4 ms·

The "work is their passion so it's not work" contrarian-ism is certainly not uncommon. But the argument against 80 hours is generally stress-induced health and

The "work is their passion so it's not work" contrarian-ism is certainly not uncommon. But the argument against 80 hours is generally stress-induced health and productivity related. Given, if a person "loves what they do" then the stress part is probably lower, reducing the negative effects of the first. But the other argument is that, after so many hours, returns on effort are reduced, and I don't see a good argument for this being not true whether a person is in love with their vocation. I would posit that a likely scenario, is that the 80-hour-a-weeker's passion for their work their concern for efficiency. They don't get as much done per hour, but they don't care as much because they love the parts even where they are just plodding along.

anaphor 13y ago
I agree, arguably one of the most productive programmers of all time apparently still manages to get 8 hours of sleep usually: "Losing sleep to hit a deadline the next day is valid, but it isn't a productivity enhancer. I have always needed a full 8hrs for good work." https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/436351780243259393 https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/436351780243259393
eropple 13y ago
It gets a bit fuzzy when what you do for a job is also a fun hobby. I don't spend 40 hours a week hacking on code outside the office, but a productive week (working on my game or on another side project) might put me around 20.
JoeAltmaier 13y ago
You have to be doing something for all the hours in the week. We don't get stresses out playing tennis or having sex (well...) or going to the movies. So its got more to do with extended concentration on one task, vs the actual hours? If the work has several tasks (e.g. rehearsing, the gig, songwriting, negotiating) then maybe its not the same as sitting in front of a screen the same time.
- mattlutze 13y ago
  I'd ask the professional tennis player or porn star if their jobs are/would be stressful at 80 hrs per week... but in the spirit of it I can definitely agree. The multitude of tasks bit is true. Where my BS meter starts to twitch is when it's a developer telling me that they've been hacking 12 hours a day for x years and feel fit as a fiddle. In those instances, I've gotta imagine the quality output vs. time quotient is lower per capita than the average 30-50 hour per week dev.

anaphor 13y ago

I agree, arguably one of the most productive programmers of all time apparently still manages to get 8 hours of sleep usually: "Losing sleep to hit a deadline the next day is valid, but it isn't a productivity enhancer. I have always needed a full 8hrs for good work." https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/436351780243259393 https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/436351780243259393

eropple 13y ago

It gets a bit fuzzy when what you do for a job is also a fun hobby. I don't spend 40 hours a week hacking on code outside the office, but a productive week (working on my game or on another side project) might put me around 20.

JoeAltmaier 13y ago

You have to be doing something for all the hours in the week. We don't get stresses out playing tennis or having sex (well...) or going to the movies. So its got more to do with extended concentration on one task, vs the actual hours? If the work has several tasks (e.g. rehearsing, the gig, songwriting, negotiating) then maybe its not the same as sitting in front of a screen the same time.

mattlutze 13y ago
I'd ask the professional tennis player or porn star if their jobs are/would be stressful at 80 hrs per week... but in the spirit of it I can definitely agree. The multitude of tasks bit is true. Where my BS meter starts to twitch is when it's a developer telling me that they've been hacking 12 hours a day for x years and feel fit as a fiddle. In those instances, I've gotta imagine the quality output vs. time quotient is lower per capita than the average 30-50 hour per week dev.