I think it's fine for kids who want to do that. You should try to get yourself into a situation around other motivated kids who want to do something great together as a tight knit focused team at that age; it's fun and you'll make lifelong friends. But by 30 you'll start to understand that work is just a tiny part of life and not really what matters at all. It will naturally shake itself out by then as simply no one will accept it in this country as a widespread policy.
996
121–130 of 561 posts
Re: 996
#122These times really do feel like those once-in-a-century redefinitions of work and labor, similar to how we got Child Labor Laws and 40-hour work weeks from the labor movement early last century. Intrinsically, more people are realizing that the former social contract was long ago fed into a shredder, and that the lack of a formal contract will have consequences. Technology broke down the 40-hour work week by enabling…
We probably need to rethink how companies are structured - there are (many) companies with revenues greater than most countries but are (in theory) dictatorships with no official ability to change course if the one guy who owns the shares does not want to.
Who is the ‘demos’ in a company? Who gets a vote ? Will voting really slow things down?
Re: 996
#123The first two quotes are from founders of:
- BrowserUse - Founded 2024
- Greptile - Founded 2023
The third quote is from a VC who has never founded a startup himself and has a clear interest in pushing founders to trade work-life balance for his own quick returns.
So none of these people worked on anything longer than 2 years. I wonder what will happen if we check back in 5–10 years. Will they still be doing and promoting 996, or will they be burned out and have changed their minds? Make your bets.
Re: 996
#124I've always told my team: focus on being super productive in the 40 hours a week you are working. Then go home and do something that really matters.
My belief has been very few lay on their death bed wishing they had given more to their jobs. But many lay there regretting they didn't invest more in their families.
I also believe that 40 truly focused hours is more productive than many people who do 50+ hour weeks just because of the limitations of human physiology.
There are times when a crunch is warranted but they are much fewer than any would be lead to believe. If, on principle, you take away "overtime" as an option, then it makes your more focused with the time you do have.
I've employed people doing software development mostly billed by the hour for almost 20 years. So my personal wealth is directly tied to how much my team works. And in all that time, there was only once that I asked a dev to do 45 hour weeks for a summer due to exceptional circumstances. And I truly asked, I didn't insist.
I've also personally put in more time than that in some weeks/months, but I compensate by working less when that period is done. And, I always know it's not long term sustainable, so there needs to be a goal in mind.
It's not perfect, but I'm confident my priorities are in the right place. And I'm confident my team benefits greatly by being cared for in this way.
Re: 996
#125In China, its birthplace, '996' always seen as practice of failed management. Because for at least half of the 72-hour workweek, most employee will mentally checkout (in Chinese we call this 摸鱼). Although middle managers know their subordinates are inefficient, they still impose working hour KPI on their team, so they can demonstrate their own value to upper management.
Touch fish?
Re: 996
#126I don't understand what people spend their time at work on. I have a very successful career, top .01% income for my age bracket, and never worked more than 40 hours at one job in my life.
Re: 996
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but why does this rhetoric both persist, and only go one way? You never hear anything about an expectation from employers to pay more than what was agreed. If I'm an employee with miniscule equity, why would I put in any more time and effort than what was agreed?
Are you actually agreeing to specific hours? For example, in a contract, as an hourly worker, or with some formal arrangement with the company? If so, then yes you should only work those hours. However, if you’re a typical full-time employee in most countries you don’t have agreed upon hours. > If I'm an employee with miniscule equity, why would I put in any more time and effort than what was agreed? Again, if someth…
I'm British and every job contract I've ever signed included the expected weekly hours. Maybe I got lucky?
Re: 996
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
When 996 makes being able to afford a house easier, many people will be compelled to do it.
What’s the point in having a house if you only spend one day in it, which realistically you will spend doing chores and sleeping?
China has this figured out. You pay a mortgage on a house that will never be built.
Re: 996
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is where the slippery slope leads but a lot of materialist cultures manage to find a midpoint and stick there. In a sense this isn't even materialist: you are chasing numbers in an account for their own sake. A materialist wants things, and might sacrifice everything else to get them, but doesn't want to do the work for its own sake. Ultimately this is feeding the ego, the least material thing of all. And I can't…
It really is materialist, as numbers in an account is a direct representation for the number of coins you have, which are spent fueling a life full of hedonistic pleasures and vices. The ego is attachment to pleasures and vices.
When you’re too busy to spend the money you make, the observable effect of a pay raise is mostly the number in the account going up faster
Re: 996
#130For those like me who didn’t know what 996 was: it stands for working from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week.
What the heck? And why is everyone even discussing this? What kind of nightmare.