4 ms·
Don't take it personal. All business want to reduce costs. As long as people cost money, they'll want to reduce people.
by xnx 10mo ago
Don't take it personal. All business want to reduce costs. As long as people cost money, they'll want to reduce people.
- bill_joy_fanboy 10mo agoWhich is why quiet quitting is the logical thing. Managers and business owners shouldn't take it personally that I do as little as possible and minimize the amount of labor I provide for the money I receive. Hey, it's just business.
- safety1st 10mo ago[flagged]
- Giefo6ah 10mo agoLet's say the average firm has 10 workers. 90% of people are nihilists and empty lifers? Do I want to lead a business filled with losers?
- bill_joy_fanboy 10mo ago> What a nihilistic perspective and empty life. Equally nihilistic are owners, managers, and leaders who think they will replace developers with LLMs. Why care about, support, defend, or help such people? Why would I do that?
- safety1st 10mo agoI think you missed my point. If you "quiet quit" you're still working for someone you hate. They still own you. Instead, you could ACTUAL QUIT and start a business. Then you work for yourself, who you hopefully don't hate as much, and you have the power to define how things are done. So if you think developers shouldn't be replaced by LLMs or whatever, then you can... not do that. I have zero doubt in my mind that that will be a niche somewhere in the global economy for many years to come. Also you might make a lot of money. Make enough and you're basically free from all these assholes. It doesn't actually take a ton of money when you own 100%. You pretty quickly get to a point where you can start telling off any wanker you want to, but you don't even feel the need, you are your own boss, so you just walk away from them and deal with whoever you want to deal with instead. Trust me, speaking from experience, this is 1,000,000% better than "quiet quitting" which is pretty much remaining a corporate serf, just the most useless and pussy one in somebody else's room. Of course it's harder, most people who try it fail, real economics, real laws and real people will call you out pretty fast if you don't do things that people other than you think are valuable!
- falloutx 10mo agoEvery founder and owner is basically a money chaser and bill_joy_fanboy is the true businessman. You will not get it.
- tbrownaw 10mo agoAnd you do this honestly, by negotiating reduced hours for the same pay or by negotiating piecework rather than time-based pay. Right?
- nullorempty 10mo agoWhat does the term mean? I think the answer to your question is obvious.
- Izkata 10mo agoUnless something has changed, "quiet quitting" means "do only what the job requires". Arrive at 9, leave at 5, no out-of-hours work functions, etc. It's more a return to normalcy, but with a bad name because it comes from a generation who has always been told they have to go above and beyond to succeed alongside a corporate culture that tries to lure people into work by making it more of a social experience.
- bill_joy_fanboy 10mo agoLike any shrewd businessman, I negotiate to receive the highest price possible for the minimum cost on my end. This is how business is done.
- throwjjj 10mo agoWhich is why I fire the quiet quitters on the spot
- minomushi 10mo agoI am so appreciative of the employment protection laws we have in Europe so I don't have to deal with managers like you.
- throwjjj 10mo agoYeah but you are paid less than half for a reason
- beepboopboop 10mo agoBut they get to live in Europe
- curiouspupil 10mo agoAnd you wonder why you're understaffed.
- 10mo ago
- CodingJeebus 10mo ago> Don't take it personal. All business want to reduce costs. As long as people cost money, they'll want to reduce people. "Don't take it personal" does not feed the starving and does not house the unhoused. An economic system that over-indexes on profit at the expense of the vast majority of its people will eventually fail. If capitalism can't evolve to better provide opportunities for people to live while the capital-owning class continues to capture a disproportionate share of created economic value, the system will eventually break.
- bdcravens 10mo agoWhile not an incorrect statement, trillions of dollars have been paid to software developers to build software that invariably reduced labor costs.
- CodingJeebus 10mo agoYou're absolutely correct on that. The technology industry, at least the segment driven by VC (which is a huge portion of it), is funded based on ideas that the capital-owning class thinks is a good idea. Reducing labor costs is always an easy sell when you're trying to raise a round.
- bdcravens 10mo agoEven in boring development jobs. For example, one of my first development jobs was for a large hospital, building an intranet app to make nurse rounds more efficient so they didn't have to hire as many.
- bdcravens 10mo agoThe irony being that software, and developers, have often been the tool for reducing head count.
- psychoslave 10mo agoSome businesses want to reduce costs. Some want to tackle the challenge of using resources available in the most profitable manner, including making their employees grow to better contribute in tackling tomorrow's challenges. A business leader board that only consider people as costs are looking at the world through sociopath lenses.
- cannonpalms 10mo agoThis is just a layer of emotion on top of raw capitalism. And it will always prove to be a lie when push comes to shove.