4 ms·

Wonder how many software devs would be able to do this. When I have a long weekend, a lot of times, its 'finally, no interruptions so I can get some work done'

Wonder how many software devs would be able to do this. When I have a long weekend, a lot of times, its 'finally, no interruptions so I can get some work done', and end up working. Guess, if you have an itch, could fill it with open source projects instead.

Syonyk 3y ago
If you're doing interesting, deep level work, I've found I'm a lot more productive when I spend my weekends doing "literally anything but computers." I'll typically spend Thursday afternoon curled up with some datasheets or architecture references related to my current project, and let my mind chew on it over the weekend in the background, while I'm doing other stuff. The distance from the problem allows a fresh perspective, and I not-really-joke that a lot of my most clever solutions to a problem came while I was banging on rocks or running a chainsaw. But I've also built the habits, over the years, of trying to make sure I have way more than just work going on in my life.
- jakupovic 3y ago
  I wholeheartedly agree and find myself the same. Banging your head on a rock only makes the head hurt
teaearlgraycold 3y ago
I do this, but I instead do more like 6 hours across Mon-Fri. If my life circumstances change I can see preferring longer days Mon-Thu.
Shaanie 3y ago
I'd wager the majority of software developers do not code at all outside of work hours, and the vast majority do not code more than an hour or two per month on average. The "constantly coding on side projects" developer is pretty rare, in my experience, but tend to bubble together. (in startups, cooler tech companies or in the "innovation teams").
godelski 3y ago
> Guess, if you have an itch, could fill it with open source projects instead. Somewhat related, but I do wonder what this community will look like once humans enter a post scarce (or mostly) world. Which a 4 day weekend seems like a step in that direction. Along with the other aspects of what humans will do with their new found free time. Which seems especially interesting in a consumer based economy.
- JambalayaJim 3y ago
  We seem to be going in the opposite direction of a “post scarce” world where everything is getting more expensive and most people I know are working longer hours or multiple jobs to survive.
  - godelski 3y ago
    Yeah and I don't understand why. Like we even have the old saying "9 to 5" but who works a 9 to 5 job? That used to be literally the hours which included the lunch break. I only know 8-5 or 9-6 jobs being the norm. And it's weird that we have this codified in our language but no longer in reality without any clear justification. I feel like a fast one was pulled on us here.
    - piuantiderp 3y ago
      Paraphrasing Adam Smith, The main reason is economic profit of any venture can go to pay 3 things: 1. capital invested (having an inventory of things, having done the R&D, having built an expensive factory, just represents existing wealth and assets (not money!!)) 2. labor (the people involved) 3. rent (for the land used) With technology, and there is no indication AI is any better, capital owners get more and more of the profit of any venture. If anything, its point is to reduce the dependence on labor. So you have more people, competing for fewer spots, and you can get away with paying them less. The lower bound for what you could pay labor is just barely enough, so they keep having enough kids to provide future workers. If you start with a glut of workers, then it is a dark situation (which we are already living in, how many people can afford to have kids?)
  - 3y ago

Syonyk 3y ago

If you're doing interesting, deep level work, I've found I'm a lot more productive when I spend my weekends doing "literally anything but computers." I'll typically spend Thursday afternoon curled up with some datasheets or architecture references related to my current project, and let my mind chew on it over the weekend in the background, while I'm doing other stuff. The distance from the problem allows a fresh perspective, and I not-really-joke that a lot of my most clever solutions to a problem came while I was banging on rocks or running a chainsaw. But I've also built the habits, over the years, of trying to make sure I have way more than just work going on in my life.

jakupovic 3y ago
I wholeheartedly agree and find myself the same. Banging your head on a rock only makes the head hurt

teaearlgraycold 3y ago

I do this, but I instead do more like 6 hours across Mon-Fri. If my life circumstances change I can see preferring longer days Mon-Thu.

Shaanie 3y ago

I'd wager the majority of software developers do not code at all outside of work hours, and the vast majority do not code more than an hour or two per month on average. The "constantly coding on side projects" developer is pretty rare, in my experience, but tend to bubble together. (in startups, cooler tech companies or in the "innovation teams").

godelski 3y ago

> Guess, if you have an itch, could fill it with open source projects instead. Somewhat related, but I do wonder what this community will look like once humans enter a post scarce (or mostly) world. Which a 4 day weekend seems like a step in that direction. Along with the other aspects of what humans will do with their new found free time. Which seems especially interesting in a consumer based economy.

JambalayaJim 3y ago
We seem to be going in the opposite direction of a “post scarce” world where everything is getting more expensive and most people I know are working longer hours or multiple jobs to survive.
- godelski 3y ago
  Yeah and I don't understand why. Like we even have the old saying "9 to 5" but who works a 9 to 5 job? That used to be literally the hours which included the lunch break. I only know 8-5 or 9-6 jobs being the norm. And it's weird that we have this codified in our language but no longer in reality without any clear justification. I feel like a fast one was pulled on us here.
  - piuantiderp 3y ago
    Paraphrasing Adam Smith, The main reason is economic profit of any venture can go to pay 3 things: 1. capital invested (having an inventory of things, having done the R&D, having built an expensive factory, just represents existing wealth and assets (not money!!)) 2. labor (the people involved) 3. rent (for the land used) With technology, and there is no indication AI is any better, capital owners get more and more of the profit of any venture. If anything, its point is to reduce the dependence on labor. So you have more people, competing for fewer spots, and you can get away with paying them less. The lower bound for what you could pay labor is just barely enough, so they keep having enough kids to provide future workers. If you start with a glut of workers, then it is a dark situation (which we are already living in, how many people can afford to have kids?)
- 3y ago