4 ms·

> How did you know if they were "passionate" or not? I don't think being "9-5" is a good litmus test. The Latin root of the word passion is patior, which means

> How did you know if they were "passionate" or not? I don't think being "9-5" is a good litmus test. The Latin root of the word passion is patior, which means to suffer or endure. And I think that’s significant: having an affinity or appreciation for a thing isn’t the same as being passionate. In the same way that I don’t see how working for (and being compensated for) 8 hours a day can be described as suffering, I don’t see how “passionate” is an appropriate descriptor for someone who only programs between the hours of 9 to 5 For their job. When someone says they have a passion for programming, I usually take that to mean that their evenings are dominated by programming time, instead of hanging with friends, other hobbies, etc. And don’t get me wrong, I don’t think people necessarily should be passionate about programming (nor expected to be).

anyfoo 3y ago
> The Latin root of the word passion is patior, which means to suffer or endure. [...] I don’t see how “passionate” is an appropriate descriptor for someone who only programs between the hours of 9 to 5 For their job. I don't see that at all. Honestly, there is a lot I disagree with here. First, a word's etymology is not prescriptive for its actual usage. For example, the English word "eventually" and the German word "eventuell" both directly come from the same French word, and have very conflicting meanings. That's just one example of countless ones. But even if I accept your premise that passion is persevering in the face of suffering, I don't see why that "suffering" cannot be timeboxed in a sense. I've certainly had private passion projects that I could only work on during certain times, very passionately and with significant "suffering" during debugging, though. > In the same way that I don’t see how working for (and being compensated for) 8 hours a day can be described as suffering Why not? But moreover: > When someone says they have a passion for programming, I usually take that to mean that their evenings are dominated by programming time, instead of hanging with friends, other hobbies, etc. How does OP which I replied to even know that about their coworkers, unless they talk about it, which was my point? I do program outside of work. I don't think all coworkers in my own team know that I do. And about that second part: Are you saying that someone who hangs with friends, has other hobbies etc. cannot be passionate? I would call myself a very passionate programmer. Two of my favorite languages are Haskell and BQN (an APL-like that looks like line noise). My last private project included a self-designed 4-layer PCB with, just for fun, my own PAL encoder composite output analog circuit and digital modulator, where I could have just gotten off the shelf parts. In another project I reverse-engineered a bespoke discrete chip MMU in a computer from the 80s, by looking at the disassembled OS kernel and staring at pictures of the PCB. The platform has been obsolete since the early 90s and there is no modern use for that, not even in a niche. Sure, here I talk about that, but this is "Hacker News". Outside of HN and my projects, I still love hanging with friends, have other hobbies as well that have nothing to do with programming, and take care not to sit at work too much. Not passionate?

anyfoo 3y ago

> The Latin root of the word passion is patior, which means to suffer or endure. [...] I don’t see how “passionate” is an appropriate descriptor for someone who only programs between the hours of 9 to 5 For their job. I don't see that at all. Honestly, there is a lot I disagree with here. First, a word's etymology is not prescriptive for its actual usage. For example, the English word "eventually" and the German word "eventuell" both directly come from the same French word, and have very conflicting meanings. That's just one example of countless ones. But even if I accept your premise that passion is persevering in the face of suffering, I don't see why that "suffering" cannot be timeboxed in a sense. I've certainly had private passion projects that I could only work on during certain times, very passionately and with significant "suffering" during debugging, though. > In the same way that I don’t see how working for (and being compensated for) 8 hours a day can be described as suffering Why not? But moreover: > When someone says they have a passion for programming, I usually take that to mean that their evenings are dominated by programming time, instead of hanging with friends, other hobbies, etc. How does OP which I replied to even know that about their coworkers, unless they talk about it, which was my point? I do program outside of work. I don't think all coworkers in my own team know that I do. And about that second part: Are you saying that someone who hangs with friends, has other hobbies etc. cannot be passionate? I would call myself a very passionate programmer. Two of my favorite languages are Haskell and BQN (an APL-like that looks like line noise). My last private project included a self-designed 4-layer PCB with, just for fun, my own PAL encoder composite output analog circuit and digital modulator, where I could have just gotten off the shelf parts. In another project I reverse-engineered a bespoke discrete chip MMU in a computer from the 80s, by looking at the disassembled OS kernel and staring at pictures of the PCB. The platform has been obsolete since the early 90s and there is no modern use for that, not even in a niche. Sure, here I talk about that, but this is "Hacker News". Outside of HN and my projects, I still love hanging with friends, have other hobbies as well that have nothing to do with programming, and take care not to sit at work too much. Not passionate?