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

471–480 of 561 posts

Re: 996

#471

Post by vkou »

martin-t wrote: post #462
vkou wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A co-op or a partnership? But how will the non-productive class make money from it?

Funny that you say that because at some point I started dividing people in my head into what I call builders and redistributors: - Builders produce food, mine resources, build houses/machines, do research, provide essential services, etc. - Redistributors take a cut from builders, by providing a non-essential service like salesmen or assistants who call themselves managers, by getting themselves into a position of po…

> this division is at the core of inequality

Of course it is. You are limited to 168 hours in a week that you can do work.

But there is no limit to the hours that other people can work for you.

Re: 996

#472

Post by footy »

paulcole wrote: post #438
footy wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I genuinely love my job and am excited about it and I still wouldn't do it for anywhere close to 996 hours

Awesome! Then you should avoid someplace that works 996 like the plague. Do you think there are 0 people in the world who are excited about long hours at work?

No, there's a sucker born every minute after all.

Re: 996

#473

Post by pixelatedindex »

paulcole wrote: post #467
pixelatedindex wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the same argument about how when a company is remote anyone is still free to go into the office. This seems like a straw man. Where you work from is different from how/how much you work. You’re hired to do the job, what if you do the job in 8 hours? It also seems like a given that when you work at a startup that work life balance will be at a minimum. What more do you want?

> This seems like a straw man No. You’re hired to do the job, what if you do the job in 8 hours? Keep working if working is what you enjoy doing. Is the entire mission of the business “finished” after 8 hours? > It also seems like a given that when you work at a startup that work life balance will be at a minimum. What more do you want? To work somewhere where the other employees and the company leadership values the…

> Is the entire mission of the business “finished” after 8 hours?

No, but as a rank and file employee you only have access to so much information. The ones who want to work 996 will try to get this but even then that doesn’t mean you’ll get it. At least that’s how it was at a couple of the top companies in China and SEA, and I speak from first hand experience of half a decade. They just want you to jump when they tell you to jump.

Also, ironically the leadership are the least to be seen in the office.

It’s all a show dude, been there. Yeah there are a lot of people who work there but they themselves refer to themselves as dog. You fetch when the owner says fetch. It’s a toxic, mostly unrewarding effort. But they do pay well enough to have people clock in the next day.

Re: 996

#474

Post by benoau »

mystraline wrote: post #242
benoau wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a HN /jobs post a week ago for "100% in-person, 6 days per week" lol. No thanks!

Oh, I remember that as well, but its been removed from Sept 2025 who's hiring. Should have screenshotted it, but instead had a near spit-take. It was a US robotics company that worked closely with Chinese robotics. Bragging about 996. I'm suspecting the HN admins removed it cause it looked really bad. And we know that founders here have special capabilities.

I meant one on https://news.ycombinator.com/jobs

Doesn't specifically say 996 but 6-days a week in-office.

Re: 996

#475

Post by smilliken »

whstl wrote: post #193
scubbo wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and take all the upside And all of the risk. Encouraging anyone to start their own company is deeply irresponsible. Most startups fail. If you're needing encouragement to do it - if you're not already fully deluded that you're the special snowflake unique genius who will succeed where all others have failed - you shouldn't be doing it.

First: regular employees are already taking the risk of being jobless some time in the future when joining startups. Second: there is no CEO in tech taking a smaller salary than their employees.

> Second: there is no CEO in tech taking a smaller salary than their employees.

That's not just false but very often false.

Re: 996

#476

Post by martin-t »

vkou wrote: post #471
martin-t wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny that you say that because at some point I started dividing people in my head into what I call builders and redistributors: - Builders produce food, mine resources, build houses/machines, do research, provide essential services, etc. - Redistributors take a cut from builders, by providing a non-essential service like salesmen or assistants who call themselves managers, by getting themselves into a position of po…

> this division is at the core of inequality Of course it is. You are limited to 168 hours in a week that you can do work. But there is no limit to the hours that other people can work for you.

Now the question is how to get the message out and change how it works.

Because this can't be that hard to understand even for the average person.

Re: 996

#477

Post by llamavore »

Cal Newports Slow Productivity has a lot to say about this topic.

Creativity comes in bursts and can’t be scheduled. Happiness and health move with the seasons. Treating humans as divisible units of 1 hour blocks of factory farmed ROI will never yield amazing results.

It’s sad to see the more technology and automation we invent the more we become slaves to the cult of pseudo-productivity, virtue signalling hours at work in place of meaningful output or results.

Re: 996

#478

Post by georgeecollins »

NaomiLehman wrote: post #179
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…

I don't understand what kind of job, except for some very, very fringe cases like a NASA active mission or an atomic threat, would require a person to pull all-nighters. And how is that productive in the long-term? It's not exactly easy to hire talent.

There are certain things, being an elite athlete, a movie director (and a lot of the key talent), a team that makes a really great video game, a medical resident, where you are going to be competing against people willing to make incredible sacrifices for success including long hours and sacrifices of their personal life.

I agree celebrating regular workers putting in crazy hours is a terrible idea. It shouldn't be the norm, but it is also something that some people will reasonably choose to do.

Re: 996

#479

Post by brewtide »

paulcole wrote: post #385
ohdeargodno wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

996 done on your own time without expectations of it being done can be understood if you're excited about it. It's dumb, it ruins your health and your social experiences, but whatever, you're usually young and dumb. A good employer would actively tell you to slow down and manage your energy if it goes on for too long.. 996 mandated by the company is 1/ illegal 2/ straight up illegal 3/ a clear signal that they do not…

> 996 mandated by the company is 1/ illegal 2/ straight up illegal 3/ a clear signal that they do not see you as a human being. 1 & 2. I don't believe this to be true in the United States. 3. If a company mandated 9 to 5 for 5 days a week isn't that equally distasteful for someone who is excited to work 996?

Don't even both(er) with the 934's, they won't hear it.

Re: 996

#480

Post by abustamam »

redleggedfrog wrote: post #336

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,…

Thanks for sharing! I think another comment pointed out, no one on their death bed ever said "I wish I had worked more."

I like working. I like making money. But I love my wife and daughter. As long as our needs are covered, and honestly, a lot of our wants, and save enough for retirement/emergency, I see no need to overwork myself.

I hope the working class just rejects this notion altogether. This is toxic for our society. If people don't push back, then companies will keep asking for more and more and it affects everyone.

Post reply on HN