Side projects are like children | Hacker News Reader

Side projects are like children

ryanwaggoner.com

36 pointsryanwaggoner21 comments

If side projects are like kids then i'd be dragged away by social services by now for total neglect of my 30-40 kids.

I feel like I did a bad job of explaining the core of my analogy, which is that creating a child or a side project is easy and fun, but they're potentially with you for a long time, and thus deserve careful thought before starting.

Maybe use tattoos as an analogy instead.

There's an inverse correlation between the numbers of tattoos you have and the amount that you care about getting another, though...

On second thought, maybe they are a good analogy.

Nah it was a good article, like Kliment said, tattoos are probably better, but i got what you meant.

Mine are more like frozen embryos. Hopefully I can find a surrogate for a few of them.

As someone who has had the same attitude in the past, working full-time on one thing at a time that eventually went nowhere, I'm beginning to think of side projects as insurance.

Perhaps it is more fruitful to think about how to work more efficiently in the present and track potentially good ideas for the future, than to keep throwing them away.

This is how I previously thought, but I've since reconsidered. The reason is that you can't split your attention between multiple projects without a loss in overall efficiency. The amount of attention given to each of n projects isn't 1/n, but rather 1 / (n^x), where x is some measure of how bad you are at multitasking. For me, I think x is probably somewhere around 1.5, so if I have three projects, I end up giving each an average of 20% of my full attention. The remaining 40% is lost to the ether due to distraction, task-switching costs, and not having one project constantly be the main thing on my mind.

As a result, increasing diversification results in a lower overall expected value of your projects, because you're losing more and more of your productivity to efficiency losses.

We might be thinking of different time-scales. I've probably never worked on more than one thing on any one day, but if I had to do the same thing every day for more than a month I'd be bored and dragging my feet eventually.

I like the fish analogy better. Feed a little bit everyday. Don't be afraid to flush 'em and get new ones.

Does this come from something you read? I really like this analogy, though I still think focus is really important.

Came from a startup discussion I had a long time ago. We were talking about Google's 20% idea.

I find comparing side projects (something of which we grow bored with a large percentage of then abandon) to children moderately disturbing.

You mean children aren't something that you can selectively nurture or neglect, at a whim, until one of them becomes a rock star and pays your bills for you?

I get the gist of the article and can appreciate the message. I fall victim to this spawning of many projects that I can't dedicate the right amount of time to and they get some traction, but never really see the light of day. I'm my own distraction at times; the latest idea takes away from the original one...rinse and repeat.

I've recently realized this about me and started down the track of trying just to focus on one or two projects and put the right resources behind them. This is a recent "a ha" moment, so, we'll see how it goes. Good article!

The core assumption here is that the projects are a means to an end, where the end is likely one of the "Three Ps:" Power, Prestige, or Pecuniarum.

Side projects are also like plants in your garden. Some people enjoy the gardening for its own sake, and yes that means they are going to make a lot less money than someone who ruthlessly weeds out anything that isn't going to grow into a massive oak.

p.s. FWIW, I think of side projects as attempt to answer questions. I stop work on them when I think they've gone on long enough to find the answer.

Has anyone ever considered selling their side project?

There is a market here. It is easy to see it from the point of view of someone working on small side projects around their full time job. The profit of the side project is not worth the time invested in it, and killing it is the best course of action. But you have all that sunk cost (time more than money) and no way to recoup it. Wouldn't you take a few thousand dollars to sell it off?

And on the other hand, if I were to buy up 5 or 10 promising side projects and run them concurrently full time, I might be able to lower costs (economy of scale) and extract some greater value from each one and the profit will be greater than the sum of its parts.

I wouldn't kill or sell my children, but I definitely did so for side-projects. As well, children don't bring me money (at least currently), whereas the projects do.

That said I really like considering both as organic: you plant seeds, take care of them and they hopefully grow.

My side project scratches my own itch. There's no way I'd want to kill it.

One drunken night and you're stuck with them for 18 years?

from what I can tell, side projects are much better than children! :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com