Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Maybe you should do less 'work'

johnwhiles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 431 posts

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#301

Post by ianbutler »

alexashka wrote: post #289
ianbutler wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not only do start-ups normally not have 4-5 years, but they don't even try to solve hard problems - they mostly just try to solve some trivial bullshit to exploit a legal loophole or insert themselves as middlemen in a corporate/legal swamp. I don't really agree with that, the time horizon on a successful startup, one that's acquired or goes public, is 7-10 years. I also don't agree with the class of problems. Like…

I thought about it a bit more - I was unfair to start-ups. It's not that start-ups largely solve trivial problems - it's that humans largely solve trivial problems. There are factors that make start-ups more likely to solve trivial problems vs say, a research institute, but it almost doesn't matter in the scheme of things. There are exceptions - they come once every few decades, per industry, give or take. Then the m…

Yes I think I now largely agree with you. Most humans do mundane work and solve trivial problems. It's how the system keeps working though. If that stopped we'd be too busy sifting through the wreckage to produce the few exceptions where most of our value (not necessarily monetary) comes from.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#302

Post by jka »

beaconstudios wrote: post #232
danielvaughn wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if this is a new trend, or if I've only just begun noticing it over the last decade. People seem to have completely lost the ability to infer the meaning of words if it lies beyond face value. What a trite, shallow interpretation.

my point is that we should oppose the system that forces everybody to be in market competition with each other. I understand the position being forwarded, but I think it's describing a system that's antithetical to human values and thus should not be just accepted as a fact like gravity. Perhaps it is you who is being shallow and trite, not understanding the actual objection I have. I know that what the OP is saying…

Markets can behave in ways that are either competitive (my tomatoes are better than your tomatoes) or co-operative (my tomatoes are a perfect complement to your cheese). And sometimes they morph from one mode into the other.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#303

Post by RosanaAnaDana »

kqr wrote: post #246
caffeine wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We are hardcore social animals with huge biological & affective needs, this is scientifically proven. Totally agree. > We are NOT companies Actually, we are humans. However, when it comes to our economic activity, we are also a company. Both things can be true at once. > this is so one-sided, extreme, partial and damaging. What decades of neo liberal brainwashing has done to people. Woah. Anything you specifically…

What set me off (not the one you're responding to) about your comment was the bit about not having a right to a good outcome. Depending on what one means by "good", that one doesn't have a right to it is a fairly strong statement of political opinion, but it was presented as a universal truth. I also think it's very important that people are allowed to enter risky ventures and "fail" while still being secure of a som…

>What set me off (not the one you're responding to) about your comment was the bit about not having a right to a good outcome. Depending on what one means by "good", that one doesn't have a right to it is a fairly strong statement of political opinion, but it was presented as a universal truth.

I think this is a really important thing to highlight in what I think is a real contradiction that is exposing its self and largely driving our global political narrative. Does one have the right to a "good life"? It looks like oop edited his original phrasing, but I'd like to take a moment and step into this question, because to me, it seems like its one that is still working itself out in real time. Its a question that for me, the US declaration of independence and framers were trying to address (for their identity, not necessarily for others).

Does one have an inalienable right to a "good life"? Do rights exist if we aren't will to fight, tooth and claw, to maintain them?

I think there is a real divide out in the wild about ones right to a 'good life', and a lot of people are being swindled by failing to think through and understand where the right to a 'good life' is borne. So many on one side argue that

Oop is getting a ton of flack for their framing, however, for me, it was once I adopted an almost identical framing that I started getting my worth at my place of employment. I started understanding that I was responsible for and being paid for or paying for all of my time. I may not like the game, but I didn't make it and playing ignorant to its rules wasn't going to help me.

There's clearly a lot of hate for neoliberalism in the responses to OOP's comment. I despise neoliberalism as much, and likely more than most of those respondents. But you can't fight something you don't understand. Sometimes its important to think through and understand how another group might frame something. Just because a belief happens in your mind doesn't mean you are that thought. Its ok to look at things from other perspectives, especially those you disagree with.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#304

Post by pydry »

adamsmith143 wrote: post #105
cinntaile wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More taxes are a result of earning more and not really from working more although they are usually related, so they still get compensated for that "extra" work.

>More taxes are a result of earning more and not really from working more although they are usually related Even the mythical 10x engineer is not really getting paid 10x more than their same level peers so no not really. So this even furthers the argument. Why bother having 10x the output if you only see a smidge of that productivity as increased income?

It's not that uncommon for one software engineer to outearn another by 10x, assuming a little job hopping.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#305

Post by BobbyJo »

beaconstudios wrote: post #287
BobbyJo wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire comment is him explaining exactly how to interpret the you are a company statement, elaborating on the ways in which he intends the metaphor to be used. Extending it with your own biases and arguing against those biases is reactionary and not super useful. You could have phrased much of your statement as "this should not be extended to mean...", or "If you are also implying X then Y", and it would have bee…

I just went back and reread it to see if I missed something, but aside from the profit-centered angle (which I've already conceded was a misreading on my part), nope, it still appears to be entirely market focused. I couldn't say if that was intended or if the author just over-extended the analogy (obviously I inferred the former), but the whole comment was framed around operating effectively within the market econom…

> but the whole comment was framed around operating effectively within the market economy. That's explicitly what it says.

Exactly. So where does all of this other stuff about being a robot and only optimizing for profit come in? The topic is work, and he's telling you how to think about work, not how to think about relationships with colleagues, hobbies, life goals, etc.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#306

Post by mwattsun »

> What do I mean by working as hard as possible? I mean someone who can finish all the work that is expected of them in less than the total time that they are meant to spend working and then asks for more, similar, work to do.

I was surprised the author didn't use the term 'workaholic' but I'm older so maybe it's an older term. Google trends does show a steady decline in the use of the term [1]

Oxford defines a workaholic as "a person who compulsively works hard and long hours." There are too many reasons for this compulsion to go into in a comment...

[1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=w...

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#307

Post by mesozoic »

caffeine wrote: post #135

You are the boss of a company of one. Your company sells labor to the labor market, it makes investments in assets, it borrows funds, etc. It’s your job to decide how that company is run. It’s your job to decide what investments that company needs to make to get good returns. It’s also your job to interpret the contracts your company enters into and decide what is acceptable, and to appropriately risk-manage legal ha…

Or as Jay-Z puts it "I'm not a business man. I'm a business, man."

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#308

Post by sanderjd »

Toine wrote: post #185
caffeine wrote: post #135

You are the boss of a company of one. Your company sells labor to the labor market, it makes investments in assets, it borrows funds, etc. It’s your job to decide how that company is run. It’s your job to decide what investments that company needs to make to get good returns. It’s also your job to interpret the contracts your company enters into and decide what is acceptable, and to appropriately risk-manage legal ha…

From a certain extreme perspective, there is some truth to what you're saying, but wow, this is so one-sided, extreme, partial and damaging. What decades of neo liberal brainwashing has done to people. This is so sad, really. We are NOT companies, we're not robots only driven by free will, we don't live in an economy. We are hardcore social animals with huge biological & affective needs, this is scientifically proven…

The parent comment didn't say that the "company of one" is all that you are. It is a useful concept for the part of a person's life that entails their career, and it's also critical to recognize that a career is only one of a number of the important facets of a life.

So I agree with you that it's a very partial treatment, but I didn't read it as attempting to be totalizing.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#309

Post by 52-6F-62 »

lliamander wrote: post #214
caffeine wrote: post #135

You are the boss of a company of one. Your company sells labor to the labor market, it makes investments in assets, it borrows funds, etc. It’s your job to decide how that company is run. It’s your job to decide what investments that company needs to make to get good returns. It’s also your job to interpret the contracts your company enters into and decide what is acceptable, and to appropriately risk-manage legal ha…

The amount of bad faith interpretation and just missing the point in response to this solid bit of career advice is just astounding.

I'm equally wary of the hubris in declaring one has defined all of the required variables for living well.

A review of ages of history would tell that nobody ever nails it down that fully. Everything has its price, including a bank account that never goes red.

Re: Maybe you should do less 'work'

#310

Post by s_dev »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #222
s_dev wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You are the boss of a company of one. This is a poor analogy and and an analogy that isn't needed (what exactly have you simplified for the reader here -- the concept of self-determination?). Not sure why you think that every person is basically a temporarily embarrassed CEO of a minuscule company and then to grandstand on that as if anyone who doesn't subscribe hasn't hit the same threshold of maturity.

>the concept of self-determination The concept of opportunity cost.

Not sure why it helps to think like a CEO to understand that concept.

Adages like: You can't have your bun and your penny. Or 'you can't have your cake and eat it' describe such a situation.

Whats happening here reminds me of an old git/hacker news joke: "Git gets easier once you understand branches are homeomorphic endofunctors mapping submanifolds of a Hilbert space"

Think like a CEO and making where you apply for work and delegate your time descicions even easier!

Want more money -- just think like a sequoia investor!

Post reply on HN