
Is there evidence that drugs can help programmers produce “better” code? - pw7
http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/171618/is-there-any-evidence-that-drugs-can-actually-help-programmers-produce-better
======
derefr
You tend to use the very specific phrase "nootropic drugs" to talk about drugs
which help with productivity or creativity or some other aspect of working
life. Asking whether there is evidence on nootropics, is just asking whether
there are any heavily-tested nootropics. Asking anything else--to lex it out,
whether "drugs that have no productivity-enhancing aspect, enhance
productivity" is just playing the fool to incite extremely subjective
flamewars.

So, let's avoid that, and just focus on nootropics. Is there evidence that
they work? Depends on the drug. We have drugs (caffeine, theanine) that are in
foods we've been consuming since the beginning of civilization, so we've
heavily researched those and are pretty confident in what they do.

On the other hand, new, synthetic compounds, like modafinil, are only really
created and pushed through FDA approval if there can be found some sort of
therapeutic, non-nootropic purpose in their use: in modafinil's case, treating
narcolepsy. This means that their use _as nootropics_ is much less well-
researched, and consists mainly of anecdata (however much there is) shared
over the internet.

The best you'll find, I think, in terms of data for efficacy of various drugs,
is people who have set out to do double-blind studies on themselves:
<http://www.gwern.net/Nootropics>

After reading data-points like these, you might be convinced to try some of
them on your own. But be aware that people's body-chemistries can vary widely
--especially where things affecting neurochemical balance are concerned--so
everyone's reactions to these will still be different. Not in a sense of a
"bad trip", usually; just that some things which other people swear by might
not have much of an effect on your particular chemistry. So, the best thing to
do, as in most situations: first research, then experiment.

~~~
klibertp
I'm not an expert, but I'd like to comment on your statement that discussing
non-nootropics in this context is pointless. I think it is not, and my
argument goes like this: you code better when in mood to do so. Certain
psychoactive substances make it easier to fall in certain moods, easier to
change your mood or even forcibly change your mood for you (like some of
benzodiazepines or MDM, MDMA). Their working is not "nootropic" (as in it does
not necessarily improve any mental functions) but you're in generally better
disposition to code after using them. This is true even for coffee, and even
without developed dependence - if you're feeling sleepy, your code will be
worse than when you're feeling wide awake, and coffee, being a stimulant that
it is, can give you that feeling.

So, what I want to say is that not only measurable enchancement of "cognition,
memory, intelligence, motivation, attention" (as with nootropics) can result
in you doing better job. For example, while benzodiazepines generally _lower_
cognitive ability, they enable people with depression to actually do something
(to code, for example :)). Of course, when overdosed or just not fit for your
particular brain, the same psychoactive substance can lower mental function so
much, that no amount of optimistic thoughts is going to help you.

I just want to point out that there is more to productivity than memory,
intelligence and concentration and that this means that when discussing
productivity there is a place for not-strictly-nootropic drugs in the
discussion. Although, I have to admit, that place is rather marginal due to
very, very varied responses to such a substances among individuals.

~~~
derefr
Certainly, if you have a problem with your mood, whether caused by stress,
chemical imbalance, etc., that is _damping_ your productivity, then using a
mood-altering drug can remove that damping effect and let your productivity
return to an optimal level. This is different, though, I think, from
"enhancing" productivity, which usually refers to things that can be used to
move someone "beyond" the normal human optimal performance in some way.

What a part of me wants to say is, "the literature for returning humans to
optimal mood is broad and well-researched, and shouldn't really be the topic
of Amateur Medical-Advice Hour on a social news website; the best thing to do
if you have a problem with your mood is to speak to a therapist/psychiatrist,
who will recommend you a course of action based on current medical best
practices." But...

I have to admit that that really isn't exactly true. Therapists and
psychiatrists aren't required to have any more knowledge of neurochemistry
than any other doctor; they'll be able to follow a guide and tell you that if
you're depressed they should take you through cognitive behavioral therapy and
prescribe you an SSRI (and then an SNRI if that doesn't work, and then a TCA
if that doesn't work, &c) but they probably _won't_ think about the serotonin
production pathway and suggest that you might need more Vitamin B. This is one
benefit of the internet: the people who are experts on their little staked
claim of knowledge can give it to the people who seem to need it, instead of
those people having to go around and talk to experts in all sorts of different
fields to get the perspectives from those fields. On the other hand, it's
pretty useless to give these pieces of advice to no-one in particular, without
a specific problem at hand to solve. It's a bit like doing science without a
hypothesis to test; everyone sees their own--more often than not false and
overreaching--interpretation of the data.

The one good thing that does come out of these threads is that they tend to
get more people to say "wait, that sounds like me, maybe I have [X mood
disorder]," ask their doctors about it, and it turns out that they _do_. This
is in stark contrast to usual hypochondria surrounding most diseases; where a
person will be quick to diagnose themselves with [X cargo-cult symptom-
matching thing-they-don't-understand] to explain why their neck always aches
or they keep coughing up yellow phlegm, people are wary of assigning
themselves mood disorders, since most people feel that society will still
consider them "guilty" in some way for having the problem ["you're just lazy"
&c], and they definitely don't want to bring it out in the open to the point
where they _identify_ with it. Discussions with a bunch of people chiming in
to say "oh, yes, I thought I was [X fault-of-character], but really I just had
[Y chemical imbalance] and some [drug] fixed it right up" can really push
people to investigate this sort of thing where they otherwise wouldn't
consider it.

I think the best compromise is that _solutions_ should be discussed in the
context of particular _problems_. Nootropics are an exception, because they
don't solve any particular problem, other than the problem of wanting your
life to be "even better-er"; but, for example, a root-level comment in this
discussion about marijuana use really won't have anything good happen to it;
each person will be looking at it in the context of a different problem and
either implicitly accepting or rejecting the idea _prima facie_ because of
that. Better to ask a specific question, like "what drugs and/or therapies
could be used to cope with stress-induced anxiety in the workplace"; then the
discussion could actually go somewhere worth reading :)

~~~
pstuart
The whole issue of "better living through chemistry" is a big experiment and
the "professionals" may have better training but they can only guess as to
what may or not work for an individual. In the end it's always a try and see
approach.

------
pchivers
From what I understand there is only one study on the relationship between
creativity and LSD:

 _Psychedelic agents in creative problem-solving: a pilot study._ Harman WW,
McKim RH, Mogar RE, Fadiman J, Stolaroff MJ. Psychol Rep. 1966
Aug;19(1):211-27.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelics_in_problem-
solving...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelics_in_problem-
solving_experiment)

The results suggested that LSD has a positive effect on creative problem
solving. I think it is a shame that no follow-up experiments have been
conducted.

~~~
gourneau
I wonder how many adherents Steve Jobs have dosed LSD because of his advice.

~~~
waterlesscloud
I recently read the book _What The Dormouse Said_, which is about the early
days of silicon valley computer culture and the interaction of that culture
with the counter culture.

According to that book, there was a notable portion of the people in that
early SV culture who at least experimented with LSD, and there was even an
organization called the "International Foundation for Advanced Study" in Menlo
Park that was founded by an engineer to study the possible benefits of LSD use
among engineers.

------
redthrowaway
Define drugs. I know Ritalin is an invaluable tool when it comes time for me
to sit down and hack, but can also be counter-productive in limiting my
creativity.

I think it would be self-evidently false to suggest that no mind-altering
substance could lead to a state of consciousness more conducive than the
baseline for a given activity, but I would stop short of recommending any
particular drug for programming. If it works for you, do it. If not, don't.

~~~
Supreme
You do realise that you're doing something quite dangerous by turning to
dopamine-influencing drugs to motivate you, right? This class of drugs can
change brain structure, promote cancer growth and generally make you devoid of
emotion. At the very least, protect yourself with anti-oxidants and NMDA
antagonists. There are plenty of less serious things you can take/do if you
simply lack motivation. Exercise, cut out sugar and caffeine entirely and try
Noopept.

Also see:

* <http://www.nih.gov/news/health/feb2009/nida-02.htm>

* [http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2006/05/ritalin_causes_cancer...](http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2006/05/ritalin_causes_cancer.html)

* [http://www.cchrint.org/2010/11/15/adhd-ritalin-%E2%80%93-bra...](http://www.cchrint.org/2010/11/15/adhd-ritalin-%E2%80%93-brain-damage-heart-attacks-hallucinations-liver-damage/)

But for the love of god, think about what you are doing to your body. There
_are_ other ways, just look a little harder.

~~~
bennyg
He may be prescribed it. I understand your sentiment, but Ritalin may make him
take a shower and actually make the morning commute.

~~~
redthrowaway
Nothing at all like that. I was prescribed it for ADHD as a child. Now, I take
it if I'm cramming or spending all night in the lab. Generally, less than once
a week.

------
6ren
We have to mention the famous mathematician Paul Erdős
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erd%C5%91s>

    
    
      After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of
      whom bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month. Erdős won the
      bet, but complained that during his abstinence mathematics had been set back by a
      month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with
      ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly
      resumed his amphetamine use.
    

He also liked coffee.

Note: effective programming in the real world is absolutely _not_ the same as
mathematics - but some would argue that the essence of it is.

------
rbanffy
According to popular wisdom, "There are two major products that came from
Berkeley: LSD and Unix. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." It's, of
course, incorrect (<http://www.lemoda.net/people/jeremy-s-
anderson/index.html>), but, in any case, it's a funny one.

Now, on a more serious tone, a lot of programmers these days take some kind of
drug, be it to control their ADHD, Asperger and other assorted medical
conditions, be it to supplement something they think their brain is burning
through faster than our hunter-gatherer heritage made us budget. I have
noticed, however, some friends of mine who started taking ADHD medication
(Methylphenidate, the only ADHD drug approved for use in Brazil) that became,
indeed, much more focused and productive (amazingly so, sometimes), but that's
not a double-blind study.

It would be fun (if horrendously complicated) to design a good study for that.

------
meds_means_hide
LSD: I have found it possible to use it to gain insight. (Cisco systems had
some key person(s?) using LSD to design products.) The problem is that you can
trick yourself quite easily into "discovering" things which end up not meaning
much. So you do need some care, and perhaps someone to help guide you. For
beginners, I'd say LSD's bigger benefit is being able to reshape how you think
and handle life rather than understanding some new data structures. It's
definitely a "must do this at least once in a lifetime" type of thing.

Stimulants are fantastic. Amphetamines provide focus as well as a nice perky
feeling to keep you happy while coding. Ritalin (methylphenidate) works too,
but I find it harsher and not as pleasant as speed. As the name hints, it
makes you fast at things. Talking, thinking, calculating, coding. I notice
with Ritalin, doing mental math happens instantaneously - I surprise myself.
The focus can be a drawback: if you don't plan, you can end up focusing on
something "interesting" yet time wasting. So prepare your day, first.

Opiates (such as time release oxycodone) are fantastic for keeping optimism.
By keeping your mind in the right state, you can end up being much more
productive. Again, the benefit is the drawback: being overly optimistic means
your risk calculations and general decision management might be way off.
(Biggest downside here is addiction, but it _is_ manageable, at least if you
have money.)

Pot I've not found useful for much as far as work. I did try coding on it, and
ended up writing an infinite loop and thinking it was the coolest thing in the
world. Alcohol can sometimes be slightly helpful, in a similar manner as
Xanax; just by relaxing and getting one into a better mindset.

~~~
klibertp
> Opiates [...] (Biggest downside here is addiction

Dependency. Addiction is very similar for all the things you mention, physical
dependency is unique to opiates (at least in comparison with LSD, pot and
amphetamine).

------
noonespecial
I scale the Ballmer Peak on a regular basis. I've semi-scientifically mapped
out the exact amount required to get the desired effect. I've started trying
to plot the continuous consumption rate required to spend more time at the
summit.

I have spreadsheets.

~~~
jobu
In case anyone is unfamiliar with the "Balmer Peak" : <http://xkcd.com/323/>

For extra points, I would love to see your spreadsheet data plotted as a xkcd-
style graph ([http://mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/11350/xkcd-
st...](http://mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/11350/xkcd-style-
graphs))

~~~
patrickk
Does this actually seriously work? I've never tried coding while intoxicated,
let alone heard of the Ballmer peak till now.

Wonder what variables you would track? Type of drink, percentage alcohol in
it, how long since you last ate, how quickly you drink the alcohol, your
height and weight? Should there be a variable for being Irish (high tolerance)
;-) Last one was a joke btw!

~~~
redthrowaway
A couple of beers will definitely get the juices flowing, just as several more
will tend to obviate any prospect of productivity.

------
Zenst
Define better code. Code at that point/moment in time in comparision, maybe.
Code later on that is more robust and well documented so that others can
understand and change if need be better, probably not.

People say drugs help you do this and that, but over time you gain tollerance,
have downsides when drug wears off. So is this another tortoise and hare
comparision nomatter how it is thought thru.

Now if drugs help you to do what you can't, be it atheritis or the like, or
pain medication. Something that counters a condition you normaly have that
limits your abilities, then sure they do make better code. But as a rule it
has too many exceptions to make such a brash statement by using such a losely
drifined term as drugs in a title without better focus onto specific
groups/types/needs.

What goes up must come down, employers don't pay for your comedown, nor do
they pay for your supply, so beyond the offcie coffee or prescription mecial
needs. I'd say meditation and better mind focus and planning/whole mental
approach can do more for anybody to produce better code than any off the shelf
solution. On balance take the free coffee and run with it.

~~~
meds_means_hide
This comment reads as some general pondering about "no there's no way ahead
except hard work". Just because there are tradeoffs doesn't mean there's not a
clear advantage.

Thinking that humans have somehow evolved to behave at maximum performance for
engineering or software design is an odd belief.

As far as "it must come down, it can't last", there was a leader (for 10
years) of one of the world's top air forces that was a morphine addict. Using
"office coffee or prescription" is just a no true Scotsman argument.

------
getsat
Posted on HN 49 minutes ago, closed as "not a real question" 48 minutes ago.
Wow.

~~~
Bockit
> It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous,
> vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably
> answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it
> can be reopened, see the FAQ.

It seems pretty specific to me. If you have evidence, present it.

I can see an argument for it being too broad, but it saddens me that a
question such as this is closed when it has the potential to be very
interesting.

I suppose it also has the potential to devolve into a giant drugs flamewar,
which may be why it was really closed.

~~~
davidlumley
Ironically, if you posted the same question on stackoverflow you'd probably be
directed (or have it moved) to programmers.stackexchange.

Frustratingly, I can't find anything in the FAQ which would indicate why the
thread (and countless others) have been closed:
<http://programmers.stackexchange.com/faq>

Questions which are similarly open ended and perhaps more subjective are still
left open ( [http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/99445/is-
micr...](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/99445/is-micro-
optimisation-important-when-coding/99473#99473) ). If anyone has more insight
into how/why questions get closed on programmers.stackexchange I'd love to
hear it!

~~~
jamesrom
Power trip.

------
xutopia
That reminds me of the time I was taking pot while in college. During one
class I was completely zoned into the cursor and moved it back and forth 5-6
pixels across the screen.

My experience though it is anecdotal seems to rule out at least cannabinoids.

~~~
mistercow
Dosage is an important consideration, though. I know someone who used to use
pot as a programming aid, but he had to be very careful with the dosage. By
using very small amounts spread out over the day, he could maintain a flow
state that let him churn out code for hours and hours. He didn't find it all
that helpful for design and planning, but for large projects that involved an
overwhelming amount of fairly boring work, he found it to be a helpful tool.

The problem was that if he used too much, he'd be pretty much useless until it
wore off some. Smoking a plant is not exactly what you would call "precise
dosage administration", so this was a fairly significant issue.

~~~
damncabbage
flywheel has an interesting reply to this, but he has been hellbanned. Go to
your preferences and turn _showdead_ on to see it.

------
tokenadult
This question is basically a medical question, so it is best answered with the
principles of science-based medicine in mind.

[http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/about-
science-...](http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/about-science-
based-medicine/)

First of all, do we have a clear evaluation criterion for "better" outcomes?
If the question is about writing better code, is there agreement at the start
of an experiment about what "better" means? I'm not experienced in evaluating
software code (I'm much more experienced in evaluating psychological and
medical research), but it seems to me, from reading HN, that better code could
be code

a) that is able to pass all the unit tests with an earlier deadline,

b) that has a smaller total bug count when subjected to code review,

c) that solves a problem that other programmers in the same workplace didn't
solve until later,

d) that works around an intellectual property claim by a competing company
more convincingly,

e) that meets company stylesheet requirements more exactly,

f) that can be maintained by less skilled subsequent programmers,

and perhaps other criteria.

Any sound experimental study has to meet a lot of other criteria

<http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html>

to be worthy of believing, and in human drug studies the criteria include

1) sufficiently large sample size (n = 1 just doesn't do the job)

2) treatment-control design (so that some subjects of the experiment get the
drug, and some subjects do not)

3) double-blind administration (the subjects of the experiment should not know
if they are getting the drug, nor should the experimenters know which subjects
are getting the drug)

and many more, especially

4) rigorous statistical analysis afterward.

As Richard Feynman said, "The first principle is that you must not fool
yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very
careful about that."

<http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm>

So anecdotes along the lines of "I took this drug, and I wrote much better
code" can be completely discounted, because we don't have access to the
coder's before-and-after work product (nor to the coder's detailed dosage
history) to know what really happened.

------
antihero
Psh, anything that gives you a different perspective on life is important. LSD
gives you a vastly different perspective on reality, so I guess if you relate
that to life in a meaningful way, is fairly important.

------
fpp
A group of scientists from the University of Illinois at Chicago have shown
that moderate consumption of Alcohol may boost creativity.

... and there is of course the Ballmer Peak

<http://duvet-dayz.com/archives/2012/04/13/1199/>

------
dlazerka
And better music. And better paintings.

Many great people did drugs. But don't mess correlation with causation please.
Maybe great people are just more predisposed to drugs, while drugs actually
harmed them.

------
cynwoody
I don't know the answer, but I am reminded of John Markoff's 2006 book _What
the Dormouse Said: How the Sixties Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer
Industry_ [1].

If you've forgotten what the dormouse said, listen:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WANNqr-vcx0>

[1][http://www.amazon.com/What-Dormouse-Said-Counterculture-
Pers...](http://www.amazon.com/What-Dormouse-Said-Counterculture-
Personal/dp/0143036769)

------
abecedarius
Doug Engelbart took LSD. Probably other prominent hackers around there/then,
but I don't remember. (From Markoff, _What the Dormouse Said_.)

I can't answer about helping with coding.

------
sh_vipin
Question should rather be : "Should writing better code be a reason to take
drugs?"

For that matter, it's not the best code that makes a good product. A good code
is just part of it.

------
davidtanner
Insofar as programming involves problem solving I believe the answer is an
unqualified "yes".

In _The Psychedelic Explorer's Guide: Safe, Therapeutic, and Sacred Journeys_
by James Fadiman, Ph.D a chapter is devoted to discussing the results of a
study on the use of the psychedelic substance mescaline to enhance creative
problem solving.

[http://www.amazon.com/Psychedelic-Explorers-Guide-
Therapeuti...](http://www.amazon.com/Psychedelic-Explorers-Guide-Therapeutic-
Journeys/dp/1594774021)

This study was conducted at the Institute for Psychedelic Research at San
Francisco State University.

I'll quote at length from the book chapter: "The participants were 26 men
engaged in a variety of professional occupations: 16 engineers, one engineer-
physicist, two mathematicians, two architects, one psychologist, one furniture
designer, one commercial artist, one sales manager, and one personnel
manager."

"Nineteen of the subjects have no previous experience with psychedelics."

The subjects were selected based on their psychological stability and
motivation to solve a specific problem they had at work.

They met in small groups for several days before the psychedelic session and
were told what to expect and given instructions in the use of the drug-effect
for problem solving.

The subjects were given 200 milligrams of mescaline.

After six weeks the subjects were given questionnaires on how the effects of
the session had effected their ongoing creative ability as well as how valid
and acceptable the solutions conceived during the session seemed to them at
that time.

Some (but not all) examples of solutions obtained by the subjects under the
drug-effect:

* A new approach to the design of a vibratory microtome

* A commercial building design, accepted by the client

* A mathematical theorem regarding NOR-gate circuits

* Design of a linear electron accelerator beam-steering device

There are several tables full of numerical data. Table names include
"Application of Solutions Obtains in Experimental Sessions" and "Work
Performance Since Session".

My conclusion: Psychedelic substances can be used to enhance creativity - but
as always who is using them and how they go about it makes all the difference.

~~~
davidtanner
I just found a short essay by Benny Shanon,
<http://pluto.huji.ac.il/~bshanon/> , called Ayahuasca and Creativity.

<http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v10n3/10318sha.html>

Quotes from the above article that I feel are most salient for this discussion
of drugs, creativity and problem solving:

"As explained in Shanon (1998b), ayahuasca can also induce very impressive
ideations. It is very typical for ayahuasca drinkers to report that the brew
makes them think faster and better -- indeed, makes them more intelligent.
Several of my informants reported the feeling of potentially being able to
know everything; I too had this experience. While, this overall feeling is not
objectively provable, my data do reveal some ideations which are truly
impressive. Especially let me mention philosophical insights attained by
drinkers without prior formal education. Some of these resemble ideas
encountered in classical works as those of Plato, Plotinus, Spinoza and Hegel.
Significant insights are more likely to be encountered in domains in which
drinkers have special competence. Personally, with ayahuasca, I had many
insights regarding my professional field of expertise and to which, following
further critical scrutiny, I still hold. I have heard the same from other
persons."

------
knarfus
For me, "better" code seems to come from a combination of confidence,
creativity, and concentration (maybe not all at the same time).

I need a certain amount of confidence to go after a difficult chunk of work
that may not really lead anywhere or may turn out to be too big a task to
accomplish in the available time.

I need a certain amount of creativity to come up with new avenues to try when
I'm stuck on a problem or starting to brainstorm a new project.

And I need a certain amount of concentration to power through a hard coding
task (both to tune out distractions and to keep a lot of information in short-
term memory).

I have zero experience with hallucinogens, but my understanding is that they
can help immensely with creativity but are really lousy for concentration
(anyone care to chime in?).

Straight depressants don't really help me with any of the above, although I
gather some people get more confident after drinking. I tend to go straight
from "pleasantly unwound" to "I really need to get to sleep".

My experience with (legally prescribed) stimulants is that they're really
pretty great for confidence and concentration. I also find that being slightly
behind on sleep is less of an impediment to coding, and when I get into social
settings I'm much more engaged and generally better at interacting with
people.

The flip side is that I often can't sleep well, and I can rarely nap, so if I
get too far behind I end up clicking around the web like a zombie all day.
Paradoxically I'm a lot less _interested_ in socializing, even while I'm
better at it. All told I would say it's neutral to negative on creativity.

I'm also not totally comfortable with what effect five, ten, or twenty years
of daily use will have, and part of me really wants to maximize the portion of
my life spent without taking a pill every day. So it's a mixed bag.

------
lost-theory
I think stimulants and amphetamines definitely have an effect on programming.
Maybe it affects quantity more than quality, but Paul Erdos, one of the most
prolific mathematician ever, comes to mind:

    
    
      His colleague Alfréd Rényi said, "a mathematician is a machine for turning
      coffee into theorems", and Erdos drank copious quantities. After 1971 he also
      took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham)
      bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month. Erdos won the
      bet, but complained that during his abstinence mathematics had been set back by
      a month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled
      with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he
      promptly resumed his amphetamine use.
    

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erdos#Personality>

------
photorized
Define "better code."

There are medications that can influence focus, energy levels, productivity.

Problem is - we still don't really understand how the human brain works. The
implications of introducing outside chemical stimuli can be horrendous. You
may have noticed that big pharma companies are now focusing less on psych
meds.

------
tsotha
Real evidence would require a double-blind test, but there is already such a
large productivity difference between programmers you'd need a pretty large
sample.

And what possible metric could you use to determine if the code is "better"?
That's a really subjective thing.

------
Wintamute
Recreational drugs can certainly be part of a happy, functional social life
when used responsibly by people with non-addictive personality types.
Hallucinogenic drugs can give profound and life changing insight on your
mental processes, although YMMV. Coding while actually high will _not_ help
you produce quality software.

------
marcos123
In regards to the original question, Yes. Contrary to some peoples' beliefs,
experiencing new perspectives is good for learning, problem solving, living.
Francis Crick supposedly discovered the DNA helix while in the alternate
universe that is an LSD trip.

------
yaddayadda
Spiders not programmers, but definitely a graphic indication of ability to
create - or not - detailed patterns while on various drugs
<http://www.trinity.edu/jdunn/spiderdrugs.htm>

------
nostradamnit
Legend has it that Bill Joy created Vi while on LSD, or at least came up the
the idea...

------
31073
I'd suggest looking at the book Imagine by Jonah Lehrer. It doesn't refer to
coding specifically but he talks about ways to foster focus and inspiration.
The author looks in to all ways to get to these states of mind including
drugs.

------
PaulHoule
Drugs in programming, as well as other occupations, play an emotional role as
much, or more so, than a cognitive role.

If Habit A helps a programmer who'd otherwise be sidelined by emotional
problems stay in the chair, it may help that programmer be more productive
than they would be otherwise. Of course, addictions don't help us face those
problems in the long term, and often let them get worse.

All sorts of drug-related behaviors exist among programmers. Many shops full
of brogrammers celebrate beer o' clock at 4pm. Other programmers sneak out
alone or with friends at lunchtime to a bar or convience store to enjoy some
alcoholic drink.

Many programmers abstain from intoxicants at work, except for the common
stimulant caffeine. Others are hooked on opiates after being perscribed them
for chronic or acute pain.

LSD, even the weak stuff common in North America from 1970 to 2001, is
profoundly distracting. Years ago I ate a pinch of mushroom dust and found
that 25 minutes later, I couldn't keep my eyes straight to even look at a
computer screen. On the other hand, it's the only sacrament that's clinically
proven to more create spirtual experiences than a placebo -- the ability of
hallucinogens to create profound changes is practically unlimited.

Long before the statute of limitations, I once received a gift of several
dexedrine pills from a friend diagnosed with ADHD. I took one on the the first
day of a new project and felt euphoric. I wrote several hundred lines of
beautiful code that would serve the nucleus of a system that was planned to
replace critical functions of a production system that tens of thousands of
people depend on every day.

A week later I had a more sobering experience. I was tasked with upgrading
another production system, and with the dexedrine tab in me I felt cocky and
by 9:08 am I'd deleted the master instance of the production system.

I got forbearance from my co-workers because we had a backup ready, and a
tested restore procedure, so we had the system back in 13 minutes and soon
proceeded with the upgrade.

That was a portent of things to come. The project I was working on had no
project manager and a group of stakeholders that hated each other. I tried to
code my way of a difficult interpersonal problem and ultimately it all came
apart. A year later I deployed the new system with hardly any testing and of
course it didn't work. After a week of month of daily patches, each bug fix
breaking something else and spreading database corruption, we threw in the
towel and reverted to the old system.

My contract didn't get renewed at that employer the next year, and that was
the beginning of my being a "journeyman" as a mercenary maintenance
programmer.

Perhaps I shouldn't blame two amphetamine pills for something that was so much
bigger; but I like the story that the pills started the project out in a state
of spiritual misalignment. Had I listened to people instead of coding, things
might have worked out differently. I might even have quit and had an easier
time getting my next job.

Some programmers adocate nootropic drugs like Piracetam but I think those are
just as bad as speed. They mess up your reward pathways and make you feel like
you're Tony Stark but they don't really make you a genius.

I for one am addicted to caffeine and find it quite difficult to stop, even
though it screws up my digestion almost to the point where I throw up. It's
terrible, but at least I'm better off than the alcoholic and dope addicts I've
met.

~~~
001sky
Sobering reminder. Performance = output/time. so the timeframe is critical.
its trivial to increase productivity in the "short term". in ways that are
unsustainable (or: unhealthy). Exogenous modification of brain's chemistry is,
however, rarely healthy, over long-time-horizons. At least given the evidence
to date.

~~~
marcos123
Yeah, but when you think about, everything you put in your mouth is an
exogenous modification of, at least your body's chemistry, if not your brain's
chemistry.

We live in a world of gray areas, not black and white.

~~~
001sky
_but when you think about it_

There's sense, and common sense. lots of things in nature will kill you if you
eat them. lots of things in nature are unhealthy if you eat them in excess,
over the long run. phschoactive drugs? are no different, even naturally
occurring ones in food-like form. common sense and experience will illustrate
that your body is ~self-regulating. if you f@ck with it (too much), it will
f*ck with you back. =/

------
scotty79
This comes to my mind: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/22926987@N00/2198300/>

------
anonymous_mouse
Hearsay: During WWII the code breakers of Bletchley Park were provided with
benzedrine tablets.

------
photorized
The Jobs example was about vision, not "code".

------
simplexion
Yes.

------
drivebyacct2
Which drugs? I've been writing an application for 4-5 years. It's my "learn a
new language" project and it's pretty complex and I recently rewrote it and
exclusively worked on it under an influence of one or another of things, but
nothing like Adderall or Ritalin. I just finished the final version of this
project in Go and it is far and away the most readable, performant version
I've written. It's also the first version to properly protect against all
types of races.

------
ecliptic
Paul Erdos famously swore by their productiveness.

From Wikipedia:

His colleague Alfréd Rényi said, "a mathematician is a machine for turning
coffee into theorems",[31] and Erdős drank copious quantities. (This quotation
is often attributed incorrectly to Erdős,[32] but Erdős himself ascribed it to
Rényi.[33]) After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his
friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him $500 that he could not stop taking
the drug for a month.[34] Erdős won the bet, but complained that during his
abstinence mathematics had been set back by a month: "Before, when I looked at
a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank
piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine
use.

------
Supreme
Who wouldathunk that doing LSD could turn someone into a complete asshole with
no regard for an open culture and a penchant for superficial things which
don't matter in the least (like one button devices)?

