Live data from Hacker News

996

lucumr.pocoo.org

491–500 of 561 posts

Re: 996

#491
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.

It is catching up in other countries, it's a startup thing.

Silicon Valley has a reverse-Midas touch, everything it touches becomes shit.

Re: 996

#492

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…

  > if I was the founder with a huge equity stake
A few startups have reached out to me to be a founding engineer. The largest equity stake offered was 3% for being employee #2.

This kind of equity is batshit insane to me. These very early employees are much closer to co-founder than to a typical employee. I wouldn't demand to split the founder's equity with me but 3% seems pretty low to their 50% considering they're asking that I essentially be a founder but with TBH, the low equity to founding employees makes me almost think there is a conspiracy to disincentivize people to work for them. I mean you see these 0.5-2% numbers seem crazy. It's got to be a real "unicorn" company for you to make more money than you would at the big tech. I imagine it's got to end up with a lot of bad feelings too. I mean let's say that 3% gets diluted to about 1% while founder has 50% and gets diluted to 20%. Is their value 20x more than mine? Don't get me wrong, if we got to a real unicorn and did like a $10bn IPO I'd be happy with my $100m, but I can imagine a lot of people feeling ripped off seeing the person they worked neck and neck with become a billionaire.

I agree, 996 is insane. Like the author said, pulling an all nighter just results in the next day being unproductive. I think of it like going to the gym, but with your brain. You can't become a body builder by just lifting weights every single day and pushing yourself to the limit every day. That only results in injury. It can be worth it for a short period of time, but I think we've also created this weird situation where no one sees that it is not worth it for anyone but the founder. IMO, if you want a successful startup, one of the key aspects is that your founding members need to be as dedicated as you. And I just don't think you're going to get that kind of investment if you're pricing yourself as 20-50x more valuable than them. It just seems doubly bad and I can't figure out why we've normalized such situations.

Re: 996

#493

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 founder who commits to 996 is as a side effect building a brand of "grit", "hustle", etc with their investors. That gives them options, regardless of whether 996 is actually useful for productivity and regardless of who is actually working harder as a result of 996: a golden jetpack into an executive role elsewhere when the company is sold for scrap, fundraising terms that give them liquidity not available to emplo…

I think you're right about your analysis but this only moves the question to ask what is the utility of this Kabuki theater?

Re: 996

#494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just a little bit smarter and found your own startup does that work? how do you convince investors to give you money if you don't have a network/didn't go to stanford?

Not all startups are venture-backed.

I don't think you answered the question. I'm pretty sure everyone knows this. But I think most people also know that it can be very difficult to pitch investors and that this is exponentially more difficult when you don't have the backing of some ostentatious pedigree.

Re: 996

#495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're smart enough to get hired for one of these roles, and you're willing to work 996, be just a little bit smarter and found your own startup and take all the upside.

Or nobody could take the upside. Imagine if ownership of a company was divided according to the amount and skill level of work.

This sounds nice on paper but difficult to implement. I'd love to hear how you'd go about this. But I'm also pretty confident that if you show me a metric I can show you 10 ways to hack it.

Re: 996

#496

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…

> In my experience, the 996 teams aren’t actually cranking out more work. They’re just working odd hours, doing a little work on the weekends to say they worked the weekend, and they spend a lot of time relaxing at the office because they’re always there.

That's exactly what happens. Some companies' management values asses in the office, and the fitting kind obliges. They come in at 9, leave at 8/9 in the evening, but a lot of the times they are scrolling the social media, doing chit chat, reading blogs, etc. whenever they can (can't do other serious work/learning, as such companies tend to actually spy on what you are doing).

They take 90 minutes long lunch breaks, take walks to smoke, etc. But the bossman can hold a meeting with them at 1 or 3 in the morning sometimes. These get a lot of praise at such companies.

They retain the worst kind of 'talent'. These companies often hire decent technical talent, but with another dimension lacking, like poor communication skills, or a no-name college- knowing that they won't land better offers soon.

Often fearing market, some good people oblige, too, but then tend to quit after a year or two due to burnout.

Managers are the worst. They are perpetually in meetings having conversations much worse than free ChatGPT, but they can say that they are 'working' long hours, and in weekends, setting the bar for ICs.

Productivity is lower than 9-6-5 teams. But many people haven’t come out of the sweatshop/manual labour mentality.

Re: 996

#497
post #195

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…

These founders who tout this nonsense are convinced they got to their position by "hustling" (and not their background, privilege, etc) and think motivated employees should do the same (even if it makes no economic sense for them). Besides, their 996 is the usual nonsense of posting faux thought leader crap on linkedin. Not being shoved Jira tickets and hurry up with it.

> "convinced they got to their position by "hustling" (and not their background, privilege, etc)"

[1] "If you're rich, you're more lucky than smart."

[1]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/analysis-i...

Re: 996

#498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're smart enough to get hired for one of these roles, and you're willing to work 996, be just a little bit smarter and found your own startup and take all the upside.

> If you're smart enough to get hired for one of these roles s/smart/stupid/g

Well sed

Re: 996

#500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10h 4 days / week

Pfffft.

Exactly what I thought. 10am-4pm is sane, 10 hours a day is still crazy, but I guess to employees talking about 996, in comparison it seems a good deal.

I have been self employed for 12+ years, for 9am-1pm is a very productive day, and anyone that claim they can do much more actual knowledge work than that either is pushing papers or has a lot of down time and faffing about.

Also I’d rather work fewer hours 6 days a week, than pushing way past my productivity cramming everything in 4 days.

Post reply on HN