I'm working on a contract tangentially related to this work and it's really not about young people working long hours. There are plenty of older people emailing me at 10 or 11 pm after the kids are in bed that don't know what's going on. This is solely about the quality of the talent.
I encounter people and teams that are just unwilling to adopt contemporary development and deployment practices. The article notes that Hipchat was a struggle to get approval for, yet I often run into people at CMS that never log in to it and prefer tons of emails. Deployments aren't automated and still happen for some teams on calls during maintenance periods once a week. I've had people in technical capacities ask what GitHub is.
The problem is institutional, it really has nothing to do with young people working 10 hour days. I care about my work-life balance -- I'm too old to crash on the couch at my startup's office like I did at past jobs in my 20s -- but I also keep up with contemporary development practices, make a point to study a new language every year, read academic papers, and care about my work. I don't think I can say the same about most devs I've encountered in government. The consulting firms are incentivized to build walls and protect the way they do business in order to keep getting that contract money.
If you're an older dev that is intellectually curious in the practice and art of software development I think you'll be fine.
You might be fine，but I'd be ready to make a lot less money as we move into a more freelance oriented market
the problem is that labor doesn't scale very well. 2 talented young programmers working all-out 12 hours a day on one project will generally be more productive than 3 talented folks with family working all-out 8 hours a day. (Agile, git, etc. all try to fix this to a degree... ) The current economic situation is that startups have very very deep pockets and will pay an insane premium to have stuff ASAP - which will mean very small, very overworked, very talented "rock stars".
If you want to fix healthcare.gov and the president's reputation is on the line, you'll get the rockstarest rockstars you can find and slave drive them till it's done
If you want a good work life balance I recommend the defense sector - but again - expect a pay cut. (like $120K end of career in SoCal vs. $250K in SF)
> The current economic situation is that startups have very very deep pockets and will pay an insane premium to have stuff ASAP - which will mean very small, very overworked, very talented "rock stars".
Another, more descriptive way to formulate this is: some startups are really fighting against time, because they are led by financials who only watch short-scale (10y) ROI, and those will pay a premium to have stuff ASAP, whatever that entails.
Of course, startups (or other orgs) that are not only driven by financials have to manage time and money as well. But they have other plans.
Look what/who you're working for. A sprint, a marathon and a trek are different journeys.
> 2 talented young programmers working all-out 12 hours a day on one project will generally be more productive than 3 talented folks with family working all-out 8 hours a day
There's actually a lot of research that says it's the opposite.[1] The big difference, I think, is that young developers, like the previous poster mentioned, are up-to-date on the latest technology and are willing to change things to work faster.
I've been dealing with 'experienced' Ops trying to maintain control of everything, while slowing down development. The number of hours spent coding doesn't change much if the way development is done is incredibly slow.
I'll give you that not everyone is productive at 12 hours - but I'm not talking about everyone or even averages. The point is there are plenty of counterexamples of people that can work 12 hours days for months and are way more productive than anyone working 8 (hence "rock stars"). Some people really really love programming and don't have a life outside of work. A simple example is the overzealous founder/cofounder programmer that works 12 hours a day. I've seen people do that and they are very very productive b/c their heart is in it. I imagine some people with lots of stock options and/or coolaid-drinking also are very productive. Some people I've met that work at SpaceX sound incredibly productive. They probably eventually burn out, but with turn over being so high in our industry as it is, your employer doesn't really care. You'll leave after a year or two anyways.
.. The link you put up is full of conjectures, but I didn't actually see any numbers... (it's a link to class? .. I don't even understand the website)
From my experience this isn't true. I make a lot more money now freelancing than I did working much longer hours at startups. Sure, there are promises of my options being worth millions, but the reality is that they're sitting in my desk gathering dust. I'd actually take a pay cut to go back into a startup setting once this contract is over, mainly because I often miss the level of intensity, creativity, and the feeling of ownership that comes with a startup. I prefer being the dumbest person in the room.
Driving young programmers through 12 hour days is just a recipe for burn out and technical debt that you'll have to pay back later. I've definitely been there.
I guess it all comes down to what you consider a good work-life balance. For me being able to work from wherever an Internet connection exists and the ability to make my own hours is it, and yeah sometimes that'll mean a few weeks of 10-12 hour days here and there. For some it means a strict 9-5 with an hour lunch at an office park off a highway, which I don't judge, but for me sounds like a nightmare.
Again, as long as you're keeping up with contemporary development practices and are pushing your knowledge I think you'll be able to choose whatever definition of work-life balance is for you and be fine.
I encounter people and teams that are just unwilling to adopt contemporary development and deployment practices. The article notes that Hipchat was a struggle to get approval for, yet I often run into people at CMS that never log in to it and prefer tons of emails. Deployments aren't automated and still happen for some teams on calls during maintenance periods once a week. I've had people in technical capacities ask what GitHub is.
The problem is institutional, it really has nothing to do with young people working 10 hour days. I care about my work-life balance -- I'm too old to crash on the couch at my startup's office like I did at past jobs in my 20s -- but I also keep up with contemporary development practices, make a point to study a new language every year, read academic papers, and care about my work. I don't think I can say the same about most devs I've encountered in government. The consulting firms are incentivized to build walls and protect the way they do business in order to keep getting that contract money.
If you're an older dev that is intellectually curious in the practice and art of software development I think you'll be fine.