5 ms·

I disagree with #1. Not entirely but it is about perception. Working an extra 10-20 hrs a week for free in return for a chance but no guarantee of a vouch is in

I disagree with #1. Not entirely but it is about perception. Working an extra 10-20 hrs a week for free in return for a chance but no guarantee of a vouch is in itself a bad deal. So while you may have reasons for working long hours, hoping someone has your back is not a great one. Unless you have known them since you were 8 or something and even then.

pokstad 2y ago
It’s called hustling. Not everyone makes it, but putting in extra effort improves your odds. It’s pretty amazing to me that this is now considered controversial.
- codethatwerks 2y ago
  Given you are happy to work say 60 hours a week, what is the optimal use of the extra 20. For some it might be free work for their employer in return for something. Example might be in financial trading etc. to get a bonus or raise or promotion in a shop that is killing it. For some it might be leetcode and reading everything on levels.io and teamblind. For some it might be active investing for example property renovation. For some a side business. For some TOGAF and Scrum qualifications. But remember 1000hours a year is a lot to bet on your company or colleagues vouching for you and being in a position where that matters. Etc.
  - antisthenes 2y ago
    > But remember 1000hours a year is a lot to bet on your company or colleagues vouching for you and being in a position where that matters. Yeah, at 50/hr that's $50,000 for a chance of someone vouching for you in the future that may never come to pass. There's also the chance that maybe they were the manager that made you work 60hrs in the first place, so they don't see you as going above and beyond. Whoopsie, you just wasted 1000 hours of your life. No thanks. I'll get the job on my own merit.
    - axpy 2y ago
      You do you but don't complain if you end up having a harder time during economic downturn. Everything in life is about risk-reward and going the extra mile is about tipping the scale in your favor. To be fair, don't think op advocate for putting 60h every week. It's about being passionate about what you are doing and sometime just being available for your coworker outside of working hours can be enough. In my professionnal career, it was fairly obvious which colleagues was more than just clocking in and who I would be happy to recommend or hire on the spot.
      - ghaff 2y ago
        It's really not about the hours. It's getting the job done and helping out etc. I've gotten every job in a long career post-school through my network and I've never worked more than ~40 hours except in specific situations. I agree with the other comments. I am flexible and generally available but that doesn't mean I'm working ridiculous hours. I guess that means a certain discipline in that regard.
      - antisthenes 2y ago
        > You do you but don't complain if you end up having a harder time during economic downturn. Everyone has it hard during an economic downturn. Ugly people also have it harder, so do shorter and dumber people. I don't find this exercise of comparing myself to others helpful. Despite having good feedback for my work, it doesn't really grow my network. > who I would be happy to recommend or hire on the spot. Yeah, assuming you don't have any biases and are a perfect judge of who's doing a good job. That's omegacap as the young kids say.
- nytesky 2y ago
  My perception of hustling isn’t about long hours, unless those are hours hanging out after work building relationships. It’s more about making your self visible for the work you do, being memorable in a positive way, maybe helping people who in a way that leaves an impression. Working late to deliver one day early, no one is going to notice.
financypants 2y ago
There’s a good paper on how effective networking and “weak ties” is for getting a job. It’s silly that this person is blaming AI resume parsers. https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4865899/mod_resource/content/0/The%20Strength%20of%20Weak%20Ties.pdf https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4865899/mod_resou...
zer00eyz 2y ago
If you have a job and they are hiring. Two former colleagues come in. Bob: he comes in, he does his work, he goes home. He's a good productive developer. Jane: She comes in, does her work, it's always documented and well tested. She is happy to roll up her sleeves and help the people around her out. She will pause to help you even if it means she gonna finish up at home. Your boss asks you: Your call who do we hire. You're not fucking picking Bob. Dont be Bob.
- ptero 2y ago
  This is not nearly as clear cut. In the real world, Jane has a much higher chance to burn out. Or mess up the team, as everyone now wonders if working long hours is Jane's peculiarity or the new normal. And if this makes people explore other options you always lose the best folks -- those who have opportunities in any market. While I would agree with a softer form: "don't be a 9 to 5 clerk, do what is needed, including occasional long hours and weekends", if someone needs to regularly stay late it's a problem with the management, not with the Bob. My 2c.
- mrmuagi 2y ago
  Where do you draw the line in not being exploitable though? Why wouldn't you hire someone who does all your work for you then it feels like the next question is. When there's a scarcity in job openinings compared to applicants, sure one of those might be chosen, but in a regular job market I feel like both should get hired.
  - zer00eyz 2y ago
    >> Why wouldn't you hire someone who does all your work for you then it feels like the next question is. Yes, this is why people start their own companies, and cash out. >> Where do you draw the line in not being exploitable though? Boss makes a dollar, I make a dime, that's why I shit on company time... as the old adage goes. The reality is that giving you a job only works if the company makes money off of what you do. If it lost money or broke even that would not be worth it. You're always being "exploited". If you want to feel equal, there are plenty of companies that are collectives (mondragon look it up). I have a few projects going on right now that are structured like this. If one of them "takes off" it's a very even distribution for all involved as long as they are working there. The beauty of capitalism is that if you hate how companies are run you can and should go run your own with the rules you want. If it was very equal, then everyone is incentives to go above and beyond... your still not gonna hire bob!

pokstad 2y ago

It’s called hustling. Not everyone makes it, but putting in extra effort improves your odds. It’s pretty amazing to me that this is now considered controversial.

codethatwerks 2y ago
Given you are happy to work say 60 hours a week, what is the optimal use of the extra 20. For some it might be free work for their employer in return for something. Example might be in financial trading etc. to get a bonus or raise or promotion in a shop that is killing it. For some it might be leetcode and reading everything on levels.io and teamblind. For some it might be active investing for example property renovation. For some a side business. For some TOGAF and Scrum qualifications. But remember 1000hours a year is a lot to bet on your company or colleagues vouching for you and being in a position where that matters. Etc.
- antisthenes 2y ago
  > But remember 1000hours a year is a lot to bet on your company or colleagues vouching for you and being in a position where that matters. Yeah, at 50/hr that's $50,000 for a chance of someone vouching for you in the future that may never come to pass. There's also the chance that maybe they were the manager that made you work 60hrs in the first place, so they don't see you as going above and beyond. Whoopsie, you just wasted 1000 hours of your life. No thanks. I'll get the job on my own merit.
  - axpy 2y ago
    You do you but don't complain if you end up having a harder time during economic downturn. Everything in life is about risk-reward and going the extra mile is about tipping the scale in your favor. To be fair, don't think op advocate for putting 60h every week. It's about being passionate about what you are doing and sometime just being available for your coworker outside of working hours can be enough. In my professionnal career, it was fairly obvious which colleagues was more than just clocking in and who I would be happy to recommend or hire on the spot.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      It's really not about the hours. It's getting the job done and helping out etc. I've gotten every job in a long career post-school through my network and I've never worked more than ~40 hours except in specific situations. I agree with the other comments. I am flexible and generally available but that doesn't mean I'm working ridiculous hours. I guess that means a certain discipline in that regard.
    - antisthenes 2y ago
      > You do you but don't complain if you end up having a harder time during economic downturn. Everyone has it hard during an economic downturn. Ugly people also have it harder, so do shorter and dumber people. I don't find this exercise of comparing myself to others helpful. Despite having good feedback for my work, it doesn't really grow my network. > who I would be happy to recommend or hire on the spot. Yeah, assuming you don't have any biases and are a perfect judge of who's doing a good job. That's omegacap as the young kids say.
nytesky 2y ago
My perception of hustling isn’t about long hours, unless those are hours hanging out after work building relationships. It’s more about making your self visible for the work you do, being memorable in a positive way, maybe helping people who in a way that leaves an impression. Working late to deliver one day early, no one is going to notice.

financypants 2y ago

There’s a good paper on how effective networking and “weak ties” is for getting a job. It’s silly that this person is blaming AI resume parsers. https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4865899/mod_resource/content/0/The%20Strength%20of%20Weak%20Ties.pdf https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4865899/mod_resou...

zer00eyz 2y ago

If you have a job and they are hiring. Two former colleagues come in. Bob: he comes in, he does his work, he goes home. He's a good productive developer. Jane: She comes in, does her work, it's always documented and well tested. She is happy to roll up her sleeves and help the people around her out. She will pause to help you even if it means she gonna finish up at home. Your boss asks you: Your call who do we hire. You're not fucking picking Bob. Dont be Bob.

ptero 2y ago
This is not nearly as clear cut. In the real world, Jane has a much higher chance to burn out. Or mess up the team, as everyone now wonders if working long hours is Jane's peculiarity or the new normal. And if this makes people explore other options you always lose the best folks -- those who have opportunities in any market. While I would agree with a softer form: "don't be a 9 to 5 clerk, do what is needed, including occasional long hours and weekends", if someone needs to regularly stay late it's a problem with the management, not with the Bob. My 2c.
mrmuagi 2y ago
Where do you draw the line in not being exploitable though? Why wouldn't you hire someone who does all your work for you then it feels like the next question is. When there's a scarcity in job openinings compared to applicants, sure one of those might be chosen, but in a regular job market I feel like both should get hired.
- zer00eyz 2y ago
  >> Why wouldn't you hire someone who does all your work for you then it feels like the next question is. Yes, this is why people start their own companies, and cash out. >> Where do you draw the line in not being exploitable though? Boss makes a dollar, I make a dime, that's why I shit on company time... as the old adage goes. The reality is that giving you a job only works if the company makes money off of what you do. If it lost money or broke even that would not be worth it. You're always being "exploited". If you want to feel equal, there are plenty of companies that are collectives (mondragon look it up). I have a few projects going on right now that are structured like this. If one of them "takes off" it's a very even distribution for all involved as long as they are working there. The beauty of capitalism is that if you hate how companies are run you can and should go run your own with the rules you want. If it was very equal, then everyone is incentives to go above and beyond... your still not gonna hire bob!