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

An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 353 posts

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#181

Post by pdonis »

carlosjobim wrote: post #133
pdonis wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem with this article is that one does not need capital to start a tech company Yes, one does. One needs tech skills. Those are capital. (You agree with this since you say tech workers get more valuable with age and experience.) They're just not capital in the form of a large pot of cash that can be used to throw money at problems.

Skills are not capital in the communist vocabulary. Skills have an unlimited supply that can not be limited. If you want to mind-bend people into believing skills are capital, then all the workers in the world are bona-fide capitalists, since they are using their skills to get paid.

> Skills are not capital in the communist vocabulary.

I have no interest in the communist vocabulary. Communism killed more than a hundred million people in the 20th century. I would hope we have figured out by now that communism doesn't work.

> all the workers in the world are bona-fide capitalists, since they are using their skills to get paid.

In the sense that most of their pay is return on capital, not "labor", yes, that is exactly right.

However, the extent to which workers realize this, and act accordingly, in order to maximize the return on the capital they own (their skills), varies extremely widely.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#182

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

jojobas wrote: post #159
ravenstine wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My takeaway from what you said is that the employee-company relationship is inherently adversarial to a degree and to not forget that. In general, I wholeheartedly agree. However, > don’t pay any mind to burning bridges not all bridges should be burned. If you mean the bridge between you and a company, yes, said bridges should not be treated as anything more than a rope bridge over a canyon. I would limit burning bri…

>is inherently adversarial Until they invented stock options and started handing them out left right and centre.

This did not change the inherently adversarial nature. It just obscured it by adding a veneer of "see? our interests are the same as your interests!", despite this being true of just one (small) aspect of the union of all interests.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#183

Post by brightstep »

Natsu wrote: post #140
brightstep wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All companies seek to devalue their workers. It is the nature of the profit motive. The less a company can pay for labor, the more it reaps as profit.

Man, you must have worked for some terrible companies. I have friends at everywhere I ever worked and we always tried to cooperate.

So have I. I love the people I work with (usually). That doesn’t change the nature of the wage relationship. We workers produce value through our labor which companies pay for in wages. Capital (CEOs, founders, VCs) wants to maximize the ratio of value to cost, therefore they wish to pay us as little as possible while getting maximum efficiency. It has nothing to do with liking your coworkers.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#184

Post by ddoolin »

uoaei wrote: post #125
qualudeheart wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about owner-operators? Truckers who own their own trucks are both laborers and capitalists.

A truck is useless without a route. In the case of trucking, "the means of production" includes customer lead generation, driver dispatch, etc. Owning their truck only gives them the flexibility to switch employers more easily.

Agreed. But just as a thought experiment: what about a truck driver who owns their own trucking company, employs around a dozen other drivers, and also drives as one of its drivers?

I would guess, theoretically, this is impossible past a certain size of enterprise, but in the meantime I would imagine that they would be both. A capitalist laboring as part of their own means of production.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#185

Post by mustacheemperor »

SergeAx wrote: post #172

I believe that the best antidote for this utterly bullshit marxist propaganda is ESR[0]'s essay "Why hackers should eject SWJs". Please take time to read this (and, if you like it, other his essays): http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918 [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond

I truly cannot see the connection between ESR's criticisms in that essay, and the subject matter of the OP article. Can you you please add some clarifying context?

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#186

Post by pdonis »

ddoolin wrote: post #173
pdonis wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Capitalist vs laborer is a true dichotomy, in that one cannot be both simultaneously within one context. Sure one can. One can be a "laborer" in the sense of spending one's working hours doing work for an employer instead of starting a startup or owning your own company, and also be a capitalist in that same context in the sense of using your skills as bargaining power with your employer to get the best return on t…

Using one's skills as bargaining power does not make one a capitalist. That person is still a laborer, their skills are the means of production. Capitalists control the means of production, laborers are the means.

The "labor" vs. "means of production" dichotomy is just as false and pernicious as the "labor" vs. "capital" dichotomy. "Means of production" are capital. That includes skills.

> Capitalists control the means of production

As far as machines in factories go, yes, the owners of the company own those, the workers do not (unless the company is a worker cooperative, those do exist).

As far as skills go, though, no, capitalists do not control those--the people who have the skills do. But they need to realize that their skills represent ownership of capital in order to make the best use of their control over them. Many, if not most, "workers" do not realize this--and hence they are at the mercy of the "capitalists" who do.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#187

Post by wpwpwpw »

nickff wrote: post #109
darth_avocado wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how you sugarcoat it, the extra hours you make people work for no extra increase in wages, is free labor. Just because you’re getting paid doesn’t mean the company doesn’t get free labor. The company paid for the regular hours and the rest was free labor.

What if you get a pay bump for no increase in hours? Is that free money?

you have an answer in marx's capital: all surplus is wage theft because the capitalist, who does nothing, gets money from those who do the work. so any more money you get is not free, it's just a slight reduction in the money which is getting stolen from you.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#188

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

RajT88 wrote: post #35
lampshades wrote: post #16

Yes, I agree 100%. Do not help those who seek to devalue you. Extract as much value for as little work as possible. The people who run these companies are not your friends and they’re not your family, take advantage of them at every opportunity you can. Don’t care if the company fails, don’t pay any mind to burning bridges, don’t bother giving two weeks, and certainly don’t do anything more than the bare minimum. All…

Burning those bridges carries a cost to your career. If you think about your retirement prospects as amassing wealth by optimizing the "Area under the graph", it's really important to build a professional network so if one job opportunity ends, you can quickly work your network to find another similarly paying job. Failing that, you take a big pay cut, and impact your salary history. I can't imagine an employer makin…

> If you think about your retirement prospects as amassing wealth by optimizing the "Area under the graph", it's really important to build a professional network so if one job opportunity ends, you can quickly work your network to find another similarly paying job.

Do you believe the supermarket shelf stockers think this way?

Yes, you've come to understand yourself to be in a different socio-economic class than supermarket shelf-stackers, the class of people who "optimize the area under the graph". But what you fail to see is that your employer has no incentive for maintaining your status in a different socio-economic class, and lots of incentives for changes that drive you, the exalted, mutually loved, always cooperative SWE into the same life+work situation as a supermarket shelf stocker.

(apologies, if necessary, to all the fine shelf stockers who are just living their best lives; all 3 of you)

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#189

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

Supermancho wrote: post #164
etothepii wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought this might be the trick that would get pulled. House price inflation is a completely inappropriate measure. House prices are not kept stupidly high by the 1% or capital class but by the 50.1% that vote against allowing any kind of building anywhere near an existing house, not near an existing house or that, heav'n forfend, might endanger the habitat of the lesser spotted newt.

> House prices are not kept stupidly high by the 1% or capital class but by the 50.1% that vote against allowing any kind of building anywhere near an existing house, The discussion is not about a specific area or your specific area. There are large parts of the US where there is no such NIMBY voting allowed, much less enacted to prohibit construction. Prices have more or less ballooned everywhere in the US. Random h…

> There are large parts of the US where there is no such NIMBY voting allowed

It's called zoning. Do you know of any notable residential areas without zoning?

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#190

Post by p0pcult »

pdonis wrote: post #176
p0pcult wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really don't understand what a capitalist is, do you? Fortunately, I have enlisted ChatGPT to help you! p0pcult: Explain what Karl Marx would tell a five year old a capitalist is ChatGPT: Karl Marx would tell a five year old that a capitalist is someone who owns a business and makes money by hiring people to work for them and selling the things they make for a profit. The capitalist gets rich, while the workers w…

> This is what Karl Marx calls "exploitation." Karl Marx himself knew he was peddling bullshit; he once told Engels, "I have of course so worded my proposition as to be right either way." The real tragedy is that several generations of intellectuals swallowed his bullshit hook, line, and sinker, and in the 20th century well north of a hundred million people died as a result. I would hope we have figured out by now th…

Yes, he told Engels that in reference to some military maneuvers he suggested the English take, when he was writing as a war correspondent.[1] Not his economic works.

Please, do yourself a favor: stop digging. The hole is only getting deeper.

[1] https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1857/l...

Post reply on HN