[cmuguythrow]

Relevant: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

the concern would be that this new ability will actually increase competition and give us less than we had before

this is not something that can just be blamed on the "CEOs/execs/shareholders" of the world. it is evolutionary competition - unless we can ALL join forces to draw the line somewhere, someone will choose to defect from the agreement to "just work less", because doing so will make them succeed at the expense of others. even if everyone from one country agrees, the other competing country that defects and works 996 with agents will "win" and conquer the lazy country.

I wish I knew what to do to fix it, doesn't seem sustainable but I don't know how to make all of humanity cooperate without doing something even worse

[refactor_master]

If anything, China proves that 996 is not sustainable as it simply leads to involution and attrition. At best the populace benefits in a few hyper-focused industries such as take-out and e-commerce, but average life quality is still far behind "lazy countries".

[cmuguythrow]

sadly life quality is not the thing that the competitive system is maximizing for, and thats one of the article's points. we compete to our own detriment, but to not compete is to become extinct

[chipsrafferty]

Did you just link to a rat website as if that is a good source?

[satvikpendem]

A rat website? What does this mean, I'm out of the loop with SSC?

[quantummagic]

It's a pejorative shorthand for "Rationalist".

[canyp]

Why is "rationalist" suddenly a pejorative?

I am definitely out of the loop. I assume it is used pejoratively only by self-labelled idiots?

[quantummagic]

I am not in the loop either. From what i've gleaned, it's more a rejection of the specific internet-based community that embraced such ideas in the early 2000's. But I can't speak on behalf of their beliefs or those of their detractors. Was just trying to help out on the term itself.

[cmuguythrow]

Good source for what? I'm just trying to point to a concept, an idea. There's no "facts" here, just speculation. If you disagree with the point there, why don't you just say what you think is true instead, I'm happy to discuss the ways in which the article is wrong

[chipsrafferty]

unless we can ALL join forces to draw the line somewhere, someone will choose to defect from the agreement to "just work less",

> We already did draw the line and we can redraw it. We drew the line very strongly at 40 hours, 4 days a week. That is the "official" expected hours for most salaried employees.

because doing so will make them succeed at the expense of others.

> This already happens. People making salary, 40 hours, that work 50, 60, etc. to get ahead of their coworkers in a career sense. Or people taking optional overtime to get ahead financially or people who work hourly working extra hours or people who have 2+ jobs or a side hustle.

even if everyone from one country agrees, the other competing country that defects and works 996 with agents will "win" and conquer the lazy country.

> Didn't realize Japan is imminently going to conquer the US because they work more hours.

[cmuguythrow]

I would support efforts to try to redraw the line as stated above. I do think we would all be better off if we could do so. But my default assumption is that that won't happen - we will fail to organize effectively enough to redraw the line and we wont "get the day off" that the parent asks for. Maybe I need to be more optimistic to encourage such efforts, but because I think merely asking has such poor chances, I'd rather point to the problem of coordination in an attempt to move the convo towards "how do we beat the coordination problem" - hopefully by being more aware of the size of the hill we are facing, we can be more likely to devise more ambitious approaches to solving the problem

Hours alone is not the only thing that matters, but all else being equal it does matter. Someone who works smarter for 20 hours will get ahead of someone who works stupid for 40, but if both people work smart the 40 hours person gets more done