You don't have to be a passionate programmer | Hacker News Reader

You don't have to be a passionate programmer

codewithoutrules.com

32 pointsitamarst18 comments

I feel this article is confusing "passionate" with "willing to work crazy overtime", or "lacking any hobbies beside software". I would argue that most good programmers _are_ passionate about what they do, in the sense that they enjoy their work and care deeply about the quality of the work they do. They genuinely find fun in solving problems and writing code. This, to me, is on an independent axis from "amount of life-time consumed by coding".

I agree. But I think in this industry those two items are generally what employers mean by "passionate".

"Passionate", "have a GitHub profile," etc. are all signals that an employer wants someone who's life is consumed by coding and, ideally, coding for them (while being willing to tolerate tedium or terrible working conditions).

I think a lot of people confuse passionate with "coding during your waking hours." I would say I'm very passionate about the code I write and enjoy solving problems, however I barely do any coding on my own. I've had prospective employers turn me down (probably) from my lack of a repertoire of side-projects. When you commute 2 hours each way to work, go to work 6 days/week, and have a family at home there's a point when I prefer to just relax instead of code. I don't know how to convey that though.

If you are not passionate about programming, you must keep looking for your passion. And take calculated risks. Life is too short to waste on doing something you don't love. Until I discovered my passion in electronics and programming, I hated going to school and consistently underperformed. Later I did better even at unrelated areas

Being a passionate programmer does not always translate well into regular programming jobs. I love programming but the processes and bureaucracy at a job always came in my way. Of course, some of the processes are necessary - but I am not passionate about processes. When my manager asked me to develop a cool-new-complex-feature-in-bleeding-edge-tech in 72 hours straight, without paying for overtime - I didn't care about overtime or insane work-hours. That kind of insanity is possible when one is passionate. However, if that happened frequently, I'd fire the company.

And you are absolutely right - most companies that look for passionate programmers are just looking for unpaid overtime from less-experienced programmers. Companies looking for "Experts in XYZ" are much better.

Sorry don't buy passion in work arguement as an absolute.

This seems to be such a US-centric view. When doing business in US I notice typically usually within 10min of meeting a new person they tell you how they love their job. It feels like something Americans have to prove to show their worth to their company/role.

I like to think I'm good at my job but I dont have passion. I'd prefer to be out hiking, speding time with the family etc. But I have a sense of pride in getting results and doing things well. I see people who go down the passionate route, while effective in some areas blind themselves in others where they fail to see the bigger picture outside their passion area. Passion can be good, but it can also be damaging and should not be treated as this absolute requirement.

"If you are not passionate about programming, you must keep looking for your passion."

Where exactly is this rule writ? It's certainly a dominant current myth, but it seems to me to be responsible for a lot of dissatisfaction and the occasional success.

There is no preestablished harmony between the individual and this particular temporary political economy. The latter may or may not provide the facilities to indulge an individual in their "passion" (if they have one, which again isn't foreordained).

By all means if you can work at something you love, why wouldn't you? But most people probably never will, and to expect everyone to aspire to being exceptional is a demonstrated recipe for disaster.

Not all passions can be monetized enough to live on, though.

For example, I may be passionate about making music, but I'm not passionate about living on a musician's income. I'm not passionate about managing a social media presence and constantly touring around the country in a van. I need some amount of comfort and stability in order to be happy.

So I work as a programmer and make music for myself in my spare time, while being able to have a family, take vacations, and save for a house and eventually retirement. You can think that's sad if you want, I don't care.

Itamar. Great post. Given that work occupies a large majority of our lives, one should strive to be passionate about their work. That is the global ideal (global over the lifetime of a person). The local reality is that not all jobs throughout a career can sustain the same level of passion, and recognizing that goes a long way towards reconciling those periods of monotony. The post is applicable as well if one is working in a field that they have mentally exhausted but cannot yet afford to leave, or else in a new field for which passion can take time to build. Either way, both mentalities are important as long as people are not using their lack of passion as an excuse to slack off or deliver substandard work.

Want to kill a passion? Turn it into a job.

Love playing video games? Play them competitively, or play as a QA tester.

Love working with wood? Add in deadlines, the overhead of running a business, and build what other people want built.

Love programming? Go work for a company who will throw so much process, politics, and idiotic requirements at you that you want to pull your hair out before writing a single line of code.

The whole notion of being passionate about a skill or industry without any context regarding means or ends is odd to me. It's like saying you should be passionate about banking. Sure, maybe, if you're helping people purchase a home or save for college or whatever. No so much if you're participating in ripping off poor people or just participating in a soulless gambling contest. Anyone who makes simplistic arguments with no reference to reality is either a lazy thinker or actively trying to take advantage of you. Why listen to them?

You really don't need to be a passionate programmer. However, passion will bring you much further when you have to work on something that's boring, tedious, or has no real end in sight.

I've never understood this attitude. Passion doesn't necessarily bring anything to the table here for everyone. Persistence I think is the word you're actually looking for.

For example, when I was in grad school my passion for the subject actually nose-dived as the quantity of tedium and endless iteration increased. It wasn't passion that carried me anywhere then. It was simple determination.

Persistence and Passion - both have value and both might result into the same thing

Passionate person's approach: > I'm looking for something I don't know. > This framework I read on HN looks cool. I have a busy day, but let me put aside my boring work and try this new framework > Let me create a NN in my own way -just for fun. I know libraries exist, but I still want to do it my way. > I'm bored - let me check HN (I don't remember that I checked it 30 mins back) > I wonder that I work so long and hard, but I don't achieve anything concrete (Scattered energies) > I reached goal XYZ because I was trying this and that. And then the dots connected and I had this eureka moment. And now I have 10K users (accidentally)

Persistence approach: > This is the goal I want to reach (The goal could be learning a new thing) > This is the plan that I need to follow. Or experiment with another plan if this doesn't work. > Don't reinvent the wheel, use the resources available (exception: re-inventing was a part of the goal) > I need to read HN twice a day and see if something I can add to my learning/todo-list. > I need to stay disciplined even if I don't like it (Focused) > I reached goal XYZ because I planned and strategized for acquiring 10K users.

Combination of both is necessary. Throughout my career, I have seen persistent people achieve more often. However, if passionate people achieve something it is significantly larger win (amidst very low probabilities)

Passion and motivation don't cut it. They get you a foot in the door. But when everything has worn out, it's discipline that does.

You don't have to be a good swimmer in the ocean either, but if you have a specific goal, you might not reach it without. As an engineer, you have to have the passion to keep learning so, despite the confusion introduced by the (almost ephemerally tiny) article, I'll just disagree with the title on its face.

The "passion" thing is not unique to the software industry. David Mitchell had a very good take on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz2-49q6DOI

Agree with the post. But if you want to be amongst the best programmers, being passionate about your craft is a necessary condition.

Why is finding a good tech job like navigating through a maze these days?

You have to watch out for the most esoteric of traps.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com