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

996

lucumr.pocoo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 561 posts

Re: 996

#111

Post by rapatel0 »

In my life I've had the following experiences:

- In grad school, I averaged 4 hours of sleep (6/7 days per week) and about 8 hours on sunday for about 5 months straight.

- In my first startup, I worked 9am to 11pm (had to walk back from the office) for about 12 months.

- During my second startup gig, my son was born and also I had an 8 hour time difference between local time and the primary timezone of the office. I woke up at 4 am and generally went to bed at 10pm most days. Waking up randomly at night to deal with newborn through toddler moments for about 4 years.

My experience with all of this:

Pros:

- Really fun to grind at times and euphoric when something works.

- Build really strong relationships with people in the trenches.

Cons (I felt like I was working but in retrospect I wasn't really productive):

- Pseudo-working - I ended up spinning plates of unnecessary pseudo-work that didn't move the needle.

- Time Dilation (biggest factor) - 9pm to 12am feels like 30 minutes. That's because my brain was slowing down. The more sleep deprivation, the more this happens during the day.

- Physical Burnout - My body felt tired with a constant low level of pain and my energy levels low. Also, stress eating made me fat.

- Mental Burnout - My mind constantly looked for distractions. Even when trying to focus, I couldn't focus

- Tactical Stupidity - I didn't find clever ways to avoid or fix problems. I just focused on the next thing. I didn't have bandwidth to reason effectively as I normally would.

Overall:

It's definitely useful to crunch and a great way to be mission oriented, but crunch cannot be constant. Sometimes you need to eat a pile of shit, but you shouldn't smear shit out and take it one lick at a time.

Furthermore, when you've attained a degree of understanding, you should be able to find better ways to leverage your time. The brain and body needs downtime to be creative--the best solutions are creative.

Finally in the world of agents, we have near infinite leverage. As a community should be engaged in deeper thought, rather than trying to grind towards a finish line that constantly moves.

Re: 996

#112

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

analognoise wrote: post #86
mananaysiempre wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also took Russia going to shit to an extent that got everybody else scared—and that Russia still hasn’t really recovered from, because repeatedly cutting the elite out of your society (however unfairly it’s gotten there) really fucks that society up.

What? When America was strongest, we had a large and increasing middle class, and the top marginal tax rate was above 70% - it was in the 90s. We don’t need “the elite” - they don’t actually “create jobs”, and the “engine of the economy” is just a convenient vehicle for the rich (and private equity) to ruin the middle class further - it was never about “efficient markets”. If anything what we’ve seen over the last 40…

There is some benefit from having a pool of people with enough funds to take investment risks that the rank and file can't. They can outmaneuver any planned economy. The problem in the US is that those people have engineered themselves a disproportionate wealth disparity that doesn't generate a collective benefit.

Re: 996

#113

Post by macNchz »

binsquare wrote: post #44

I've been part of startups, big corps and have recently started my own startup. I've also heard from executives and management discuss how they work longer hours (from 1:1s as a dev myself). Now as a founder, many of my peers discuss working 24/7 or close to it. Most don't - but there's a hustle culture that glamorized lack of sleep as a badge of honor. The reality is that the "work" is very different for these diffe…

> there's a hustle culture that glamorized lack of sleep as a badge of honor

For all of the pop science/bro science/measured self/life optimization stuff that percolates in this world, it’s funny to me that glorifying a lack of sleep persists, when sleep is effectively a performance enhancing drug, and a lack of it effectively makes you dumber.

I recall an anecdote from a sports medicine doctor interviewed somewhere, about how his patients with overtraining syndrome-type issues were overwhelmingly high-powered professionals who were accommodating their Ironman training schedule by sleeping less, as opposed to Olympic athletes who often sleep a lot to properly recover from their training.

Re: 996

#114

Post by bicx »

I've found that when I work this kind of long hours for an extended period, I get far too attached to what I'm building and have a difficult time accepting that I need to change anything. Likely this happens because I've sacrificed so much to build up to the current state, and changing it would mean that I wasted time working that could have been spent with loved ones, hobbies, or just enjoying quiet.

When you work long hours on a regular basis, you begin to lose a healthy perspective on work and life.

Re: 996

#115

Post by jakelazaroff »

tremon wrote: post #56
Kapura wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe i've spent too much time trying to make computers operate efficiently, but it strikes me that if a process a) takes more time than should be necessary and b) produces sub-optimal results, we should maybe pursue other processes. and stop paying these idiots 7+ figures.

a) takes more time than should be necessary b) produces sub-optimal results Both of these claims are empty. Necessary according to whom? Sub-optimal against which metrics? All industrial processes are inefficient in some way because you're always dealing with engineering trade-offs. Staying in the computer domain: show me a system with optimal latency and I will show you an underutilized system; show me a system opti…

Fair point in general. With regard to 996 specifically, though, I think most of us recognize that we're talking about a system that is both less resilient to stress and fails to achieve higher throughput than the status quo alternative.

Re: 996

#116

Post by imajoredinecon »

drob518 wrote: post #95

Having worked at several startups, I’ll say that 996 is a lie. The best startups were ones that worked HARD for 8 to 10 hours, 5 days per week. What I always found at companies “working” 996 (or something close) was that mostly everyone was hanging out in the break room playing foosball or video games (or watching someone else do it). Sure, they were “in the office,” but the productivity of those hours beyond 8 was r…

Agreed. I work at a highly successful small company with a reputation for being grindy, and what that looks like in reality is probably 55 hours a week of largely focused productive work: typical core hours are 9-6:45ish, and you work longer a day or two a week and put in the odd evening or weekend hour. It’s hard to imagine working 9-9 every day

Re: 996

#117

Post by andsoitis »

analognoise wrote: post #86
mananaysiempre wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also took Russia going to shit to an extent that got everybody else scared—and that Russia still hasn’t really recovered from, because repeatedly cutting the elite out of your society (however unfairly it’s gotten there) really fucks that society up.

What? When America was strongest, we had a large and increasing middle class, and the top marginal tax rate was above 70% - it was in the 90s. We don’t need “the elite” - they don’t actually “create jobs”, and the “engine of the economy” is just a convenient vehicle for the rich (and private equity) to ruin the middle class further - it was never about “efficient markets”. If anything what we’ve seen over the last 40…

> When America was strongest, we had a large and increasing middle class, and the top marginal tax rate was above 70% - it was in the 90s.

I think you got this wrong. According to my sources the highest marginal income tax rate was 39.6%.

It was during the 50s, 60s, and 70s that it never dipped below 70%.

Source: https://bradfordtaxinstitute.com/Free_Resources/Federal-Inco...

The other thing is that different dimensions of the economy and other societal aspect have different lagging effects so you cannot simply assume causation or correlation between things during the same time frame.

Re: 996

#118

Post by chanux »

stavros wrote: post #11

I don't understand this expectation that employees work more, and stigma if you go home on time, yet we don't have a corresponding stigma for when the amount of money that reaches my account is "only" what we agreed my salary would be.

It's not a two way street my friend.

j/k. You make a valid point about the limit to expectations from the employer being the sky and yet what the employee get is static.

Re: 996

#119

Post by kaladin-jasnah »

j_bum wrote: post #5

When I was getting my Ph.D., my advisor jokingly told me that his lab has three 8 hour shifts per day, and I could pick two to work. This was never literally practiced. But excessive hours were the norm. And I loved it. It helped me launch into a successful career. But it hurt my relationship with my partner (now wife), and it burned me out. I miss those days, but I don’t miss what they did to my health.

As someone graduating from undergrad soon, and a intense and passionate person in CS, all of these reasons are seriously making me reconsider the idea of doing a PhD.

I've done the 36-hour straight work grinds, and working from 10 pm to 6 am for multiple days a week. However, I'm tired of doing that, and I've experienced enough burnout already. I'm also not okay with doing highly skilled work for more than 40 hours a week for pay that is almost demeaning—in the range of 35-45k a year. I'm more okay with it at a startup because at least the pay isn't THAT bad at more established ones with multiple rounds of funding. Just like the author, I have people in my life I'd rather devote time to because they bring be happiness. I'd like to have the savings to do practical and important things, such as do on vacation (which I find immensely good for my mental health), buy things for my other hobbies, and buy a house and have enough money to raise kids.

At least in Switzerland, I've heard your coworkers look down on your for NOT taking breaks and leaving at 5. The stipends are a bit nicer. Maybe it's worth it there. Maybe it's worth it anyway because the lack of CS jobs now will translate to requiring a PhD in the future. Maybe I should go through the extended hazing ritual known as a PhD because a startup's work won't be as technically rewarding as a PhD (the only person I know who wanted to do a PhD is now at a startup).

I still don't think the way we want people to work like this is okay. Sometimes I am a 996, but I sure don't want to be one when I need an extrinsic voice screaming into my ear to keep going because I'm not allowed to take a break.

Post reply on HN