Hacker News Reader

That's interesting, because I remember David working like a dog on Rails both before and after it became popular while also working on your applications. Sounds workaholic to me, so why didn't you fire him?

Nope, he had only 10 hours a week to build it, and he made the Rails framework so he would be able to speed up development and meet the deadline.

The one thing that is constantly overlooked when it comes to the practice debate is the reason why they were working hard in the first place. It is rarely a case where two competing parties just put out x amount of hours on practice just for the sake of working hard. It is often the case that the person putting in long hours really love what they do and want to get better at it and hence they practice. The long hours is just an after thought.

And the Google had the better idea argument makes very little sense. In hindsight of course their idea was brilliant but in the beginning they were the only ones that believed it and as a result worked hard for it.

Lets find some people in the tech graveyard that felt they were working on a bad idea for 80 hours a week.

But then I'd say "fire the workaholics" is still silly. Fire the unproductive workaholics.

Sure, there are workaholics who don't get anywhere, but that's a minority. Maybe it's common in SV though :/

>> "I run into people all the time who are putting in ridiculous hours and getting no where."

Were they not productive, or did their idea stink? A ton of the startups that get investment are just really bad ideas IMHO. Why didn't they recognize they weren't getting anywhere earlier, and make better decisions? Why didn't they change their idea, or the things they were focusing on?

Building stuff takes hard work, and sometimes crazy hours. If you're not being productive, then stop wasting time, but if you are able to put in more hours than the competition to beat them, it's going to pay off. Be a productive workaholic.

Google/Yahoo/Apple/etc just wouldn't have been built if people hadn't put in crazy hours. Same is true for most large companies.

I would say that yes, Google had a good idea, but they would not have succeeded without crazy hours. You need both.

But I also think Jasons point about "simple software" was valid. 37Signals is all about simple 'lite' software that solves the basic need, rather than taking on the massive hard problems, and that seems to be more why there's the 'do less' stance.

"Sure, there are workaholics who don't get anywhere, but that's a minority."

I don't agree that the majority of workaholics are successful. My experience has revealed that the majority are tired, frustrated, and stressed out. And those who work with them feel the effects too. Workaholism isn't a smartbomb, it's a dirty bomb - the fallout is often widespread.

While everyone's definition of successful varies, burnout, frustration, and stress are easier to spot. Just ask the people around the sustained workaholics - they have the clear picture.

And just like any addiction, it catches up with you and destroys you or those around you. Maybe not right now, and maybe not in short spurts, but sustained workaholism will do its damage.

"But I also think Jasons point about "simple software" was valid. 37Signals is all about simple 'lite' software that solves the basic need, rather than taking on the massive hard problems, and that seems to be more why there's the 'do less' stance."

It is true. We solve problems with simple solutions. That is a conscious decision. It's not because we can't solve hard problems, it's because 1. we believe most of the problems people have are simple problems, and 2. we're not interested in solving really hard problems. We'd rather solve simple problems really well, profit handsomely, and get a good nights sleep.

Lastly, I don't believe there's more glory in solving hard problems than solving simple problems. The glory comes from solving real problems. Simple problems are just as real as hard problems.

I would post an insightful comment on this debate, but I think you summarized it perfectly.

Workaholics can take it too far, and often do. Solving real problems--small or large--is virtuous. 37signals has an amazing approach, as do companies which are in dogfights with competitors and need to burn the midnight oil for a sustained period of time.

different situations call for different strategies. This debate is long overdue and I'm glad we are all having it.

That's the point, isn't it? You tried to make it in the interview but you didn't do it as successfully as you did right there.

If you're in a dogfight with a company that's A) taking funding in exchange for a minority stake or B) willing to have a whatever-it-takes development cycle, and they're executing as smartly as you are, then you have no choice.

If you want your product to succeed in the marketplace and you can't outsmart them, then you need to decide if you'll let them win just because they're using more horsepower.

Good call there Jason. Because you don't always get the choice about the dogfight. Sometimes the fight finds you.

I agree with you on many things, but your stance on "workaholics" is not one of them. Often "working a lot" = "workaholic". I'm not talking about people that are addicted to work and follow the same patterns of other addictions. That's rarely the case. I'm talking about the people that enjoy working because it isn't like "work". Why should they be made to feel bad about it? The workaholics you speak of (that get burnt out) generally have motivations beyond enjoying the work. They are trying to "get ahead" or make more money. What if you actually like your "work"?

Some people like to knit in their spare time. I like to code and do things that resemble work to many people. Maybe I'm not in the majority, but I refuse to believe that I would be happier or healthier if I went on a hike instead.

>> "And just like any addiction"

shrug I think most workaholics are workaholics because they enjoy their work.

I've also been told that heroin is enjoyable- but that's no excuse for that addiction either.

Heroin is extremely detrimental to your health.

I read quite a lot of autobiographies (business people, media), and pretty much all of them involve obsessive hard work. That's kinda why they're successful.

Not that I'm putting a stake into either side of this debate, but workaholism is clearly also extremely detrimental to your health; there are ways to abuse drugs while being careful about your health just like there are ways to work 70 hours a week and still take care of yourself --- it's just that in both cases people rarely pull it off.

Heroin is actually not that bad for your health per se -- it's the stretching agents that'll get you.

The tech graveyard is full of overworked, tired, run-down, exhausted people who put in more hours than their bodies could handle. I run into people all the time who are putting in ridiculous hours and getting no where.

Academia too.