7 ms·

Are You A Bad Developer If You Don't Take On Side Projects?

70 points by triketora 13y ago

anonymoushn 13y ago
Forbes is republishing experts-exchange now?
3pt14159 13y ago
You will make more money if you have an active github account. For most people this means side projects/work. You will be a better developer if you code more. You will be exposed to more languages, tools, people, and ideas. If you don't code in your spare time, but you are happy where you are, don't feel like you are a bad developer, you just will not be as good at development as you could be. It is your life, why does it matter if you prefer to paint paintings at night instead of code? If you don't need to maximize your future revenue, don't feel bad. If you want to be a better developer more than anything, then you should code. If something is stopping you from doing that, remove the blocker. Personally, I don't hire anyone if I can't see code samples. 95% of the people I hire have their code samples on Github (not in a .zip file). So make sure you have some code samples available, but it doesn't have to be a side project or open source work.
- CmonDev 13y ago
  "but it doesn't have to be ... open source work" Would you be comfortable with the candidate that would put a brief description on CV and bring a laptop to the interview to show it?
- speeder 13y ago
  That reads to me very wrong. "remove the blocker" That mean to me either dropping the SO or not doing my house chores. EDIT: fixed typo
- 7Figures2Commas 13y ago
  > If you don't code in your spare time, but you are happy where you are, don't feel like you are a bad developer, you just will not be as good at development as you could be. This is simply not true. Some developers will improve the more they code under the right circumstances. Others are sort of like the person at the gym who has bad form that, for one reason or another, is never corrected. For this person, more exercise is actually detrimental.
- jt2190 13y ago
  > You will make more money if you have an active github > account. I highly doubt this, but I'd love to be proven wrong. There's also a downside with sharing too much information about yourself without being present to answer questions or provide more context: It lets an employer discount you as a potential candidate simply because of their misunderstanding of your work. As evidence, refer to the "n projects on github have SQL injection security flaws" articles that show up here occasionally. But we all know that when you're just hacking around on something for fun, you might write code like this. The point of your project might have been to quickly demonstrate something cool, yet it can be used to demonstrate that you lack security awareness (even if that's not actually true.)
  - 3pt14159 13y ago
    If you doubt this then you are probably in a completely different industry than I am. I cannot prove it to you except by my own experiences with managers and salary recommendations.
    - jstelly 13y ago
      This seems highly dependent on which kinds of software companies you are talking about. I hire lots of developers and I have never looked at anyone's github profile. Also, I don't recall any candidate asking me to look at their profile. I have seen a few resumes that have included one, but not very many - and I look at a lot of resumes. I'm not making any judgement about the value of the profile, but in my corner of the world it doesn't seem very important or even common.
- zecho 13y ago
  I hear this quite often about Github and it's a bit disturbing to me. If I heard an editor judge an author's work based on what that author posts to twitter, I'd be horrified. I can't be the only person on Github that uses it primarily as a junk drawer full of bad implementations and abandoned "projects" that were more quick and dirty personal itches. Sometimes I'll contribute to random OSS, but the vast majority of GH for me is just a place to store random ideas, many of which were just toying around with some new tool or whatever and would never see the light of day in production without given much more thought. Honestly, if you want to see code samples, you're probably better off watching the person work through a problem. Give prospective hires a project. Whether its as simple as fizzbuzz or as difficult as a trial week is up to you, I suppose.
  - bdcravens 13y ago
    I don't think you're necessarily judged by the quality of your Github code as much as the fact that you have Github code. Especially if it's a bit out of your normal box.
  - nukerhazz 13y ago
    This is why I use Bitbucket, with its unlimited private repos, for that junk drawer. I can keep my throwaways and false starts private.
    - hardwaresofton 13y ago
      Very true - I use Assembla!
  - jared314 13y ago
    > If I heard an editor judge an author's work based on what that author posts to twitter, I'd be horrified. And yet, many potential hires are judged by their facebook posts[1,2], tweets, blog entries, and anything that can be found in a google search. All of this amounts to methods of elimination. You can treat it like a portfolio, but an active github account is just a cheap way to filter out possible negatives. It is also good to mention that, unlike writers, a lot of programmers cannot show their previous work, because it is the private property of their current/previous employer. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/03/05/facebook-can-tell-you-if-a-person-is-worth-hiring/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/03/05/facebook-... [2] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/password-protected-states/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/password-protected-...
- applecore 13y ago
  > You will make more money if you have an active github account. For most people this means side projects/work. This can't be true if you count all the programmers working in the financial industry.
- kasey_junk 13y ago
  How does your no hiring without code samples work when it comes to IP encumbered industries? I for one haven't worked without a NDA that includes my code for over 10 years, and neither have any of the people on my current team. Further, contributing to open source projects (outside of what I do for my employer) is also problematic, because nearly all the things I'm interested in/expert in are very related to what I do for my employer. Figuring out what is and is not work product and what I can and cannot release is a hassle I just don't want. Seems like your rule and your reliance on GitHub is a very narrow filter and you are likely getting a very narrow subset of potential applicants.
  - lmartel 13y ago
    Keep in mind that the OP is probably in a very different industry than you are; if you have enough expertise that your interests are things you can't work on independently (like quant or security?), you will likely be applying to a nonoverlapping set of jobs as the OP, which (I'd guess) are much more interested in experience than a github profile. On the other hand, if you're a startup CRUD hacker, your potential employers are much more likely to expect some personal CRUD projects in your github, since 1) that's easier to do than personal quant/sec/whatever work and 2) there are likely a lot more applicants for such jobs, so they can afford to filter for "hustlers"
    - alok-g 13y ago
      With reference to my comment here [1], here are the two weak points I see in what you wrote: A. From a legal standpoint, AFAIK (IANAL), things that fall under the same trademark code are considered to be one industry. I have said this before in various discussions forums and while I am open to hear that I am wrong, no one so far as told me so. This means that "Computers, software, electronic instruments" are considered to be one industry [2] from a legal standpoint. B. Even if the OP or you feel that you are in a very different industry, you/OP need to check your contracts for such IP issues before concluding that you do not have the same issues. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6245738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6245738 [2] http://www.tmweb.com/trademark_classes.asp http://www.tmweb.com/trademark_classes.asp
- edw519 13y ago
  You will make more money if you have an active github account. For most people this means side projects/work. More than what? The highest earning programmers I know have never heard of github and would never consider using it. You will be a better developer if you code more. You will be exposed to more languages, tools, people, and ideas. You will be a better developer if you deliver more. "More languages, tools, people, and ideas" can just as easily dilute your focus as improve your skill. To get better, you must focus on results, not activity. If you don't code in your spare time, but you are happy where you are, Why do you assume these 2 are mutually exclusive? I know lots of excellent programmers who deliver more before noon than most deliver all week. Nothing wrong with being excellent during working hours and doing something else in your spare time, like perhaps, enjoying your spare time. If you want to be a better developer more than anything, then you should code. If something is stopping you from doing that, remove the blocker. If you want to be a better developer more than anything, then you should deliver production quality software. Sometimes the "blocker" is a distraction. Distractions can be other things that masquerade as "side work". Personally, I don't hire anyone if I can't see code samples. 95% of the people I hire have their code samples on Github (not in a .zip file). So make sure you have some code samples available, but it doesn't have to be a side project or open source work. Personally, I never show code samples. I'll gladly go through the right company's process, including coding for them. But they don't get to see anything I've ever done before out of context and without proper permissions. And personally, I will never work for anyone with hard and fast rules about hiring. 3pt14159 is choosing to not consider many of the best programmers who refuse to show their underwear. His loss.
  - erichmond 13y ago
    Hopefully this attitude becomes more prevalent in the industry, the pendulum has swung too far to the other side.
  - brianpgordon 13y ago
    > Personally, I never show code samples. I'll gladly go through the right company's process, including coding for them. But they don't get to see anything I've ever done before out of context and without proper permissions. And personally, I will never work for anyone with hard and fast rules about hiring. 3pt14159 is choosing to not consider many of the best programmers who refuse to show their underwear. His loss. This is a pretty bizarre position. Don't you have any code that's carefully prepared and that you think represents your ability to at least write clean code? And wouldn't you rather show a potential employer that carefully prepared code than trying to whip something up on the spot? Also, a lot of things like showing off your chops at configuring complicated builds with, say, maven or ant can hardly be demonstrated in an interview or an overnight coding assignment. You need to have a nontrivial project prepared to show that you can write a nontrivial project.
- yalogin 13y ago
  This is quite bad. Why don't where I work and what I do get any credit? If you see my github account will you hire me without an interview and without asking me any of those "programming puzzles" popularized by google? You could learn about the drive of a person by his github account but cannot get anything else from it. Of course that does not mean a person without a github account is without motivation.
- alok-g 13y ago
  I am quite positive many of these are more myths like many that Google busted. [1] https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130620142512-35894743-on-gpas-and-brain-teasers-new-insights-from-google-on-recruiting-and-hiring https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130620142512-3...
Jgrubb 13y ago
Is Forbes really scraping content from Quora and presenting it as an article?
- eterm 13y ago
  This struck me also. I initially thought "blimey, does HN provide them so much traffic that they're linkbaiting them now", but taking Quora content and repackaging it is just even lower. It particularly struck me that HN very recently had an article that kicked off this exact debate. What a sad state of affairs, although the full advert splash and the junky "similar" articles give that impression too.
  - epoxyhockey 13y ago
    Forbes has been linkbaiting HN for at least 73 days (the time when I first cared to comment about it). Our clicks are providing positive reinforcement for Forbes' blogspam and I'm surprised that HN hasn't banned forbes.com yet.
- austinz 13y ago
  Forbes' web site has been for a while little more than a collection of badly-curated, badly-written blogs. This seems like a logical next step.
- zach 13y ago
  Forbes and Quora have an arrangement to republish content from Quora that's interesting to Forbes readers. The authors are asked individually if they want their answers to appear on Forbes and receive no compensation.
- chadwickthebold 13y ago
  It's not entirely slimy. Its a great way to drive traffic for both Forbes and Quora. How many people would have read this opinion if Forbes hadn't made it slightly more high-profile? Ars has been doing a similar feature-series for awhile, and I think its one of the best parts of their site: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/how-easy-is-it-to-hack-javascript-in-a-browser/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/how-ea... I will give you that the Ars series is edited much much better than this one-off from Forbes
Matt_Mickiewicz 13y ago
Clearly, the answer is no. BUT, and this is a big BUT, having multiple personal projects does make you much more marketable to potential employers. If you don't have a well known University or a well known company on your resume, having a stack of personal projects that show you're constantly learning, that you're passionate about the programming and that you love what you do can mean the difference between getting a request to interview at a start-up vs. getting put in the "pass" pile of resumes/profiles that internal recruiters have to look at. This especially holds true if you work at a large, enterpris-ey company (IBM, VMWare, Goldman, Delloite, etc.) and want to attract the attention of, and get a job at, a venture funded start-up based on our experience at DeveloperAuction.
- johnward 13y ago
  I work at a large enteprisey corp (one that you listed actually) and I'm trying to break out. I find what you say to be true. You don't necessarily have to do side work but employers basically require it to hire you. Maybe it's not required but if it's you against someone with an awesome github profile you aren't getting the job. In my case I'm trying to get out of a consultant role and more into a development role. Said company forbids me to share things I have done internally. My only option is to start doing side projects. I understand that an employer needs a way to make sure you can do what you say you can do. The only choice I have right now is to sacrifice my personal life to develop some projects I can share, look for another consulting role (which I don't want), or suck it up. The problem is the longer I stay the more out of touch I become with the development world. It's like a big trap.
nonchalance 13y ago
I encounter a massive ad every time I read a forbes article. At this point, I'm convinced forbes.com is blogspam
janeglendale 13y ago
One side effect of this is people feeling like the have to work on a side project. People who otherwise would be happy working for their company find themselves spending hours and hours on something on the side. This cuts into hours that could be used for work or family or fun, and probably won't succeed because their heart isn't actually in it.
- CmonDev 13y ago
  An addition to other recent unfortunate trends: older devs not getting jobs, apps costing 99 cents.
tbrownaw 13y ago
Maybe this is a sign that we need continuing education / professional development rules, like real professions have?
chunky1994 13y ago
I would say that the reason people tend to look for developers who work on side projects etc. tend to generally be good developers, while those who don't can go either way. It's hard to know whether a developer is good or bad with only a resume/interview. If you're looking for smart motivated people, the ones who tend to work on side projects etc. can actually show you stuff they've built, and generally you can get a good idea as to how/if they'd fit in with your company/start-up. While this doesn't mean developers who don't take on side projects are bad, it's just hard to identify whether they are in fact good or bad.
jt2190 13y ago
From the Quora answer [1]: > I do attend (and give) technical talks; and perhaps most > importantly, I pick my day job based on learning and > growth opportunities: which company I’m working at, which > team I’m on, and which projects I take on. I stumbled > onto this a little bit by accident, but I discovered that > responsibilities in your day job that require you to > learn are a great forcing function for learning. I think that this is the nuance of the article that the headline simplifies away. I think we often look for side-projects because they are an indicator of ongoing learning and they demonstrate expertise. They are by no means the only way to show these things to a prospective employer. Giving presentations, writing articles, being able to discuss industry trends intelligently... All of these things count too. [1] https://www.quora.com/Software-Engineering/Are-you-a-bad-developer-if-you-dont-take-on-side-projects https://www.quora.com/Software-Engineering/Are-you-a-bad-dev...
- lmartel 13y ago
  I agree, you're dead on with the point the author is actually making (there are other ways to learn / build a portfolio in one's free time than side projects) vs the point many commenters seem to want the author to be making: software engineers should be able to do their jobs well, go home, and do something else for a couple hours. I'd like to see someone take that on, but this article--err, Quora post--doesn't quite do that.
- codezero 13y ago
  If you add ?share=1 to the end of the Quora URL, folks daring enough to follow the link won't get any sign-up call to action.
  - davidcuddeback 13y ago
    That sounds like the sort of thing that could get someone in hot water under the CFAA these days.
    - codezero 13y ago
      It could if it weren't added explicitly for people to use in the way described: https://blog.quora.com/Making-Sharing-Better?share=1 https://blog.quora.com/Making-Sharing-Better?share=1
7Figures2Commas 13y ago
> Side projects are not necessarily a great way to get better at engineering, and by no means the only way to get better. If you take on a side project, you do go through the process of defining a product and coding it up, most likely full-stack and hopefully with some interesting technologies, but you’re probably not going to be working with a lot of teammates on a large, complicated codebase with evolving and expanding product requirements and scaling it up and maintaining it over time, which ends up being a lot of what software engineering actually is. Notwithstanding the fact that working "with a lot of teammates on a large, complicated codebase with evolving and expanding product requirements and scaling it up and maintaining it over time" is not necessarily what "software engineering" entails (or should entail) at every company, I actually think this is why a lot of developers take on side projects: being able to design and build something of one's own using the technologies of one's own choosing can be a lot more satisfying than refactoring code and putting out fires for 8+ hours every day. Obviously, developers who are adequately stimulated and satisfied by their day jobs probably have less incentive to indulge in side projects, and there's nothing wrong with that, but most people in the industry know that engineering jobs, even at the hottest or most prestigious companies, often leave something to be desired.
umsm 13y ago
Many developers have a bad LIFE / WORK balance. For the long run, I decided not to work beyond working hours. I try to enjoy the little time I do have with friends and family.
MartinCron 13y ago
I have found that I don't have the energy to take on paid side projects and still be my best-and-brightest for my primary employer. I still do small things on my own, but I just don't have what it takes to moonlight for money without being a zombie the next day. I envy others their limitless energy.
willismichael 13y ago
Are you a good developer if you do take on side projects? I think the answer to both questions is "not necessarily". The big problem that I see with questions like these is that it presents a false dichotomy of "bad" vs. "good" developers. Not only is this a false dichotomy, but skills aren't even one dimensional, so even considering them as falling on a spectrum is wrong. I'm certain that there exists some task that would take me 10 hours that would take my co-worker 1 hour, but there also exists some task that would take him 10 hours and only take my 1 hour.
jobu 13y ago
My kids are my side projects. I used to be worried about how they affected my career, but three years ago a bicycle accident put me in the hospital for a week and I completely reevaluated my life. It's a little sad (and a bit of a cliché) that it took nearly dying to realize their importance, but now I just smile and think about my kids when someone talks about their amazing project.
- xutopia 13y ago
  A friend of mine died in the last year from cancer. He was in his 30s. I too replaced a lot of the time I spent hacking to spend with my family. I like side projects but I love my family.
- mrexroad 13y ago
  agree x10. tragically, it took losing one of my children to realize that the extra hours and time management i put into balancing parenting w/ startup-life should have just been put into spending more time w/ my kids. i'm currently back at a far less exciting enterprise job, and made it to every baseball game this year even though they started at 5pm. you only get one short chance at being their hero, so better make the most of it. i haven't coded on the side in a long time, but look forward to doing so soon w/ my oldest now going into 1st grade. whatever i code will be for/with them.
- andy_adams 13y ago
  I have 2 little ones. When my oldest was growing from 0-2, I can remember nearly every moment. I was at an unexciting 9-5 job. As my youngest goes from 0-1, I've been working lots of projects via my own consultancy. I look at him and can't believe how much I've missed. I'm currently shifting gears to get back to focusing on my family. I'm still new at this, but it's pretty clear programming/career is so far below family in importance, I need to adjust my life accordingly.
- 3pt14159 13y ago
  When I was a kid (6 to 10 years old) my mom helped me program computers (QBASIC games and attempts at C++, haha). :) Some people get to have it all.
a-priori 13y ago
I'm a developer who does take on side projects. I have two on the go right now, plus I'm the technical reviewer for an upcoming book. Yet, I agree with this entirely. I think it's silly to expect a "good" developer to code in their spare time, just like it would be silly to expect any other occupation to do so. Instead, it should be like a carpenter that does their own home renovations, or an accountant who uses double-entry book-keeping for their personal finances: they're using their work skills in their personal lives. That's like a developer who makes up a tool to keep track of errands in their house, for example. Or, it should be like a technical writer or copy writer who writes short stories in their spare time. That's like an application developer who writes games in their spare time. In none of these cases would you think that an carpenter who hires professionals or an accountant who just does normal budgeting and so on or a writer who writes only at work must be bad at their jobs. Why should it be any different with programming?
jack-r-abbit 13y ago
"Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
- tzs 13y ago
  That is frequently wrong.
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    But not this time. ;)
GoNB 13y ago
I don't have side projects, instead I spend that free time training for and running triathlons. I can't show as impressive a GitHub as my peers, but I'm sure as hell a lot more healthier and physically active. Whether that means anything to recruiters, who knows.
at-fates-hands 13y ago
When I first got into development, I was urged to do side projects because I could make more money and because people thought I would learn a lot. After a two years, I really didn't learn a lot and ended up dealing with customers who were overzealous and pushed me around to get more out of me then what they were paying me for (virtually peanuts). After a while, I figured I would take a year off and not do any side projects and focus on building my skills. I built more stuff in that year then I ever could being shackled to something which I would never learn much from. I never looked back after that first year. I continue to learn faster and pick frameworks, techniques and languages far faster than I ever imagined. What's the downside? - Maybe not putting a few thousand tax free American dollars back in my pocket. What's the upside? - Spending more time with my family since I can learn on my own time and at my own pace without any deadlines looming. - Learning things that are interesting to me. - Building things I think are cool - not what somebody else thinks they want. Like having Comic Sans in their company logo. - Staying on the cutting edge of my industry without falling behind.
iyulaev 13y ago
Are you a bad artist if you don't paint on your own time? Are you a bad writer if you don't write on your own time? Are you a bad carpenter if you don't craft on your own time? No. You can be an excellent, professional .+\. But it's very rare to see someone at the top of their field who isn't passionate about their vocation. I haven't heard of many rockstars who started playing music for the money.
- lmartel 13y ago
  Well the thing about art, music, and writing is that, at least until you make it big (which most people never do) you're doing it only on your own time, since no one's paying you. Software's in this weird spot where it has some qualities of art (creative, inspires "passion", we expect people to do it without getting paid) and some qualities of a craft (it pays)
  - iyulaev 13y ago
    School doesn't pay for itself (quite the opposite, really). Learning on your own time certainly doesn't pay for itself. You're right in that a larger proportion of programmers "make it big" but I don't believe there's a fundamental difference.
jamieomatthews 13y ago
ABH. Always. Be. Hacking. I think there are plenty of jobs that wont weigh side projects too heavily, as long as what you are working on for your job is awesome. I also think there are companies who like the modo I suggested at the top, and are looking for someone who loves to hack away at projects
cgag 13y ago
I want to say yes, but it could just be because I can't imagine having my coding needs satisfied by coding for someone else. I suppose there might be people who are truly satisfied with their jobs out there.
jmspring 13y ago
You should do something you enjoy in your spare time, if that is a side project, so be it. Some people do maker type things, others spend time with their families, for myself it is biking and gardening. When I have had to interview people, there is the technical abilities that are pretty easy to get through. What I prefer, when trying to find out something about the person, is to have them talk about a passion or something they enjoy. For some, that is coding, for others something else.
shubb 13y ago
People should spend their time doing things they like. I don't think people should feel bad, or like they lack balance because they enjoy programming side projects. People should do them because they enjoy them. (Like exercise, people who don't, usually only mean to do them. And that's fine). They are important in a careers way though. Not so much because 'you need code samples' - there is a skills shortage you know. It's more that at large companies, you learn to be a Facebook Programmer, rather than a programmer. Goldman Sacs apparently have their own private programming language. Side projects let you do things that are not your job. That is why they are fun (rather than more of the same). Some places, programmers never get to decide what they build (they get a list of features). Some programmers are 'test engineers', or maintenance engineers, and never write greenfield code. A lone inhouse programmer in a non IT company might enjoy working on opensource stuff and actually talking to someone about what they write. And you do need that. I've work with plenty of C++ people who have never touched a dynamically typed language. One day they will need to - the world always moves on faster than your team.
trustfundbaby 13y ago
I think it does the profession a great disservice to present these things as mutually exclusive ie "If I don't do side projects, I am a bad developer". For me I like to think of things in a different light. What I find with side project developers is a certain self-directedness that bodes well for the kind of employees that can thrive in a pure startup environment. The kind of thinking it takes to go ... "I have this problem, Heck, I'm going to hack something together that does what I need" or "this open source tool I use is missing this one feature, I'll just code it and send in a pull request" Then actually take time out of your life to code it up and put it out for use and, even better still, maintain it over a period of time. That tells me that such a person will have no trouble figuring out what they need to do if they go to work for a startup that they're passionate about. It tells me that they'll usually be the kind of people to drive initiatives at bigger firms if they don't lose patience with the politicking, red tape and glacial pace of things. Now, this DOES NOT mean that developers who don't do side projects won't possess these traits as well. Its just that the signal is clearer with the side project types. In the end you still have to go ahead and find out if they're actually good engineers before you hire them
lrobb 13y ago
The fact that this is even a question at all, let alone one that could make it on to forbes, is symptomatic of the tech industry being a giant echo chamber. Are you a bad [lawyer | accountant | civil engineer | doctor | musician] if you don't take on side projects?
brandon_wirtz 13y ago
If this is the case then every developer working at a 12 hour a day Start up, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook (who all are anti-moonlighting) are bad developers. I don't have side projects. My one main project is all consuming enough that side projects would be distractions. The only distractions I can afford are enough to keep my live/work balance so I don't burn out.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
twotwotwo 13y ago
No. At a different level from the other "no"s. You are a good developer if you make stuff that helps people. Not if you have an impressive résumé, not if you make a lot of money. Not even if your stuff is really technically impressive or shows off IQ or promise. Really, that's important. There's a lot on this site about being the cleverest, the fastest, knowing more comp sci than the next person or handling trickier interviews or proving there's something wrong with some other ecosystem, program, language, etc. Sometimes I'm not sure everyone feels they have a job to do that can improve people's lives. Whether sideprojects can sometimes help you reach career goals is a more appropriate question. For applicants I think there's an initial threshold of whether they can ship nontrivial stuff. They can demonstrate it with their past jobs or by actually building stuff. A sideproject could certainly help you get hired if you have no experience and the credentials aren't getting you there; it might be smart to do if you're having trouble finding right work out of college, say. Likewise, it might help you show you have potential in a radically different specialty that your past experience has no bearing on (e.g., you used to write Ruby on Rails but want start to writing code for microcontrollers). And if someone has unrealistic expectations about how much of a rockstar you need to be, maybe you don't want to work for them. If a potential employer wants you to have a github account that shows you spend all weekend every weekend hacking, maybe you dodged a bullet when they didn't hire you. I say this having just taken a bunch of time to build a side project. It was fun and stuff (building from scratch instead of tweaking a giant codebase! learning golang! making things go fast!) but there's no possibility in my mind it makes me "better" or I'd be "bad" had I not done it.
sinkasapa 13y ago
Most of what I do is a side project to my central tasks of eating, shitting and attempting to reproduce (or at least tricking my body into believing I'm making the attempt). I really feel like these side projects of reading, thinking and exploring are very important to my reason for existing. I could have finished with the real imperatives when I was 13.
brianmcc 13y ago
Can't believe we're still discussing this. Are there great developers who just code 9 - 5? Yes. Are there great developers who code in their own time? Yes. Are there terrible developers who just code 9 - 5? Yes. Are there terrible developers who code in their own time? Yes. Doing stuff in one's own time - or not - isn't any substantive determinant and we shouldn't try to make it so.

70 points by triketora 13y ago

Forbes is republishing experts-exchange now?

You will make more money if you have an active github account. For most people this means side projects/work. You will be a better developer if you code more. You will be exposed to more languages, tools, people, and ideas. If you don't code in your spare time, but you are happy where you are, don't feel like you are a bad developer, you just will not be as good at development as you could be. It is your life, why does it matter if you prefer to paint paintings at night instead of code? If you don't need to maximize your future revenue, don't feel bad. If you want to be a better developer more than anything, then you should code. If something is stopping you from doing that, remove the blocker. Personally, I don't hire anyone if I can't see code samples. 95% of the people I hire have their code samples on Github (not in a .zip file). So make sure you have some code samples available, but it doesn't have to be a side project or open source work.

CmonDev 13y ago
"but it doesn't have to be ... open source work" Would you be comfortable with the candidate that would put a brief description on CV and bring a laptop to the interview to show it?
speeder 13y ago
That reads to me very wrong. "remove the blocker" That mean to me either dropping the SO or not doing my house chores. EDIT: fixed typo
7Figures2Commas 13y ago
> If you don't code in your spare time, but you are happy where you are, don't feel like you are a bad developer, you just will not be as good at development as you could be. This is simply not true. Some developers will improve the more they code under the right circumstances. Others are sort of like the person at the gym who has bad form that, for one reason or another, is never corrected. For this person, more exercise is actually detrimental.
jt2190 13y ago
> You will make more money if you have an active github > account. I highly doubt this, but I'd love to be proven wrong. There's also a downside with sharing too much information about yourself without being present to answer questions or provide more context: It lets an employer discount you as a potential candidate simply because of their misunderstanding of your work. As evidence, refer to the "n projects on github have SQL injection security flaws" articles that show up here occasionally. But we all know that when you're just hacking around on something for fun, you might write code like this. The point of your project might have been to quickly demonstrate something cool, yet it can be used to demonstrate that you lack security awareness (even if that's not actually true.)
- 3pt14159 13y ago
  If you doubt this then you are probably in a completely different industry than I am. I cannot prove it to you except by my own experiences with managers and salary recommendations.
  - jstelly 13y ago
    This seems highly dependent on which kinds of software companies you are talking about. I hire lots of developers and I have never looked at anyone's github profile. Also, I don't recall any candidate asking me to look at their profile. I have seen a few resumes that have included one, but not very many - and I look at a lot of resumes. I'm not making any judgement about the value of the profile, but in my corner of the world it doesn't seem very important or even common.
zecho 13y ago
I hear this quite often about Github and it's a bit disturbing to me. If I heard an editor judge an author's work based on what that author posts to twitter, I'd be horrified. I can't be the only person on Github that uses it primarily as a junk drawer full of bad implementations and abandoned "projects" that were more quick and dirty personal itches. Sometimes I'll contribute to random OSS, but the vast majority of GH for me is just a place to store random ideas, many of which were just toying around with some new tool or whatever and would never see the light of day in production without given much more thought. Honestly, if you want to see code samples, you're probably better off watching the person work through a problem. Give prospective hires a project. Whether its as simple as fizzbuzz or as difficult as a trial week is up to you, I suppose.
- bdcravens 13y ago
  I don't think you're necessarily judged by the quality of your Github code as much as the fact that you have Github code. Especially if it's a bit out of your normal box.
- nukerhazz 13y ago
  This is why I use Bitbucket, with its unlimited private repos, for that junk drawer. I can keep my throwaways and false starts private.
  - hardwaresofton 13y ago
    Very true - I use Assembla!
- jared314 13y ago
  > If I heard an editor judge an author's work based on what that author posts to twitter, I'd be horrified. And yet, many potential hires are judged by their facebook posts[1,2], tweets, blog entries, and anything that can be found in a google search. All of this amounts to methods of elimination. You can treat it like a portfolio, but an active github account is just a cheap way to filter out possible negatives. It is also good to mention that, unlike writers, a lot of programmers cannot show their previous work, because it is the private property of their current/previous employer. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/03/05/facebook-can-tell-you-if-a-person-is-worth-hiring/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/03/05/facebook-... [2] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/password-protected-states/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/password-protected-...
applecore 13y ago
> You will make more money if you have an active github account. For most people this means side projects/work. This can't be true if you count all the programmers working in the financial industry.
kasey_junk 13y ago
How does your no hiring without code samples work when it comes to IP encumbered industries? I for one haven't worked without a NDA that includes my code for over 10 years, and neither have any of the people on my current team. Further, contributing to open source projects (outside of what I do for my employer) is also problematic, because nearly all the things I'm interested in/expert in are very related to what I do for my employer. Figuring out what is and is not work product and what I can and cannot release is a hassle I just don't want. Seems like your rule and your reliance on GitHub is a very narrow filter and you are likely getting a very narrow subset of potential applicants.
- lmartel 13y ago
  Keep in mind that the OP is probably in a very different industry than you are; if you have enough expertise that your interests are things you can't work on independently (like quant or security?), you will likely be applying to a nonoverlapping set of jobs as the OP, which (I'd guess) are much more interested in experience than a github profile. On the other hand, if you're a startup CRUD hacker, your potential employers are much more likely to expect some personal CRUD projects in your github, since 1) that's easier to do than personal quant/sec/whatever work and 2) there are likely a lot more applicants for such jobs, so they can afford to filter for "hustlers"
  - alok-g 13y ago
    With reference to my comment here [1], here are the two weak points I see in what you wrote: A. From a legal standpoint, AFAIK (IANAL), things that fall under the same trademark code are considered to be one industry. I have said this before in various discussions forums and while I am open to hear that I am wrong, no one so far as told me so. This means that "Computers, software, electronic instruments" are considered to be one industry [2] from a legal standpoint. B. Even if the OP or you feel that you are in a very different industry, you/OP need to check your contracts for such IP issues before concluding that you do not have the same issues. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6245738 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6245738 [2] http://www.tmweb.com/trademark_classes.asp http://www.tmweb.com/trademark_classes.asp
edw519 13y ago
You will make more money if you have an active github account. For most people this means side projects/work. More than what? The highest earning programmers I know have never heard of github and would never consider using it. You will be a better developer if you code more. You will be exposed to more languages, tools, people, and ideas. You will be a better developer if you deliver more. "More languages, tools, people, and ideas" can just as easily dilute your focus as improve your skill. To get better, you must focus on results, not activity. If you don't code in your spare time, but you are happy where you are, Why do you assume these 2 are mutually exclusive? I know lots of excellent programmers who deliver more before noon than most deliver all week. Nothing wrong with being excellent during working hours and doing something else in your spare time, like perhaps, enjoying your spare time. If you want to be a better developer more than anything, then you should code. If something is stopping you from doing that, remove the blocker. If you want to be a better developer more than anything, then you should deliver production quality software. Sometimes the "blocker" is a distraction. Distractions can be other things that masquerade as "side work". Personally, I don't hire anyone if I can't see code samples. 95% of the people I hire have their code samples on Github (not in a .zip file). So make sure you have some code samples available, but it doesn't have to be a side project or open source work. Personally, I never show code samples. I'll gladly go through the right company's process, including coding for them. But they don't get to see anything I've ever done before out of context and without proper permissions. And personally, I will never work for anyone with hard and fast rules about hiring. 3pt14159 is choosing to not consider many of the best programmers who refuse to show their underwear. His loss.
- erichmond 13y ago
  Hopefully this attitude becomes more prevalent in the industry, the pendulum has swung too far to the other side.
- brianpgordon 13y ago
  > Personally, I never show code samples. I'll gladly go through the right company's process, including coding for them. But they don't get to see anything I've ever done before out of context and without proper permissions. And personally, I will never work for anyone with hard and fast rules about hiring. 3pt14159 is choosing to not consider many of the best programmers who refuse to show their underwear. His loss. This is a pretty bizarre position. Don't you have any code that's carefully prepared and that you think represents your ability to at least write clean code? And wouldn't you rather show a potential employer that carefully prepared code than trying to whip something up on the spot? Also, a lot of things like showing off your chops at configuring complicated builds with, say, maven or ant can hardly be demonstrated in an interview or an overnight coding assignment. You need to have a nontrivial project prepared to show that you can write a nontrivial project.
yalogin 13y ago
This is quite bad. Why don't where I work and what I do get any credit? If you see my github account will you hire me without an interview and without asking me any of those "programming puzzles" popularized by google? You could learn about the drive of a person by his github account but cannot get anything else from it. Of course that does not mean a person without a github account is without motivation.
alok-g 13y ago
I am quite positive many of these are more myths like many that Google busted. [1] https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130620142512-35894743-on-gpas-and-brain-teasers-new-insights-from-google-on-recruiting-and-hiring https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130620142512-3...

Jgrubb 13y ago

Is Forbes really scraping content from Quora and presenting it as an article?

eterm 13y ago
This struck me also. I initially thought "blimey, does HN provide them so much traffic that they're linkbaiting them now", but taking Quora content and repackaging it is just even lower. It particularly struck me that HN very recently had an article that kicked off this exact debate. What a sad state of affairs, although the full advert splash and the junky "similar" articles give that impression too.
- epoxyhockey 13y ago
  Forbes has been linkbaiting HN for at least 73 days (the time when I first cared to comment about it). Our clicks are providing positive reinforcement for Forbes' blogspam and I'm surprised that HN hasn't banned forbes.com yet.
austinz 13y ago
Forbes' web site has been for a while little more than a collection of badly-curated, badly-written blogs. This seems like a logical next step.
zach 13y ago
Forbes and Quora have an arrangement to republish content from Quora that's interesting to Forbes readers. The authors are asked individually if they want their answers to appear on Forbes and receive no compensation.
chadwickthebold 13y ago
It's not entirely slimy. Its a great way to drive traffic for both Forbes and Quora. How many people would have read this opinion if Forbes hadn't made it slightly more high-profile? Ars has been doing a similar feature-series for awhile, and I think its one of the best parts of their site: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/how-easy-is-it-to-hack-javascript-in-a-browser/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/how-ea... I will give you that the Ars series is edited much much better than this one-off from Forbes

Matt_Mickiewicz 13y ago

Clearly, the answer is no. BUT, and this is a big BUT, having multiple personal projects does make you much more marketable to potential employers. If you don't have a well known University or a well known company on your resume, having a stack of personal projects that show you're constantly learning, that you're passionate about the programming and that you love what you do can mean the difference between getting a request to interview at a start-up vs. getting put in the "pass" pile of resumes/profiles that internal recruiters have to look at. This especially holds true if you work at a large, enterpris-ey company (IBM, VMWare, Goldman, Delloite, etc.) and want to attract the attention of, and get a job at, a venture funded start-up based on our experience at DeveloperAuction.

johnward 13y ago
I work at a large enteprisey corp (one that you listed actually) and I'm trying to break out. I find what you say to be true. You don't necessarily have to do side work but employers basically require it to hire you. Maybe it's not required but if it's you against someone with an awesome github profile you aren't getting the job. In my case I'm trying to get out of a consultant role and more into a development role. Said company forbids me to share things I have done internally. My only option is to start doing side projects. I understand that an employer needs a way to make sure you can do what you say you can do. The only choice I have right now is to sacrifice my personal life to develop some projects I can share, look for another consulting role (which I don't want), or suck it up. The problem is the longer I stay the more out of touch I become with the development world. It's like a big trap.

nonchalance 13y ago

I encounter a massive ad every time I read a forbes article. At this point, I'm convinced forbes.com is blogspam

janeglendale 13y ago

One side effect of this is people feeling like the have to work on a side project. People who otherwise would be happy working for their company find themselves spending hours and hours on something on the side. This cuts into hours that could be used for work or family or fun, and probably won't succeed because their heart isn't actually in it.

CmonDev 13y ago
An addition to other recent unfortunate trends: older devs not getting jobs, apps costing 99 cents.

tbrownaw 13y ago

Maybe this is a sign that we need continuing education / professional development rules, like real professions have?

chunky1994 13y ago

I would say that the reason people tend to look for developers who work on side projects etc. tend to generally be good developers, while those who don't can go either way. It's hard to know whether a developer is good or bad with only a resume/interview. If you're looking for smart motivated people, the ones who tend to work on side projects etc. can actually show you stuff they've built, and generally you can get a good idea as to how/if they'd fit in with your company/start-up. While this doesn't mean developers who don't take on side projects are bad, it's just hard to identify whether they are in fact good or bad.

jt2190 13y ago

From the Quora answer [1]: > I do attend (and give) technical talks; and perhaps most > importantly, I pick my day job based on learning and > growth opportunities: which company I’m working at, which > team I’m on, and which projects I take on. I stumbled > onto this a little bit by accident, but I discovered that > responsibilities in your day job that require you to > learn are a great forcing function for learning. I think that this is the nuance of the article that the headline simplifies away. I think we often look for side-projects because they are an indicator of ongoing learning and they demonstrate expertise. They are by no means the only way to show these things to a prospective employer. Giving presentations, writing articles, being able to discuss industry trends intelligently... All of these things count too. [1] https://www.quora.com/Software-Engineering/Are-you-a-bad-developer-if-you-dont-take-on-side-projects https://www.quora.com/Software-Engineering/Are-you-a-bad-dev...

lmartel 13y ago
I agree, you're dead on with the point the author is actually making (there are other ways to learn / build a portfolio in one's free time than side projects) vs the point many commenters seem to want the author to be making: software engineers should be able to do their jobs well, go home, and do something else for a couple hours. I'd like to see someone take that on, but this article--err, Quora post--doesn't quite do that.
codezero 13y ago
If you add ?share=1 to the end of the Quora URL, folks daring enough to follow the link won't get any sign-up call to action.
- davidcuddeback 13y ago
  That sounds like the sort of thing that could get someone in hot water under the CFAA these days.
  - codezero 13y ago
    It could if it weren't added explicitly for people to use in the way described: https://blog.quora.com/Making-Sharing-Better?share=1 https://blog.quora.com/Making-Sharing-Better?share=1

7Figures2Commas 13y ago

> Side projects are not necessarily a great way to get better at engineering, and by no means the only way to get better. If you take on a side project, you do go through the process of defining a product and coding it up, most likely full-stack and hopefully with some interesting technologies, but you’re probably not going to be working with a lot of teammates on a large, complicated codebase with evolving and expanding product requirements and scaling it up and maintaining it over time, which ends up being a lot of what software engineering actually is. Notwithstanding the fact that working "with a lot of teammates on a large, complicated codebase with evolving and expanding product requirements and scaling it up and maintaining it over time" is not necessarily what "software engineering" entails (or should entail) at every company, I actually think this is why a lot of developers take on side projects: being able to design and build something of one's own using the technologies of one's own choosing can be a lot more satisfying than refactoring code and putting out fires for 8+ hours every day. Obviously, developers who are adequately stimulated and satisfied by their day jobs probably have less incentive to indulge in side projects, and there's nothing wrong with that, but most people in the industry know that engineering jobs, even at the hottest or most prestigious companies, often leave something to be desired.

umsm 13y ago

Many developers have a bad LIFE / WORK balance. For the long run, I decided not to work beyond working hours. I try to enjoy the little time I do have with friends and family.

MartinCron 13y ago

I have found that I don't have the energy to take on paid side projects and still be my best-and-brightest for my primary employer. I still do small things on my own, but I just don't have what it takes to moonlight for money without being a zombie the next day. I envy others their limitless energy.

willismichael 13y ago

Are you a good developer if you do take on side projects? I think the answer to both questions is "not necessarily". The big problem that I see with questions like these is that it presents a false dichotomy of "bad" vs. "good" developers. Not only is this a false dichotomy, but skills aren't even one dimensional, so even considering them as falling on a spectrum is wrong. I'm certain that there exists some task that would take me 10 hours that would take my co-worker 1 hour, but there also exists some task that would take him 10 hours and only take my 1 hour.

jobu 13y ago

My kids are my side projects. I used to be worried about how they affected my career, but three years ago a bicycle accident put me in the hospital for a week and I completely reevaluated my life. It's a little sad (and a bit of a cliché) that it took nearly dying to realize their importance, but now I just smile and think about my kids when someone talks about their amazing project.

xutopia 13y ago
A friend of mine died in the last year from cancer. He was in his 30s. I too replaced a lot of the time I spent hacking to spend with my family. I like side projects but I love my family.
mrexroad 13y ago
agree x10. tragically, it took losing one of my children to realize that the extra hours and time management i put into balancing parenting w/ startup-life should have just been put into spending more time w/ my kids. i'm currently back at a far less exciting enterprise job, and made it to every baseball game this year even though they started at 5pm. you only get one short chance at being their hero, so better make the most of it. i haven't coded on the side in a long time, but look forward to doing so soon w/ my oldest now going into 1st grade. whatever i code will be for/with them.
andy_adams 13y ago
I have 2 little ones. When my oldest was growing from 0-2, I can remember nearly every moment. I was at an unexciting 9-5 job. As my youngest goes from 0-1, I've been working lots of projects via my own consultancy. I look at him and can't believe how much I've missed. I'm currently shifting gears to get back to focusing on my family. I'm still new at this, but it's pretty clear programming/career is so far below family in importance, I need to adjust my life accordingly.
3pt14159 13y ago
When I was a kid (6 to 10 years old) my mom helped me program computers (QBASIC games and attempts at C++, haha). :) Some people get to have it all.

a-priori 13y ago

I'm a developer who does take on side projects. I have two on the go right now, plus I'm the technical reviewer for an upcoming book. Yet, I agree with this entirely. I think it's silly to expect a "good" developer to code in their spare time, just like it would be silly to expect any other occupation to do so. Instead, it should be like a carpenter that does their own home renovations, or an accountant who uses double-entry book-keeping for their personal finances: they're using their work skills in their personal lives. That's like a developer who makes up a tool to keep track of errands in their house, for example. Or, it should be like a technical writer or copy writer who writes short stories in their spare time. That's like an application developer who writes games in their spare time. In none of these cases would you think that an carpenter who hires professionals or an accountant who just does normal budgeting and so on or a writer who writes only at work must be bad at their jobs. Why should it be any different with programming?

jack-r-abbit 13y ago

"Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

tzs 13y ago
That is frequently wrong.
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  But not this time. ;)

GoNB 13y ago

I don't have side projects, instead I spend that free time training for and running triathlons. I can't show as impressive a GitHub as my peers, but I'm sure as hell a lot more healthier and physically active. Whether that means anything to recruiters, who knows.

at-fates-hands 13y ago

When I first got into development, I was urged to do side projects because I could make more money and because people thought I would learn a lot. After a two years, I really didn't learn a lot and ended up dealing with customers who were overzealous and pushed me around to get more out of me then what they were paying me for (virtually peanuts). After a while, I figured I would take a year off and not do any side projects and focus on building my skills. I built more stuff in that year then I ever could being shackled to something which I would never learn much from. I never looked back after that first year. I continue to learn faster and pick frameworks, techniques and languages far faster than I ever imagined. What's the downside? - Maybe not putting a few thousand tax free American dollars back in my pocket. What's the upside? - Spending more time with my family since I can learn on my own time and at my own pace without any deadlines looming. - Learning things that are interesting to me. - Building things I think are cool - not what somebody else thinks they want. Like having Comic Sans in their company logo. - Staying on the cutting edge of my industry without falling behind.

iyulaev 13y ago

Are you a bad artist if you don't paint on your own time? Are you a bad writer if you don't write on your own time? Are you a bad carpenter if you don't craft on your own time? No. You can be an excellent, professional .+\. But it's very rare to see someone at the top of their field who isn't passionate about their vocation. I haven't heard of many rockstars who started playing music for the money.

lmartel 13y ago
Well the thing about art, music, and writing is that, at least until you make it big (which most people never do) you're doing it only on your own time, since no one's paying you. Software's in this weird spot where it has some qualities of art (creative, inspires "passion", we expect people to do it without getting paid) and some qualities of a craft (it pays)
- iyulaev 13y ago
  School doesn't pay for itself (quite the opposite, really). Learning on your own time certainly doesn't pay for itself. You're right in that a larger proportion of programmers "make it big" but I don't believe there's a fundamental difference.

jamieomatthews 13y ago

ABH. Always. Be. Hacking. I think there are plenty of jobs that wont weigh side projects too heavily, as long as what you are working on for your job is awesome. I also think there are companies who like the modo I suggested at the top, and are looking for someone who loves to hack away at projects

cgag 13y ago

I want to say yes, but it could just be because I can't imagine having my coding needs satisfied by coding for someone else. I suppose there might be people who are truly satisfied with their jobs out there.

jmspring 13y ago

You should do something you enjoy in your spare time, if that is a side project, so be it. Some people do maker type things, others spend time with their families, for myself it is biking and gardening. When I have had to interview people, there is the technical abilities that are pretty easy to get through. What I prefer, when trying to find out something about the person, is to have them talk about a passion or something they enjoy. For some, that is coding, for others something else.

shubb 13y ago

People should spend their time doing things they like. I don't think people should feel bad, or like they lack balance because they enjoy programming side projects. People should do them because they enjoy them. (Like exercise, people who don't, usually only mean to do them. And that's fine). They are important in a careers way though. Not so much because 'you need code samples' - there is a skills shortage you know. It's more that at large companies, you learn to be a Facebook Programmer, rather than a programmer. Goldman Sacs apparently have their own private programming language. Side projects let you do things that are not your job. That is why they are fun (rather than more of the same). Some places, programmers never get to decide what they build (they get a list of features). Some programmers are 'test engineers', or maintenance engineers, and never write greenfield code. A lone inhouse programmer in a non IT company might enjoy working on opensource stuff and actually talking to someone about what they write. And you do need that. I've work with plenty of C++ people who have never touched a dynamically typed language. One day they will need to - the world always moves on faster than your team.

trustfundbaby 13y ago

I think it does the profession a great disservice to present these things as mutually exclusive ie "If I don't do side projects, I am a bad developer". For me I like to think of things in a different light. What I find with side project developers is a certain self-directedness that bodes well for the kind of employees that can thrive in a pure startup environment. The kind of thinking it takes to go ... "I have this problem, Heck, I'm going to hack something together that does what I need" or "this open source tool I use is missing this one feature, I'll just code it and send in a pull request" Then actually take time out of your life to code it up and put it out for use and, even better still, maintain it over a period of time. That tells me that such a person will have no trouble figuring out what they need to do if they go to work for a startup that they're passionate about. It tells me that they'll usually be the kind of people to drive initiatives at bigger firms if they don't lose patience with the politicking, red tape and glacial pace of things. Now, this DOES NOT mean that developers who don't do side projects won't possess these traits as well. Its just that the signal is clearer with the side project types. In the end you still have to go ahead and find out if they're actually good engineers before you hire them

lrobb 13y ago

The fact that this is even a question at all, let alone one that could make it on to forbes, is symptomatic of the tech industry being a giant echo chamber. Are you a bad [lawyer | accountant | civil engineer | doctor | musician] if you don't take on side projects?

brandon_wirtz 13y ago

If this is the case then every developer working at a 12 hour a day Start up, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook (who all are anti-moonlighting) are bad developers. I don't have side projects. My one main project is all consuming enough that side projects would be distractions. The only distractions I can afford are enough to keep my live/work balance so I don't burn out.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

twotwotwo 13y ago

No. At a different level from the other "no"s. You are a good developer if you make stuff that helps people. Not if you have an impressive résumé, not if you make a lot of money. Not even if your stuff is really technically impressive or shows off IQ or promise. Really, that's important. There's a lot on this site about being the cleverest, the fastest, knowing more comp sci than the next person or handling trickier interviews or proving there's something wrong with some other ecosystem, program, language, etc. Sometimes I'm not sure everyone feels they have a job to do that can improve people's lives. Whether sideprojects can sometimes help you reach career goals is a more appropriate question. For applicants I think there's an initial threshold of whether they can ship nontrivial stuff. They can demonstrate it with their past jobs or by actually building stuff. A sideproject could certainly help you get hired if you have no experience and the credentials aren't getting you there; it might be smart to do if you're having trouble finding right work out of college, say. Likewise, it might help you show you have potential in a radically different specialty that your past experience has no bearing on (e.g., you used to write Ruby on Rails but want start to writing code for microcontrollers). And if someone has unrealistic expectations about how much of a rockstar you need to be, maybe you don't want to work for them. If a potential employer wants you to have a github account that shows you spend all weekend every weekend hacking, maybe you dodged a bullet when they didn't hire you. I say this having just taken a bunch of time to build a side project. It was fun and stuff (building from scratch instead of tweaking a giant codebase! learning golang! making things go fast!) but there's no possibility in my mind it makes me "better" or I'd be "bad" had I not done it.

sinkasapa 13y ago

Most of what I do is a side project to my central tasks of eating, shitting and attempting to reproduce (or at least tricking my body into believing I'm making the attempt). I really feel like these side projects of reading, thinking and exploring are very important to my reason for existing. I could have finished with the real imperatives when I was 13.

brianmcc 13y ago

Can't believe we're still discussing this. Are there great developers who just code 9 - 5? Yes. Are there great developers who code in their own time? Yes. Are there terrible developers who just code 9 - 5? Yes. Are there terrible developers who code in their own time? Yes. Doing stuff in one's own time - or not - isn't any substantive determinant and we shouldn't try to make it so.