A Survey of Programmers' Cannabis Usage, Perception, and Motivation
arxiv.org
arxiv.org
So many people claim that Cannabis helps them sleep but the science just doesn’t support that idea.
Also it should be noted that this is not the primary reason for my cannabinoid use.
After many years of on and off heavy smoking, I would say that the best best practice is actually not smoking weed every day. I think there are some amazing benefits to weed, but for me they all but disappear with enough tolerance.
Smoking a gram or two would be enough to get a newbie high as hell for the entire day. For chronic users it’s more like a cup of coffee that wakes you up for the day. And in that respect, many chronic stoners are forever chasing that feeling of the first time they got high. You can feel that way again, just take a break!
Smoking some potent bud after a long break can be unpleasant, like taking big cup of coffee having no tolerance to caffeine. More likely to experience the negatives like anxiety, paranoia and confusion. The only upsides of low THC tolerance are some more intense spells of nonsensical laughter and things like “munchies” which were novel and fun things as a kid experimenting with a group of friends.
But that is quite different from what I enjoy most about MJ as an adult, which is more akin to adult enjoyment of caffeine. A morning cup of black coffee feels great because I have a tolerance, not despite it.
How do you define being addicted to it, what is your benchmark?
I smoked occasionally since my 20's and by occasionally i mean 3-4 times a year if even. then around 35 I started smoking on my own and it went from a puff or two at 9pm to help sleep to 3-4 j's a day. Like you I cant tell if it does anything any more. Likely I'm just giving myself lung cancer. And I too enjoy being intoxicated. my family is full of addiction so it figures.
Bottom line is YMMV and be careful with self medicating.
Do you prefer smoking over edibles because of the instant rush versus a slow ramp up?
Maybe you know me, you can check my profile, I've been in the "in" side of like... three? or maybe four? of this super-secret techie psychedelic ultra select clubs even involving VPs of unicorns and directors of tech companies and most of the heavy indica smokers also smoke nicotine like, a lot. Weed and tobacco are a very different thing as just smoking weed, on some cultures that smoke weed heavily like Rastas that's the more common method, like in a spliff or a blunt.
If you don't vape nicotine can I out of curiosity ask about your other super-secret habits? Because in my super secret extracurricular experience in this circles multiple time per year LSD trips and occasional cocaine binges are not unusual and both LSD and cocaine probably effect glutamate receptors in ways that I theorize help with the brain fog or fatigue that for some people regular weed use causes.
I just wanted to chime in and say that, for some people, THC+caffeine in the right settings can give you a nice hyper-focus. I wish I could use the combo more often.
Is it the caffeine gives you focus, but the THC removes the jitters and antsy-ness that goes along with it?
You won’t magically get the benefits being espoused, if that’s what you’re thinking.
Addictive habits form suddenly, but not immediately. Every drug requires a period of optional, regular, and increasing use before dependency develops. (Some, like nicotine, can have rapid dependency onset. Others take 6 or more months of intermittent use before withdrawal threatens).
This non-dependent yet regular use is usually driven by genuine (subjective) benefit to the user - euphoria or focus, amnesia or nescience, etc.
This is the essence of the word "drug": if inactive we say supplement, snake oil, homeopathic, etc.
Pharmacology _is_ somewhat magic - absurdly improbable in a way reality, and human endeavor, often is (see: organ transplants, the bioengineered mutant grass known as maize/corn).
I don't think this works for everyone but THC can help me focus in small amounts. The coffee (caffeine) is just there to keep you energized and going. I will also drink lots of water along with it. For me, caffeine actually makes me less focuses and more prone to anxiety, so it's for more of an energy kick.
Further down the this thread, there's mention of making you "dumber." Yes, that can happen if you take too much. I have messed up trying this method before on a weekend and wasn't able to figure out my own code so I just relaxed for a bit and came back later.
I like to say it's akin to some sort of alchemy. Need to find the right mixture for you and environment to work in.
Or so I assume, at any rate, based on knowledge of each drug's action in isolation. I had a heavy cannabis habit back ages ago, and kicking it cold was really one of the best decisions I've ever made - of all else in my recollection, the only thing comparable in terms of immediate cognitive and emotional improvement has been beginning APAP treatment for obstructive sleep apnea. Given that I'd be very wary of self-reports of the benefits of heavy cannabis use - after all, I thought for a long time it was helping me, too! - but I suppose I can see why folks who do choose to indulge might choose also to pair cannabis with coffee.
Smoking definitely helps me reach a deep state of focus but unfortunately it's fairly brittle (cars idling nearby, other subtle things can be really distracting) and requires a long period of stage-in if I haven't worked on something for a while (I have little long-term memory for code details).
so, a day in remote-meetings can be quite nice high, a complex migration hardly..
€dit: could we pair our experiences with our "handed"-style? i'm strongly lefthanded. i have a theory, with left handeds the possibility is higher to the "logical stuff does not work anymore" component than for righthandeds
When I'm high I can follow the instructions so hard that I won't notice a person standing next to me addressing me by name.
0: Very good logic game on steam: https://store.steampowered.com/app/736260/Baba_Is_You/
I've fortunately only had a few of my friends succumb to addictions, but it was surreal to watch them remain convinced that the drugs (including alcohol) were actually helping their performance, relationships, and productivity while everyone around them could clearly see that the opposite was happening.
One of the most striking examples is benzodiazepine abuse. Benzos famously mislead users into a false sense of sobriety even when they may be so inebriated that they struggle to accomplish basic tasks.
Within the tech scene, I've also noticed this with LSD microdosing. The few people I know who (openly) tried it were convinced they were smarter and more productive while microdosing, but it was objectively clear to everyone else that they were thinking more slowly, generally more confused, making more mistakes, and so on. The difference is that the drug convinced them that everything they accomplished was a wonderful achievement that made them happy, which led them to perceptions that they were accomplishing more on those days.
I see similar trends in acquaintances with excessive marijuana habits: A general belief that the drug is helping them do more of the things they want to do, but they're clearly doing very little on the days they smoke. Obvious from the outside, hard to see from the inside when your perceptions are being bent to extremes.
It’s well known that many of the greatest rock bands, highly productive mathematicians like Paul Erdos and comedians like George Carlin found great benefits in the disciplined use of mind altering substances. Not the addictive side which he regretted but the occasional one as a creative boost. Steve Jobs swore that it changed him. Not that it was perfect but he himself claimed it played a pivotal role in shaping him into the unique person that he was.
There are peer reviewed studies that show that psychedelics are among the most effective tools for treating depression. ADHD medication is prescribed quite often today and it’s a game changer for many people.
This is not without its dangers so proceed with caution and have other people in your life to check on you often. But let’s not deny the enormous power.
Why should some stimulants like caffeine or alcohol be permitted for responsible use while others have to be kept away ? Many of them are less addictive than either.
And besides far beyond any argument about utility it’s also one about aesthetics and spirituality. It’s an entire new dimension to the human experience.
If you don’t have a good track record of practicing moderation then stay away.
Prior discussion on Erdos, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2497420
https://youtu.be/nCGGWeD_EJk?t=6m50s
I understand the comment thread you are responding to is lumping many psychoactive substances together, but the authors of the posted study were careful to distinguish this.
I think Paul Erdos' stimulant usage has been blown out of proportion. According to his biography, he took "10 to 20 milligrams of Benzedrine or Ritalin" ( https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/first/h/ho... ) which is, believe it or not, lower than a lot of people's commonly prescribed ADHD doses today. Erdos also published a lot of his best works before taking up non-caffeine stimulants, so it wasn't exactly the driving force behind his productivity.
Anyone using Erdos to justify an excessive or non-prescribed/non-medical stimulant habit has misunderstood the history.
> Steve Jobs swore that it changed him.
Steve Jobs was also famously terrible to everyone around him and died prematurely because he firmly believed he could cure pancreatic cancer with an all-fruit diet. Which of his properties are we to ascribe to the mind-altering drugs and which are we to overlook?
Again, using Steve Jobs to justify drug consumption (or anything, really) is missing the point that he was a unique person.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-gates-once-coyly-defende...
The truth is far more nuanced. Like I said no one will openly admit to this as it sets a risky example for others.
From various experimentations over the years, the only drugs that make a real positive difference in my cognitive function are caffeine (in large doses) and alcohol (in small to moderate doses).
In programming terms, I think it's great for refactoring, or let's say working through a bunch of corner cases on some weird business data you have to parse, and terrible for learning a new framework or implementing something new you where you need to read several articles about something and combine them into a coherent plan.
Maybe creative technical problem solving it has a benefit. However, from listening to interviews from successful comedians, there are many that express that worry about not being funny off weed, and it rarely if ever works out that way so I’m the “it likely has no to mild negative effect” on most (but not necessarily all) creative problem solving
Spend some sober hours wrapping my head around some new concept (e.g. programming pattern/paradigm or theory topic) or just reading a large codebase for the first time. At a certain point, my brain is just “done”. Then a small toke of some good weed with the intention of checking out and relaxing. More often than not, the effect is the opposite: the complex material i had spent the previous hours analyzing starts to piece itself together in new ways and my energy and interest in the task is restored to 100%.
While it may not be the right time to hammer out a complete implementation, it has often assisted in that crucial step of “getting it”. This happened for me often with topics that require a new perspective e.g. vector calculus and functional programming patterns
Edit: for reference, I am a heavy user (typically on 2+ doses/day), with occasional long breaks of weeks/months. I believe “tolerance” plays the dominant role in programmers’ experience with this. After a month long break, there is NO way I’m able or interested to work with complex systems of any sort when under the influence.
If I have to develop (or much worse, alter) abstractions that make use of generics and OOP I do not feel productive at all. I get very confused, easily. (Though I often power through it just fine)
I do not smoke during business hours while working on client systems however, that does not sound appealing at all.
I have used cannabis extensively on personal projects for inspiration and to make easy but mundane programming tasks interesting for motivation. Refctoring is very boring sometimes, and getting high can keep you focused on how nice it will be to complete it and get to the end result. I often am able to uncover a bit of fun in the refactoring process after smoking.
My personal projects benefit from a pattern of: program for an hour or two (completely engrossed), short video game battle or two, smoke up a bit, program...repeat. I can chew through a tremendous amount of work in a five hours (measured by git commits and the complexity within those commits) that would easily take me weeks in a corporate setting. The pattern or rythum triggers "flow" consistently.
I know the domain very well, so it's like the SME or product owner who is also an experienced developer just cranking shit out. I work with a visual designer for the UI which lets me play around with different concepts very quickly. I just iterate very quickly in code and in the UI, expressing myself...it's more art than science.
I may plan to do something, and then sit down and get interested in a totally different feature...it is very important to do the thing that thrills me in the moment. It increases quality and ideation momentum.
I can't do much of anything that requires concentration once I put my three kids to bed. The nights that my wife is out give me a lot of sympathy for single parents.
(But I will admit that there are times that I've had to just wait until the effects wear off.)
Must be the drugs.
Maybe I'll just assume you were high when you wrote that comment.
Most of the time getting high is a good way to get ideas for what personal project to work on next.
Late at night is the only time I can get any deep work done.
I have since then, done the following, found a special zone/cabin and started to make a list when I go to this cabin. This has helped on tasks that I like to do (like designing and programming) but I still have to slog through other tasks (making presentations and writing pointless documents) in the late evenings.
The guide that helped me was this : https://adhdatwork.add.org/adhd-accommodation-guide/
I also never put slack on my phone, and use the snooze functionality.
Usually you can make the time if you really want to.
FWIW, I find that if I have a boring task and attempt to use cannabis to power through it, half of the time I complete the task with vigor and then other half of the time I do literally anything else. So my story is as similar to yours as those saying that cannabis leads them to be anything but productive.
I have to keep self medicating I guess.
I NEVER do it during work or when I have to drive.
I started smoking weed when I was 16. I remember it was New Years day and the cool older kids from the nearby city took a liking to me and offered to smoke with me. We all got high, and it was extremely fun. Still friends with those people today. They all did quite well for themselves.
It was my rebellion growing up in a small town where there wasn't really much to rebel against. I had good parents and a good family. Little did I know my dad was also toking...
Then I went from my small town to the big city for college, and life got really hard. I didn't have the money to pay for weed anymore, and my mental health wasn't great due to all of the stress of college and work, so I stopped for around 6 years.
Then, about 3 years ago, I moved to a state where it as legal, and the first thing I did was buy some weed just to have the fun experience of purchasing it legally. And I smoked it. And I discovered something!
It wasn't just youthful rebellion, or following along with the cool kids, or anything like that. I actually really enjoy the feeling of being high! It makes me feel calm and relaxed.
And that is a good thing! Doing drugs is amoral[0]. There is this puritanical vein through US society that altering your state of mind, and making yourself feel good is a BAD thing. It even extends to coffee and caffeine sometimes.
But altering your state of mind is not inherently wrong! Clearly, it can sometimes be used as a crutch for avoiding other pain in your life. I am sure we have all seen it. But the same can be said of video games, and television, and even exercise when overdone. If it doesn't have any other effect on your life, doing a drug is fine.
- 0: Legal, not funding drug lords. I avoid illegal drugs for this reason.
I hate to break it to you...
[Edit: it's best if I expand this comment. The people who currently sell "legal" weed whitewashed illegal operations and coordinated it with lawmakers to put them at the top. Chinese, oddly enough, play a big part at this, since we're on an anti-China bend right now it might be useful to know. This whole legal drug thing... no, it doesn't exist. Anyone thinking otherwise needs to get a wake up call. You're supporting massive drug lords that wear suits and work alongside law enforcement.]
People find this surprising, but they've never stopped to ask themselves where did all that weed and infrastructure to grow it suddenly spring up from the moment it was legalized.
Same with the meat packers, the fruit pickers. Same with the people working in all of the factories and shipping plants and driving the trucks. The invisible labor we are all surrounded by every day that touches literally everything I can see right now, aside from the tree outside my window.
And all of the money I spend inevitably trickles upwards to people who are going to use it to do things I consider evil like destroying our natural world for profit.
But! That is not a problem I am going to solve over-night. I can try and tailor my consumption to products that I vet and are hopefully more ethically sourced than alternatives. Even doing this is of questionable utility.
“No ethical consumption under capitalism” and all that.
Do you have more information on this nefarious China-sponsored drug supply-chain?
(you can probably search for better articles, here is one I just found)
Lots of areas (like here in Canada) have well regulated, legal Cannabis businesses. The product even goes through thorough testing procedures [1]. As far as I can tell, it's a very similar setup to alcohol related businesses.
I would love to see a source on this supposed Chinese involvement. This sounds like some early 1900's opium den stereotyping to me.
So Heineken, big tobacco, folks behind the opioid crisis, Wells Fargo, etc?
Surely they're more effective than cannabis, which typically makes everything feel great, but in a sober frame of mind, and on hindsight, seem trivial and over-hyped when sober.
I've tried various nootropic 'blends' (stacks) over the years and they've all been great. Cannabis has its uses, like experiencing the various vibes and feel of a new city for the first time, or making a snowman when it's snowing, but it's not some panacea that makes you super-productive.
Not saying nootropics are a panacea either. You have to have the base multiplier before using nootropics, and already be in a flow state before getting any leverage from them. They don't automatically make you more productive or creative.
I think the other problem with cannabis as a workday desk-job productivity enhancement substance that you are not mentioning is its interaction with other drugs and the unpredictable and really deep tolerance buildup. Like giving an average someone a curve of how much they need to smoke to get the same "effect" among weeks or months is probably really hard.
still take some of course, yolo
Wow, That seems so high. I don't know anyone in my circle of friends who was drug tested. Although, we are all on the west coast.
Not new.
These days it’s 50/50 for me. Depending on how conservative the corp culture is. But I work in finance and could literally embezzle their money. I’m actually surprised when i don’t get drug tested.
Most regular smokers I know just use fake piss to get around it.
How can anyone who has tried it remotely believe this nonsense?
As someone that is a heavy longtime user and recently diagnosed ADHD (there is a deep relationship between cannabis/substances and ADHD), I did find during the pandemic that smoking cannabis prior to writing software made it feel more productive. Given I couldn't prove that I was really more productive, and there are other costs, I decided against using it at least for my full time job. This is all to say, YMMV with cannabis or any psychoactive substance.
Not something I do often (or even occasionally), but I definitely don't think it's nonsense.
I'd be skeptical of a programmer who claimed cannabis made them more productive, especially at high doses, but if I could see that their work were consistent and good, I might believe them.
Thinking "this drug makes me useless hence it should make the rest of the world also useless and any claims to the contrary are nonsense" it not only a blatant abuse of incomplete induction, but also kinda rude as it can make some people feel othered out just because of how their brain chemistry works.
Sometimes I get lost in the programming equivalent of throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. After some time with no progress in figuring out what sticks, it’s time to step away from that approach.
I don't smoke daily. I use it as a tool because I found it helps me when I am semi-manic and just trying to get something to work. I step away from the keyboard and spend time thinking about how to architect my code so that it is easier to write and understand. I'm sure other people do that without smoking, but it's been a big help for me to do that more often.
Contrary to the notion that you can think about great ideas and brainstorming - it’s amazing when you’re high. Write down those ideas and think about them when sober - I quickly realized how foolish they were.
Concentration and programming is so far from my experience (and others that I know), I absolutely cannot believe this study. Couldn’t even stay motivated to go take a shower. There has to be a study that matches my experience. What’s going on?
I hear people talk about it like it's a miracle drug for pain management, but for me it makes pain worse. I spend the entire time focused on every pain in my body.
I knew a guy who concentrated on problems and coded better when he was stoned. Another who was an amazing chess player and had to smoke before he could play. Others who mixed records and played music while high and it enhanced their abilities. I tried to DJ techno once while high and it was a horrible trainwreck, and I can't focus more than 30 seconds at a time. I wrote a paper in university while high and it was the worst crap I ever wrote. Others swear by it.
Many of my friends were super social and enjoyed going out and doing things. It always made me paranoid, overly self-critical, and I spent the whole time taking myself apart and feeling sad.
So I didn't smoke it for almost 20 years. I tried it again recently now that it's legal here. Basically the same experience, even with "low THC, high CBD" strains.
It really comes down to YMMV. And yes, I saw many people with the same experience as you, including a close relative. Unproductive, unmotivated, and low concentration, and chronic.
But I also never really stopped smoking and learned to use it to cope with a multitude of things like migraines and sleeplessness.
In the end it often comes down to the person and their reactions to a substance more than the substance itself. I can smoke and melt on the couch or I can smoke and go for a long walk and decompress.
What do you not believe about the study? Did you read the study?
> In this paper, we presented results of the first empirical study of cannabis’s prevalence, perceptions, and usage motivations in programming environments
I don't think this study says "weed makes you better" or anything like that.
In my (speculative) opinion, it's not "societal pressure" but rather "capitalism pressure" narrating the recent weed uprise. As in, the opportunity to capitalize on weed has been pushing the narrative that it's a harmless cool drug.
The risks of heavy cannabis use are well documented and easily available to those who care to research it. For example, try CTRL+F "cannabis" on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia.
Once again, just like alcohol and tobacco, capitalism wins over public health.
Others who are not as thrilled with consuming food and media to begin with will have different cannabis experiences. You'll probably find them exercising, making art/music, or creating software like mentioned in the article.
I'm sorry if this offends you, but your statement might say more about you as a person than about the effects of cannabis.
It’s pretty well known that marijuana helps to boost creativity; just look at all the music (and media in general) that’s been created by musicians high on pot.
Arguably, it’s effects have not been studied as well as regular drugs so perhaps that’s needed to make more objective statements about its effects.
Also going to add that the time-dilation effect of marijuana will definitely make you feel less productive but you will realize only 1/3 of the time you thought passed has passed. I'm sure this might play into some of the findings.
Tricky memory stuff, trying to deal with complex order of operations (threads, race conditions, etc) tends to go way better sober.
House keeping like light refactors (im in rust these days so stuff like: oh that should be a result not an option, or using matches instead of ifs, genericize this struct), boiler plate stuff and cleaning up logs/error handling tends to go better when I'm high.
But there are exceptions to both trends and I've done good deep work high and done plenty of good housekeeping sober. And of course since it's coding, i've (re)done plenty of bad work in both states too.
Sad to know my experience is just nonsense. I guess I need to get in touch with the CFO and let him know the profit from the product I wrote is just a pipe dream.
I have absolutely had profoundly productive days while using THC. It's not black and white. Like any tool, it needs to be used responsibly.
The recuitment basis for the survey is not random and is only amongst a very small subset of candidates the authors considered "ethically permitted" (specifically from GitHub, the University of Michigan and social media). So probably few enterprise programmers and few non-US participants, etc.. In other words not the majority of programmers.
"We now present indirect evidence that our participants, while not a random sample, are similar in many ways to previous random samples or studies. A true random sample would not have been ethically permitted, but we gain confidence in our results’ generalizability by contextualizing participants’ gender, age, and employment. ... our study population by recruitment pool (e.g., how they were contacted to participate in this study)... from GitHub ... from the university ... and social media" - page 4, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2112.09365.pdf
A more meaningful lead-in survey would have been to ask programmers from all sources if they are subject to any form of drug-testing.
Perhaps they should have selected a less clickbaity title for their study:
A Survey of [Ethically Permitted USA] Programmers' Cannabis Usage, Perception, and Motivation
Doesn't stop me though.
As a weird side-effect it occasionally makes me want to work more, because an idea will hit me as I'm high. 50% of the time it's actually a really good idea. The effects on creativity are so apparent, I never would have guessed before trying it.
I'm very diligent with not partaking during normal working hours though, my worst nightmare is having to debug something time-sensitive while high... it absolutely does not seem like a good time.
I'm more inclined to believe that Ballmer Peak[0] is a real thing and I do get productive, motivated and creative when I'm slightly drunk.
Back in the university, one night when I was lonely and bored I just got enough drunk to code a Facebook app that will give invitations to invite-only shopping startup using my referral. By the time the sunlight hit me, I was finished reverse engineering their invite system, write a code that will generate the invite, design the UI where people will request the invite, write the copy that promotes it, integrate all that into Facebook app(at that time FB was cool), post it to the social media. Not the biggest engineering or creative challenge but I was first at it.
When I woke up, my app was all over the social media, the founder had me added as a friend and invited me to their office. Lifted my max invitations limit and I made quite substantial(for a student)referral bonus and kept spending it for years to come.
There's also the possibility that different people are affected differently, and maybe you just prefer alcohol to marijuana ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There are many stories about how people invent things when slightly drunk at the bar and write it down on a napkin.
I've gotta ask: how do you know you haven't yet? Not everyone who is high loves to announce it to the world.
Common misconception. Find vaporization people!
But I’m very interested to see if low dosages help.
I learn languages in very much sober place, but learning linux I can be stoned, and maybe it helps?
Also if your in this space at all, you just need to modify Hemingway's advice: commit stoned, but rebase sober!
Taking the edge off is a strategy that works well in moderation since often procrastination is a phenomenon where fear and anxiety can be inhibiting.
Stigma is one of the reasons experimentation has such a bad rap.
edit: originally omitted “something else”
I’ve heard it’s very useful for extremely traumatic or temporarily stressful incidents but I found the opposite for chronic stress.
Also puts me in a really bad mood the next day - short tempered, even aggressive.
On rare occasions it does help with brainstorming, looking at things differently. But mostly it's good for forgetting about your day and just going to bed.
Despite the above, personally I have a hard time justifying getting "high on the clock" as ethical even if it makes me more productive in some things. Though it feels like having a little puff on a wide-open, set-aside Friday afternoon isn't too much different than having a drink in that situation, something I'm occasionally guilty of. IDK. What do people here think?
The same argument applies to alcohol, but I've noticed that cultural expectations around drinking are a lot different. A "business lunch" with a beer is no big deal in many (most?) industries. But I've never been at a business lunch where everyone passed around a joint!
Is it your view that cannabis is a federally scheduled drug for ethical reasons? Or is your view that it's always ethical to follow laws as written? I guess what I'm getting at is that to me there doesn't seem to be any good ethical reason for cannabis to be a federally scheduled drug in the first place. In fact, given the devastation the war on drugs has caused, it's my opinion that it's unethical for cannabis to be a federally scheduled drug.
Perhaps I could approach my employer and explain actually getting high makes me more productive, but I have never had the courage to start such a conversation :)
I've basically stopped doing weed altogether though, except on holidays and vacations when I really feel comfortable forgetting all responsibility for awhile.
I'm in a someowhat rare position of wanting to consume (and particularly smoke) more cannabis, especially during the work day, but I refrain because of the "anxiety" or "paranoia" it causes.
I use quotes because these phenomena aren't precisely anxiety or paranoia, and after-the-fact, I'm almost always thankful for the reflection that they provide.
Has anybody found a way to increase intake and keep it regular over the long-term amidst these pain points?
The catch is that I take frequent breaks. My current rule is, for every session, I have to go one calendar day without using it at all. This also keeps my tolerance low, so I only use about a gram a month.
What? 29% ... seriously? That's outrageous.
Interesting there is so little research into the actual *effects* on humans. You get better data from Leafly reviews!
Just as congress prohibited the government from maintaining statistics on gun violence almost 20 years ago.
If you don't like what might be learned, don't let anyone look.
(I don't like smoking pot, or really any mind altering substances, but other peoples' use is none of my business and I think it is worth a study).
I imagine that this will always be true, because what you want to know about the effects is inherently qualitative and subjective, and that kind of research gets relatively little attention and funding.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pot-smoking-motorist-not-guil...
From everything I've read about him, the guy was a hell of a character and maybe some of his misfortune was self-inflicted, but he did fight some important court cases around marijuana laws.
The survey also asked for detailed demographic data (well enough to de-anonymize IMHO) -- age, gender, income, field, highest degree...
The link to the form to enter the drawing for $100 gift cards at the end was also dead (https://twitter.com/remram44/status/1379071856326684678)
Not to put the results into questions, only to echo the recent Princeton mishaps I guess.
Selection bias.
How much does a Senior Engineer doing something like writing kernel code have in common with a fresh high school grad writing on something like a single threaded ASP/PHP codebase for an internal tool that has fewer than 100 daily users?
I've done both of those jobs, and they both involve the same set of general tasks (requirements, brainstorming, coding). But in actuality they have almost nothing in common. The fact that both involve writing code is mostly a red herring.
More to the point: is a convenience sample taken by a university research group representative of the profession?
I'm generally suspicious of Emperical SE research that doesn't either:
1. focus on specific sub-populations of the programming profession, or else
2. make an extremely strong case that their research questions are highly likely to generalize across all research labor.
(edit: changed wording because many folks made the worst-possible interpretations of my original comment.)
Well, it's a profession, so yes.
> They have almost nothing in common.
They both write code all day. Professionally.
I'm sorry for the snark. You might be able to make a case that this study doesn't take income into account but that's not the comment you're making here.
There is merit to the idea that different developers focus on different kinds of problems, but the positioning of the parent comment - that this variance is due to the size/prestige of the org - is incorrect.
Meanwhile over in embedded I'm writing highly performant const-correct modern asio C++ applications requiring custom kernel drivers.
Parent comment had the nerve to imply that I'm not even a true programmer. None of this shit makes any sense anymore, I can't wait for the bubble to pop.
That wasn't my intention.
> Fresh grads with experience only in Java at $FANCY_CO outearn me by a factor of 2.5 because they get on the web/app track.
1. In fact, my example of "less complex job" was "web dev".
2. Most fresh grads doing web dev make $55K or so. The $FANCY_CO engineers are an outlier. And, FWIW, within those companies, the low-level C++ people tend to make a lot more than the fresh grad web dev people.
It's missing things like licensing groups to limit the supply of labour. Similarly, while some programmers are highly educated, plenty are self taught or started working after a couple weeks of boot camp.
What word would you prefer to use to refer to the group of people who get paid to program?
> Well, it's a profession, so yes.
I meant from a scientific perspective. I.e., here's the point: "can we lump all programmers together, randomly sample, do a correlational study or survey, and draw conclusions about the underlying population?"
I assert that such studies will generally fail to replicate and will mostly tell you about the properties of a skewed convenience sample.
> They both write code all day. Professionally.
You could say the same thing about people who work in hospitals. Or people who work in offices. What's the difference between a novelist and a listicle author? They both write all day, professionally.
Heck, what's the difference between a journalist and a lawyer? Again, they both write natural language all day. Professionally.
And sometimes you can do studies that generalize. But, generally speaking, an empirical study about what makes novelists productive won't necessarily tell you how to make legal clerks more productive.
It's not income. In fact, I didn't even mention the salary of the senior engineer in my hypothetical! $FANCY_CO was supposed to be a sign-post for difficult problems and/or complex politics, not compensation. (The $10/hr web dev does sign-post the complexity of the work, and wasn't meant as a hyperbole... I started my career making $10/hr doing PHP dev for local businesses. It was really easy work. Requirements were simple, code was trivial, and there was never more than 1 counter-party. The job was low-paying for a reason.)
It's the type of work. I've done a lot of programming, of lots of varieties at nearly all pay scales. Here are some buckets:
There's a lot of programming that is easy and mechanical (at all payscales). There's a lot of programming that is extremely complex and requires intense symbolic/mathematical reasoning.
There's a lot of programming where the code is simple but you need to think long and hard about some complex technical topic separate from the code.
There's a lot of programming that is extremely social and requires an incredible amount of intentional interaction with customers or internal stakeholders.
These are the same job in the same sense that all medical professions are the same job or all people who write natural language all day have the same job.
There is a strong relationship between pay and the degree to which an inebriating drug would impair your ability to perform well. But it's of course not a perfect correlation. Some highly paid people do trivial work. Some low paid people do complex work.
It’s unclear what kind of point you’re trying to make and how it had any bearing on the cannabis angle.
Sure. Also, any job that requires writing English all day has some cross-cutting fundamentals.
I'm making a general point about empirical software engineering research: "does the question that's being asked get at the fundamentals that are shared between all programmers, or do we need to be more careful about specifying what we mean when we say 'programmer'?"
> It’s unclear what kind of point you’re trying to make and how it had any bearing on the cannabis angle.
I could probably do the "$local_shop web dev job" high all day. Not probably. I definitely could write straight-forward iPhone apps or Django web apps all day long while high as a kite. No problem.
I definitely couldn't do other programming jobs high all day -- either because I need to spend a ton of time in careful conversation with other people, or because the technical problems require sobriety, or more usually a combination of both.
Apparently the basic observation that some programming is easier than other programming is divisive here. That's fine for an HN comment thread. But I'd love to see a paper that goes something like "here are some buckets of programming jobs. Let's try to replicate a bunch of empirical SE studies with samples selected from each of these buckets and see what happens."
It’s easy to find easy programming work in big shops, and not uncommon to find hard work in small shops.
As I said in my previous comment, there is absolutely a difference between different kinds of work.