Many of humanities greatest scientific discoveries and works of art were 'side projects'.
It's better than lounging around like a lemon doing nothing with your time.
We're setting expectations for and normalising something which is not normal IMHO.
By all means do side projects if you want, but don't feel compelled.
I do have side projects, most of them never come to an end, after I learned what I wanted about programming language, framework, OS, build system, whatever.
What I am definitely opposed to is the expectation that I have to transform my 40h week into a 60h one just to keep some companies and head hunters happy.
I play with tech when I happen to have some time available to myself away from family and friends, while in business trips and such, and not to fulfill some implicit passion requirement.
Even if you want to improve yourself professionally, coding is not always the best option for everyone: you can study more the industry, domain you work in, improve your communication skills, build connections, improve your physical and mental states, draw, etc.
I can recommend these guys to pick advice from something like The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Subtle_Art_of_Not_Giving...
That being said, I think the main point that most people fail to get across about "side projects" is that they don't have to be programming. I play music with a band in the area and would very much consider that to be a side project.
It would be a much healthier exercise if we focused the narrative on doing anything you enjoy outside of work.
Likely way more than what I would get out of trying to build a software product myself.
How much self care you need and what constitutes self care varies tremendously from person to person. High energy people may actually need outlets for that energy so they don't make themselves or other people crazy.
Nadia Commenici was enrolled in gymnastics at age five in part because she was breaking the furniture at home. I have heard that Chuck Norris does two workouts a day and makes everyone crazy if he skips one of them.
If you have it to give, directing it into something productive with potential payoff is good advice. But for other people it's a case of "You can't get blood from a stone."
Most people don't do a great job of speaking to all use cases. They tend to speak to the one with which they are familiar. So then you get these situations where one party says "You should do X!" and some people reply "Absolutely not. You should do Y instead." Both are typically guilty of not including any provisos or qualifiers and talking like it's universal truth.
Why assume that that's the only non-work option out there? There are plenty of productive non-work things that you can focus on. Exercise will benefit you in numerous ways. So will learning about nutrition and how to cook. I would say those are both benefiting the person more than repeating what they do at work for 40+ hours a week.
This quote for example: 'I’ve asked David Wong, working in the cryptocurrency team at Facebook, what would be the best way to be noticed by Facebook? He answered: “Side Projects” and “Blog”.'
To many people with kids, that reads: Facebook doesn't want to hire engineers with families, because the things they care about from folks are diametrically opposed, in many cases, to the time required with children.
I absolutely think that if you have the time and flexibility you should use it. But there are (and should be) other ways to stand out to companies or to create value that don't involve side gigs outside of the normal work day.
It's not particularly compatible with having kids, but it makes you a better musician.
I'm all in favour of finding better ways to let programmers who don't have side projects stand out but I don't think that devaluing side projects is the way to do that.
concerning professional advantages: after spending more than two decades writing software I seriously doubt that a side project gets you professional advantages.
Imho more important are soft skills that are not in the focus of most technically savvy people. Being able do communicate well and being a team player are at least as important in most cases- not everybody builds a new google...
We tend to focus on technical aspects while most fail to see that this is not a purpose in itself (in most cases / companies) but the purpose is to generate business value.
>Imho more important are soft skills that are not in the focus of most technically savvy people.
I find that this is mostly true outside of tech hubs, especially in non tech companies, but not necessarily in tech hubs.
Hard technical skills are much more valued relative to soft skills in, say, Facebook than in, say, an insurance company or HMO based in Houston.