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

331–340 of 561 posts

Re: 996

#331

Post by ibejoeb »

davedx wrote: post #321
ibejoeb wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're doing R&D and you're actually into the problem, you're probably devoting the majority of your waking hours to "working" regardless. This is a different 996 than stitching shoe welts 996. Hanging around and passively considering the problem with others can be good, productive work. If someone who actually like this kind of thing freely enters into it, well, best of luck to you. I think the shouting "996" thi…

That’s not 996 at all. 996 is an explicit number of hours mandated from above, not “shit this problem is cool I can’t stop thinking about it”

Right. That's what I'm saying. The posts cited in the article are from leaders in those hype companies essentially rebranding a term and using it to recruit. One is explicitly inviting employees that are about to be assimilated into Atlassian, and he's betting that some are not thrilled about going into traditional corporate.

Re: 996

#332

Post by MontyCarloHall »

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…

A company touting its 996 culture is unfurling a huge red flag that it doesn't have the best talent. The very best companies/workers accomplish extraordinary things in ordinary working hours, because they are extremely good at what they do and thus extremely efficient at it. Work smarter, not harder, as they say. If a company needs to work 996, it simply means it isn't all that smart.

Re: 996

#333

Post by Daishiman »

esseph wrote: post #231
NaomiLehman wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's comical that the browser use guy tweeted "crazy salaries, 996" and the highest salary they offer is $320k. In SF.

SF or not, that is 5x the US median wage. There's people in the US that would suit up in gladiator garb and fight to death in an arena for that pay.

They would do that but they wouldn’t be arsed to sit down 8 hours a day reading compsci literature.

Re: 996

#334

Post by paulryanrogers »

ivape wrote: post #79
stego-tech wrote: post #9

These 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…

To educate people you just need the internet (communication infrastructure). We can also house and feed everyone if we wanted to. The concept of work has been overblown to the point where it’s everything . I can’t even say war will solve it because war puts everyone to work, which is no different than the status quo. Things are not in place for people to spiritually feel what is actually a good life and world. It may…

> To educate people you just need the internet (communication infrastructure).

This is laughably reductive. Certainly the Internet can help people get educated and pop some comfort bubbles, but it's not automatic. Many (most?) humans need personal attention from others to learn. Even fewer place a value on what they're taught, much less learning itself. A significant number of people must have supervision and some proding to become functioning, literate, and informed adults.

All that said, I'd agree with most of your other points.

Re: 996

#335

Post by tmoertel »

NelsonMinar wrote: post #234

One thing I appreciated at early Google (2001) was how folks mostly worked normal hours. Roughly 8 hours a day 5 days a week. Maybe a bit longer if you wanted to stay for the free dinner. Maybe you checked email at home in the evening or had a week of being on call. But in general the company did just fine on a humane schedule. (There were exceptions, particularly the product folks working on early AdWords partnershi…

I think that reasonable hours are still the norm at much of Google.

I worked there as a SWE for over decade before I left last year. I never once felt pressured to work long hours or extra days. I do recall several times when management folks emphasized that if you're working long hours, it's a sign that something went wrong in our planning, and we should look into it. The few times I stayed late for dinner, the office was mostly empty.

I understand that others may have had a different experience, but for me Google was way healthier than any previous company I have worked at over my decades-long career, including the two companies that I started myself.

Re: 996

#336

Post by redleggedfrog »

Let me share an anecdotal but very telling story about this attitude of more work is better work.

I have been a software developer for 30+ years now, and I have avoided working outside the 8-5 hours at every opportunity. I had bosses who very much chaffed at this, who were spending literally their entire lives working, and wish that we drones did the same.

I didn't, I just didn't show up if such a thing was expected, and made sure my work was good enough that they wouldn't think to fire me.

Now, I spent time with my kids, I stayed healthy and happy. My wife adores me for the time we spend together. The loss - nothing. I invested my income wisely, low risk, starting in my 20's, and am now sitting 9 million in assets and cash.

My bosses? One divorced, alienated from their kids, their companies sold and disassembled, and super sadly then contracting cancer because they could never give up their cigarettes with the level of stress they felt. They'll never get to enjoy the money from their sold company, they'll never get their family back.

Another, shunned by all their ex-employees, their own children (and grandchildren), suffering from the need to "get back in the game" when they're way past their prime, and when they were near useless at their job before anyway. But they worked all the time!

And another (years after I worked for them), fresh from a failed startup where they had invested all their money, and convinced their friends and family to invest, and having to lay off their entire staff after a failed pivot where they worked 24/7 for 5 years, going slightly nuts and now living in a commune in Massachusetts.

You get one life folks. I don't care if you're having the time of your life with your 24/7 job/startup you love so much. It's like taking drugs - it's great while you're doing it, but the repercussions come later in life. And they're awful.

Re: 996

#338

Post by hdgvhicv »

regentbowerbird wrote: post #51
Aurornis wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies that try to demand extreme hours with average pay have very high turnover. As employees realize they’re getting a bad deal and that they can find a better ratio of pay to hours worked at other companies, they leave.

What happens when the companies band together to compress wages? Like what happened with the high-tech employee antitrust litigation. Individual employees are far more numerous (therefore harder to coordinate) and have way shallower pockets than companies, so the negotiation power is always going to be lopsided.

That’s where your union fights back. You are in a union right?

Re: 996

#339

Post by Balgair »

r_lee wrote: post #167
Aurornis wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because for at least half of the 72-hour workweek, most employee will mentally checkout (in Chinese we call this 摸鱼). The CEO of one of my employers was smitten with his new China office because they bragged about operating 996. To everyone else, it was obvious that they weren’t working more. They were just at the office a lot, or coming and going frequently. When they’d send a video from the office (product demos)…

It's sad how a lot of things in life now are all about optics. And it's shocking that it works for leadership/management so well

Nothing new under the sun:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/210z3FRgTPU

Carry a clipboard around too.

Maybe a paper notebook is the new clipboard these day though, some moleskin hipster thingy, nice fountain pen with a nib, I dunno.

Anyone else have suggestions on how to shine on management in 2025?

Re: 996

#340

Post by franktankbank »

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…

Is this seen anywhere in the US or is this just another flex trying to beat down the working man? I can't believe anyone would acknowledge it here.
Post reply on HN