[ospzfmbbzr]

Not personal unless you take it that way -- instead take it as a challenge and show him he was wrong about you.

Programming well is difficult and takes time and effort to get good at, but it's worth it.

Being junior and learning while remote is not ideal at all. I work very well remotely but only because everything is second nature to me now after so many years. If that makes me a 'top performer' then it's only because I worked my way up to that.

Do you believe you are at your top performance already? Or can you get better still?

[mgfist]

You're totally missing the original point.

> I work very well remotely but only because everything is second nature to me now after so many years.

This is coming from the narrow view that people who struggle remotely only do so because they are inexperienced. I know people who struggled because they lived in a small NYC apartment where their desk was 2 feet from their bed, and the lack of movement or change of environment was killer mentally. I know people who struggled because they are highly extroverted and not seeing people IRL led to crushing mental health issues. I know people who did not live up to their IRL potential because they thrive on watercooler chats for creativity. I know people who just felt disconnected remotely and didn't feel the purpose and connection to the team/company in person.

Basically, "technical ability" is not the sole reason why someone would be worse remotely than in person. Likewise there are people who feel distracted in person and need the remote solitude or get drained from the commute.

[ospzfmbbzr]

I don't think I'm missing the point... it's just that those seem like excuses and self-employed or self-directed workers are only making these excuses to themselves (as they fail).

> This is coming from the narrow view that people who struggle remotely only do so because they are inexperienced. I know people who struggled because they lived in a small NYC apartment where their desk was 2 feet from their bed, and the lack of movement or change of environment was killer mentally. I know people who struggled because they are highly extroverted and not seeing people IRL led to crushing mental health issues. I know people who did not live up to their IRL potential because they thrive on watercooler chats for creativity. I know people who just felt disconnected remotely and didn't feel the purpose and connection to the team/company in person.

I dealt with every one of these in varying degrees at one point or another. I still miss watercooler talk with interesting people but you can't have everything.

If YOUR environment isn't conducive to getting work done -- fix it!

- Inside too much? Get a dog or a hobby outside. (work is not a life) - Miss people? get a hobby where you meet people (work is not a life) - etc..

Who's responsibility is it to fix? YOURS (unless you want to fail but I guess at least you can blame someone else?)

Now it's not easy to do these things... but nothing worthwhile is easy.

[mgfist]

> If YOUR environment isn't conducive to getting work done -- fix it!

You listed a bunch of ways one can do this. I'll list one more: going to work in-person!

I think we're in agreement here: environment plays a huge role in productivity and one should make changes if an environment is not conducive to productivity. I posit that changing your working model to one that suits you is just as valid a change as getting a dog or hobby.

Importantly, I don't mean to say that in-person is better than remote. Just saying that people have different preferences, and the fact that not all people excel in all environments doesn't make them inferior. You just need to have one environment that works well.

[Riverheart]

> unless you want to fail

Nobody wants to fail. Life is complicated. Maybe they tried and couldn't. Maybe they have obstacles we don't. We should be more empathetic. We don't know their stories.

[phoehne]

Or they might just suffer from the basic problem that people find remote work over teams and periodic meetings depressing. I don't like bull-pen style team rooms. The distractions and everyone sitting there with headphones on, tuning each other out. It makes going to an office seem counter-productive and, for lack of a better word, stupid. There has to be a happy medium. Like having an individual room like a home office but at the company offices. Where you could set up a permanent desk the way you wanted. I wonder why no one's thought of that...

I was an essential worker through the pandemic and had to go in. I never could go remote but I think I was happier than most people I knew. I had gripes. I had fast food, to-go options for lunch (for the most part). I still had work friends. We even started a subversive happy hour at the office, when everything else was closed. (Masked up and sitting apart, because on one wants to be the one who takes out the whole ops center with a quarantine, but enjoying a cold brew and some commiserating is hops lubricated therapy.) I watched some of my co-workers go to "on line happy hour" events and it looked weird with fake backgrounds. No thanks.

I've worked remote before. It was okay. But I still went into the office a couple of days a week. For brief, informal chats with may boss and peers. It was a happy medium, but I still found it a little isolating. It was great at first, but slowly became 'meh' and then I was happy to go to another, more normal gig.

I'm taking a new role at my company, one where I could work remotely. But I'm going to go into the office. I don't like the bull-pen seating but the corporate overlords are putting in more focus rooms. If I find I really need a break, well, I can put in a couple of days at home. Fortunately, that's much easier to do now. I know myself. I don't need someone to watch over me to be productive. That was never the issue. I need to be around some number of people because I'm a human fucking being and, a number of counter examples aside, we're largely social animals.

[travisgriggs]

> Programming well is difficult and takes time and effort to get good at, but it's worth it.

I agree very much with parts 1 and 2 of your assertion. At 51, with a decent brag list of successes, I think I’ve even achieved some measure of it.

The part I’m not sure about is the “worth it.” I used to think that, I’ve become less sure of late.

What makes it worth to you? I’m honestly curious. I used to have various things that made it worth it to me, and of late they’ve become less valued.

[ospzfmbbzr]

Yeah I'm a bit jaded too. Would I get into this business today? Probably not.

Mostly because of the potential employers, who they hire and why, and how success is 'measured' these days. I've been contract only for 17 years and I'll never go back to employment. I guess I'm lucky to have the option, but if I didn't I'd find another non-employment way to earn a living.

As you say the problem is that individual contributor quality isn't valued as it should be -- it's not prioritized above say compliance with 'all the current things.'

Engineering culture is mostly absent everywhere nowadays and in it's place a culture of entitlement and groupthink -- the hallmarks of failing institutions.