http://henrikwarne.com/2014/12/08/5-reasons-why-software-dev...
In contrast doctors and lawyers don't even have this kind of memory load. For example, medical records are mostly sufficient; we often understand if a doctor has to look things up; however, if a programmer doesn't remember how a program is structured, things get difficult quickly.
But the point I want to make is that while I agree that many software engineering jobs are like this, they don't have to be: A well-structured agile project where tasks are properly broken down into sufficiently small units, you can generally achieve a kind of closure at the end of the day (tests are green, code is pushed, task is marked complete) that would allow you to reduce the memory load significantly.
It's no small feat to successfully structure a process like this, and it definitely requires the support of the wider org, but know it can be done, because I worked on one. It was super-pleasant and rewarding.
Lawyers take their work home with them every day. They never have any rest at all, because they have to respect certain deadlines and they have multiple clients breathing down their neck. Next to that, there's also the question of morality: Sometimes a lawyer has to make immoral decisions to get the right outcome. This is especially true in penal law.
Doctors have to face the consequences of wrong diagnoses. If one of the patients dies because of an error the doctor made, you can be damn sure he'll carry that mistake with him for the rest of his life. Not only morally, but also legally and it could be a possible career killer.
Programmers have it the easiest, they only have computational problems to worry about. While programming is without a doubt strenuous on the mind, it is by no means affected by morality and therefore incomparable to practicing law or medicine.
Part of doing tough complex things is worrying if you are making the right decisions. If a patient dies inappropriately, that can be career ending. If my server crumbles or leaks private information, that too can be career ending.
But if you had a database of 1000s of people with STDs, how many lives might get destroyed if that got hacked?
But how long does each case take?
> Doctors have to face the consequences of wrong diagnoses.
I found this:
> Medical misconduct is defined as behavior that deviates from duty by a healthcare professional. Examples of medical misconduct include, but are not limited to the following: practicing as a healthcare professional fraudulently, practicing with gross incompetence or medical negligence, practicing while impaired by alcohol, drugs, physical or mental disability, being convicted of a crime, filing a false report; guaranteeing that treatment will result in a cure, refusing to provide services because of race, creed, color or national origin, performing services that are not authorized by the patient, harassing, abusing or intimidating a patient, ordering excessive tests, and/or abandoning or neglecting a patient in need of immediate care.
It is a bit more subtle, but it seems that if doctors just follow the book, they will be fine.
My personal experience with doctors is that they always have to look my data up. Every time I visit one, I hear: "let's see what case we have here" (and looks at computer screen).
If a doctor doesn't feel event the slightest twinge of regret or "what if..." when a patient dies, even if they did everything perfect, they very well may be a sociopath.
I don't think they should be wracked with guilt for years, not at all. But we're not just talking about legal repercussions. The cognitive load of someone dying while directly under your care has to be staggering.
2. Medical misconduct as defined by law, with some examples included (a non-exhaustive list). What is your point with this? That article is purportedly vague so that medical accidents could be judged on a case by case basis. In other words, if the opposition has a good lawyer, you're screwed.
And you're forgetting the point of my post. Even if the doctor didn't do anything wrong legally, he'll still be haunted by the loss of a patient if he could have prevented it somehow.
His paraphrased response:
I appreciate it, but I'm in the office regardless so I'd rather keep on top of all my clients' correspondence at the same time.
--
I occasionally have a cigar with a coworker of his in another department (how we got the referral originally), and his plans the last time we were out at approximately 4 PM on a Sunday was to head back for the office "for a quick 5 or 6 hours."
They're both newish associates so I'm sure they're trying to make an impression, but the hours attorneys put in is often staggering, especially at the lower end of the corporate ladder.
The mental burden of knowing there's an opportunity cost for going to the bathroom or taking a 15 minute break during the day looks so terribly draining.
Our associate billed $185/hr. His boss (Partner and in charge of the biz group) billed $345/hr.
The firm is not going into the red because the associate goes #2 and doesn't bill the time. And at 90+ hours a week their future at the firm is not going to hinge on that amount of billed time.
an immediate family member is a prosecutor. as a software engineer who loves hard problems and agree that few professions rival the mental strain of holding that problem in memory, but i can attest as to just how strong the parallels are between trial prep and architecting complex technical solutions. I can't speak for doctors, but the mental models required for non-trivial jury trails could rival those i've encountered during my career as a software engineer. one could probably even argue the analogy the lead prosecutor is a backed developer building system of arguments for logic meeting definition of law, ensuring redundancy and failover in event of error condition (new evidence, evidence struck, motions, etc), all while playing role of pm+designer creating the interface delivering accessible content in a way meaningful to the user (jury). again, i can't comment on other professions, but capital cases were the closest thing i've seen to hours/stress/effort of early stage start ups--with the difference being failure meant you live knowing a murder/rapist walked free, instead of a shitty exit or returning to a "boring" enterprise job.
and then there's the imprint left once the project/trial is over. over the years, i've noticed that interesting/hard problems (the ones we dream about) tend to leave an imprint on my thought process on how i view complexity (e.g. the world). except for us developers/engineers, we just carry some vignette of organizing complexity, instead of being haunted by nauseatingly detailed accounts of how some asshole murdered his wife and children, or other sickening acts that prosecutors, cops, journalists, etc are required to become immersed into the details of.
now that i think about this, it's almost funny how easy we engineers/developers/designers have it.
It wasn't that I wanted to do it, but I had to have a job to support my family. Needless to say, I quickly found another job.
My father was a career ER doctor. He would not do it again because of the toll it took on him. It was very hard and demanding work physically and mentally and spiritually. Treated patients did get brought home as a load on the memory in his mind.
Even now, over 10 years into retirement, there's a weight.
plus think about how hard it is to program for edge cases (vs well-defined inputs). In a legal document, clauses are only 'executed' in edge cases.
wacky right?
This term is too broad and so is misleading.
There will indeed be programmers in the future but, more to the point, you will not be one owing to ageism.
For example, if you hire a guy that doesn't know your JavaScript framework and build system, is that distinguishable from hiring a guy that doesn't even know JavaScript? From what I've seen, introducing an experienced engineer to an alien framework is just as difficult as hopping languages (that being, specifically: measurable, but not terrible, and as such you shouldn't discount someone for one but not the other).