

From disgruntled developer, to founder, to burnout - zidar
https://medium.com/lessons-learned/26d8e1c9b6ec

======
jes5199
This is what happens when you think that a programmer's job is to create code
- you type and type and type and just get buried in the complexity and things
get worse and worse.

A programmer's job is to understand problems. A programmer's job is to think
clearly. The code is incidental. If you think clearly about the problems, you
will _need_ less code, and gradually things will get _simpler_ \- I've seen
code-bases that actually _shrink_ as they gain functionality.

The only good thing about programmers who spew code all day without thinking
is that they create jobs for good programmers to come and clean up their
messes later.

~~~
yardie
There are still far too many companies that use LOC as the benchmark. It's
similar to basing productivity based on the number of browser tabs you have
open.

------
jtreminio
> Offices showered in natural light. Large windows overlooking a lush green
> park, playful decor, walls covered in old design projects, sofas in the
> lounge, shelves full of books on design and marketing. A relaxed culture.

> Nobody had any real idea how programmers function. How we think, how we
> work, what we need to feel productive. For a long time I was the only
> programmer on the team.

This isn't pointed only at you (although you triggered it), but really, do we
_have_ to use words like "terrible" to describe our lives as developers?

We sit in a comfortable chair, hitting keys on a keyboard and get paid much
more than the average American salary. Is that such a huge sacrifice? Unless
you're going home with just barely enough to feed yourself, with a beat up
body, then your job is _not_ terrible. It may not perfectly fit your
sensibilities, but talking like this makes you seem like nothing more than a
pampered baby.

~~~
knieveltech
I worked in the trades (carpentry, roofing, ironwork) for years before I
switched careers and became a programmer. The biggest adjustment for me was
learning not to cringe whenever one of my coworkers goes on a hyper-entitled
rant about working conditions or how our codebase and our company is archaic
and shitty because we aren't using <insert latest flash in the pan technology
here>.

~~~
JanneVee
There are working conditions within software development we can complain
about. Starting of with people thinking just because it is not physical labour
we can work much longer hours. Yes up to a point we can work a little longer.
But if people get sleep deprived then you might as well have free beer instead
of sodas in the fridge. Just google "sleep deprivation drunk equivalent" and
you will find a bunch research.

~~~
knieveltech
Spend 10 hours in front of an industrial milling machine cranking out
identical bars for cable trays, or my personal favourite, the epic 22 hour
weekend roofing job in 95 degree heat. Just for laughs imagine your skillset
isn't particularly in demand and the reality of your situation is you do this
shit day in and day out or you're homeless in a matter of weeks.

Sure, there's stuff that crops up in our industry that royally sucks (game
industry crunch time comes to mind), but it's relative, and given the amount
of demand in the market for programmers, one could argue voluntary.

~~~
JanneVee
Yeah, the decision to apply myself to learn programming was a couple of days
in plastic factory. I never wanted to do that work again. Yes sometimes
programmers complain like spoiled brats. But I've heard a couple of complaints
and have had a couple myself that aren't in the spoiled territory. (and I
admit I've complained like a spoiled brat myself a couple times also.)

------
kingj
It's one thing to, as the founder of a startup, pour in 50 - 60 hours a week
into your baby -- but it's another thing to routinely expect your team to do
the same. Additionally, crunch-weeks should start to become less frequent as
the startup moves from early stages to later stages.

I would argue that the ideal case shouldn't even expect hired work to put in
substantially more hours than a "normal" job with an established company
(e.g., 40-50 hours) -- hired work should just be expected to be better than
the average candidate at those companies, and able to contribute in the team
sport of startup creation and growth. If you want to argue for a hidden catch,
then yes -- maybe at startups there will be a higher incidence of crunch-weeks
where the team will be required to pull longer hours to put out fires -- but
this shouldn't be the "norm".

At the end of the week, you're going to need enough time to recuperate and
rest. Routinely working 10, 11, 12 hour shifts is just a recipe for burning
out yourself and, maybe just as importantly, your team. When you think about
it, a ten hour shift is like going to work at 8AM, staying until 7PM (with an
hour for lunch) -- then when you factor in getting to work and getting home,
you're talking about getting 2 - 3 hours of "free time" each workday, which
you can devote to breakfast, dinner, and getting ready for bed. Making that a
twelve hour shift just makes it two hours worse.

And if you want to talk about incentives, expecting employees to pour in 60
hours a week is the equivalent of essentially paying them 33% less "per hour"
than whatever they're already getting. And 80 means that they're working for
half-price. Factoring that in with whatever [potentially] fraction of a
percent of equity that the employee will have by the time of acquisition (or,
if you're really lucky, IPO) -- and that employee may not even be coming out
ahead financially -- and that's assuming that the startup doesn't fail
beforehand.

Maybe this means that I'm a shitty startup employee because I don't consider
forcing employees to spend 80 hours a week to be the right way to run a
company, but I'd rather pass on that particular opportunity and keep my
sanity.

Anyways, just my two cents.

------
fro
In the description of the book the author is pushing, I find this sentence, "A
popular trend is to get up at 4am and get some work done before the day’s
craziness begins. Others like going to bed at 4am."

Do real, professional programmers work this way? It is romantic to think of
hacking away in front of a glowing screen at 3am, but I believe most work gets
done during the actual work day. Often hacking at night means you are writing
code but not making progress, which seems to be the problem with this
"disgruntled developer".

Set a schedule, start working in the morning and stop working in the evening,
and your sessions will be much more productive and produce higher quality work
than these late night, crazed, caffeine-fueled sessions.

~~~
greenrice
There seems to be a certain aspect of the night owl that is present in many
programmers, I for one am far more productive in the late-afternoon and
evening than I am in the morning. Setting a morning-to-evening schedule isn't
going to work for a lot of us.

~~~
hackula1
> There seems to be a certain aspect of the night owl that is present in many
> programmers

This seems likely and could be attributed to the fact that we receive above
average artificial light from staring at screens too late into the evening.

------
timje1
It's funny, the process this writer describes - you get frustrated with a
company, go off and build your own, and then don't realise that what you've
built is just as atrocious to work for..

I feel like many of the people that split off to start their own companies
can't really build something better - all they do is reproduce the same bad
work environment, but with them in the dictator seat instead of someone else.

------
robodale
replace disgruntled with whiny.

