4 ms·

Scott, that's exactly what I was getting at. My only fear about making it as a startup is having to one day answer that existential question myself. I frankly

• kscaldef 16y ago
  Fair enough, I respect that you're willing to admit that. But please don't call me a "wage slave" because of your fears and uncertainties.
  • steveklabnik 16y ago
    "wage slave" is a pretty well-known, long-standing term for someone that works for another. It's not intended to be depreciating towards those enslaved, it's attacking the idea of using your labor to enrich someone else's life rather than your own. Now, you may disagree with that, and that's fine...
    • kscaldef 16y ago
      "Wage slave" is always, in my experience, used in one of two derogatory ways: 1) In the original usage, as a condemnation of the whole capitalist system, or 2) In the sense that's more common in this crowd, to describe anyone who doesn't want to be a startup founder. Applied to technology workers (typically privileged & upper middle class), the term is offensive on multiple levels.
      • steveklabnik 16y ago
        Even if tech workers are upper middle class, that doesn't mean that they're not bound to their job. The conditions may be better, it's true, but if they lost their job, they'd end up just as destitute. I only say this because it's something I've though a lot about recently, mostly while investigating the arguments of usage #1 up there. My parents are solidly middle class; but for most of my childhood, they basically lived paycheck to paycheck. When times get tough... things start to get ugly. Granted, not as ugly as 'real' slavery... but I think that the analogy is a good one.
        • kscaldef 16y ago
          I could quit my job right now. I'd need to get another one eventually, maybe in 6 months, maybe in a year, depending on how tightly I budgeted myself. I've chosen to live within my means; to build up enough savings that I don't need to be terrified of losing my job. I'd venture to say that virtually any other tech worker could do the same. If you feel bound to your job, and that you're at imminent risk of becoming destitute if you lose it, that's because of your own choices. The slavery exists only in your head.
          • steveklabnik 16y ago
            Just because your in a better situation, and are on the way to pulling yourself up out of wage slavery doesn't mean that you're not still in the situation that you're in. I had an analogy here to drug dealers working their way out of a ghetto, and decided it was slightly hyperbolic.
            • joeyo 16y ago
              So your definition of wage slavery is anyone who is not independently wealthy?
              • steveklabnik 16y ago
                THE definition of 'wage slave' (from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery) is: > Wage slavery refers to a situation where a person's livelihood depends on wages, especially in a total and immediate way. So, yes, someone who's independently wealthy is not a wage slave, but someone who is self-employed or who owns a significant stake in the business they work for is also not a wage slave. It's about the boss/worker relationship, the power an employer has over an employee.
        • lg 16y ago
          You're still a cash slave. But calling people these names is silly.