For anybody?? Let's say the social status and pay was the same as a shelf stacker. You are being employed to code for the website of boohooman, or something you have no particular interest in (as a context, I appreciate you are interested in coding itself). I think I see this differently. Both would be unrewarding, both in pay and in tediousness. But at least stacking shelves doesn't occupy your mind (for now lol)

Replies (4)

programming is much more creative and less mind-numbing, so not sure you can categorise them as the same even if you are not a fan of either
I can't really say what it's like to code really, so I'm mostly guessing there:) But I imagine the context / purpose would matter to me, if I was coding for something I had no interest in Vs something I thought was meaningful as a whole. And it's very rare to be employed under the circumstances of the latter lol.
If I wasn't interested in the work, than it's just a means to an end. I must not occupy my mind, because whatever I'm doing after stacking shelves is what will occupy my time. Given in this scenario, programming being equally unrewarding, I wouldn't be doing either. Period. I don't find programming itself rewarding either, it's also a means to an end in a way. I'm not a programming and never have been professionally. It's a tool to satisfy my need to build things. I may be arrogant, but like many, I believe I was put on this earth for more than sitting at a desk, or stocking shelves, but I'm not above either. That said. if both are equally unrewarding, and have the same social/economic status, then it comes down to more simple things i think. Id rather work with my hands and have my brain idle for the work after my job. I'm not a desk person, and I don't like building other people's things. It's that simple.
There was a time when programming paid reasonably, but not exceptionally well and the median quality of code was far higher. Prestige and pay attracts the disinterested.