Live data from Hacker News

Against Productivity

medium.com

31–40 of 110 posts

Re: Against Productivity

#31
post #22

I liked this essay, but it's also important to point out that GDP is very strongly correlated with health outcomes like life expectancy. It might be that we are starving our souls, but let's not forget about the fairly serious consequences of starving our bodies. I don't mean to say that I disagree with the conclusion, just that I think the historical context is missing something. We didn't become productive out of g…

Then how you explain the fact that USA has one of the lowest life expectancy among the developed world?

I think that what the author tries to explain is that, in some places, societies have gone too far in the seek of productiveness and, ironically, people there is less happy and healthy.

I guess finding the good balance is more important than trying to be the number one.

Re: Against Productivity

#32

Even though some valuable ideas are expressed in this piece, there's a lot of conflation of highly distinct social phenomena that goes on. The author looks at the notion of "productivity", judges that people blindly rush from birth straight to the grave in the pursuit of being "productive", somehow lops that in with GDPs (not per capita, not at PPP?) and the weird way in which we have industrialized pleasure, and con…

"...not for themselves, but maybe for society. Or for their boss."

A lot of things (like this) remind me that we are often barely different to bees and ants. Even down to our queens.

Re: Against Productivity

#33
post #16

This post is full of mistakes and unclear thinking. I can't figure out what the author is arguing against or for. Is she against quantifying wealth? I'm not sure. Is she against working hard? Maybe. Does she think it impossible to quantify happiness and well-being? I get the impression she does. First, the author made a huge mistake when talking about GDP. Her comparison used absolute instead of per-capita values. In…

Note that the author partly justifies it by the writing she produced later, which wouldn't have happened without her "unproductive" time.

Applied to programming, it seems to me the author is against measuring lines of code per day, and in favor of going for long walks and letting solutions pop into your head that don't require so much code. Or longer walks that cause you to realize the whole program is bunk and you ought to be building something different. It's pretty difficult to measure the productivity of this sort of thing (except perhaps after a lot of hindsight), but it can have a huge effect on your long-term results.

Richard Feynmann wrote about this. He got burned out trying to be scientifically productive, started screwing around, got curious about the physics of something trivial, and ended up figuring out something important.

Re: Against Productivity

#34
post #16

This post is full of mistakes and unclear thinking. I can't figure out what the author is arguing against or for. Is she against quantifying wealth? I'm not sure. Is she against working hard? Maybe. Does she think it impossible to quantify happiness and well-being? I get the impression she does. First, the author made a huge mistake when talking about GDP. Her comparison used absolute instead of per-capita values. In…

If you're attempting to find a productive rhetorical truth in a piece about shedding productivity as a focus, you're missing the point.

In fact, you're arguing that she should 1) be able to quantify happiness, 2) consider life-expectancy as a proxy for life quality, and 3) pursue optimizing life by quantifying and measuring it. I think you're missing many points.

The whole idea—the wisdom, if you will—is that you lose an extremely precious thing by focusing on measurement and optimization and increasing quantity and productivity. She has an extremely clear and valid point, which lucidly carries so much truth in it, and is not particularly hindered by slight rhetorical mistakes or lack of clarity. It's that true.

In fact, the clarity and style and beauty of this piece remarkably matches almost exactly how it feels. It's so confusing and seemingly contradictory and paradoxical, yet we know it's true. Even so, no one knows what, exactly, to do with it; so we call it unproductive and go on trying to live our highly productive lives. It's so much bigger than we are, this thing, and resistance seems futile.

And this is when you begin looking into Zen, and things become clearer and muddier at the same time, but you have a fleeting chance, at least, of converging on the ability to hold a thing in your head that's both true and false at the same time, and come just a bit closer, thereby, to the reality of things.

Re: Against Productivity

#35
post #9
post #2

This may be far wiser than almost anything that has ever been posted on HN, but you can't feed this shit to people who are not ready for it. It is a lesson which can not be taught. The real truths in life are not something you can read about. Real knowledge can only ever come from within. You can never lead someone to knowledge, but you CAN inspire them to seek their own - and you've done a pretty good job at that. T…

"A decade in the lab will save you an afternoon in the library."

For sure. I'm thankful that my children and students will not have to spend my decade in the lab. If I manage to tell them in a way that they can hear.

Re: Against Productivity

#36

Fantastic piece. I believe in similar things. Here, where I currently live, we spend so much time working and being productive that we forget to ask questions. "Why am I doing this?" "What is the meaning of it?" "What is really important?" Then we end up lost, depressed and what not. Not all of us do, but some? Certainly. We do it because others do it. Because we believe that pursuing a different venue is not realist…

I'm a recent immigrant to USA, and while I don't presume to know everything about American culture, your comment and this article really resonate with my observations in the time I've spent here.

There is a consistent message pervasive in the culture - you are worth what you produce. You are defined by what you produce. Productivity is the currency that buys you respect in society. I've met many many people who rise above this view, but as a society, this is prevalent. Everything has to be about "winning" in some way - even if you are working out, or playing a game, you gotta "play hard", compete, kick the other guys ass, not feel sorry for yourself, not mope, just WIN. Forget about what you're winning, what or why you produce, as long as you produce more than the other guy. Other cultures may use wisdom, or age, or kindness as currencies for respect/status in society.

And then people wonder why society is becoming increasingly isolated. See, when you tie your worth to what you produce, you must give up everything to produce. EVEN IF "producing" means painting a beautiful portrait in your garage, the compulsion to produce is the problem. It makes people focus too hard on themselves and how they can improve/level-up. Too focused inward to see the people around you and their lives, and the joy that can bring. That isolation leads to addiction, depression, isolation and all manner of mental illness. Because humans have evolved to be social creatures. It is hardwired in our nature. We cannot and should not try to fight that. We should not view that as a sign of weakness or an obstacle to productivity, or money, or fame, or any other idol.

Re: Against Productivity

#37
post #14

This is an excellent post because it focuses on a central topic: mankind's behavioral predispositions. The world today runs on profit and productivity. Morals, ethics and philosophies are irrelevant hindrances, as SV and Wall St. have demonstrated repeatedly. This is all well and good, as the last century apparently demonstrated that all ideologies and philosophies are the devil incarnate (Nazism, Leninism, Maoism, e…

>>But I do wonder one thing...did we quit on ideology prematurely?

In reality we quit on the idea that society can be engineered, but we nevertheless retain the notation that individual actors can be engineered. For example, we reject the notation that the communist party can build a stable society but we retain social value that you shouldn't judge people solely on wealth.

>>I can envision a society built around the pursuit of knowledge.

Its hard to say what is and isn't knowledge, I shudder to think of a society based on research publications.

This goes back to my first point. Its very hard to engineer a society. We can only hope to make reasonable actors.

Re: Against Productivity

#38
post #9
post #2

This may be far wiser than almost anything that has ever been posted on HN, but you can't feed this shit to people who are not ready for it. It is a lesson which can not be taught. The real truths in life are not something you can read about. Real knowledge can only ever come from within. You can never lead someone to knowledge, but you CAN inspire them to seek their own - and you've done a pretty good job at that. T…

"A decade in the lab will save you an afternoon in the library."

Do you know who this quote is attributed to?

Re: Against Productivity

#39

805 million people on earth don't have enough to eat. 783 million don't have access to clean water. 1.9 million die of diarrhea every year. 176 million African adults can't read. And this guy sits around the first world for a couple years with the back of his hand nailed to his forehead. If he can't bring himself to do more than write a couple essays and snap some photos over a couple years, I would suggest a refresh…

The author is a woman.

Re: Against Productivity

#40

If you liked the theme of this essay you will like this book: "How to Be Idle" by Tom Hodgkinson. The book starts similarly and expands the idea of idleness to trying to bring it into your life.

And more recently, "How Much Is Enough?" by Robert Skidelsky and Edward Skidelsky
Post reply on HN