Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab
-
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.
once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.
Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.
it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.
Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.
Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.
So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?
I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.
Amen. I can't believe this view is unacceptable to the NTG minions (not just the employees). Life is for living, and much of that (for me anyway) occurs NOT in front of a screen. I used to do the whole "eat, drink, live, breathe, shit IT stuff 24/7" thing when I was younger, but eventually doing IT for 40-60 hours a week becomes enough. I've never had a job where I didn't have the luxury of on the clock learning time (of which I have taken great advantage), so maybe my view is fuct, but at 42, I have other (better) shit to do after I clock out.
-
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.
once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.
Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.
it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.
Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.
Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.
So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?
I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.
I don't blame you. Also, just because 5-10 voices here say they would pick someone who is actively pursuing learning engagements outside of their job over someone who is not, that's hardly a broad view of the job market as a whole. I think you'll be safe. On the other hand, it doesn't minimize the fact that those who do work hard for the competitive edge are bound to find it.
-
@RojoLoco said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.
once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.
Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.
it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.
Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.
Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.
So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?
I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.
Amen. I can't believe this view is unacceptable to the NTG minions (not just the employees). Life is for living, and much of that (for me anyway) occurs NOT in front of a screen. I used to do the whole "eat, drink, live, breathe, shit IT stuff 24/7" thing when I was younger, but eventually doing IT for 40-60 hours a week becomes enough. I've never had a job where I didn't have the luxury of on the clock learning time (of which I have taken great advantage), so maybe my view is fuct, but at 42, I have other (better) shit to do after I clock out.
So, back in your ambitious youth, did that serve you well? Now that you've put in the extra time to get real experience in a broader form, do you not enjoy the benefits of having gained that experience? And once again, the opponents seem to be missing the point; it's not that we would never hire someone without a home lab. It's that we're looking for avid learners. With the number of options we have to sift through, we're going to go for the ones who possess the traits we feel are beneficial. Why is that so seemingly difficult to grasp? I'm certainly NOT saying that it is an official prerequisite for employment, which I think has been demonstrated numerous times. But, given the choice, that's where we are going to lean.
-
@wirestyle22 said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.
once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.
Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.
it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.
Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.
Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.
So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?
I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.
That is a completely reasonable decision to make. Dad passed last year and mom lives in England. No kids yet (that I know of). Fiance and I are balancing my learning schedule with planning for a wedding very well. My job is also my hobby so I get a lot of enjoyment out of testing. Point being that I don't feel like I'm sacrificing anything. You are in a different position though
If it is your hobby, great, you love to test and play around, that is awesome. But should it really be grounds to base a hiring decision off of? That is what I am failing to understand. Does it really set you that much farther apart from me? Does it show a difference in how hungry I am to find that golden job that needs all of these self taught skills?
My point at the end of all of 128 posts, it has been determined that ntg (as an organization) is looking at a specific subset of people (that I don't fall into, which is fine) with a passion which is defined as having IT as a job and as a hobby. Eat/sleep/breath technology and willing to do anything to be apart of that.
This is my opinion. You absolutely shouldn't need to have a home lab to get into IT and to make your way up the ladder and shouldn't be considered when hiring. Those that can afford to great, the more power to you. But those that cannot (me) shouldn't be ruled out just because we don't fit the "ideal candidate" that the company has set forth.
-
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@RojoLoco said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.
once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.
Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.
it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.
Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.
Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.
So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?
I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.
Amen. I can't believe this view is unacceptable to the NTG minions (not just the employees). Life is for living, and much of that (for me anyway) occurs NOT in front of a screen. I used to do the whole "eat, drink, live, breathe, shit IT stuff 24/7" thing when I was younger, but eventually doing IT for 40-60 hours a week becomes enough. I've never had a job where I didn't have the luxury of on the clock learning time (of which I have taken great advantage), so maybe my view is fuct, but at 42, I have other (better) shit to do after I clock out.
So, back in your ambitious youth, did that serve you well? Now that you've put in the extra time to get real experience in a broader form, do you not enjoy the benefits of having gained that experience? And once again, the opponents seem to be missing the point; it's not that we would never hire someone without a home lab. It's that we're looking for avid learners. With the number of options we have to sift through, we're going to go for the ones who possess the traits we feel are beneficial. Why is that so seemingly difficult to grasp? I'm certainly NOT saying that it is an official prerequisite for employment, which I think has been demonstrated numerous times. But, given the choice, that's where we are going to lean.
But once again, just because we don't have home labs doesn't mean we aren't avid learners. It just means we chose to spend our time differently.
-
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@RojoLoco said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.
once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.
Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.
it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.
Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.
Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.
So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?
I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.
Amen. I can't believe this view is unacceptable to the NTG minions (not just the employees). Life is for living, and much of that (for me anyway) occurs NOT in front of a screen. I used to do the whole "eat, drink, live, breathe, shit IT stuff 24/7" thing when I was younger, but eventually doing IT for 40-60 hours a week becomes enough. I've never had a job where I didn't have the luxury of on the clock learning time (of which I have taken great advantage), so maybe my view is fuct, but at 42, I have other (better) shit to do after I clock out.
So, back in your ambitious youth, did that serve you well? Now that you've put in the extra time to get real experience in a broader form, do you not enjoy the benefits of having gained that experience? And once again, the opponents seem to be missing the point; it's not that we would never hire someone without a home lab. It's that we're looking for avid learners. With the number of options we have to sift through, we're going to go for the ones who possess the traits we feel are beneficial. Why is that so seemingly difficult to grasp? I'm certainly NOT saying that it is an official prerequisite for employment, which I think has been demonstrated numerous times. But, given the choice, that's where we are going to lean.
Yes, it has served me well, but it's painful to think that my lack of a home lab now would put me at the bottom of the job getting roster... well, that and being the most hated and shat upon thing possible around here - a windows admin.
-
-
"Live IT"
-
"24 hours Shift"
-
"24/7 so while it might seem unfair it is life"
-
if when you are at work you are..working
wow ... based on your posts, it seems like you're running a really tight ship ... I could be wrong, ofcourse.. I see these as red-flags ... personally, I would not want to work in this environment ....but, that's just me ...
We focus primarily on "Satisfaction" ,and not just profits. ...be it with our team-mates, or with our client .. ofcourse, we too set high standards for ourselves - a high quality of life ..
Although, we provide round-the-clock services to a few clients, who have 24 hr operations, no one from my organization has ever pulled a 24 hr work shift ... If a client requires 24 hrs or service or support from us, we have 3 team-mates working, each for 8 hours.. Over-n-above, there's one person on stand-by, to fill-in, just incase 1 person cant make it, for some reason .. Plus, the shifts are rotated (it is decided by the 3 of the above persons)
Taking work home, for most parts is discouraged... Ofcourse, if you want to learn/practice @ you home-lab, on your time, we certainly can't/won't stop you... However, we certainly don't encourage it .. .. We encourage our team-mates to have a life, apart from IT .... Using the office lab to learn, test, crash, burn, experiment etc etc, is highly encouraged .... providing you're willing to share the knowledge, findings, test-results, outcome etc ... I don't think anyone even has a home-lab .. Most of us find time to learn something new, and improve our skills sets, at the office-lab ( plus a couple of instances on AWS) is used extensively for that, by everyone...
No one in our organization actually works ....cause we're all just doing what we love, and are passionate bout it, and dedicated to it.... For most parts nothing is really forced-upon anyone ...However, what we've all agreed to, and practice, is a continuous improvement cycle - On a organizational level, professional level and personal level ..
We're a small team of 13, so I guess this works for us ... Oh, and there's no boss ... no employee ... Although, the company was founded by me, I'm not the sole owner.. all 13 of us are..
-
-
@david.wiese said
This is my opinion. You absolutely shouldn't need to have a home lab to get into IT and to make your way up the ladder and shouldn't be considered when hiring. Those that can afford to great, the more power to you. But those that cannot (me) shouldn't be ruled out just because we don't fit the "ideal candidate" that the company has set forth.
Should you be excluded from jobs because you lack
- A degree
- A certification
- A zip code
Companies get to pick and choose their candidates for a number of reasons, NTG has made a choice that those with a home lab are more likely to be the ideal candidate same way another company will say those with whatever magical quality they seek, will be the ideal candidate.
I would say you ABSOLUTELY should not have to get a degree to get a job in IT but look at the number of jobs that explicitly require it before they will even touch you.
Just my 2 cents.
-
@Breffni-Potter
@Breffni-Potter said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said
This is my opinion. You absolutely shouldn't need to have a home lab to get into IT and to make your way up the ladder and shouldn't be considered when hiring. Those that can afford to great, the more power to you. But those that cannot (me) shouldn't be ruled out just because we don't fit the "ideal candidate" that the company has set forth.
Should you be excluded from jobs because you lack
- A degree
- A certification
- A zip code
Companies get to pick and choose their candidates for a number of reasons, NTG has made a choice that those with a home lab are more likely to be the ideal candidate same way another company will say those with whatever magical quality they seek, will be the ideal candidate.
I would say you ABSOLUTELY should not have to get a degree to get a job in IT but look at the number of jobs that explicitly require it before they will even touch you.
Just my 2 cents.
Nope, you shouldn't be excluded. Personality and people skills tumps technical knowledge to some degree.
-
@david.wiese said
Nope, you shouldn't be excluded. Personality and people skills tumps technical knowledge to some degree.
HR says you are worthless to the company without a degree. I don't care what experience or personality or qualities you have, no degree, no interview.
That's backwards and stupid thinking I know but it keeps happening.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said
Nope, you shouldn't be excluded. Personality and people skills tumps technical knowledge to some degree.
HR says you are worthless to the company without a degree. I don't care what experience or personality or qualities you have, no degree, no interview.
That's backwards and stupid thinking I know but it keeps happening.
Yep, it's a rather unfortunate reality ...
-
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@Breffni-Potter
@Breffni-Potter said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@david.wiese said
This is my opinion. You absolutely shouldn't need to have a home lab to get into IT and to make your way up the ladder and shouldn't be considered when hiring. Those that can afford to great, the more power to you. But those that cannot (me) shouldn't be ruled out just because we don't fit the "ideal candidate" that the company has set forth.
Should you be excluded from jobs because you lack
- A degree
- A certification
- A zip code
Companies get to pick and choose their candidates for a number of reasons, NTG has made a choice that those with a home lab are more likely to be the ideal candidate same way another company will say those with whatever magical quality they seek, will be the ideal candidate.
I would say you ABSOLUTELY should not have to get a degree to get a job in IT but look at the number of jobs that explicitly require it before they will even touch you.
Just my 2 cents.
Nope, you shouldn't be excluded. Personality and people skills tumps technical knowledge to some degree.
I'm a generally well liked person, professionally and personally. I do not think my people skills and personality trump my lack of knowledge in any capacity.
-
I will add to this discussion with this.
When I look to hire another person for @Bundy-Associates that I will most certainly be looking for the self motivated person that is going to be able to work in a very atypical environment compared to most places.
Someone with a lab environment that teaches themselves outside of work will most certainly rank over some 8-5 working Joe. @david-wiese and @RojoLoco will most certainly not be employed by me.
I work 24/7. I may only average 6 to 8 hours per day and 42 hours per week. But those hours are spread out over all 24 hours of the day and all 7 days of the week.
Any employee of ours will be expected to do the same.
-
@JaredBusch Would you be more likely to hire a person you like who is personable or someone who has a higher degree of technical knowledge? Assuming they have the same work ethic.
-
@JaredBusch said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
I work 24/7. I may only average 6 to 8 hours per day and 42 hours per week. But those hours are spread out over all 24 hours of the day and all 7 days of the week.
Any employee of ours will be expected to do the same.
Sounds like sweatshop torture. Not even with a gun to my balls would I take a job like that.
-
@RojoLoco said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@JaredBusch said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
I work 24/7. I may only average 6 to 8 hours per day and 42 hours per week. But those hours are spread out over all 24 hours of the day and all 7 days of the week.
Any employee of ours will be expected to do the same.
Sounds like sweatshop torture. Not even with a gun to my balls would I take a job like that.
Do you even understand math? 42 hours per week comes out to 6 hours a day if you work 7 days a week. Sometimes I work 10 or 12 hours days. But I still only work 42 hours a week on average. This would obviously mean that I did not work all 7 days in that week.
The same for the hours. There are 24 hours in a day and I work 6 on average. That means the other 18 are mine to do what I please.
-
@JaredBusch said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
I work 24/7. I may only average 6 to 8 hours per day and 42 hours per week. But those hours are spread out over all 24 hours of the day and all 7 days of the week.
Any employee of ours will be expected to do the same.In return what can an employee expect from the organization ?
-
@wirestyle22 said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@JaredBusch Would you be more likely to hire a person you like who is personable or someone who has a higher degree of technical knowledge? Assuming they have the same work ethic.
We are a consultancy. That means that I need both of those skills. So it will be a balancing act. I have to have employees that are knowledgeable and personable.
-
@JaredBusch said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
I will add to this discussion with this.
When I look to hire another person for @Bundy-Associates that I will most certainly be looking for the self motivated person that is going to be able to work in a very atypical environment compared to most places.
Someone with a lab environment that teaches themselves outside of work will most certainly rank over some 8-5 working Joe. @david-wiese and @RojoLoco will most certainly not be employed by me.
I work 24/7. I may only average 6 to 8 hours per day and 42 hours per week. But those hours are spread out over all 24 hours of the day and all 7 days of the week.
Any employee of ours will be expected to do the same.
I personally wouldn't want to work for an organization like that. I value my time and would not be expected to work like that. That sounds horrible. I guess for positions like that it takes a special kind of person that has no life outside of the job.
Also that description right there is what is wrong with the American culture. To much emphasis put on work and not enough put on life outside of it. Like I have already stated, I work to live, not live to work.
-
@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
@JaredBusch said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:
I will add to this discussion with this.
When I look to hire another person for @Bundy-Associates that I will most certainly be looking for the self motivated person that is going to be able to work in a very atypical environment compared to most places.
Someone with a lab environment that teaches themselves outside of work will most certainly rank over some 8-5 working Joe. @david-wiese and @RojoLoco will most certainly not be employed by me.
I work 24/7. I may only average 6 to 8 hours per day and 42 hours per week. But those hours are spread out over all 24 hours of the day and all 7 days of the week.
Any employee of ours will be expected to do the same.
I personally wouldn't want to work for an organization like that. I value my time and would not be expected to work like that. That sounds horrible. I guess for positions like that it takes a special kind of person that has no life outside of the job.
Also that description right there is what is wrong with the American culture. To much emphasis put on work and not enough put on life outside of it. Like I have already stated, I work to live, not live to work.
Read the reply I made about about math and hours.
