An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer • Hacker News Board

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#321

Post by RajT88 » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 2:48 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #294

RajT88 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what you fail to see I don't fail to see the point of the article, I just think it's wrong. > your employer has no incentive for maintaining your status in a different socio-economic class, and lots of incentives for changes that drive you, the exalted, mutually loved, always cooperative SWE into the same life+work situation as a supermarket shelf stocker. Worker protections are good. So is being good at your j…

> Even shelf stockers have basic human dignity Sure, but no thanks to their employers. Are you telling me that you don't know anyone who doesn't actually like their job, and gets nothing from it except a paycheck? Because it certainly sounds that way.

I am certainly not saying that, but I am now sure that if you think that, that you probably didn't get my original post at all, and are unlikely to do so no matter how I explain it.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#322

Post by Natsu » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 3:14 PM UTC

MarkMarine wrote: post #295

Natsu wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the capitalist class colludes to push down wages, make working conditions worse, and do mass layoffs when the company is so profitable that they have so much money they don't even know what to do with it and are therefore buying back stock, are there any laws that protect workers? Yes, the laws don't magically vanish. Also, you seem to be neglecting inflation in those numbers, which is the main reason things h…

I was a marine. I got paid 1000$ a month to be shot at, by people who know how to hit a target. I know what a bad job for low pay is. I also know what solidarity is. You gave a bunch of examples for why people don’t need unions, because laws will protect them, then undercut your examples with your personal anecdotes about making yourself valuable. You don’t need laws to protect if you’re “valuable.” … but you’re only…

No question, that's a bad job for low pay. But based on the experience of friends, I can also guess that your solidarity did nothing to fix that, and GTFO from the military did.

And no, becoming valuable doesn't undercut anything I said. It means you have other people willing to hire you. This is an economic problem, with real profits going down even as numbers go up thanks to inflation that got boosted by energy supply issues.

There are issues from technical disruptions, e.g. the proverbial buggy whip makers. But these are more reason to understand what you do that gives value, not less. For example, if I were an artist, I'd be learning how to use Stable Diffusion, not hoping that I can continue to live on simple image commissions.

The laws against collusion aren't going anywhere, but if you expect to do things that no longer have value for money, you're living on borrowed time even if the government mandates purchasing of your work.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#323

Post by phillias » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:09 PM UTC

Fighting against your employer is exactly what they want and gives them leverage to clamp down harder. Your efforts are best spent pushing initiatives like the FTCs repeal of non-competes. Corporations have captured our government, our only chance is to take our government back not to continue in fighting.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#324

Post by ticviking » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:10 PM UTC

darth_avocado wrote: post #73

WalterBright wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends. If they lose you to a competitor that pays more, then the company loses. It's that old Supply & Demand thing again.

Well if everyone decides to pay less, like it’s being argued here, then there is no supply demand, that’s just the cost of your labor.

Eventually the risk/reward to trying to make it with your side project gets in favor of taking the risk.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#325

Post by ticviking » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:13 PM UTC

jojobas wrote: post #264

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the dilemma with employers and employees comes from the differing numbers thereof. The fact that there are (relatively) few employers, and that these employers have already chosen to seek their fortune (or that of their shareholders) by tapping the excess value of their employees, means that it is much easier for their interests to all align, without coordination. However, the vastly greater numbers that make up…

The inherent problem with a union is that, unlike with metalworkers, stonemasons or train drivers, there is still no way to tell a capable software developer from a bootcamp wannabe, and people in the same position can differ 10-100x in output. Call me an elitist gatekeeper, I don't want to pay dues to protect dunces and have my employers keep paying them.

I want a guild that can drum dunces out and refuse to promote them past apprentice.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#326

Post by uoaei » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #269

p0pcult wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, he told Engels that in reference to some military maneuvers he suggested the English take, when he was writing as a war correspondent.[1] Not his economic works. Please, do yourself a favor: stop digging. The hole is only getting deeper. [1] https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1857/l...

If you seriously believe that remark described a rhetorical strategy that Marx only used in that one particular context, I think you are the one who needs to stop digging. But obviously we're not going to come to agreement, so I'll bow out at this point.

Your accusation that Marx conflated rhetoric and analysis is pretty funny, because of how flagrantly you're doing exactly that in this thread.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#327

Post by uoaei » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #207

ddoolin wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. But just as a thought experiment: what about a truck driver who owns their own trucking company, employs around a dozen other drivers, and also drives as one of its drivers? I would guess, theoretically, this is impossible past a certain size of enterprise, but in the meantime I would imagine that they would be both. A capitalist laboring as part of their own means of production.

This thought experiment doesn't have to involve trucks: most small businesses involve owners working in some capacity, even if it's only managerial (but productive management is labor same as any other component that is required to produce the final product). Thus, they're being a laborer when they perform productive work, and they're being a capitalist when they pocket the wealth that business as a whole (i.e. all e…

You said it better than I. I don't think I made my point about "context" sufficiently clear above. A person's capital can be earning more capital at the same time as they are employed in productive work, but not in the same context. An owner of a small business may "pay themselves a salary" in accordance the salaries of their employees, but that doesn't make them "not a capitalist" at any point in time insofar as they own the company and employ people to work at that company who do not own it.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#328

Post by tpush » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 5:10 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #152

MarkMarine wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you square the circle of management wanting to pay employees the minimum they can for the maximum amount of their employees labor? The company is a giant thing, with lawyers, power and resources that are impossible for an individual to push against and win anything that is contested. Like 80 hour work weeks. Children working in manufacturing jobs. Unsafe working conditions with fire exits blocked. Which are al…

> How do you square the circle It's squared by the employees wanting the maximum pay for the least amount of work. It's call "Supply & Demand". It's the Law. > impossible for an individual to push against and win anything that is contested Not impossible at all. I've done it many times. The power the employee has is to say "No" and go work for someone else, or start their own company. > Like 80 hour work weeks / chil…

Walter Bright, you're a callous fuckstick.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#329

Post by js8 » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 5:10 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #84

darth_avocado wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if everyone decides to pay less, like it’s being argued here, then there is no supply demand, that’s just the cost of your labor.

> if everyone decides to pay less That's called a "cartel", and the big problem with cartels is the members cheat on them under the table. They're unstable, unless maintained by force (i.e. using the law to punish members who cheat). I recall one job I had where I was offered X, and I said X wasn't enough. They said they weren't officially allowed to pay more, but they would if I kept my mouth shut. Deal!

> They're unstable, unless maintained by force

You should look up work of Steve Keen in the theory of the firm. It's actually the other way around, the oligopoly pricing is stable, while pricing that sets marginal cost to marginal revenue is unstable.

Re: An Introduction to Class Warfare for the Software Engineer

#330

Post by thiagoharry » Wed, Feb 08, 2023, 7:18 PM UTC

nickff wrote: post #109

darth_avocado wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how you sugarcoat it, the extra hours you make people work for no extra increase in wages, is free labor. Just because you’re getting paid doesn’t mean the company doesn’t get free labor. The company paid for the regular hours and the rest was free labor.

What if you get a pay bump for no increase in hours? Is that free money?

No company will pay for you more than what you produce, excluding exceptional circumstances. So no, it is not free money. Either it is money that you produced with your labor, or is an investment from the company to motivate you to produce more than what they are paying you for.