5 ms·
Three is too short. Try five?
by JulianMorrison 8y ago
Three is too short. Try five?
- JulianMorrison 8y agoI'm getting voted down but I'm serious... it is a cultural choice to feed people by paying them for work. And so work must be procured and time occupied by what is essentially walking a treadmill until the rent pops out.
- Fjolsvith 8y agoIn my business, if time is just occupied by a worker, they loose a job. Their job depends on them doing something that pays for their income.
- JulianMorrison 8y agoThen they are probably doing a great if slightly panicked job of pretending to be "doing something" (as in "don't just sit there, do something!!") every hour of the workday. Because their rents and ramen depend on convincing some guy who grumps at people on news.ycombinator.com that a task which will naturally have surges and lulls consists of continuous machine-like effort.
- Fjolsvith 8y agoThey can't pretend to produce the final product in my shed manufacturing business. Their rents and ramen depends on them filling orders that customers paid for, not the grump who retorts to nitpickers on HN.
- kinos 8y agoWhats your point exactly?
- Fjolsvith 8y agoHonest pay for honest work.
- emaginniss 8y agoThat may be how you feel about it, but the employers feel differently. They wouldn't hire and pay someone unless they felt that the person was providing some value. Also, if you believe that one should have rent and food without work (and probably not paying for it), why would you expect those that provide the food and shelter to do their job without remuneration? Are you in favor of developing a class of people who have no choice but to do work for the benefit of others without pay? I feel like I've heard of that idea before.
- JulianMorrison 8y agoI'm in favour of automating away 100% of the donkey-work. Slaves are an evil thing for a culture to have; robots aren't.