5 ms·

These discussions inevitably split the crowd into nine to fivers and enthusiasts.

by varjag 3y ago

camdat 3y ago
Am I expected to expend my enthusiasm for programming on my employer? I find it insulting that I must be a "nine to fiver" if I advocate for labor. My passion isn't building what my boss wants, it's building what _I_ want.
- gloryjulio 3y ago
  I would only work more if that means more money (overtime pay, promotion etc). Otherwise that's a no
  - lawn 3y ago
    I earn enough money so I can choose to work less. I wouldn't work more even if it means more money.
  - chasd00 3y ago
    I agree, i really like my job and my coworkers but i'm not doing more of it for free. That's for sure.
- varjag 3y ago
  There are plenty in the industry get the opportunity to work on what they like working on.
  - camdat 3y ago
    You're not saying anything here. Sure there are people like that, but the nature of capitalism means that people _must_ work to survive. This requirement precludes finding work you enjoy, and thus those that have the opportunity to work on something they like are in the minority. Put another way, would you quit your job immediately if you're asked to work on something you don't want to do? If not, are you a "nine to fiver"?
- Zetice 3y ago
  Ideally your incentives get aligned such that you're not spending your enthusiasm on your employer, but on yourself via your employer. You should be invested in the success of the people who you work for, financially (or whatever you value). You're a "nine to fiver" if your incentives don't align. That can be your fault, but often isn't.
  - camdat 3y ago
    This implies that accepting a job that pays more, even if it doesn't align with your incentives, is being a "nine to fiver", which I disagree with. Innate to our economic system is the tension between labor and employer. Us as laborers want a higher share of the profit from our labor. Employers seek the opposite, and "fulfillment" provides them the means to extract it. Consider the wages of game developers, which have stagnated compared to less "fulfilling" SWE work, because employers are able to supplant higher pay with work that people are passionate about. If being a "nine to fiver" prevents me from falling into that trap, so be it.
    - Zetice 3y ago
      I'm sorry but no, it doesn't imply that at all. Your incentives can be, "Earn enough money to justify spending time on a problem."
      - camdat 3y ago
        > Ideally your incentives get aligned such that you're not spending your enthusiasm on your employer, but on yourself via your employer. If the "via" here is "by giving me money to do what I want", then I agree. GP is arguing that fulfillment from work is necessary to be an enthusiast, thus the assumption that your response is related. Even in the purely financial scenario though, aren't the incentives still in conflict? If both you and your employer's incentive is "earn as much money as possible", then you are both vying for the same pool of profit.
        Zetice 3y ago
happytoexplain 3y ago
This is a fundamentally false binary. There are absolutely loads of people who are both of those things, usually due to their enthusiasm for their day job being matched by their enthusiasm for other things.
nonethewiser 3y ago
Im not an enthusiast and really balance work life balance but I get more done when working 9 hours instead of 8. That shouldn’t be a controversial take. Whether thats worth it or if employers can reasonably expect it is another matter. But absolutely more work gets done. This is a topic where the reddit and hackernoon takes are comically extreme sometimes.
- varjag 3y ago
  I admit you make a great point.
- robryan 3y ago
  Yep and I am going to get more done in 5 days than 4. Maybe this doesn't play out over a large group but I just find it hard to apply those articles about the 4 day work week actually being more productive to my personal experience.
  - nonethewiser 3y ago
    > those articles about the 4 day work week actually being more productive to my personal experience. They are conflating diminishing returns with less total work and it leads to ridiculous propositions. If you can get more work done in 4 days it means the 5th day of work is a negative output.
slt2021 3y ago
You conveniently ignored the part that modern work is not only about coding, it is a lot about collaborating, politics, reviewing and writing bunch of non-sense paperwork, policies, manuals etc. I wouldn't mind to work long hours if that would mean purely coding. But no, employers prefer to throw bunch of non-coding tasks at engineers and introduce politics, the more higher up the chain you go and the more impact you want to make. If you let me code and get stuff done, I will happy do it. However if you require me to create dumb paperwork, track JIRA tickets, create reports about reports, demand using the latest TPS REPORT cover on all my deliverables - you will get 9-to-5 PERIOD
- eduction 3y ago
  > I wouldn't mind to work long hours if that would mean purely coding. But no, employers prefer to throw bunch of non-coding tasks at engineers You can’t have it both ways. If you want to just code, call yourself a coder or programmer. An “engineer” is of a profession devoted to “the application of science and mathematics by which the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made useful to people.” Making your work useful to people involves communication and research beyond coding. Maybe it ain’t jira tickets but it also ain’t “purely coding.”
  - slt2021 3y ago
    It is not even engineering. A lot of software devs have become slaves on the alter of Agile software development. A senseless machine that only cares about the number of your JIRA tickets, and making sure your agile shibboleths like standups, retros, sprints and etc are conducted. You can look at gogle - the company that has never produced any useful product beyond a few of search/ads, youtube, gmail, and maybe google docs. Thats it. Nothing more. and gogle is considered very efficient in its engineering processes, that entire industry copies it. meanwhile the most disruptive innovation comes from small teams that dont care about formalized rituals and jsut focused on execution and coding, they dont need PM, TPM, and Agile Coach, and Engineering manager to deliver value
    - eduction 3y ago

These discussions inevitably split the crowd into nine to fivers and enthusiasts.

by varjag 3y ago

These discussions inevitably split the crowd into nine to fivers and enthusiasts.

Am I expected to expend my enthusiasm for programming on my employer? I find it insulting that I must be a "nine to fiver" if I advocate for labor. My passion isn't building what my boss wants, it's building what _I_ want.

gloryjulio 3y ago
I would only work more if that means more money (overtime pay, promotion etc). Otherwise that's a no
- lawn 3y ago
  I earn enough money so I can choose to work less. I wouldn't work more even if it means more money.
- chasd00 3y ago
  I agree, i really like my job and my coworkers but i'm not doing more of it for free. That's for sure.
varjag 3y ago
There are plenty in the industry get the opportunity to work on what they like working on.
- camdat 3y ago
  You're not saying anything here. Sure there are people like that, but the nature of capitalism means that people _must_ work to survive. This requirement precludes finding work you enjoy, and thus those that have the opportunity to work on something they like are in the minority. Put another way, would you quit your job immediately if you're asked to work on something you don't want to do? If not, are you a "nine to fiver"?
Zetice 3y ago
Ideally your incentives get aligned such that you're not spending your enthusiasm on your employer, but on yourself via your employer. You should be invested in the success of the people who you work for, financially (or whatever you value). You're a "nine to fiver" if your incentives don't align. That can be your fault, but often isn't.
- camdat 3y ago
  This implies that accepting a job that pays more, even if it doesn't align with your incentives, is being a "nine to fiver", which I disagree with. Innate to our economic system is the tension between labor and employer. Us as laborers want a higher share of the profit from our labor. Employers seek the opposite, and "fulfillment" provides them the means to extract it. Consider the wages of game developers, which have stagnated compared to less "fulfilling" SWE work, because employers are able to supplant higher pay with work that people are passionate about. If being a "nine to fiver" prevents me from falling into that trap, so be it.
  - Zetice 3y ago
    I'm sorry but no, it doesn't imply that at all. Your incentives can be, "Earn enough money to justify spending time on a problem."
    - camdat 3y ago
      > Ideally your incentives get aligned such that you're not spending your enthusiasm on your employer, but on yourself via your employer. If the "via" here is "by giving me money to do what I want", then I agree. GP is arguing that fulfillment from work is necessary to be an enthusiast, thus the assumption that your response is related. Even in the purely financial scenario though, aren't the incentives still in conflict? If both you and your employer's incentive is "earn as much money as possible", then you are both vying for the same pool of profit.
      - Zetice 3y ago

happytoexplain 3y ago

This is a fundamentally false binary. There are absolutely loads of people who are both of those things, usually due to their enthusiasm for their day job being matched by their enthusiasm for other things.

nonethewiser 3y ago

Im not an enthusiast and really balance work life balance but I get more done when working 9 hours instead of 8. That shouldn’t be a controversial take. Whether thats worth it or if employers can reasonably expect it is another matter. But absolutely more work gets done. This is a topic where the reddit and hackernoon takes are comically extreme sometimes.

varjag 3y ago
I admit you make a great point.
robryan 3y ago
Yep and I am going to get more done in 5 days than 4. Maybe this doesn't play out over a large group but I just find it hard to apply those articles about the 4 day work week actually being more productive to my personal experience.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  > those articles about the 4 day work week actually being more productive to my personal experience. They are conflating diminishing returns with less total work and it leads to ridiculous propositions. If you can get more work done in 4 days it means the 5th day of work is a negative output.

slt2021 3y ago

You conveniently ignored the part that modern work is not only about coding, it is a lot about collaborating, politics, reviewing and writing bunch of non-sense paperwork, policies, manuals etc. I wouldn't mind to work long hours if that would mean purely coding. But no, employers prefer to throw bunch of non-coding tasks at engineers and introduce politics, the more higher up the chain you go and the more impact you want to make. If you let me code and get stuff done, I will happy do it. However if you require me to create dumb paperwork, track JIRA tickets, create reports about reports, demand using the latest TPS REPORT cover on all my deliverables - you will get 9-to-5 PERIOD

eduction 3y ago
> I wouldn't mind to work long hours if that would mean purely coding. But no, employers prefer to throw bunch of non-coding tasks at engineers You can’t have it both ways. If you want to just code, call yourself a coder or programmer. An “engineer” is of a profession devoted to “the application of science and mathematics by which the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made useful to people.” Making your work useful to people involves communication and research beyond coding. Maybe it ain’t jira tickets but it also ain’t “purely coding.”
- slt2021 3y ago
  It is not even engineering. A lot of software devs have become slaves on the alter of Agile software development. A senseless machine that only cares about the number of your JIRA tickets, and making sure your agile shibboleths like standups, retros, sprints and etc are conducted. You can look at gogle - the company that has never produced any useful product beyond a few of search/ads, youtube, gmail, and maybe google docs. Thats it. Nothing more. and gogle is considered very efficient in its engineering processes, that entire industry copies it. meanwhile the most disruptive innovation comes from small teams that dont care about formalized rituals and jsut focused on execution and coding, they dont need PM, TPM, and Agile Coach, and Engineering manager to deliver value
  - eduction 3y ago