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

The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–78 of 78 posts

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#71

Post by kkfx »

Something can be *lazy synchronous* for instance you can write some code now, stop for an hour and start again, but you still need to be sync-ed with others in a few-days time frame in general. You can pack customers orders at an irregular peace but they want them delivered so you should anyway produce something fast enough. Something MUST be synchronous, a doctor can't cure a patient asynchronously. A dentist can't fill a tooth cavity asynchronously with the patient.

That's can be called flexible scheduling, the opposite of the most current industrial just-in-time model. Drop the just-in-time model means more smartness, knowledge, decision power is needed at every level of the process, like Toyota win against Ford, like we have done in the past and we have tried to stop in the relatively recent time to centralize power.

The centralization theory was designed basically because some see automation as a way to satisfy their thirst for power, cutting intermediate hierarchies and rule as ancient absolute monarch, formally with the justification that dictatorship make decisions faster then Democracies. Such theory prove again to be a scam, we can't sustain for long. Complex hierarchies of course have their issues, but thanks to automation and TLCs we can overcome many of them. Only we need *distributed* knowledge, culture, power, like the ITs of early pioneering days have foresee for a bright future. Unfortunately modern management/politicians/finance cohorts hate such model as they hate Democracy.

The real fallacy is that yes, dictatorships are faster IF they came from a non-dictatorship background. Nazi scientist realize a big advance in knowledge BUT they was not born/educated under the nazi regime. That's the point. It's about time to switch from the "infinite growth model" to the "infinite evolution model".

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#72

Post by bitwize »

soupfordummies wrote: post #59
cercatrova wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like symptoms of adult ADHD from what I've read on HN about it.

Also sounds like symptoms of boredom :P

ADHD people are more sensitive to boredom than normies; they are boredom canaries if you will. Normies can deny themselves the excitement/novelty marshmallow in exchange for other rewards later; ADHD people have much greater difficulty with this.

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#73

Post by coffeefirst »

solaarphunk wrote: post #38
lmm wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you have a position that requires 40hrs/wk or less and no work on weekends whatsoever, consider yourself lucky. That's backwards. If you have a position that requires over 40hrs/wk, or any weekend work without overtime pay, consider yourself exploited (and if you're doing it without it being required, consider yourself a scab). Join a union, quit that job, or both.

If you have sufficient equity upside, it’s not unreasonable to put in “extra” time to grow the company.

And in general, if growth is dependent on this, then there is no plan and you should value the equity accordingly.

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#74

Post by hopperific »

jdminhbg wrote: post #8
itslennysfault wrote: post #3

small but important correction... > However, when society industrialised, a rigid, five-day, 40-hour workweek arose in factory settings ummm... no. More like the 6 day 16 hour per day work-week arose in factory settings. The five-day, 40-hour workweek was fought and died for by the labor movement.

Quoted post unavailable.

You comment is greyed out, even if it's correct. At least your holding up a flag for the remnant.

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#75

Post by idiotsecant »

barry-cotter wrote: post #55
idiotsecant wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Productivity gains do not lead to increased worker benefit, they lead to increased owner benefit. Organized labor leads to increased worker benefit.

Nah, depends on the ability to coordinate. Communist governments can suppress wages even with enormous productivity gains, like post 1949 Shanghai. Capitalists mostly can’t though. Even with non state puppet unions completely illegal as in the PRC or Vietnam competition for workers leads to rises in wages. Maintaining a cartel without being able to enforce contracts to that effect is hard with fewer than 10 conspirat…

Unions are necessary, as we see when we look at the US. As productivity has increased workers are receiving a smaller and smaller piece of the resulting wealth. Not coincidentally labor is less organized now than it has been in almost a century. If you have power you get resources, simple as that. Individual workers usually have almost no power - they may get a little bit of power temporarily when their skill is heavily in demand but that isn't enough to counteract the inherent power imbalance capital possesses.

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#76

Post by idiotsecant »

barry-cotter wrote: post #58
uoaei wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've misinterpreted GP. Tech salaries started high, and that is mostly a scarcity problem. The market will correct that in due time without labor organizing because the profits go to the owners, not the workers. The owners are the ones who decide what happens with the profit (reinvestment, their employees' wages, their own wages, etc.).

Yes, with a powerful union you can restrict entry so there are fewer workers. The workers who are allowed in get a better deal. The people who are kept out by the union suffer and the consumers suffer through lower production and higher prices.

It's not necessary to restrict the number of workers - only to refuse to work if the owners allocate too little of the resulting profits back to the workers. This is in fact the whole point of a union.

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#77

Post by 2000UltraDeluxe »

barry-cotter wrote: post #70
2000UltraDeluxe wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need for that. The golden c64 generation will start with early retirements in a few years. Younger generations have less interest in IT (on average) and will yield fewer and fewer tech workers.

What I describe is the mechanism by which unions increase wages for their members. It would be good if you could explain what you were trying to say and its relevance.

Less workers means scarcity and implies better wages and conditions.

Re: The non-linear workdays changing the shape of productivity

#78

Post by barry-cotter »

2000UltraDeluxe wrote: post #77
barry-cotter wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I describe is the mechanism by which unions increase wages for their members. It would be good if you could explain what you were trying to say and its relevance.

Less workers means scarcity and implies better wages and conditions.

Yes. You get less workers by restricting entry. That reduces output but increases union workers bargaining power, making society generally poorer but the members of the union richer.
Post reply on HN