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

Executive Function Theft

hedgehoglibrarian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 227 posts

Re: Executive Function Theft

#81

Post by maxbond »

satisfice wrote: post #69
rexpop wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, for one, appreciate your deliberate and expository introspection but if you need this explained to you, there's a chance you will never—and I mean never—get it, but here goes: Some people believe that we owe it to one another to be considerate to one another, ie to take responsibility for one another's emotional well-being. Yes, that "underlying idea" is actually quite common in polite society if not outright ubiq…

The same reasonable people who believe that also believe in reasonable limits to taking responsibility for other peoples' emotional well-being. It's not right to cry "theft" as if it is unethical to leave things undone that should not be done by anyone, or as if it is unethical to delegate to people to whom it is in your lawful power to delegate. It is, in a way, EVIL, to call that theft. It trivializes the notion of…

> It's not right to cry "theft" as if it is unethical to leave things undone that should not be done by anyone

I understand that Newport argues that and tasks shouldn't be done at all, but this is not at all a fair representation of the author's position.

> It is, in a way, EVIL, to call that theft. It trivializes the notion of theft.

You can critique their rhetoric but "evil" is an overreaction. Indeed, your critique that they are weakening the definition of theft applies to your use of "evil".

Re: Executive Function Theft

#82

Post by darkerside »

maxbond wrote: post #64
brightlancer wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PP said that it was _compared_ to an illegal act, which the author did. > (Theft by violent means is called robbery.) (Legally, that's not accurate.) _Morally_, all theft is violence. Shoplifting a pack of chewing gum is extremely minor, almost zero but it's not zero. Shoplifting also includes the "flash mobs" which run in and steam items, or the folks who walk into stores (e.g. in California) with trash bags and loo…

I'm open to theft being violence (though skeptical, that seems to elevate property to the moral status of a person), but comparing something to theft isn't in the same universe as incitement to violence. When you say someone has implied that someone else is "inciting violence" I think the comparison has broken down and we're getting into accusation territory. That certainly wasn't what I meant by shoplifting but if I…

And when somebody does defend the store and the situation becomes violent, will you feel the same way?

Maybe I just think theft is worse, and that violence is relatively less unacceptable than you do.

Re: Executive Function Theft

#83

Post by maxbond »

darkerside wrote: post #82
maxbond wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to theft being violence (though skeptical, that seems to elevate property to the moral status of a person), but comparing something to theft isn't in the same universe as incitement to violence. When you say someone has implied that someone else is "inciting violence" I think the comparison has broken down and we're getting into accusation territory. That certainly wasn't what I meant by shoplifting but if I…

And when somebody does defend the store and the situation becomes violent, will you feel the same way? Maybe I just think theft is worse, and that violence is relatively less unacceptable than you do.

How does this relate to the article and how does it support your assertion the author accused Newport of inciting violence?

(To make my ethical position explicit, I believe in nonviolence and I don't believe in theft. But I don't think that's relevant to a discussion about a turn of phrase.)

Re: Executive Function Theft

#84

Post by [deleted] »

brightlancer wrote: post #65
vonnik wrote: post #35

TLDR: some people and organizations make us to tedious work. Personal opinion, when that person is your boss, just do your job. When that organization is supposed to serve you but makes you do work, look for an alternative.

But you didn't include the parts about sexism, racism, classism, elitism, ableism, etc. The author is a victim of a _system_.

[deleted]

Re: Executive Function Theft

#85

Post by aatd86 »

jimmaswell wrote: post #59

My parents did this to me the whole time I lived with them whenever they had to do something involving the computer. It was exhausting and infuriating. "It's so easy for you and so hard for me" - it wouldn't be hard if you'd start trying and stop making yourself helpless.

This so much ;D I mean I alwaysbtellnthelnto prepare, there will be a day I won't be here to write those emails anymore.

Anyway... It's also the least one can do when you're with them but that's not necessarily practical.

Re: Executive Function Theft

#86

Post by yu3zhou4 »

canvascritic wrote: post #25

Oof, this hits close to home. during my tenure as a principal engineer at a certain startup, well known and loved in these parts. Anyway I was new to engineering leadership and this big initiative came down from above to migrate to k8s. team was excited to be done with the myriad adhoc scripts and duct tape infra. But it turned out the team was very junior, and I was green as a leader and manager. every day brought a…

Would be great to read a longer piece about your experience. Do you have a blog? If not, maybe you consider one?

Re: Executive Function Theft

#87

Post by [deleted] »

frob wrote: post #15

On a side note, the author's example is exactly why I have chosen to not use FSAs. Sure, it saves me 20% or so since it's pre-tax money, but is my stress, time, executive function, and sanity all worth that? Plus if I screw up and don't spend the money or file something wrong, I lose it or pay penalties.

[deleted]

Re: Executive Function Theft

#88

Post by zo1 »

RecycledEle wrote: post #28

Accounts Payable implements as much friction as they can to avoid paying money. They think this is their job. I see many companies treating their customers like criminals or slaves; many more than used to pull that stuff. It's only going to get worse.

It's because of commodity-ification of debt. Like a conversion-funnel, they turned it from a human function into an assembly line that eventually leads to your non-payment being sold to a debt collection agency. They assume you won't pay.

So many times I've looked at a reminder email, put it aside because it pisses me off. Yes I have the money to pay, yes its like 2mins to do in my banking app, yes I will settle it, but No I won't do it now that you effing emailed me about it. I'll do it on my own time...and then I forget till the next annoying reminder email that pisses me off even more.

Some days I wonder if some of this stuff is normal or if it's just me. I'd love to just have an assistant to offload this mental drain to either way.

Re: Executive Function Theft

#89

Post by Retric »

KRAKRISMOTT wrote: post #47
haswell wrote: post #43

> I will admit to never having been able to read Cal Newport’s Deep Work all the way through — I got too irritated — but I would point to his dismissive naming of the idea of “shallow work”, which he defines as logistical and often repetitive tasks, such as writing short emails. Newport recommends entirely stopping or poorly performing that work; I read this as encouraging readers to commit EFT against others around…

But getting rid of shallow work is the entire reason why people get executive assistants.

That doesn’t actually eliminate the work. The books point isn’t about delegation it’s that nobody should be doing shallow tasks.

Either avoid the need for them or automate them.

Re: Executive Function Theft

#90

Post by zo1 »

conradev wrote: post #48
msteffen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the 'thief' doesn't gain the thing being 'stolen'. IIUC, they do—the thief delegates tedious, finicky work to preserve their own executive function for “important stuff”. They don’t have more executive function than before the task existed, but they do have more than before they delegated it, and the delegation is the theft.

Isn't this just a description of hierarchical management? Which most organizations implement, including co-ops The article is just describing a phenomenon where the people with the power to decide who works on what are not the people in the explicit power structure, and thus don't have the same accountability that usually comes with that power?

I get it the other way around. From lazy subordinates (usually juniors but older people too) that don't want to do the work required of them so instead they come "asking questions" because "they don't understand". Like if I wanted to do the work and figure out all the problems in this task, I'd have done it myself instead of delegating it to you.

It's almost as if they want to be little assembly line workers that make the same CRUD widget over and over. They're not lazy, they're probably also just as stripped of their EF as the rest of us plebs.

Post reply on HN