[Beached]

I'd argue that the overwhelming amount of people would choose to work on something, even if they didn't have to. they would choose the arts, or work on inventing some new thing they want, etc. most people work stupid jobs because they can't afford there risk of doing what they actually want

[philipov]

Yes, what you're describing isn't Work. We may have been conditioned to use the same word for both things, as you did, to make it appear they are the same thing, but they're very different.

[raincom]

Exactly, it is a fallacy of equivocation: use the same word in different senses.

[birdyrooster]

Eh, you have to work for yourself too. It comes down to who are you working for... who's "will" are you sustaining? This is about willpower and using it for your own ends instead of others whether that is work or some other activity.

[BobbyJo]

What would the difference be?

[Sohcahtoa82]

I know this is Hacker News, and so someone "working on something" on their own is typically interpreted to mean "building a startup", which I would still call "work" in the more classic meaning of employment, but "work" doesn't have to mean that.

A friend of mine retired early and spends a lot of time in his workshop building fun things for himself. That is work, but it's not "work" in the way people think of the term.

One project I want to do some time is design and 3D print a model roller coaster, including building a train to travel over it. That's work, but it's not employment.

[slothtrop]

I think this reflects your social bubble. I seriously doubt "most people" are interested laboring as artisans hours every day. Left to their devices without the need to work, they would just consume.

> most people work stupid jobs because they can't afford there risk of doing what they actually want

Again this projects some kind of strong desire for a specialized low-demand sort of work on the greater population. This is a fantasy.

Work is a vector for people to contribute to society and participate in it, allows them to find validation, to compete (if they so choose). Whether a job is "stupid" is a rationalization that betrays the fact that there is demand for it. At best, it can be unenjoyable, but most people don't "hate" their job. Arguably people have stronger feelings about commute time, which is a greater reflection of faults in city planning.

[pmoriarty]

"the overwhelming amount of people would choose to work on something, even if they didn't have to. they would choose the arts, or work on inventing some new thing they want, etc."

I used to believe that when I was young, and that's pretty much the argument I made to my dad, who responded that most people would rather stay home, drink beer, have sex, and watch tv.

As I've grown older, I've come over to my dad's side, as I learned that most people don't have a creative bone in their body, have no desire to be productive in any way, and would rather spend their time entertaining themselves and consuming above almost anything else.

At least that's the case in much of the US, which is heading relentlessly towards the world predicted by the movie Idiocracy. Maybe in some other countries it's better.

[avgcorrection]

Then you’ve become the jaded HN poster stereotype. Congrats?

Plenty of people dream of doing these sinful, consumerist—not manly, Hacker News-productive—things because they are the rewind from work pasttimes; they’re the off-time-from-work things that many people just plain need in order to be able to must the energy for another workday. But the fallacy here is to assume that a reality without work is the same. It clearly isn’t though if these things are used to recuperate from work. What if there was no work to recuperate from? I don’t know if they would do manly HN things like implement yet another JS framework, but they would probably do other things than whatever they do in order to recreate themselves right now.

[imtringued]

I mean I would be that guy too if I had unpredictable commitments that override my creative aspirations and spend 10 to 12 hours a day just working.

[marcosdumay]

I do believe that healthy people need to feel useful. But notice that for that to mean they want to work, you need people to be healthy (and addiction is are really troublesome thing here) and that feeling useful is strongly correlated with whatever "work" is.

But anyway, that is not relevant in the world we have today. Today people are required to work, no other option is given, and if this doesn't satisfy their need of feeling useful, they are just forced to go without and face the desperation that deprivation from a basic need leads to.

Just this revolt of people against pointless job is evidence enough that if people could choose, they would do something different from "work" as we have today. You can argue this is a good thing, but you can't argue it's business as usual.

[tmn]

I appreciate your optimism, but I think such pursuits would be the exception. There are too many cheap dopamine consumption options available.

[avgcorrection]

Yes, I guess people would do something rather than nothing.

What a vacuous side-point to make.

[ghaff]

That's probably a very rose-colored view of how most people would choose to pass their time if all their needs and wants were provided for them.