undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdiminoten12y ago0 comments

If you work with the same people you socialize with, work and leisure starts to blend. You think of your office as a place to be around your friends, and you think of your work as a problem you and your buddies figure out together.

Many, many people crave working in places like this, and with people who want to experience this. Apparently Stripe is one of those places. Apparently not everyone wants to work like this.

I do. They do. Who are you to tell us we can't work like that, and hire people who also want to work like that?

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

zerooneinfinity12y ago· 1 in thread

It's a bit idealistic, but I'm certainly not telling you what you can or can't do. I can only speak to the effects I've observed from working in similar environments (most of this is anecdotal so take it as you will):

-People will get burned out. But instead of having a place to seek refuge (friends outside of work) the only place they have to go is the very place that is causing it, creating a negative feedback loop. Don't get me wrong, having co-workers who are friends are great, but it shouldn't be a requirement of the job. If work crew is small enough it may work for some length of time, but your theory on everyone being friends breaks down, somewhere I'd wager above 5 people.

-I've met extremely smart people who are great to work with in the sense they can get stuff done in a timely manner, but who prefer to stay in with their family or be home for dinner, you are missing out on great candidates like that.

-The biggest thing for me however, is the importance of giving programmers free time. We're in a fast moving world, and to only be able to focus on one subset is damaging to a persons professional growth. People should have the spare time to pursue things on their own, 40 hours is barely enough, 60 you can forget it.

diminotenOP12y ago

This just sounds like a rationalization that comes from not being able to/not wanting to do the things other are able to/like to do. I'm talking in trends, and you're talking about specific people you've met, which is orders of magnitude more prone to sample error.

Let me rephrase this for you: what I'm describing works. Period. This isn't some navel gazing here, it's an explanation of how companies like the submission company and others succeed. This isn't a case of, "let's all give our opinions on what might work and what might not work" this is, "let's give our opinions on why this already works."

So with that in mind, your argument simply doesn't mesh with reality. Sure, people such as you describe exist, but people such as I describe are giving interview outlines on Hacker News, and we're commenting about it.

You're saying what should and shouldn't be, but at the same time you're saying you're not telling me what I can and can't do. Those are dichotomous - pick one.