996 • Hacker News Board

Re: 996

#281

Post by graemep » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 4:59 PM UTC

rsynnott wrote: post #265

graemep wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 996 is just theater for investors. Investors who have not heard of the research into productivity that says long hours have no significant benefit for skilled work? Who have not heard of diminishing returns? Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

A lot of these VC types, ah, not the smartest, to put it mildly. See their twitters (or, well, their investments; remember WeWork?)

A lot of their investments are made on the basis of what they can sell it for before it all falls apart.

So in that context theatre in general makes sense. Not sure why long working hours would be - its not something people fund managers about with regard to an IPO, for example, so it probably does not hugely raise exit values.

Re: 996

#282

Post by MrMorden » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 4:59 PM UTC

masterj wrote: post #217

graemep wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 996 is just theater for investors. Investors who have not heard of the research into productivity that says long hours have no significant benefit for skilled work? Who have not heard of diminishing returns? Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

Yes, many such cases

We have thousands of such caches.

Re: 996

#283

Post by mananaysiempre » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:02 PM UTC

Maken wrote: post #80

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.

The same elite is still running Russia today.

On the contrary, most of that elite has been rotting in the ground for nigh on a century. The elite I’m speaking of is the one that existed pre-1917 (with some offshoots and cultural descendants surviving until the 1960s). They weren’t saints by any means (in ways that sometimes rhyme quite well with slavers in the US, including the chronology), and I’m no monarchist, but it’s telling what part of e.g. meaningful science, or even good secondary education can trace its ancestry to people with pre-October-Revolution education (spoiler: all of it).

(To be clear, a university professor in pre-Socialist Russia is very well off compared to most, and except for the for a lucky few the October Revolution treated them accordingly.)

Re: 996

#284

Post by throwawaymaths » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:02 PM UTC

robterrell wrote: post #106

Aurornis wrote: post #23

When founders put 996 in their job descriptions or Tweet about their 996 culture it’s a helpful signal to avoid that company. The only time I’d actually consider crazy schedules was if I was the founder with a huge equity stake and a once in a lifetime opportunity that would benefit from a short period of 996. For average employees? Absolutely not. If someone wants extraordinary hours they need to be providing extrao…

If you're smart enough to get hired for one of these roles, and you're willing to work 996, be just a little bit smarter and found your own startup and take all the upside.

> just a little bit smarter and found your own startup

does that work? how do you convince investors to give you money if you don't have a network/didn't go to stanford?

Re: 996

#285

Post by joshdavham » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:03 PM UTC

If an early employee is being made to work as much as a founder, then they should probably be made a co-founder.

Re: 996

#286

Post by herval » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:03 PM UTC

glhaynes wrote: post #136

grantdong wrote: post #18

In 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.

Because for at least half of the 72-hour workweek, most employee will mentally checkout Management seeing this and doing the calculation: “if they’re gonna be checked out half the time, we’re really only getting 36 hours of the 40 we’ve been promised.”

That’s sadly the reality of the push to 996. When Google added early breakfast and late dinner, it was the same reasoning: if people stay “in the zone” longer, you end up squeezing out a bit more.

I get the feeling the push to 996 is in part due to the social media epidemic - everyone spends so much time doomscrolling, might as well keep people in the office much longer to account for that extra wasted time too.

Good times

Re: 996

#287

Post by HighGoldstein » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:04 PM UTC

kriops wrote: post #279

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

As long as the companies in question aren't monopolies on violence, it's a complete non-issue. So with that in mind, why would any sane person want to impose such an inefficient mechanism to allocate resources and make decisions within a company or corporation? The only good thing about democracy in the context of a state, after all, is that every other alternative is worse. But that is strictly because of the fundam…

Violence is not always physical. The likes of Meta have subjected the world to unfathomable violence, but we give them a pass because we can't see the scars with our eyes.

Re: 996

#288

Post by ohdeargodno » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:05 PM UTC

graemep wrote: post #205

whstl wrote: post #177

996 is just theater for investors. Saw this happening even at YC companies. There was always that stupid expectation of overworking, staying until 9. The reality is that people twiddle thumbs. And the disorganization and micromanagement power plays are enough to negate any additional worked hour. This ranges from pure disorganization in terms of what to build to having 3 hour meetings with the whole fucking company w…

> 996 is just theater for investors. Investors who have not heard of the research into productivity that says long hours have no significant benefit for skilled work? Who have not heard of diminishing returns? Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

>Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

The vast, vast majority of investors are nepo babies that inherited dad's company and his trust fund. The rest of them that may have worked have deluded themselves into thinking it was because of their "hard work" they got there

So uh, yeah, they're dumbasses. But even then: they don't care that long hours have no significant benefit: the people that will accept 996 will do it for the same salary as someone doing a 9-5. Don't anthropomophize investors, they never see people, they see numbers.

Re: 996

#289

Post by citizenpaul » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:06 PM UTC

graemep wrote: post #205

whstl wrote: post #177

996 is just theater for investors. Saw this happening even at YC companies. There was always that stupid expectation of overworking, staying until 9. The reality is that people twiddle thumbs. And the disorganization and micromanagement power plays are enough to negate any additional worked hour. This ranges from pure disorganization in terms of what to build to having 3 hour meetings with the whole fucking company w…

> 996 is just theater for investors. Investors who have not heard of the research into productivity that says long hours have no significant benefit for skilled work? Who have not heard of diminishing returns? Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

>Who have no experience of the reality of working long hours themselves?

The majority of rich people do not work for their money. They inherit or "soft inherit" the money. They do investment stuff because it makes them feel big and powerful and important.

You can tell by their speech patterns. Meet some rich people in real life and pay attention to just how slow their patterns of speech and movement are on average. Most of them act like they don't have a care and all the time in the world. Because they do and they always have. Hustle is for the plebs.

Look back at some of the big scams like Wework, FTX, theranos. I've read the documentaries and its the same story. All the rich people they bilked say the same thing. "THEY PAID SO MUCH ATTENTION TO ME" more or less.

Re: 996

#290

Post by ForOldHack » Sat, Sep 06, 2025, 5:06 PM UTC

Aurornis wrote: post #23

When founders put 996 in their job descriptions or Tweet about their 996 culture it’s a helpful signal to avoid that company. The only time I’d actually consider crazy schedules was if I was the founder with a huge equity stake and a once in a lifetime opportunity that would benefit from a short period of 996. For average employees? Absolutely not. If someone wants extraordinary hours they need to be providing extrao…

Crunch time for companies? Making billions? Hire more staff. A lack of planning on your part, does not constute an emergency on my part. The jackpot payday helped, but not by much. I worked from 10 til 10 6 days a week, and the product still stunk in ice.