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

On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

libcom.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 390 posts

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#311

Post by toadi »

nilkn wrote: post #224
jug6ernaut wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not going to deny anything you said, its almost 100% true. But I believe your missing an important "fact"(maybe). That is its not really physically/physiologically/mentally possible to put in 40 hours of true "work". Not consistently anyways. So as much as it is we not truly putting in 40 hours, its the entire effort to be available for 40 hours IMO that you are getting paid for.

It's most definitely possible to put in 40 hours of work. This mainly happens in more labor-intensive jobs. Note that it doesn't have to be construction work. Even your primary care physician's job might be described as "labor-intensive," just because they have so many patients to meet with and so much administrative work to do for each one. I'm sure many (most?) doctors do put in a legitimate 40 hours of work a week…

I'm the same I'm a night person. When I was younger I operated the same as you. Chatting on irc during worktime and in the night do the work at home. But after marrying and getting kids I need the night time to rest...

Beste would be I work at home so during the day time I can take a nap. The kid wakes up early. Bring him to school. I take a nap. Pick him up again take some time out with him and when he sleeps I work. But because I have to sit at work I have to work during my least productive time. Because I don't have the energy to do 24/7.

So before marriage and kids I had 2 responsibilities. Going to work and actually working. But after marriage I had more and I couldn't cater it.

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#312

Post by dllthomas »

zaccus wrote: post #296
thedufer wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People actually like to work - to feel useful Your argument seems to hinge on this, but I see no reason to believe it. There have been fairly long-term experiments on BI, and people who choose not to work do things they enjoy - learning to paint, going to school, etc. There weren't any problems with people "needing to work" but not being able to. > It it proven and was highly successful during the previous depressi…

>There have been fairly long-term experiments on BI, and people who choose not to work do things they enjoy - learning to paint, going to school, etc. How are those things not work? They require focused effort, just the same as any job does. Does something not qualify as "work" just because it is enjoyable?

I think something does not qualify as "work", in the sense thedufer was using it, if you don't stand an appreciable chance of being paid for it. I think that's an important sense, but I agree that we need to be careful that this does not cause us to overlook or undervalue productive efforts where that isn't the case.

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#313

Post by toadi »

Zarel wrote: post #105
jseliger wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

White-collar employees 'work' (periods of focused concentration) a lot less than 40 hours There's definite truth to this, but it's also true that, as many hackers have attested, moments of downtime and wandering attention are often where new ideas come from. Sample: I suspect a lot of people aren't sure what's the top idea in their mind at any given time. I'm often mistaken about it. I tend to think it's the idea I'd…

Can't that kind of "work" be done just as well while doing yardwork or cooking or similar things? I don't see a strong reason to confine employees for 40 hours a week for that.

it's physical work vs knowledge work. When I'm trying to solve a problem for work I sometimes find a solution while doing yard work.

I've been thinking about it at work for 8 hours no solution. But doing some mindless activity I found a solution.

With knowledge work we should think about the value you deliver not at amount of hours you put in.

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#314

Post by ownedthx »

I work 40 hours a week at a minimum, every week, and have always done so. I'm a programmer primarily, but also do other related things (build, devops, customer support). But if I have a week with nothing but programming, I will still work a minimum of 40 hours a week.

The idea that you can't do more than 15-20 hours a week is not true.

I do love my job. Perhaps that's why I work this much.

I admit that I have a hard time relating to this general idea I see over and over about the need to fill up time with non-work. Also, over the years, I've met my fair share of those who also work just as hard.

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#315

Post by mahyarm »

ejstronge wrote: post #271
georgemcbay wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We only really live about 6 and a half years longer than we would prior to the industrial revolution on average. This relatively modest number is obscured somewhat by overall life expectancy averages which are buoyed by drastically reduced infant mortality. In any case, the political/economic response has been to move up the age of retirement, which isn't helpful to the long term knee health of the hypothetical farme…

We only really live about 6 and a half years longer than we would prior to the industrial revolution on average. This relatively modest number is obscured somewhat by overall life expectancy averages which are buoyed by drastically reduced infant mortality. I haven't heard this before - where are you getting your data?

Life expectancy numbers should be quoted at 'life expectancy at 10 years old' if you want to filter out child mortality in the past.

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#316

Post by solistice »

klunger wrote: post #239

The "elephant in the room" of this article was wealth redistribution. Technological advancements should make it possible for people to work 15-20 hours a week. In theory. The problem is that those same technological advancements go hand in hand with increased concentrations of wealth. It is the regrettable observed tendency of people with considerably more wealth than the masses to be stingy with that wealth, feel th…

What about the Giving Pledge[1] or the 2,000,000 people the Antony Robbins Foundation is trying to feed this year[2]? Whilst I agree with the assessment that charitable giving among the billionaires of the world might not be what it could be, there are shining examples of charitable giving amongst them, and I think that the generalization of stinginess, entitlement and heartlessness is overly broad and extremely harsh.

[1] http://givingpledge.org/index.html [2] https://www.anthonyrobbinsfoundation.org/

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#317

Post by AnimalMuppet »

dragonwriter wrote: post #302
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be repeating this idea over and over - that this is what a few people 200 years ago meant when they said "capitalism", and therefore that's what capitalism is. But that is not exactly what most people today mean by the term. Even if you were right 200 years ago, you're wrong today. Your approach therefore winds up changing the use of the term, to make it more useful for your side of the debate. That's not…

> You seem to be repeating this idea over and over - that this is what a few people 200 years ago meant when they said "capitalism", and therefore that's what capitalism is. You have misunderstood. It is not that it is what "capitalism" means because it was what the term was first coined for, its because it was both what the term was first coined for and what it has been used predominantly for since -- both in critic…

For example, you talked about cronyism. You said that it's inherent to capitalism. For authority for that claim, you said (but did not cite) 19th-century critics of capitalism.

I don't believe you that this is inherent to capitalism. Do you have anything this century (21st, not 20th)? An actual citation, not just a claim that this is what they said? Some kind of a study of the degree of cronyism in capitalism, preferably across countries? Something besides just an un-evaluatable claim that depends on the "everybody knows" and the definitions used by unspecified people two centuries ago?

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#319

Post by JoeAltmaier »

ownedthx wrote: post #314

I work 40 hours a week at a minimum , every week, and have always done so. I'm a programmer primarily, but also do other related things (build, devops, customer support). But if I have a week with nothing but programming, I will still work a minimum of 40 hours a week. The idea that you can't do more than 15-20 hours a week is not true. I do love my job. Perhaps that's why I work this much. I admit that I have a hard…

And yet, here you are, posting on HN. Is this part of work? Or are you off work now? Curious.

Re: On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs

#320

Post by ownedthx »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #319
ownedthx wrote: post #314

I work 40 hours a week at a minimum , every week, and have always done so. I'm a programmer primarily, but also do other related things (build, devops, customer support). But if I have a week with nothing but programming, I will still work a minimum of 40 hours a week. The idea that you can't do more than 15-20 hours a week is not true. I do love my job. Perhaps that's why I work this much. I admit that I have a hard…

And yet, here you are, posting on HN. Is this part of work? Or are you off work now? Curious.

I don't work at an office. I guess you can say I'm on a break.
Post reply on HN