18 ms·

My name is Rick and I'm a 80 hour a week guy. I'm 26, single, and have no pets. I have a family and friends, but I'm very transparent about my work habits and

My name is Rick and I'm a 80 hour a week guy. I'm 26, single, and have no pets. I have a family and friends, but I'm very transparent about my work habits and priorities as a full-stack engineer. Being so young, I see myself as training to be the person I want to be in the future. The best programmers in the world worked at it relentlessly. Sure, there are variances in the amount that they all worked, and some did it with much less work than others. But if I want to be the best in the world, or at least attain my personal upper bound, I have to work hard at it and I have to work consistently at it. John Resig didn't wake up one day and write jQuery. Steve Wozniak didn't just throw together the Apple I. Linus didn't just decide to write the Linux kernel one afternoon. They all put to work the investments they made in themselves. I don't do it because I want money, success, or fame. I do it because I deeply want to make a meaningful impact on the world. I want it so bad that when I think about it my palms sweat and my chest gets heavy. When you look at the future of humanity as a whole, we need to either improve or die. And to improve, we need improvers. I want to be an improver and I don't want to rest until I am. To be clear, I love what I do and I don't really consider it work. Solving hard problems with creative techniques is one of my favorite things to do. I really enjoy learning new things, and being able to pull them into my work is really satisfying. Being able to build something that I imagine, push it out to people, and see them get excited about it is surreal. I don't want to be doing anything else. I don't want to stop working. But I understand the research. I understand that the work I put in will be more productive and beneficial to me if I have a balance in all areas of my life--which means that I need to be social, have hobbies, and live a healthy lifestyle. So I've aligned my life such that those interactions still help me reach my upper bound. My friends are smarter than I am and many are in technical fields so getting a beer with them involves talking about a hard problem we solved. My hobbies include writing StackOverflow posts, trying out new frameworks, and reading books like Thinking, Fast and Slow, RabbitMQ in Action, and Secrets of the Javascript Ninja. I truly enjoy and am satisfied with these parts of my life, even though I'm never really leaving the mindset of work. One day I want to write those books, not just read them, and I want those books to meaningfully impact the world. So I train, and that means I'm an 80 hours a week guy.

DoctorZeus 13y ago
I admire your passion and dedication to having a positive impact on the world. My challenge to you is this: What gives you confidence that the impact you'll have on the world will in fact be positive? Engineering certainly gives us the ability to impact the world. Increasingly and since the first industrial revolution power goes to the greatest engineers. But are the skills that give us the ability to change the world really sufficient to decide what change is best? For that, I believe we need wisdom and understanding far outside our field of expertise, and in the evening and on the weekend we should be reading not just Javascript Ninja but also books on history, philosophy, political theory, literature, and psychology - if we want to optimize the chance that our impact will truly be positive.
- ritchiea 13y ago
  To be fair to the poster you're replying to, he did mention reading Thinking Fast & Slow which is by the nobel prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman. That's no web programming manual.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > To be fair to the poster you're replying to, he did mention reading Thinking Fast & Slow which is by the nobel prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman. When I read this, I realized something was wrong. Psychology isn't a science, and scientific Nobel prizes are awarded for scientific breakthroughs. So I looked it up and discovered that the psychologist Kahneman won the Economics Nobel, which makes more sense (economics isn't very scientific, but it's certainly more scientific than psychology). A quick search reveals that a psychologist has never won a science Nobel for psychological work. As in the above example, the notable work of some psychologists is recognized by awarding a Nobel in a more scientific field, to avoid polluting the Nobel's reputation and opening the door to awards in any number of other pseudoscientific fields.
    - rickhanlonii 13y ago
      You make a valuable distinction; Kahneman did not win the Nobel for psychology, and in fact there is no such thing. But to call psychology a pseudoscience confuses either the definition of science or of psychology. In Thinking, Fast and Slow, Kahneman spends the majority of each chapter outlining scientific studies in detail, many that he personally carried out, making the text a 500 page atlas of counter-examples.

DoctorZeus 13y ago

I admire your passion and dedication to having a positive impact on the world. My challenge to you is this: What gives you confidence that the impact you'll have on the world will in fact be positive? Engineering certainly gives us the ability to impact the world. Increasingly and since the first industrial revolution power goes to the greatest engineers. But are the skills that give us the ability to change the world really sufficient to decide what change is best? For that, I believe we need wisdom and understanding far outside our field of expertise, and in the evening and on the weekend we should be reading not just Javascript Ninja but also books on history, philosophy, political theory, literature, and psychology - if we want to optimize the chance that our impact will truly be positive.

ritchiea 13y ago
To be fair to the poster you're replying to, he did mention reading Thinking Fast & Slow which is by the nobel prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman. That's no web programming manual.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > To be fair to the poster you're replying to, he did mention reading Thinking Fast & Slow which is by the nobel prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman. When I read this, I realized something was wrong. Psychology isn't a science, and scientific Nobel prizes are awarded for scientific breakthroughs. So I looked it up and discovered that the psychologist Kahneman won the Economics Nobel, which makes more sense (economics isn't very scientific, but it's certainly more scientific than psychology). A quick search reveals that a psychologist has never won a science Nobel for psychological work. As in the above example, the notable work of some psychologists is recognized by awarding a Nobel in a more scientific field, to avoid polluting the Nobel's reputation and opening the door to awards in any number of other pseudoscientific fields.
  - rickhanlonii 13y ago
    You make a valuable distinction; Kahneman did not win the Nobel for psychology, and in fact there is no such thing. But to call psychology a pseudoscience confuses either the definition of science or of psychology. In Thinking, Fast and Slow, Kahneman spends the majority of each chapter outlining scientific studies in detail, many that he personally carried out, making the text a 500 page atlas of counter-examples.