Dont call yourself a programmer (2011)

<i>sigh</i> Again?<p>There are tons of great advice in that post, but the title and the eponymous section are based on something I didn't buy the first time around, either: <i>“Programmer” sounds like “anomalously high-cost peon who types some mumbo-jumbo into some other mumbo-jumbo.”</i><p>Heck, I'm just 34 years old, but you make me feel like a friggin' <i>dinosaur</i> because I got into this line of work out of my love for <i>programming</i>. It used to be an exciting thing to do, with a whole world of new things to explore. Nowadays you have people who are trying to make it sound like you're doing something mundane and boring, like you're expendable and should be ashamed of not having achieved anything greater than being a nerdy peon.<p>Look, as far as I can tell, it doesn't matter what <i>you</i> call <i>yourself</i>. From what I've lived so far, until you build up some solid skills and experience, nobody gives a damn if you come up with a fancy name or explanation for what you do. And once you've built up some cred, it won't matter what you call yourself either, because you'll be able to prove your worth.<p>Here's another piece of advice people don't offer frequently because it's not glamorous: do what makes you happy. We all grow up thinking we want to be rich, famous and/or powerful. If that's what you still believe in, go read or watch "Fight Club". Then come back and try different things and different paths. Maybe founding startups will make you happy. Then again, maybe working for BigCo Inc. and programming your own stuff on the side will make you happy.<p>TL;DR: The post offers good advice, but use your own judgment. There's nothing wrong in being a programmer.

Great advice if you want to optimize for salary.<p>Most of this stuff I learned from the streets and I've done pretty well following it.<p>However I've reached a point where a bigger salary, better benefits, and equity offers won't cut it for me anymore. There's a hidden nugget in this article that suggests that there are things in life outside of work which are better sources of happiness. One of the sources it fails to mention is accomplishment and achievement. If you are a programmer that spends their time reading the latest research, crafting your skills by implementing a compiler for some exotic language you're interested in, and following your passion then you will find optimizing your career by writing CRUD forms for an accounting package for 8+ hours a day to be an incredible waste of time and energy.<p>(It's also incredibly hard to develop a source of accomplishment and achievement if you spend the majority of your life being bored)<p>I've once heard the advice that you should optimize for happiness and great things will begin to happen. If modelling weather simulations is what turns your crank you will never be happy building web APIs to a legacy CRM system. If you enjoy pushing the envelop of static analysis then what good are you doing for the world hacking on a javascript front-end for a client at a creative agency? Rather than optimizing for salary you optimized your life around what motivates you and makes you happy then perhaps we'd have better weather predictions and early warning systems for tropical storms or better tools that allow us to write safer, faster, bug-free code. The icing on the cake is that you'd be happy to do it.<p>If you're just getting out of school though, then I'd follow the advice in this article for a while first. You don't know where to go without getting a lay of the land first. And a good salary will help you build up a "screw-up" fund for when you're ready to take the dive and follow your calling.

I find it's really helpful to be flexible with your terminology. The power of different phrases is enormous-it can make a difference between taking 5+ minutes to explain a concept to someone so that they superficially understand it, vs. having them instantly get it at a deep level.<p>For example-I work on Machine Learning, and that's the phrase I'll use with the HN crowd. With the general public, I'll use "Big Data". With Statisticians, I'll use "Predictive Analytics".<p>One problem with the phrase "programmer" is that it's just too general. It is impossible to get a sense of what value you create when you tell someone you're a "programmer", because the term is so broad. "Web Developer", "Statistics Automation Guru", "Ruby on Rails Consultant", "Data Scientist", "SEO", "Marketing Automation Expert"...all these are really useful terms simply because people instantly grok them. And when people have a clear sense of what you do, it opens up a world of career opportunities.

"In the real world, picking up a new language takes a few weeks of effort and after 6 to 12 months nobody will ever notice you haven’t been doing that one for your entire career.".<p>Not exactly my experience. I agree that there are many programmers that <i>think</i> they are fluent in a new language after a few months.<p>Learning the syntax of a new language, like learning how chess pieces move, takes a few hours. Mastering a programming language is like mastering chess, a lifelong journey.

Earlier discussion on HN: <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3170766" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3170766</a>

Dependant upon who your dealing with you tailor the description. In general I use the term `Binary BDSM` this means that I can avoid a lot of silly conversations.<p>Programmers spend there time programming computers, debugging computers and in effect deprogramming computers. They operate upon binary and in that there will be those that appreciete a more encompasing term.<p>Now of all the work labels we encounter the one I find most off is `Human Resources` when it is mostly paper programming that they do. So you could equaly have the term Binary Business Muscian or many other permutations, its fun.<p>Now if as a programmer you work to the letter of yoru contract and job description then many of you would see that programmer do alot less work. That is how you qualify your worth in part. Ironicly engaging with HR and all the other overheads of working life also help. So by doing less work you can get paid more money. That tells you more sadly.<p>But there are two types of programmer, those working in large business and those who are not and with that the definition and the work involved vary greatly. Also the opertunities too work bomb yourself with no return are also varied.<p>No two programming jobs are the same, yet the job title stays the same. Maybe we could learn something from other industries like the food industry and the various types of Cheifs. Who wouldn't want to employ a mitchlen stared programmer, sadly there is no standard that is respectfuly recognised. This is why in many area's programmers are looked upon as the labourers in the digital construction undustry and don't get the love they deserve or truely need.<p>Bottom line if your not happy then you are doing something wrong or letting somebody else do something wrong too you. This is true of all jobs, nomatter the title bestowed upon them and with that does a label effect your work or the perception that work has is realy the question here.

“90% of programming jobs are in creating Line of Business software”<p>That is awfully true. That is why I always teach my students at the very beginning the simplified versions of software business life cycle for both categories of consumer software and customized software.<p><a href="http://www.drdacademy.com/?id=12" rel="nofollow">http://www.drdacademy.com/?id=12</a><p>I am also planning a set of lessons-learned for new hires to avoid their frustrations. Stay tuned.

c) ”What is your previous salary?” is employer-speak for “Please give me reasons to pay you less money.” Answer appropriately.<p>Could you elaborate on 'appropriately'?

If a company is smaller than 10 people I can't be bothered with formal processes and HR people. When I get people applying that call themselves engineers I just think of comp-sci graduates who have no practical skill or someone trying to play up their ego with a fancy title. When it comes down to it, its the code you produce. I never give out résumés. At the end of the day its what you can produce.

I don't have a problem with calling myself a programmer because, when you take away all the fluff, somebody has to tell the machine what to do. The only people that can do that are programmers. An engineer can have the brightest ideas,but still needs programming. The buck stops at the programmer, you'd better respect us.

Lots of good advice, but don't get hung up on the title.<p><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmckenzie" rel="nofollow">http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmckenzie</a>

Yeah, programmer, engineer, software developer, those names all don't cut it for me these days. I call myself low-brow "caveman-coder".

Have some pride in what you do for gods sake.

Very good text, I liked it a lot thanks for sharing it.

I'm a programmer..

[2011]

Yeah, I almost see it.)<p>You are not your stack.. Not an IDE you're using.. Your are not any particular design pattern or an agile process.. You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else.<p>But this was already taken and became a cliche years ago.)