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

You are not your job

jry.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 443 posts

Re: You are not your job

#361

Post by interroboink »

abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

  > there are billions of souls on this planet. They're not a rare thing
  > like say, gold. They're very easily produced, by two people getting it
  > on. That leads to a harsh conclusion: human beings aren't that valuable
  > as individuals. We are in fact very disposable and replaceable.
I appreciate the perspective you're offering here, and I don't entirely disagree, especially from an economic angle. But I do want to offer a counterpoint:

Lumps of gold are largely interchangeable. It's just a mass of gold atoms that we don't differentiate between, so one lump of gold is as good as another. But people are not like that. If you were to painstakingly transform a lump of gold into a beautiful sculpture, it would be worth more than its face value. And if a person transforms from the lump of flesh they are born as into a unique individual, they are worth something more, too. Two gold sculptures would not be interchangeable, to an art aficionado, and two people are not interchangeable in that way, either.

On the gross large scale, yes, we're all lumps of flesh squidging around on the planet; a uniform slimy patina on a tiny ball of dirt. And our various large-scale systems and policies (economic, political, etc) treat people in this way, too, in varying degrees.

But you are living your one and possibly only life (just like everyone else). And you have taken a unique path through that life (just like everyone else), and I'd just encourage you and/or others reading to cherish that, both in yourself and others, even if (or especially if) the systems in which we live don't seem to. It is something that can't be taken from you, because it is intrinsic to you, and that is a value beyond "what someone will pay for."

Just my 2¢

Re: You are not your job

#363

Post by GMoromisato »

I'm curious whether this is a strawman argument or not. Do software engineers really believe, even subconsciously, that they are their job?

Imagine that tomorrow the government decided to pay $250K per year to each software engineer for life as long as they never worked again. Would there be a lot of anxiety about losing the meaning of existence? Of course not! SEs would be celebrating in the streets.

That means the anxiety about AI destroying jobs is all about economic loss, not psychological meaning.

Re: You are not your job

#364

Post by tvier »

Mathnerd314 wrote: post #360
tvier wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment defines value as what people pay for things, then comes to the conclusion that they way to value people must be based on what people will pay for them. That's not insightful, that's just circular reasoning, and it fails to explain normal human behavior. Does a child have no value to it's parents because it's "easily produced"[1] and "disposable and replaceable"? [1] I imagine OP has never given birth

Well, I mean, you can certainly say economic value doesn't capture all of the value. But you can also say that there are metrics of value that do capture everything. Thermodynamic entropy, for example - its steady march to zero is statistically unstoppable. You can't measure a child's economic value without making a lot of assumptions, but you can measure a child's thermodynamic heat production with a few simple expe…

This comment brings me so much joy, it might be the most "hackernews" thing I've ever read.

I don't disagree though. Everything is physics, and physics is applied math

Re: You are not your job

#365

Post by asdff »

helloplanets wrote: post #153
abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

> We are in fact very disposable and replaceable. To your friends and family as well? Or just your employer? You're describing things that may well be true for a lot of employers, but fall apart outside of that context.

I think modern healthcare really put a focus back on people as individuals. Mortality rates were quite high even from what we see now as trivial illness or injury, and people would have a lot of offspring to account for this in the past.

By the time I reached adult hood I only experienced a handful of deaths of close people, all from old age.

Re: You are not your job

#366

Post by vvs29 »

helloplanets wrote: post #153
abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

> We are in fact very disposable and replaceable. To your friends and family as well? Or just your employer? You're describing things that may well be true for a lot of employers, but fall apart outside of that context.

Apart from a few, friends and family who care about you can be counted on one hand as well. When automation replaces our job or diminishes our economic worth many fold, not many friends and family remain unchanged. You parents, your siblings maybe and maybe 1-2 of your closest friends. Others will drift apart because we are in a different lifestyle now. Heck, even without any change, parent/siblings drift apart for many. It is tough then to not correlate our value with our economic value.

Re: You are not your job

#367

Post by sifar »

Mathnerd314 wrote: post #360
tvier wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment defines value as what people pay for things, then comes to the conclusion that they way to value people must be based on what people will pay for them. That's not insightful, that's just circular reasoning, and it fails to explain normal human behavior. Does a child have no value to it's parents because it's "easily produced"[1] and "disposable and replaceable"? [1] I imagine OP has never given birth

Well, I mean, you can certainly say economic value doesn't capture all of the value. But you can also say that there are metrics of value that do capture everything. Thermodynamic entropy, for example - its steady march to zero is statistically unstoppable. You can't measure a child's economic value without making a lot of assumptions, but you can measure a child's thermodynamic heat production with a few simple expe…

I look at it from the other side. Life, and by extension human civilization,is a local entropy minimization mechanism.

Re: You are not your job

#368

Post by danilocesar »

tock wrote: post #211
Tor3 wrote: post #176

The focus on "what you do" is very US-centric (or possibly North American). When you meet someone then one of the very first things asked is "what do you do" or something to that extent. What your job is. But it's not like that at all elsewhere in the world. It varies a lot. I myself never ask that question, unless it's for a very specific reason. And _never_ as part of an introduction. I've known people for decades…

Not surprised because most people in the world only have time to work/commute/sleep. Stuff like hobbies, sabbaticals, vacations, etc are quite rare. I've only seen the contrary when I met Europeans.

Nah,

All around the world, even people in the lower income brakets take vacation. Sometimes they travel if they can, sometimes they don't.

Working until you wear off is mostly a US thing.

Re: You are not your job

#369

Post by aanet »

I was prepared for another fluffy post... But this resonated with me 100%

> The people who love you don't love you because you're good at your job. They love you because of something else entirely. Maybe it's your humor. Maybe it's that you actually listen. Maybe it's that you remember things about their lives and ask about them. Maybe it's simply that you show up. You're present. You don't extract a conversation and then disappear.

As I get older (and, I hope, wiser), this matters more and more. Jobs come and go (and how many have gone), money comes and goes (rather too quickly), time comes and goes (progressively faster, if I might add), but what matters more than anything else is the people in your life who stick by you, and who you stick by.

The nattering nabobs of negativism will disagree (and there are plenty in the comments). I dont care.

I agree with the poster.

@jyrio - let's do a bagel + coffee in NYC. I'll be there the last week of April

Re: You are not your job

#370

Post by dragontamer »

abcde666777 wrote: post #122

Being able to see ourselves as something beyond our job (our means of survival) is a luxury. If a person can't provide for themselves the rest goes out the window fast. The only way to ease the anxiety in people isn't with fluff about their 'human worth', but rather to help them envision other tangible and plausible ways in which they can provide for themselves. The cold reality, in my opinion, is that the things we…

I mean, Jack London was pretty famously a professional hobo, wandering the country looking for a place to stay. He got good at storytelling so that he'd have something to give to the families who took him in and fed him.

Eventually Jack London writes Call of the Wild and becomes stupidly rich.

Was Jack London the famous author, living off of all the money (writing less popular stories, like White Fang) more valuable because of all the money he made? Was Jack London the hobo less valuable because he didn't write the bestseller Call to the Wild yet?

Or maybe, the entire concept of valuing people off a monetary lens is just bullshit.

Post reply on HN