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

411–420 of 443 posts

Re: You are not your job

#411

Post by satisfice »

dragontamer wrote: post #370
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…

Comments like this are what I hope to see whenever I visit. Spurring thought. Challenging the obvious.

Re: You are not your job

#412

Post by Our_Benefactors »

drfloyd51 wrote: post #354
watwut wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article is crating the ground for manosphere, incels and culture wars. It tells the men they have no value and don't really matter as people. Have young men read that article, believe it and you will end up with them joining manosphere, incels and culture wars. Also, it does in fact matter whether a guy is nice.

It matters to me. Therefore I try to be nice. I know it costs me some opportunities and some “success”. But I sleep well at night.

I think this perspective is false. You have no way of knowing how many more opportunities and success you would cost yourself by being not nice.

Re: You are not your job

#413

Post by nuancebydefault »

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…

In fact entropy is relative to what we define as chaos vs what we define as ordered. When we can't explain the order, we define it as being chaotic, and for convenience we model it statistically in stead of in absolute terms. I learned that few months ago from a HN posted article.

Re: You are not your job

#414

Post by nuancebydefault »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #155
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…

Reminds me of a very old essay on Cracked that says something very similar: https://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-truths-that-will-make-y...

I read that relic just now for the first time.

There's some truth in there about in case of a serious emergency you mostly need competence over empathy. But, to me, it's always love, empathy and connectedness that wins. Why are you commenting on HN? Is it for bringing value in return for money or services or material goods? I don't think so. It is about human connection. In absence, life or death makes not much difference anymore.

Re: You are not your job

#415

Post by cat-turner »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #155
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…

Reminds me of a very old essay on Cracked that says something very similar: https://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-truths-that-will-make-y...

Reading content written by humans and not AI is a breath of fresh air. Thanks for sharing this.

Re: You are not your job

#417

Post by thoughtpeddler »

I'm surprised that neither this article nor any of the comments have thus far mentioned the fact that rarely do tombstones, eulogies, and the like mention or emphasize much a person's occupation. Most of the time it's "Here lay {name}, loving {relation}, {relation}, and {relation}. May he eternally do {hobby} in the skies forever."

And here's the crazy part: I'm still not convinced this is the right take! Of course we are our jobs and what we do. It literally shapes who you get to meet on the dating market, favors you can call in, and so forth. How naive it is to think otherwise. The Cracked article that another post linked to is pretty spot-on.

Yes, obviously being a 'person' who can be 'with' people (cf. 'for' people) is simultaneously also a thing. Both are true. But "You are not your job" is just cope, and the tombstones and eulogies fall for it too.

Re: You are not your job

#418

Post by svessi »

asdff wrote: post #371
svessi wrote: post #225

My father in law lost his job 2 years ago, completely unrelated to AI, at the age of 63. He had worked this same job since he was 18 and it was his identity. He'd almost greet people with "Hey I'm CEO, my friends and family call me X". Being fired from his own company completely destroyed him - and not because he's worried about the financial aspect, he doesn't need to worry about that at this point. I remember watch…

Makes you wonder with some of the dinosaurs in office if a big reason why they cling on is that internal mythmaking. Presumably everyone knows they can just up and kick back by some body of water doing whatever they'd like with their time, should they ever want to step down. And yet they don't. They prefer their busy, stressful, life of importance. Me personally I'm just not wired like that. I work hard only to get t…

[dead]

Re: You are not your job

#419

Post by hackable_sand »

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…

You refuse to be in denial about your personal fears?

Re: You are not your job

#420

Post by necovek »

BobbyJo wrote: post #374
ajb wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so when you, BobbyJo, become too old or unwell to work; other people should just shoot you in the head and take your stuff, right? It would only be efficient. Or does this 'harsh reality" only apply to other people?

Modern society has the luxury of surplus resources at the moment, and we are able to take care of the old and weak, which we indeed choose to do. If/when that ceases to be the case, the harsh reality will apply to everyone, me included, yes.

Another thing humans are arguably good at is making a longer term plan and investment: if we see that old people simply get shot, we won't be investing surplus value into our retirement funds — at least not of the same sort. Perhaps we'll be building fortresses when younger, accumulating wealth to be able to pay soldiers to protect us etc...

Wait, that's exactly what has happened, except it has evolved into a more systemic solution (our taxes and social contributions pay for police, courts; bigger accumulated wealth allows for more options...).

Post reply on HN