6 ms·

The fact that you can quit your job and not starve to death is a sign that something is seriously right about the software industry. Poor peasants living hand-t

The fact that you can quit your job and not starve to death is a sign that something is seriously right about the software industry. Poor peasants living hand-to-mouth don’t have the luxury of burnout or sabbaticals. They work every day or their family dies. Being more generous, I think a work patten more like a tour of duty in war may be desirable to encourage. Work hard in a high stress job for a period of time at the metaphorical frontline and then rest and recuperate.

1000units 8y ago
"Listen kid, just be glad you aren't a peasant."
- danieltillett 8y ago
  Having worked as a farmworker in the past every day I am thankful that I have a cushy office job. I live better than the kings of 200 years ago lived let alone my poor ancestors.
  - ryandrake 8y ago
    Exactly. Spend a summer nailing shingles to roofs in 100F weather all day, and then complain to me about how awful an open office is (with air conditioning and a comfortable chair to sit on). I’m grateful every day that my old man pressured me to get a technology education so I didn’t have to destroy my body daily doing construction like he did.
    - gerbilly 8y ago
      >Exactly. Spend a summer nailing shingles to roofs in 100F weather all day, and then complain to me about how awful an open office is Both can be awful. Just because physical labour is physically tiring, it does not follow that mental labour might not be even more stressful. I worked farm labour in my 20s and those were some of the best jobs I ever had. Every meal was a banquet and I slept like a log. Potatoes tasted so good, it was as if I was eating ambrosia. I also believe that the body and the mind need to be worked together. The disembodied work typically done in offices is unbalanced, and can be very taxing.
  - kentrado 8y ago
    Kings 200 years ago didn't have to spend most of their lives working.
    - beaconstudios 8y ago
      statecraft is a job. It's a popular fiction that historical monarchs spent all their time indulging their hedonistic impulses, but it is fictional.
    - falcor84 8y ago
      Are you sure about that? From the but of history I know, monarchs had extremely busy schedules and high demands on their "free" time, and I don't expect that all of that was particularly fun.
      - danieltillett 8y ago
        Especially having to go around "curing" scrofula by the laying on of hands [0]. 0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_touch https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_touch
- jlawson 8y ago
  It is healthy to have a proportional sense of gratefulness for the good things you have. Even if someone else has more. When you live an easier life than 99% of humans, that's worth being grateful for. Interestingly given the context of this thread, I think the attitude of always needing to be angry, always focusing on negatives, always demanding more, always blaming others and obsessing over grand injustices can itself tip some people into mental illness. It's a memeplex thing, though. Constant rage at injustice is a great way for a memeplex to turn people into highly-motivated ideological soldiers. It's a technique used by demagogues from Stalin to Hitler to Castro and Kim, and which you see today as well. But the need to always emphasize that rage and injustice and resentment can definitely push some people over the edge. Gratefulness is a good antidote, in proportion with a balanced and contextualized understanding of the problems of the world.
  - projektir 8y ago
    I'd be more sympathetic to this view if injustice wasn't so glaringly common, and often the things you're grateful for only started to exist because of said injustice being fixed, so it seems backwards to complain about people bringing it to light.
    - lobotryas 8y ago
      I dunno. I'm grateful for simple things like sunlight and a good sandwich. None of these are related to "injustice". I even stopped intentionally following the news because the whole concept of worrying about injustice seems so draining and almost pointless.
  - gaius 8y ago
    Interestingly given the context of this thread, I think the attitude of always needing to be angry, always focusing on negatives, always demanding more, always blaming others and obsessing over grand injustices can itself tip some people into mental illness. Absolutely, and social media only amplifies these “oppression Olympics”.
  - eeZah7Ux 8y ago
    > When you live an easier life than 99% of humans, that's worth being grateful for. There is nothing "easier" in feeling unhappy or angry. Mental illness is widespread across billionaires despite their wealth. It's also well known that mental illness is less common in traditional, less developed societies. > ... I think the attitude of always needing to be angry ... can itself tip some people into mental illness. No. People cannot artificially create mental illness in themselves by simply thinking "negatively". There is no simple self-destruct button in our mind: people need to go through (untreated) trauma, pressure, abuse from external sources or diseases or serious genetic conditions.
- Infernal 8y ago
  There's a big difference between "be glad you aren't a peasant" and "be glad you have the luxury of not working for 5 months". One of those things is a luxury 99%+ (WAG) of folks in the US cannot afford.
pyrale 8y ago
Or, you know, build an industry that doesn't burn through people...
- danieltillett 8y ago
  Businesses don’t generally burn through people for fun, it is a function of the competitive nature of industry that results in pushing people to their limits (and sometimes beyond). You are more than welcome to start your own business with a more relaxed environment, but don’t be surprised when a company with a lower work/life balance puts you out of business.
  - projektir 8y ago
    You're outlining the problem but presenting it like an inevitability. That's why we're in this mess. We see these things as inevitabilities. You know what that means? We don't control them. So we're going to create a bad situation for ourselves because businesses cannot pull out of a basic game theoretical problem? You think this is OK and not worth looking at? What is even your endgame here?
    - danieltillett 8y ago
      You are attributing to me approval when all I am doing is describing the problem. I don't have a good solution given the current economic system.
      - mistersquid 8y ago
        > You are more than welcome to start your own business with a more relaxed environment, but don’t be surprised when a company with a lower work/life balance puts you out of business. This quote from your earlier comment comes after you finish "describing the problem". Taken together, the rhetorical effect is an expression of fatalism. Your formulation accepts the currently destructive state of affairs. It's disingenuous to say "all I am doing is describing the system". You're describing the system and then subtly suggesting any attempt to improve matters is folly. EDIT: Fix number agreement in first sentence.
nickthemagicman 8y ago
This is a classic "Appeal to worse problems" logical fallacy. Because other situations could be worse then your problem is irrelevant. It goes all the way back to your parents telling you that your problems are irrelevant because there are starving children in Africa. Here's a wiki on it. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as It's one of the purest most common logical fallacies used.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  It would be if I was actual using the “appeal to worse” fallacy. I didn’t say that the OP’s problems were irrelevant, only pointed out that the software industry is doing something right (high pay for one) if it allows people to quit because they feel burnt out.
  - nickthemagicman 8y ago
    You absolutely did if you look at your comment. But whatever helps you sleep at night sir.
Griffinsauce 8y ago
You realise war generally leaves soldiers a wreck of a human right? You probably need to deconstruct that fantasy a bit.
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
> Poor peasants living hand-to-mouth don’t have the luxury of burnout or sabbaticals. They work every day or their family dies. There is plenty of historical evidence that shows otherwise. In most subsistence societies people, including farmers, worked far less than now and with less pressure, lived in a more social environment and had a lot of holidays (especially in the middle ages).
- danieltillett 8y ago
  Are you seriously arguing that the average peasant had the luxury to not work because they were feeling burnt out? Not that it matters too much, but a holiday in the Middle Ages didn't mean the peasants didn't work, it just meant that they didn't eat meat. Otherwise it was work sun-up to sun-down 6 days a week for barely enough food to keep your family alive - that is provided there was not a harvest failure two years in a row.

1000units 8y ago

"Listen kid, just be glad you aren't a peasant."

danieltillett 8y ago
Having worked as a farmworker in the past every day I am thankful that I have a cushy office job. I live better than the kings of 200 years ago lived let alone my poor ancestors.
- ryandrake 8y ago
  Exactly. Spend a summer nailing shingles to roofs in 100F weather all day, and then complain to me about how awful an open office is (with air conditioning and a comfortable chair to sit on). I’m grateful every day that my old man pressured me to get a technology education so I didn’t have to destroy my body daily doing construction like he did.
  - gerbilly 8y ago
    >Exactly. Spend a summer nailing shingles to roofs in 100F weather all day, and then complain to me about how awful an open office is Both can be awful. Just because physical labour is physically tiring, it does not follow that mental labour might not be even more stressful. I worked farm labour in my 20s and those were some of the best jobs I ever had. Every meal was a banquet and I slept like a log. Potatoes tasted so good, it was as if I was eating ambrosia. I also believe that the body and the mind need to be worked together. The disembodied work typically done in offices is unbalanced, and can be very taxing.
- kentrado 8y ago
  Kings 200 years ago didn't have to spend most of their lives working.
  - beaconstudios 8y ago
    statecraft is a job. It's a popular fiction that historical monarchs spent all their time indulging their hedonistic impulses, but it is fictional.
  - falcor84 8y ago
    Are you sure about that? From the but of history I know, monarchs had extremely busy schedules and high demands on their "free" time, and I don't expect that all of that was particularly fun.
    - danieltillett 8y ago
      Especially having to go around "curing" scrofula by the laying on of hands [0]. 0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_touch https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_touch
jlawson 8y ago
It is healthy to have a proportional sense of gratefulness for the good things you have. Even if someone else has more. When you live an easier life than 99% of humans, that's worth being grateful for. Interestingly given the context of this thread, I think the attitude of always needing to be angry, always focusing on negatives, always demanding more, always blaming others and obsessing over grand injustices can itself tip some people into mental illness. It's a memeplex thing, though. Constant rage at injustice is a great way for a memeplex to turn people into highly-motivated ideological soldiers. It's a technique used by demagogues from Stalin to Hitler to Castro and Kim, and which you see today as well. But the need to always emphasize that rage and injustice and resentment can definitely push some people over the edge. Gratefulness is a good antidote, in proportion with a balanced and contextualized understanding of the problems of the world.
- projektir 8y ago
  I'd be more sympathetic to this view if injustice wasn't so glaringly common, and often the things you're grateful for only started to exist because of said injustice being fixed, so it seems backwards to complain about people bringing it to light.
  - lobotryas 8y ago
    I dunno. I'm grateful for simple things like sunlight and a good sandwich. None of these are related to "injustice". I even stopped intentionally following the news because the whole concept of worrying about injustice seems so draining and almost pointless.
- gaius 8y ago
  Interestingly given the context of this thread, I think the attitude of always needing to be angry, always focusing on negatives, always demanding more, always blaming others and obsessing over grand injustices can itself tip some people into mental illness. Absolutely, and social media only amplifies these “oppression Olympics”.
- eeZah7Ux 8y ago
  > When you live an easier life than 99% of humans, that's worth being grateful for. There is nothing "easier" in feeling unhappy or angry. Mental illness is widespread across billionaires despite their wealth. It's also well known that mental illness is less common in traditional, less developed societies. > ... I think the attitude of always needing to be angry ... can itself tip some people into mental illness. No. People cannot artificially create mental illness in themselves by simply thinking "negatively". There is no simple self-destruct button in our mind: people need to go through (untreated) trauma, pressure, abuse from external sources or diseases or serious genetic conditions.
Infernal 8y ago
There's a big difference between "be glad you aren't a peasant" and "be glad you have the luxury of not working for 5 months". One of those things is a luxury 99%+ (WAG) of folks in the US cannot afford.

pyrale 8y ago

Or, you know, build an industry that doesn't burn through people...

danieltillett 8y ago
Businesses don’t generally burn through people for fun, it is a function of the competitive nature of industry that results in pushing people to their limits (and sometimes beyond). You are more than welcome to start your own business with a more relaxed environment, but don’t be surprised when a company with a lower work/life balance puts you out of business.
- projektir 8y ago
  You're outlining the problem but presenting it like an inevitability. That's why we're in this mess. We see these things as inevitabilities. You know what that means? We don't control them. So we're going to create a bad situation for ourselves because businesses cannot pull out of a basic game theoretical problem? You think this is OK and not worth looking at? What is even your endgame here?
  - danieltillett 8y ago
    You are attributing to me approval when all I am doing is describing the problem. I don't have a good solution given the current economic system.
    - mistersquid 8y ago
      > You are more than welcome to start your own business with a more relaxed environment, but don’t be surprised when a company with a lower work/life balance puts you out of business. This quote from your earlier comment comes after you finish "describing the problem". Taken together, the rhetorical effect is an expression of fatalism. Your formulation accepts the currently destructive state of affairs. It's disingenuous to say "all I am doing is describing the system". You're describing the system and then subtly suggesting any attempt to improve matters is folly. EDIT: Fix number agreement in first sentence.

nickthemagicman 8y ago

This is a classic "Appeal to worse problems" logical fallacy. Because other situations could be worse then your problem is irrelevant. It goes all the way back to your parents telling you that your problems are irrelevant because there are starving children in Africa. Here's a wiki on it. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as It's one of the purest most common logical fallacies used.

danieltillett 8y ago
It would be if I was actual using the “appeal to worse” fallacy. I didn’t say that the OP’s problems were irrelevant, only pointed out that the software industry is doing something right (high pay for one) if it allows people to quit because they feel burnt out.
- nickthemagicman 8y ago
  You absolutely did if you look at your comment. But whatever helps you sleep at night sir.

Griffinsauce 8y ago

You realise war generally leaves soldiers a wreck of a human right? You probably need to deconstruct that fantasy a bit.

eeZah7Ux 8y ago

> Poor peasants living hand-to-mouth don’t have the luxury of burnout or sabbaticals. They work every day or their family dies. There is plenty of historical evidence that shows otherwise. In most subsistence societies people, including farmers, worked far less than now and with less pressure, lived in a more social environment and had a lot of holidays (especially in the middle ages).

danieltillett 8y ago
Are you seriously arguing that the average peasant had the luxury to not work because they were feeling burnt out? Not that it matters too much, but a holiday in the Middle Ages didn't mean the peasants didn't work, it just meant that they didn't eat meat. Otherwise it was work sun-up to sun-down 6 days a week for barely enough food to keep your family alive - that is provided there was not a harvest failure two years in a row.