4 ms·

But what if it's true? tptacek can be irascible at times, true, but for folks who can bill a lot by the hour or are in similar management positions, simplicity

by declan 13y ago

But what if it's true? tptacek can be irascible at times, true, but for folks who can bill a lot by the hour or are in similar management positions, simplicity is more important than saving a few pennies or dimes. Put another way: even if I felt it was ethically OK to pirate videos, an hour of my time is worth much more now than it was when I was a relatively impoverished student. So I wouldn't. BTW, I suspect that HN is recreation for many of us, and not work.

tptacek 13y ago
I'm having a hard time imagining any software developer being in a position where streaming content charges dominated even their entertainment budget, let alone their whole budget. I think whoever-that-guy-upthread is thought I was somehow bragging about my income, but that's not what I'm suggesting at all.
- unclebucknasty 13y ago
  Not to mention the brainpower. Most devs spend enough cycles during the day, and frequently on very tedious details. Who wants to spend more cycles thinking about a few bucks when all they want to do is unwind and watch a flick or two?
- prutschman 13y ago
  Your phrasing struck me as well, though not as arrogant exactly. (By the way, I'm in no way calling you out specifically on this by what I'm about to say.) I understand full well what people mean conversationally when they say that their time is worth $x/hr, but it's worth unpacking the notion: what has worth is the value you create* by the work you perform during that time. If you spend an hour watching a movie, you are (presumably) not performing that work, and not creating that value. To go from "I get paid $x/hr when I'm working" to "My time (even when I'm not working) is worth $x/hr" is to reason that because you sometimes create a lot of value with the time you spend working an hour of your life is more valuable than an hour of someone else's. From there it's a short semantic step to "this is beneath me because I make a lot of money." In your particular case, I presume the spirit of your remark was more along the lines of "I make enough money that it's no hardship to spend what is for me a little bit of money to stream a movie, and if you work in tech you probably do too." That that's the case is because you've (presumptively) earned a lot of money, but not because your leisure time is inherently more valuable than, say, someone who earns minimum wage, or someone who performs uncompensated domestic work. *This of course leaves aside the valid critiques of markets-in-practice as measures of value.

by declan 13y ago

tptacek 13y ago

I'm having a hard time imagining any software developer being in a position where streaming content charges dominated even their entertainment budget, let alone their whole budget. I think whoever-that-guy-upthread is thought I was somehow bragging about my income, but that's not what I'm suggesting at all.

unclebucknasty 13y ago
Not to mention the brainpower. Most devs spend enough cycles during the day, and frequently on very tedious details. Who wants to spend more cycles thinking about a few bucks when all they want to do is unwind and watch a flick or two?
prutschman 13y ago
Your phrasing struck me as well, though not as arrogant exactly. (By the way, I'm in no way calling you out specifically on this by what I'm about to say.) I understand full well what people mean conversationally when they say that their time is worth $x/hr, but it's worth unpacking the notion: what has worth is the value you create* by the work you perform during that time. If you spend an hour watching a movie, you are (presumably) not performing that work, and not creating that value. To go from "I get paid $x/hr when I'm working" to "My time (even when I'm not working) is worth $x/hr" is to reason that because you sometimes create a lot of value with the time you spend working an hour of your life is more valuable than an hour of someone else's. From there it's a short semantic step to "this is beneath me because I make a lot of money." In your particular case, I presume the spirit of your remark was more along the lines of "I make enough money that it's no hardship to spend what is for me a little bit of money to stream a movie, and if you work in tech you probably do too." That that's the case is because you've (presumptively) earned a lot of money, but not because your leisure time is inherently more valuable than, say, someone who earns minimum wage, or someone who performs uncompensated domestic work. *This of course leaves aside the valid critiques of markets-in-practice as measures of value.