Hacker News Reader

I think it's exactly the same thing as coffee, and it's not a medical condition at all.

Coding really IS naturally boring and mind numbing. That's neither your imagination nor subjective experience. No one ever steps through a series of break-points in a debugger, or skims through 1,000 lines of log output, and thinks: "YEAH, MAN! THIS IS REALLY LIVING!" It pretty much requires an altered state to enjoy this stuff.

I think the truth is that modern society measures "success" in radically different and totally unnatural ways now.

Look back at history, and there's a famous correlation between the introduction of coffee, tea and chocolate to Europe, and the age of enlightenment. (https://encrypted.google.com/#q=caffeine+enlightenment+histo...)

The reason pills are used on kids is because they won't reliably drink coffee on their own. Meanwhile, many parents won't subject their kids to substances other than normal, healthy food, unless they're comforted by rational, selfless purpose. Without an appeal to authority, in the form of a soliciting a qualified doctor's auspicious opinion, parents would just let their kids be kids.

The industrialized world is obsessed with abstract achievements, and rigid behavioral norms. Most people have a hard time resisting the trend, and sometimes do so at their own risk. All of it is artificially tied to quality of life (more than survival) by social pressures, so it's not so much survival instinct, so much as it is envy or maybe a desire for inclusion that drives the behavior.

It's not the drug that's demonized, but the fact that it has become a prerequisite for staying competitive and Keeping Up With The Joneses, so to speak.

Coding really IS naturally boring and mind numbing. That's neither your imagination nor subjective experience. No one ever steps through a series of break-points in a debugger, or skims through 1,000 lines of log output, and thinks: "YEAH, MAN! THIS IS REALLY LIVING!" It pretty much requires an altered state to enjoy this stuff.

That's just not true. I'm a counterexample.

I think, working on the type of code I tend to write on my own time: delightful, exciting fun. Working on things assigned by any employers I ever had: somebody kill me already.

Is this really a common viewpoint in the developer community?

I'm a programmer, and I do it because I find what I do to be exciting. I, in fact, truly enjoy "skimming 1,000 lines of log output" to finally find a bug I've been scouting for, or spending hours solving a particularly difficult problem.

If I found coding naturally boring and mind numbing I certainly wouldn't have chosen it as my career. Perhaps you should look at whether you are truly in the right field?

Different developers are good at different things. Some developers like looking at the big picture structure of program, other like minute detail(Bug hunting) for example.

People with ADHD can't focus on detail before they zone out. They need be in either intense(Lots of pressure, like sales), or big picture and creative positions.

Your second paragraph is incorrect. Many people with ADHD exhibit both attention deficits and contrasting hyper-focus behaviors. When I'm wrestling with a nasty bug in some software I find fascinating I can pick over little details in my differential for 6 hours without taking a break or eating.

Not being able to focus is quite a bit different from simply being bored.

Distractions are a problem not only because of the sheer number of them, but because you don't really notice you aren't on task anymore. It can take 30 minutes to realize that reading about ancient Mongolia has nothing to do with that paper you were reading, and another five minutes to trace exactly how you got there. And then you need to find where you were and start again.

Focus is incredibly complex, and not well understood. I don't know where the line is between problem and "lazy", but I do know that will power isn't the whole answer to these types of problems.

The article states that most doctors and researchers acknowledge that ADHD is a legitimate disease (as yours seems to be), and that some people should take medication. But they are protesting the vast over-diagnosis of the condition, and the push for medication to fix symptoms that are common in most people.

Also, though you might not notice any side effects, the article discusses that the side effects can be substantial (trouble sleeping, loss of appetite, sometimes suicidal thoughts), and that they are typically vastly understated in advertisements. The drug can be addictive too.

This sounds like something to make a big fuss about. If the opposition is to be believed (and I think it is), children are being vastly over-medicated with strong drugs based on bad science and misleading advertising.

> Also, as a person with ADHD who takes Adderall I don't see what the big fuss about it as a drug/medicine is.

> Over diagnosed? Sure. But I don't see why this drug is so demonized, where nicotine, alcohol and caffeine are just kinda standard parts of society and accepted.

the fuss is about the pharma industry spending millions upon millions on getting ever more people to take these meds. and for the wrong reasons.

“Medicines may make it easier to pay attention and control your behavior!”

"Adderall XR Improves Academic Performance"

these are statements that hold true for EVERYBODY, and not just for people suffering from adhd. that's what stimulants do. the pharma industry is basically trying to get as much people as possible (especially children) hooked on legal stimulants. that's what the fuss is about. it's like marketing opiates as drugs that 'take the edge of'. everybody could do with some of that. most probably on a daily basis.

> Also, as a person with ADHD who takes Adderall I don't see what the big fuss about it as a drug/medicine is.

If you, as a responsible adult, consent to taking this medication on a regular basis, then fair enough. The big fuss is that this is being imposed on a whole generation of children, essentially as a form of behavioural control. It's really the revival of the old Victorian "little children should be seen, not heard" mindset, under the guise of medical treatment. Children misbehave at school for a variety of reasons. Instead of dealing with the often institutional causes of this problem, we lay the blame at the children's door and try to medicate them into docility.

Over diagnosed? Sure. But I don't see why this drug is so demonized

Nobody dislikes Adderall. If you need it, I've never met anyone who would begrudge taking it. The demonization is of over diagnosis; Adderall is the poster-child.