4 ms·
My intuition is that for the typical person, it hurts more than it helps. But life is unfair, and there probably are some people legitimately can put in 130 ho
by akavi 10y ago
My intuition is that for the typical person, it hurts more than it helps.
But life is unfair, and there probably are some people legitimately can put in 130 hours of net-positive work for extended periods of time. And presumably, these people will be disproportionately represented among the "successful".
Another issue is it seems like it'd be hard to tell while you're pulling those ridiculous hours whether or not you're part of the "lucky" subset that actually continues to be productive.
- eeeeeeeeeeeee 10y agoI don't deny that she was "doing work" during 130 hours a week, but I question what she was doing or how productive it really was. I don't see why this is a thing to gloat about. And my take on Yahoo is that it has been lacking a strategic thinker and had unfortunately been saddled with numerous scattered-brained ideas that sound good over a lunch discussion, but cannot be tied to a central plan for the business with a straight face. The hours she is working immediately says to me that she is not capable of hiring good people and delegating responsibilities. Now, I don't expect a CEO of a large company to work a 40 hour work week, but 130 hours is ridiculous. Out of that 130 hours of work, none of that could have been delegated? Is she really that special that only she can handle it?