Code for fun (hobby)
-
GuyThiebaut wrote:
I know plenty of 'successful' people who lead extremely 'unbalanced' lives.
Success in one area does not make up for failure in all others.
Jeremy Falcon
What if Einstein lived a balanced life? Would he have bothered with any equations or theories? To be good at something you have to concentrate and work hard on it. To be great at something you have to work very, very hard. Thus, somethings else have to be ignored or minimized. Olympic athletes are great. And they don't really do anything else besides practice all of the time. I've never met a really great coder/programmer/developer who did not spend more than "balanced" time getting there. But for other people, who don't care about greatness, then a balanced life is great for them. But don't equate "balanced life" with greatness. There is no such thing. - Grant
-
To me, A Balanced Life would mean doing no work at all! :)
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
Tightrope walkers lead a balanced life. Why not join a circus?
I may not last forever but the mess I leave behind certainly will.
-
Tightrope walkers lead a balanced life. Why not join a circus?
I may not last forever but the mess I leave behind certainly will.
vertigo!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
What if Einstein lived a balanced life? Would he have bothered with any equations or theories? To be good at something you have to concentrate and work hard on it. To be great at something you have to work very, very hard. Thus, somethings else have to be ignored or minimized. Olympic athletes are great. And they don't really do anything else besides practice all of the time. I've never met a really great coder/programmer/developer who did not spend more than "balanced" time getting there. But for other people, who don't care about greatness, then a balanced life is great for them. But don't equate "balanced life" with greatness. There is no such thing. - Grant
C Grant Anderson wrote:
What if Einstein lived a balanced life? Would he have bothered with any equations or theories?
While I don't know him personally, Einstein was balanced. Perhaps not so much as John Doe in a bar, but enough to at least function well enough to be happy. Anyway, he played instruments, messed around with women, etc.
C Grant Anderson wrote:
To be good at something you have to concentrate and work hard on it. To be great at something you have to work very, very hard. Thus, somethings else have to be ignored or minimized. Olympic athletes are great. And they don't really do anything else besides practice all of the time.
I totally agree with you on that man. I really do. Bodybuilders that are hardcore spend their life inside a gym. And yet, most of them are miserable. The gym almost becomes a church for them because that's all they know.
C Grant Anderson wrote:
I've never met a really great coder/programmer/developer who did not spend more than "balanced" time getting there.
I have to agree, but coming from that myself, as I've aged I realized what's really important in life. Back in "my day" I lived that crap and knew a lot, but I couldn't communicate well to others. So, I was the only one that knew it. Therefore, my life's work would not have been much useful if I never bothered to learn other skills to get it out there so people can use it. Einstein did this as well. What's the point if you can't market it and you die being great at something nobody ever knows about for instance. And while I agree with the premise of sacrifice, I really do man. Being happy accounts for a lot. I suppose if you're truly happy doing nothing else with your life then more power to you. I just don't see how knowing one extra tech fact can make up for never knowing the true love of a good woman for instance.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Leng Vang wrote:
Is my observation off?
Yes.
Totally. When its your job you have to get it right, if a hobbyists programs fails what does it matter? plus if you work in a team you glean knowledge from those that know more. A hobbyists and self taught person can fall into bad habits without knowing or realising. do I need to go on lol. GL
-
Technically, a successful life is one where the organism reproduces before it dies. Achieving no other objective can make its life successful. (Coding by day + coding by night + actually managing to reproduce) doesn't sound too incredibly likely.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
Technically, a successful life is one where the organism reproduces before it dies. Achieving no other objective can make its life successful.
You know, I never thought of it this way. Brilliant.
-
I've found that developers who program for fun at their off time usually more in-tune with their skills and have broader knowledge. There are developers that would code at work but have other interests out side of work tense to not very deep in their field. Is my observation off?
I used to, but now I have way too many other interests. if something is really calling me to research, i'll get a book work with it for a hour or two in the late evening (really liking "D" lang). I got some projects I could do for myself rattling around in my head, but can't justify taking that much time away of the wife and kids. Maybe someday i'll get back to it.
-
I've found that developers who program for fun at their off time usually more in-tune with their skills and have broader knowledge. There are developers that would code at work but have other interests out side of work tense to not very deep in their field. Is my observation off?
I think you're right. I also think most of the commenters on this thread completely misunderstood what you asked. For those who did, note that he didn't state that the people programming outside of work weren't also programming at work. His question was more about whether people who *also* program at home, for fun, are more in tune with programming than people who switch off as soon as they leave the office, and only program for work. But yes, all the best of us engage in recreational programming: programming is more than a job for us: it's a way of thinking.
-
"Balanced life" sounds like one of Those Things from the type of magazine that women read, along with "balanced diet" and "balanced body". They'll probably recommend a couple of fads in order to attain it.
Ah yes. A Real Programmer works 10-12 hours at their day job, picks up a bag of Cheeto's and a 12 pack of Red Bull on the way home, and then spends 6 or 7 hours working on an open source project of some sort. On the weekend, he puts in 14 hours on Saturday, and 12 on Sunday (his mom won't do his laundry, so he loses a couple hours; good thing the laundry's in the basement next to his computer desk).
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Quote:
You can't rot in front of a computer your whole life and be happy
...but you can try to! I haven't noticed any rot setting in yet and I have done both professional and hobby programming since 1975.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
Forogar wrote:
I have done both professional and hobby programming since 1975.
Yes, but you can't do it all the time, unless you met your wife like in Weird Science[^]. Wait a minute... you are Gary Wallace, heh?
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
-
Do you regret asking yet? :-\
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
I used to do both, and while I do agree that my tech skills were greater than my coworkers, I lacked in so many other areas in life (like people skills) that my life sucked. You can't rot in front of a computer your whole life and be happy, and I find now that happy people are the most productive. So while I don't know as many random facts as I used about tech, I still get more done with a balanced life.
Jeremy Falcon
Totally agreed with balancing life and productivity. In the early career days, I used to bring work home but now once I'm out of the office, don't even think about work stuff. From what I see around (colleagues) those that have vested interests in what they do both at work and at home tends to spend more time to stay up current with changing technologies.
-
Your answer can be found here :suss:
»»» Loading Signature «««· · · Please Wait · · ·:badger: :badger: :badger: -
At the end of the day, developers are people, and everyone is different and work in their own way. The way that works best for them. I do a fair amount of geekery outside of work, but I also have interests that are non-geek related. I think it's healthy to have other interests, as it makes you a more rounded individual.
-
I used to, but now I have way too many other interests. if something is really calling me to research, i'll get a book work with it for a hour or two in the late evening (really liking "D" lang). I got some projects I could do for myself rattling around in my head, but can't justify taking that much time away of the wife and kids. Maybe someday i'll get back to it.
Exactly. However, some developers just want to go fishing or golfing on their day off. Some will pick a book and learn a new language, new ideas, new paradigm... These are what I've observed that make the different between those that just work in tech and those that lead the tech.
-
Forogar wrote:
I have done both professional and hobby programming since 1975.
Yes, but you can't do it all the time, unless you met your wife like in Weird Science[^]. Wait a minute... you are Gary Wallace, heh?
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
I met my wife 40 years ago when she stood in front of an IBM 1401 printer. Those lovely long legs were very distracting. I was working with another programmer teaching an IBM 360/30 to tell time.
-
Totally agreed with balancing life and productivity. In the early career days, I used to bring work home but now once I'm out of the office, don't even think about work stuff. From what I see around (colleagues) those that have vested interests in what they do both at work and at home tends to spend more time to stay up current with changing technologies.
Leng Vang wrote:
I used to bring work home but now once I'm out of the office, don't even think about work stuff.
Same here. Life is just more fun that way man.
Jeremy Falcon
-
I think you're right. I also think most of the commenters on this thread completely misunderstood what you asked. For those who did, note that he didn't state that the people programming outside of work weren't also programming at work. His question was more about whether people who *also* program at home, for fun, are more in tune with programming than people who switch off as soon as they leave the office, and only program for work. But yes, all the best of us engage in recreational programming: programming is more than a job for us: it's a way of thinking.
You hit the nail square. Couldn't said it better myself. I have colleagues with some very sharp and some are okay. But the okay folks are kept going back to the other sharp for answers on the team. The only difference I've notice is that those sharp group spend more time off hours to understand the technology where the okay group seems to not care so much about technology and be there just for the pay check.
-
I met my wife 40 years ago when she stood in front of an IBM 1401 printer. Those lovely long legs were very distracting. I was working with another programmer teaching an IBM 360/30 to tell time.
-
You hit the nail square. Couldn't said it better myself. I have colleagues with some very sharp and some are okay. But the okay folks are kept going back to the other sharp for answers on the team. The only difference I've notice is that those sharp group spend more time off hours to understand the technology where the okay group seems to not care so much about technology and be there just for the pay check.
I've seen much the same thing... I think for the sharp ones, they job is because they like to do it, and it's easy to have that job, whereas the other ones learned it in order to do the job, which is a whole different viewpoint.
