 'retire' tomorrow, and do a bit more belt-tightening - savings/investments would last probably another 10-12 years without any major changes to lifestyle, then could collect social security. But that's... not something I want to do. I like doing most of what I'm doing, and am just being a bit choosier about what I do now. EDIT: no kids, semi-rural southern US. EDIT 2: Moderately high, but irregular, income from consulting/contract dev/tech work. Not W2.
zikduruqe 3y ago
>The only reason I go to work is for money. Don't forget healthcare being tied directly to being employed. If it was not for that, people could purse their passions versus what they have to do just because.
- UncleOxidant 3y ago
  I tend to agree, but then I wonder if people in places like Canada (which has universal healthcare) tend to pursue their passions more than those of us in the US?
  - appleaday1 3y ago
    Canada is kind of slowly imploding. It's going through a lot of crisis currently. Housing is one of the biggest ones, for example I am a housing activist and trying to do something actively about the housing crisis happening in Canada.
    - mulmen 3y ago
      Can you give an example of what actually happened up there? And what you are doing? I hear rumors (China!) but you seem much more knowledgeable on the topic. I live down in Seattle so I'm curious how similar the situations are.
      - cableshaft 3y ago
        I don't live in Canada, but Toronto has an average housing cost of $1.1 million dollars (USD)[1], which is almost as much as San Francisco (at $1.3 million dollars)[2]. Meanwhile the average salary in Toronto is $52k USD per year[3], versus San Francisco's average salary of $109k[4]. So that might give you some idea. [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-home-sales-1.6802017 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-home-sales-1.... [2]: https://www.zillow.com/home-values/20330/san-francisco-ca/ https://www.zillow.com/home-values/20330/san-francisco-ca/ [3]: https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Location=Toronto-Ontario/Salary https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Location=Toronto-Ontari... [4]: https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Location=San-Francisco-CA/Salary https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Location=San-Francisco-...
2devnull 3y ago
Be thankful your non-work life is better than your work life. For many people work is a pleasant escape from non-work.
- sBqQu3U0wH 3y ago
  Of course, but this is just my point of view. I am doing relatively well compared to, I dare say, a large number of people. It just felt pointless to state the obvious.
kortilla 3y ago
> I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?) This mindset is how you kneecap your career. You’ve pigeonholed yourself into the foot soldier category when it becomes immediately obvious to managers that you aren’t thinking about what’s actually good for the company. You may already know this, but it needs to be explicitly called out that taking that approach to your business relationship with your employer defines the relationship.
- czscout 3y ago
  I think it's possible to be invested in the performance and improvement of the company you work for without being personally invested in the exact product you're helping to develop.
- jonfw 3y ago
  Caring about the product is not good for your career. You should care about your career, and most of the time, that means that progressing the product should be your goal. However, when the interests of yourself and your company diverge, don't get stuck holding the bag.
  - Alupis 3y ago
    If you care about your work-product, and can find a way to be passionate about it, then everything else comes very easy. That includes being noticed, promoted, etc. Passionate does not necessarily imply loving absolutely every aspect of the job, it just means you've found some aspect you really enjoy and are excited to spend some time on. People who work solely to advance their careers are generally not awesome to work with, in my experience. The people who work passionately tend to have their careers advanced for them. YMMV...
    - jonfw 3y ago
      When the interests of the company and yourself are aligned, absolutely! It is easy though to fall into the trap of making improvements for the sake of improvements, without any real visibility of why that matters to the business. That’s when you can work hard and stagnate at the same time
JohnMakin 3y ago
I have been in places where I not only didn't give a shit about the product, but it was against what I believed ethically or morally. In those cases I managed to find pride in my own small piece of it and ignored the bigger picture. I'm lucky to work in a place now where I really believe in and use the product, and the same kind of soul-suckiness you're describing is far more tolerable. Making money for someone else is inherently soul-sucking though, at the end of the day.
- musicale 3y ago
  > Making money for someone else is inherently soul-sucking though, at the end of the day The emergent nature of corporations is to slowly consume employees' lives and throw away the burnt-out husks once they no longer bring value to executives and shareholders.
danny_taco 3y ago
The main reason we all work for someone else is for money but there is something to be said about the things we build at work and not caring about them. This is something that took me a long time to realize but you need to stop thinking about software as a field and start thinking of it as a skill set. From there figure out what interests you. Wildlife, economics, vehicles, etc. or whatever, and then use your skill set to work on what field of your choosing. Working on something that doesn't interest you just for the sake of technology is not something that will ever make you happy. If you truly have no interest in anything then that's another problem on itself.
- the_only_law 3y ago
  > From there figure out what interests you. Wildlife, economics, vehicles, etc. or whatever, and then use your skill set to work on what field of your choosing. Unfortunately the wildlife, economics and vehicle companies won’t hire me because I’m not an established domain expert in wildlife, economics or vehicles. To be a bit more concrete I’ve actually applied to jobs in some of the industries you’ve noted recently, particularly wildlife. I applied for a job that seemed pretty cut and dry: Doing mostly .NET CRUD work for an application supporting [wildlife domain]. It didn’t pay well but it genuinely seemed like a domain I would like and Delma technical view the job was a perfect match for my resume. The application had several binary yes/no questions I had to fill Out mostly along the lines of “Do you have experience in X”. For 90% of the questions my answer was yes. But there was one question basically asking “Do you have experience writing software for our hyper specific domain”. I suppose I could have lied and said yes, though that just meant I’d be rejected after wasting my time and the organization’s time, so I answered truthfully “no”. I was rejected not long later and while it’s impossible to know the exact reason I have my suspicions.
- notyourwork 3y ago
  Big +1, work on something that bothers you in your personal life or something that interests you in your personal life. It will always undoubtedly be more fulfilling compared to simply "working for the man."
  - 3y ago
cmilton 3y ago
Its possible you just picked the wrong career. Time for a change?
fswd 3y ago
It's funny, if you say this duringg an interview "Why do you want the job?" "Money" you won't get hired. So it becomes a performance artist act.
- escapedmoose 3y ago
  That seems a little disingenuous. Of course they know you’re there primarily for money, so that’s not really the question they’re asking. They’re really asking “why are you looking for money from us and not someone else?” You can be cynical and call that “performance” or be realistic and recognize it as communication shorthand.
  - cstrahan 3y ago
    Are you assuming “money” isn’t also the answer to this implied question?
    - escapedmoose 3y ago
      Haha maybe that’s the answer for you personally. I wouldn’t take more money for a worse job (generally), so I guess I am assuming money isn’t also the second answer
      - cstrahan 3y ago
        By the time I have offers in hand I’ve deemed each company to be worth working for, so there is no matter of one job being “worse” than the other — they are all acceptable. If there was something I disliked I would have terminated the hiring process. I guess if someone has a fixation on some particular technology or industry then that could be a distinguishing factor. But I’m motivated solely by the capacity for me to make a positive impact and be appreciated. However, any company that isn’t completely dysfunctional will (at least, from the outside, appear to) check that checkbox. Maybe I have just had good luck with my interviews so far and I am thus taking (at the point in time that I’m choosing between competing offers) some critical thing that usually varies between employers for granted. I dunno.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
srcreigh 3y ago
The grass is always greener. Plenty of people become depressed once they stop working. The excitement of a hobby comes out of a balance with the struggle of work. Not everybody. If you like try taking extended time off to see where you land.
- slothtrop 3y ago
  There is a certain balance to be had yes when experiencing flow. Practice raises the threshold, makes harder things more enjoyable (e.g. a musical instrument). However we're creatures of habit, and I think most people search for rationalizations to do nothing or change nothing. That's comfortable and familiar. People don't know what they want and seem to shop around for placeholders for identity. It's not certain what the payoff will be for any new undertaking.
quijoteuniv 3y ago
Have you considered the posibility of doing a rewarding job (other than money). I think is possible sometimes, often it might be less money involved, but imagine that your work allows you to work in what you enjoy and in your free time, er r …you just rest or do more of what you enjoy.
- slothtrop 3y ago
  I've expended an inordinate amount of effort trying to get a rewarding job, more-so than at any of the jobs themselves. It's not a given. If you've taken a career trajectory that employers find don't match the pattern they are most familiar with and place a premium on, you will have a doubly hard time, as you're competing with those who haven't. Free time is what there is for me, and though I don't think of it in "productive" terms, I do think it's important to bias towards action rather than passive consumption.
  - quijoteuniv 3y ago
    What I am saying is that entertaining the idea, that there might be a job out there that you actually enjoy, might help you find it. At the end of the day is a transaction and is better to learn to make good deals for oneself, and also accept if one can only take a bad deal at the moment. I always tried to make the best out of the bad deals with different degree of success.
    - slothtrop 3y ago
      > What I am saying is that entertaining the idea, that there might be a job out there that you actually enjoy, might help you find it. Pretty sure competing for them necessitates that one might suppose they exist.
ksd482 3y ago
I am a software engineer. I struggled to find meaning in my work for the first few years of my career. I used to lie (unknowingly) to myself "I love my job", "I am passionate about my job", "It's my passion" and I was always disappointed. That is until one day, after many years and barring many details, I decided to tell myself that "I push buttons on a company laptop in exchange for money and I happen to somewhat like it from time to time". I immediately became better at my job as it improved my mental health. I started seeing my work for what it was. As for "passion", I started looking elsewhere for it and eventually found it. I can't make living from it, but that's another story.
- gdsdfe 3y ago
  where did you find your passion? just curious
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - tilne 3y ago
    On the advice of a commenter in a different HN thread I recently read Cal Newport’s book, “So Good They Can’t Ignore You.” The main premise is that passion results from valuable skills built via hard work over years of deliberate practice. Only after you have those valuable skills, the book argues, do you have the leverage to dictate your life in a way many people find necessary for satisfaction. Passion follows from there. The book is a fun read, but that’s basically the entire takeaway. And I find it to be a compelling argument. Passion does need to be found, but it seems logical that your skills will lead you to the passion, rather than the other way around.
    - pdimitar 3y ago
      That seems like a load of crap, I have a few passions ever since 13 year old and 30 years later they're still in me even though I barely ever practiced them. If that's the core idea of the entire book then I'm glad I'll save my money and time not to read it. Generalizations are dumb.
bojan 3y ago
> The only reason I go to work is for money. I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?) You should care a bit, because ultimately whatever we produce ends up directly or indirectly used by other human beings. That is at least my motivation to care about the product - thinking about that person on the other side that will be directly affected in their daily life by the choices I make.
- FourHand451 3y ago
  I agree with what you say, but for me it's easier said than done. There's a disconnect in my brain because it feels like the rewards for taking the extra time and effort to care about the product tend to end up mostly in the pocketbooks of upper level management. Some days the idea of making a better product because it makes the lives of users better is enough motivation, but not most. I wish I could consistently be more selfless in this regard, but when I'm tired or stressed or depressed, my lizard brain needs a more direct incentive.
D13Fd 3y ago
This isn’t really what the article is talking about though. It’s talking productivity outside of work.
- chasd00 3y ago
  yes and the article's definition of productive is hazy to me. Pursuing a hobby or interest outside of work seems productive to me but the article implies it's not. From the article it seems like the only productive activity outside of work is preparing for more work, i don't think that's true.
chankstein38 3y ago
I feel like I could've written this. I've even been feeling this more strongly lately and talking to friends about it. I just wish I could live my life and stop needing to work so I could have money.
thelittleone 3y ago
I've found that by caring about the product, I can deliver higher quality results and charge a premium rate for doing it. Additionally, the quality of the work leads to good reviews and referrals, increasing demand (and lowering cost of sales) which ultimately increases my rate / profit.
MuffinFlavored 3y ago
> I work a normal 8-hour day I'm "around on Teams/Slack" for ~7 hours a day but I 100% have not worked 8 hours a day in years. Am I the only one? Am I the minority? Am I the majority? If I go to 60 minutes of meetings a day, it's a lot. If I write 80 lines of code, it's a lot. If I research 1-2 production issues, it's a lot. If I write 20 Teams messages/3 e-mails, it's a lot.
- lisasays 3y ago
  This is quite normal in fact. However all the other stuff certainly counts as "work" also. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
- mcv 3y ago
  Ages ago, someone (I forgot who) argued that nobody really worked more than 2 hours a day. Most of the rest of our work is either waiting, hanging around, or pointless busywork. I'm sure it's not true for every job, but I'm pretty sure there's a lot of unnecessary inefficiency in our work. On the other hand, lots of people like those inefficiencies: a chat at the watercooler, talking about how your weekend was, etc. And those are certainly better for your mental health than the pointless meetings some managers would love to pad your schedule with.
musicale 3y ago
People really need time to recharge - especially after mental work.
alfonsodev 3y ago
I agree that productivity for the shake of productivity is non-sense, but self development could be beneficial for you. For example just even learning enough social/negotiation skills, or influence to educate your clients to be oriented by results rather than hours. That could be the key, then you can leverage "boring" technology, to solve real problems that matter. Creating a nice feedback loop were you grow and create your craft so work becomes frustration free and time independent.

88913527 3y ago

If you care about the products, the emotional investment in your work might propel your income, which is the reason why you're working in the first place, so ostensibly a follow-on goal of that might be to raise your income.

thatfrenchguy 3y ago
Eh, there's quick diminishing returns in making more income, especially in software engineering. Being interested in the products you're building is a better path to work contentment in my opinion.
cool_dude85 3y ago
This is an interesting theory. My experience has been quite the opposite, in that typically jobs that people care about and connect with on an emotional level are those which pay relatively little. Teaching, social work, caring, and so on.
- notaimbot 3y ago
  a huge part of the gaming industry basically
- rbancroft 3y ago
  It's not guaranteed, but caring and working hard can pay off over time and can give longevity to what you do. If you are working with the right people, they tend to notice and reward this. The result of not caring shows over time and companies that operate like this tend to fall behind and become obsolete.
- kortilla 3y ago
  If you think people don’t care and connect with other industries on an emotional level, you are wrong.
- escapedmoose 3y ago
  This has been my experience so far. It seems employers/supervisors can sniff out when you really care about something, so they use that as leverage to take advantage: heap on more responsibilities without accompanying pay increase, cut benefits, delay raises and promotions, etc. I really wish that weren’t the case, but as a person who’s passionate about my work, I’ve encountered it at every employer so far :( I’m not in SV so maybe the situation is different there
  - zentwoo 3y ago
    It is not.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
briffle 3y ago
Like all those Microsoft developers, who worked long hours, made their company $15B in profit last quarter (and $5B in stock buybacks) and are now not getting any raises?
- 88913527 3y ago
  At-will employment isn't a valid reason to not care about what you do. The armchair theory is the emotional investment would still lead to promotions, higher raises, etc than someone who otherwise wouldn't be. The macroeconomic climate is orthogonal. For example, suppose that by caring, they got promoted to a new job that will make them a more competitive candidate in the job market. Now that person can more easily leave Microsoft for a non-pay freeze company, so the advantage remains.
  - escapedmoose 3y ago
    I posted this elsewhere but it’s relevant here: It seems employers/supervisors can sniff out when you really care about something, so they use that as leverage to take advantage: heap on more responsibilities without accompanying pay increase, cut benefits, delay raises and promotions, etc. I really wish that weren’t the case, but as a person who’s passionate about my work, I’ve encountered it at every employer so far. Because of that, my career mobility has come entirely from job-hopping (which I’m not a fan of, but I need to pay the bills). I’m not in SV so maybe the situation is different there
notabee 3y ago
Caring just as often leads to burnout, since many people wind up dealing with organizational dysfunction. If you truly care and the resultant product gets butchered due to politics or simply killed on an executive's whim despite having promise, that's going to affect you longer term and could make you less efficient or unable to dedicate good effort in the future, especially if that cycle is repeated several times. Getting too invested in something that you only have marginal control over is a two edged sword.
- overgrownzygote 3y ago
  I’m surprised I had to scroll this far to see this. I think most folks want to care about their jobs and the default is having a healthy level of investment. But especially in larger companies, it’s so easy to get burned by workplace politics or leaders just not seeing things the same way you do — just as you said. Emotional disinvestment in work is a defensive mechanism. Honestly, it feels like the two camps in this thread are almost talking past each other. Yes, it’s good to be invested in your work — it’s better for your emotional/existential health and good for your career. On the other hand, investment being a net good for an employee is hugely dependent on your work environment. While one could argue that the right thing to do if you feel you can’t be invested is to leave, and I generally agree that leaving is the only real long-term solution, there are also a million reasons why it might not in the short term.
  - notabee 3y ago
    Yes, I think that the folks who haven't been burned like that before have either not been in the industry for very long, or they have been very, very fortunate in their work environments. Having a supportive work environment that rewards passion is something that everyone who puts in solid work effort deserves, but unfortunately much of the industry works like slash and burn agriculture: exploiting, exhausting, and then moving on.

xenocratus 3y ago

> I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?) I mean, this obviously depends on the kind of product - is it some biotech to make someone's life better, or is it a gambling website tuned to suck the most out of whales? As engineers we're much better placed than most people to do something meaningful with our work, and sticking with a job where you don't see that value is a pity. But if you just don't care about building something for someone else... maybe you should change that? As you say, there's little choice in whether you have to do it (unless you win the lottery or something), why not make a goal out of it and get some enjoyment out.

badpun 3y ago
> As you say, there's little choice in whether you have to do it (unless you win the lottery or something) With some frugality and smart money management, you can retire in 5-10 years if you're on a dev salary.
- nly 3y ago
  Frugality is an understatement on that timeline. To retire in 10 years you're going to have to be able to live comfortably on something like 1/3rd of your take home pay. No employer is going to pay you 3x what your nearest peer is willing to live on.
  - Jach 3y ago
    It's relatively easy for software devs to live comfortably on $50k and make $150k+.
    - jacobyoder 3y ago
      Can confirm. Have done this for the last several years. Wife stopped working a few years back due to an injury (but no disability or other income for better or worse), so I've been the sole breadwinner the last few years. I've typically been bringing in between $150k and $220k (gross), and we've spent most of the last ... 7-8 years not doing or buying much. Min obligations each month are now around $3000/month (mortgage, utilities, food, insurance), so there's been a bunch of savings. I can't retire and never have to work again, but I'm slowing down a bit, and spending more time not earning money (gym, reading, travel, etc). On second though, if I absolutely needed to, we could probably 'retire' tomorrow, and do a bit more belt-tightening - savings/investments would last probably another 10-12 years without any major changes to lifestyle, then could collect social security. But that's... not something I want to do. I like doing most of what I'm doing, and am just being a bit choosier about what I do now. EDIT: no kids, semi-rural southern US. EDIT 2: Moderately high, but irregular, income from consulting/contract dev/tech work. Not W2.

zikduruqe 3y ago

>The only reason I go to work is for money. Don't forget healthcare being tied directly to being employed. If it was not for that, people could purse their passions versus what they have to do just because.

UncleOxidant 3y ago
I tend to agree, but then I wonder if people in places like Canada (which has universal healthcare) tend to pursue their passions more than those of us in the US?
- appleaday1 3y ago
  Canada is kind of slowly imploding. It's going through a lot of crisis currently. Housing is one of the biggest ones, for example I am a housing activist and trying to do something actively about the housing crisis happening in Canada.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    Can you give an example of what actually happened up there? And what you are doing? I hear rumors (China!) but you seem much more knowledgeable on the topic. I live down in Seattle so I'm curious how similar the situations are.
    - cableshaft 3y ago
      I don't live in Canada, but Toronto has an average housing cost of $1.1 million dollars (USD)[1], which is almost as much as San Francisco (at $1.3 million dollars)[2]. Meanwhile the average salary in Toronto is $52k USD per year[3], versus San Francisco's average salary of $109k[4]. So that might give you some idea. [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-home-sales-1.6802017 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-home-sales-1.... [2]: https://www.zillow.com/home-values/20330/san-francisco-ca/ https://www.zillow.com/home-values/20330/san-francisco-ca/ [3]: https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Location=Toronto-Ontario/Salary https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Location=Toronto-Ontari... [4]: https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Location=San-Francisco-CA/Salary https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Location=San-Francisco-...

2devnull 3y ago

Be thankful your non-work life is better than your work life. For many people work is a pleasant escape from non-work.

sBqQu3U0wH 3y ago
Of course, but this is just my point of view. I am doing relatively well compared to, I dare say, a large number of people. It just felt pointless to state the obvious.

kortilla 3y ago

> I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?) This mindset is how you kneecap your career. You’ve pigeonholed yourself into the foot soldier category when it becomes immediately obvious to managers that you aren’t thinking about what’s actually good for the company. You may already know this, but it needs to be explicitly called out that taking that approach to your business relationship with your employer defines the relationship.

czscout 3y ago
I think it's possible to be invested in the performance and improvement of the company you work for without being personally invested in the exact product you're helping to develop.
jonfw 3y ago
Caring about the product is not good for your career. You should care about your career, and most of the time, that means that progressing the product should be your goal. However, when the interests of yourself and your company diverge, don't get stuck holding the bag.
- Alupis 3y ago
  If you care about your work-product, and can find a way to be passionate about it, then everything else comes very easy. That includes being noticed, promoted, etc. Passionate does not necessarily imply loving absolutely every aspect of the job, it just means you've found some aspect you really enjoy and are excited to spend some time on. People who work solely to advance their careers are generally not awesome to work with, in my experience. The people who work passionately tend to have their careers advanced for them. YMMV...
  - jonfw 3y ago
    When the interests of the company and yourself are aligned, absolutely! It is easy though to fall into the trap of making improvements for the sake of improvements, without any real visibility of why that matters to the business. That’s when you can work hard and stagnate at the same time

JohnMakin 3y ago

I have been in places where I not only didn't give a shit about the product, but it was against what I believed ethically or morally. In those cases I managed to find pride in my own small piece of it and ignored the bigger picture. I'm lucky to work in a place now where I really believe in and use the product, and the same kind of soul-suckiness you're describing is far more tolerable. Making money for someone else is inherently soul-sucking though, at the end of the day.

musicale 3y ago
> Making money for someone else is inherently soul-sucking though, at the end of the day The emergent nature of corporations is to slowly consume employees' lives and throw away the burnt-out husks once they no longer bring value to executives and shareholders.

danny_taco 3y ago

The main reason we all work for someone else is for money but there is something to be said about the things we build at work and not caring about them. This is something that took me a long time to realize but you need to stop thinking about software as a field and start thinking of it as a skill set. From there figure out what interests you. Wildlife, economics, vehicles, etc. or whatever, and then use your skill set to work on what field of your choosing. Working on something that doesn't interest you just for the sake of technology is not something that will ever make you happy. If you truly have no interest in anything then that's another problem on itself.

the_only_law 3y ago
> From there figure out what interests you. Wildlife, economics, vehicles, etc. or whatever, and then use your skill set to work on what field of your choosing. Unfortunately the wildlife, economics and vehicle companies won’t hire me because I’m not an established domain expert in wildlife, economics or vehicles. To be a bit more concrete I’ve actually applied to jobs in some of the industries you’ve noted recently, particularly wildlife. I applied for a job that seemed pretty cut and dry: Doing mostly .NET CRUD work for an application supporting [wildlife domain]. It didn’t pay well but it genuinely seemed like a domain I would like and Delma technical view the job was a perfect match for my resume. The application had several binary yes/no questions I had to fill Out mostly along the lines of “Do you have experience in X”. For 90% of the questions my answer was yes. But there was one question basically asking “Do you have experience writing software for our hyper specific domain”. I suppose I could have lied and said yes, though that just meant I’d be rejected after wasting my time and the organization’s time, so I answered truthfully “no”. I was rejected not long later and while it’s impossible to know the exact reason I have my suspicions.
notyourwork 3y ago
Big +1, work on something that bothers you in your personal life or something that interests you in your personal life. It will always undoubtedly be more fulfilling compared to simply "working for the man."
- 3y ago

cmilton 3y ago

Its possible you just picked the wrong career. Time for a change?

fswd 3y ago

It's funny, if you say this duringg an interview "Why do you want the job?" "Money" you won't get hired. So it becomes a performance artist act.

escapedmoose 3y ago
That seems a little disingenuous. Of course they know you’re there primarily for money, so that’s not really the question they’re asking. They’re really asking “why are you looking for money from us and not someone else?” You can be cynical and call that “performance” or be realistic and recognize it as communication shorthand.
- cstrahan 3y ago
  Are you assuming “money” isn’t also the answer to this implied question?
  - escapedmoose 3y ago
    Haha maybe that’s the answer for you personally. I wouldn’t take more money for a worse job (generally), so I guess I am assuming money isn’t also the second answer
    - cstrahan 3y ago
      By the time I have offers in hand I’ve deemed each company to be worth working for, so there is no matter of one job being “worse” than the other — they are all acceptable. If there was something I disliked I would have terminated the hiring process. I guess if someone has a fixation on some particular technology or industry then that could be a distinguishing factor. But I’m motivated solely by the capacity for me to make a positive impact and be appreciated. However, any company that isn’t completely dysfunctional will (at least, from the outside, appear to) check that checkbox. Maybe I have just had good luck with my interviews so far and I am thus taking (at the point in time that I’m choosing between competing offers) some critical thing that usually varies between employers for granted. I dunno.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

srcreigh 3y ago

The grass is always greener. Plenty of people become depressed once they stop working. The excitement of a hobby comes out of a balance with the struggle of work. Not everybody. If you like try taking extended time off to see where you land.

slothtrop 3y ago
There is a certain balance to be had yes when experiencing flow. Practice raises the threshold, makes harder things more enjoyable (e.g. a musical instrument). However we're creatures of habit, and I think most people search for rationalizations to do nothing or change nothing. That's comfortable and familiar. People don't know what they want and seem to shop around for placeholders for identity. It's not certain what the payoff will be for any new undertaking.

quijoteuniv 3y ago

Have you considered the posibility of doing a rewarding job (other than money). I think is possible sometimes, often it might be less money involved, but imagine that your work allows you to work in what you enjoy and in your free time, er r …you just rest or do more of what you enjoy.

slothtrop 3y ago
I've expended an inordinate amount of effort trying to get a rewarding job, more-so than at any of the jobs themselves. It's not a given. If you've taken a career trajectory that employers find don't match the pattern they are most familiar with and place a premium on, you will have a doubly hard time, as you're competing with those who haven't. Free time is what there is for me, and though I don't think of it in "productive" terms, I do think it's important to bias towards action rather than passive consumption.
- quijoteuniv 3y ago
  What I am saying is that entertaining the idea, that there might be a job out there that you actually enjoy, might help you find it. At the end of the day is a transaction and is better to learn to make good deals for oneself, and also accept if one can only take a bad deal at the moment. I always tried to make the best out of the bad deals with different degree of success.
  - slothtrop 3y ago
    > What I am saying is that entertaining the idea, that there might be a job out there that you actually enjoy, might help you find it. Pretty sure competing for them necessitates that one might suppose they exist.

ksd482 3y ago

I am a software engineer. I struggled to find meaning in my work for the first few years of my career. I used to lie (unknowingly) to myself "I love my job", "I am passionate about my job", "It's my passion" and I was always disappointed. That is until one day, after many years and barring many details, I decided to tell myself that "I push buttons on a company laptop in exchange for money and I happen to somewhat like it from time to time". I immediately became better at my job as it improved my mental health. I started seeing my work for what it was. As for "passion", I started looking elsewhere for it and eventually found it. I can't make living from it, but that's another story.

gdsdfe 3y ago
where did you find your passion? just curious
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- tilne 3y ago
  On the advice of a commenter in a different HN thread I recently read Cal Newport’s book, “So Good They Can’t Ignore You.” The main premise is that passion results from valuable skills built via hard work over years of deliberate practice. Only after you have those valuable skills, the book argues, do you have the leverage to dictate your life in a way many people find necessary for satisfaction. Passion follows from there. The book is a fun read, but that’s basically the entire takeaway. And I find it to be a compelling argument. Passion does need to be found, but it seems logical that your skills will lead you to the passion, rather than the other way around.
  - pdimitar 3y ago
    That seems like a load of crap, I have a few passions ever since 13 year old and 30 years later they're still in me even though I barely ever practiced them. If that's the core idea of the entire book then I'm glad I'll save my money and time not to read it. Generalizations are dumb.

bojan 3y ago

> The only reason I go to work is for money. I don't care about the products we build for someone else (why should I?) You should care a bit, because ultimately whatever we produce ends up directly or indirectly used by other human beings. That is at least my motivation to care about the product - thinking about that person on the other side that will be directly affected in their daily life by the choices I make.

FourHand451 3y ago
I agree with what you say, but for me it's easier said than done. There's a disconnect in my brain because it feels like the rewards for taking the extra time and effort to care about the product tend to end up mostly in the pocketbooks of upper level management. Some days the idea of making a better product because it makes the lives of users better is enough motivation, but not most. I wish I could consistently be more selfless in this regard, but when I'm tired or stressed or depressed, my lizard brain needs a more direct incentive.

D13Fd 3y ago

This isn’t really what the article is talking about though. It’s talking productivity outside of work.

chasd00 3y ago
yes and the article's definition of productive is hazy to me. Pursuing a hobby or interest outside of work seems productive to me but the article implies it's not. From the article it seems like the only productive activity outside of work is preparing for more work, i don't think that's true.

chankstein38 3y ago

I feel like I could've written this. I've even been feeling this more strongly lately and talking to friends about it. I just wish I could live my life and stop needing to work so I could have money.

thelittleone 3y ago

I've found that by caring about the product, I can deliver higher quality results and charge a premium rate for doing it. Additionally, the quality of the work leads to good reviews and referrals, increasing demand (and lowering cost of sales) which ultimately increases my rate / profit.

MuffinFlavored 3y ago

> I work a normal 8-hour day I'm "around on Teams/Slack" for ~7 hours a day but I 100% have not worked 8 hours a day in years. Am I the only one? Am I the minority? Am I the majority? If I go to 60 minutes of meetings a day, it's a lot. If I write 80 lines of code, it's a lot. If I research 1-2 production issues, it's a lot. If I write 20 Teams messages/3 e-mails, it's a lot.

lisasays 3y ago
This is quite normal in fact. However all the other stuff certainly counts as "work" also. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
mcv 3y ago
Ages ago, someone (I forgot who) argued that nobody really worked more than 2 hours a day. Most of the rest of our work is either waiting, hanging around, or pointless busywork. I'm sure it's not true for every job, but I'm pretty sure there's a lot of unnecessary inefficiency in our work. On the other hand, lots of people like those inefficiencies: a chat at the watercooler, talking about how your weekend was, etc. And those are certainly better for your mental health than the pointless meetings some managers would love to pad your schedule with.

musicale 3y ago

People really need time to recharge - especially after mental work.

alfonsodev 3y ago

I agree that productivity for the shake of productivity is non-sense, but self development could be beneficial for you. For example just even learning enough social/negotiation skills, or influence to educate your clients to be oriented by results rather than hours. That could be the key, then you can leverage "boring" technology, to solve real problems that matter. Creating a nice feedback loop were you grow and create your craft so work becomes frustration free and time independent.