I learned coding because I wanted to tear shit up as a somewhat dark child. And that's why I know pretty much everything from databases to reverse engineering to packet sniffing/editing to patching, injecting, loaders, class modification, obfuscation and deobfuscation, and XSRF, RCE, shellcode, buffer overflowing, the list goes on. Along with whatever it takes for an interesting programming job.
New coders just don't get it, they are too far outside the scope of (played around with it as a child, because it was interesting.) Money isn't a good enough motivator to teach grubbers the real internals of a machine.
This article reeks of immaturity. And I'd rather
have only passionate people in our field.
I'm all for talented, experienced people in our field, but I think we also need a healthy work-life balance. If someone wants to work 60 hours a week then spend 20 hours a week on their open source side project because they're passionate about coding, that's their choice - but if someone else wants to work 40 hours a week then turn off the computer and spend time with their children, I don't see that as a problem or something they should be ashamed of.
And if my boss stopped paying me, you can bet I'd stop coming into work. If that means I'm in it for the money, then I'm in it for the money.
It may seem like these impostors are encroaching on your passion, but understand that they are doing a massively difficult task that you may not be able to: to become a master in a field in which they simply choose to be employed.
At risk of hijacking this comment tree, I'd love to see some kind of citation is this is true. It'd be striking if it were.
With that said, I'd rather die than study women's studies for the rest of my life for ten times my salary[1].
[1] No free time allowed besides eating and sleeping and going to the bathroom.