Yeah you can fuck yourself with a rusty pitchfork. I’d prefer death over those shitty hours.
You’ll get four and you’ll like it.
We need to tax these fuckers till they bleed.
Yeah, it’s the only nonviolent way to control them.
Isn’t the point of working hard so that you can take it easy eventually? These psychos never take it easy, the suffering is the point for them.
It’s the difference between people who “work to live,” vs. those who “live to work.”
The latter are borderline sociopaths, at best
It can be that or it can be the satisfaction of doing useful work well. Venture capitalists don’t do useful work so they don’t know that satisfaction. And they don’t know what else to do but chase money because they lack the capacity to appreciate life as it is and are probably scared to just stop, in case they have to face the void in their heart. Hence their unstoppable, narrow-minded craving for more money.
Jokes on him: some of the laziest jobs I’ve had were for successful startups.
Hell, I work for a startup right now and spent the last three hours in my hammock watching YouTube.
I get paid for results, not time
Must be nice. I’ve worked for a couple myself, and all I constantly felt like I was being exploited the entire time.
I’ve worked for a few where I was being exploited. One paid me by letting me keep the laptop they bought me.
Then some accountant called me and asked if I still had it.
I said no.
Luckily as you do this more you learn what to look out for. The one I work for now is pretty great.
He might be right, but if he wants me to work more than 5 days a week then I would expect to be compensated accordingly. Otherwise he can fuck off.
I don’t even think he is right… Productivity already takes a nose dive at like 40 hours
I mean this is just how you get any real talent with any real mobility to use that mobility to leave.
996 work culture isn’t for everyone - or even most people. But if someone wants to start a company doing something they love and work that much, I say go for it. I started a company, albeit I only work 60/week, doing something I love and working with my family. It isn’t the only way, but is the way that works for us. 🤷
deleted by creator
albeit I only work 60/week
You do realize that this is a lot of fucking hours to work per week, right? We need to stop normalizing this shit.
I work from home and with my family, and I love what I do (it is my hobby). I don’t ask our staff to work this much and I don’t communicate with them outside of business hours (or after 2pm on a Friday). So, I’m not sure why this is wrong.
I didn’t say anyone was forcing you to do it, I just find it disgusting that we’ve normalized hours like that to the point where it’s talked about like it’s on the low side. “Only 60/week”
I’m glad you can work for yourself, but the overwhelming majority of people who work 60hrs+ are not doing it by choice, and it consumes their waking life.
But it is normal for me and I don’t think I should feel bad about it.
OK, then don’t… I’m talking more about the society we live in, in general, where people would preface “60 hours/week” with the word “only.” Reading shit like that makes me super sad.
It’s a societal problem, not a you problem.
I’m fine with that, it just sounds like these people think they can commodify that kind of dedication in exchange for much less than what you got creating your own.
That’s fine since you get the upside of the business as an owner. A salaried employee may not. Equity may be offered too, but i have seen enough situations where the capital investors get a payout that leaves those with lesser shares in the cold.
In short, fuck these people, pay me to care and I may choose to help build their business.
One cannot eat pie in the sky.
deleted by creator
Check out the bags under this guy’s eyes. He’s not even thirty
Meanwhile, some places have been trying out 4-day 8 hour days, and have found that they retain competent staff who have fewer accidents and make fewer errors, increasing company productivity while reducing wage spend.
Yeah, I’d rather pay for clear-minded hours of a worker, rather than near-burnout hours. But the guy doesn’t care, he’s trying to compete by saving in wages…at the frontline of tech. It makes no sense either way.
I’ve told bosses before they can have either my early hours or my best hours, but not both. There’s so much waste in our work lives trying to fit to some picture of productivity that isn’t actually real. We just play the parts we’re required to while getting nothing done.
Can we just agree as a society that people like this are ruining the world? Maybe if they were treated like the enemies of humanity they are, and exposed to 1% of the misery they cause, it would be a less common genre of shitty person?
Robber Barons are back in style!
Why is anyone questioning why people want to murder the rich and support social programs more and more. You have just sit and think how much people will take before they absolutely slaughter these fucking pieces of human trash.
Y’all know why there aren’t any more Robber Barons right? ✊👷
They throw people in concentration camps without any process, much less due process, get giant tax breaks while taking away people’s healthcare, layoff thousands of workers while getting a generous bonus, dump toxic waste in the rivers, use 45% of the corn grown to make ethanol that doesn’t solve anything, and say there’s not enough room for solar panels.
But don’t post Luigi memes because that’s inciting violence.
Yeah, you can go fuck yourself with your 7 day work week.
What I don’t get is…they can just hire more people to do the work and expand the company? When you consider this, you realize that they’re just asking people to work 40% more without an increase in pay (hence hiring more people is not an option)…then they call it “productivity gains”.
Then they’ll complain when no one wants to work those ludicrous hours and they’ll sing one of the greatest hits of all time:
“nOBodY WaNts To woRk ANyMorE”
they can just hire more people
In software development, it’s not that easy. Having multiple people working on the same code adds a lot of overhead. Also, finding another excellent programmer is slow and expensive. (The “fast, cheap, good: pick two” rule applies.)
Plus, do you want two software developers with a good work/life balance and fulfilling ways to spend their free time, or do you want one software developer with mental issues that, among other things, leave him with nothing to do except work and no source of meaning in life except getting work done? The first option is more dependable, since the guy in the second option is crazy. However, if you’re building a startup then you need to take risks and the second option is the one more likely to create something amazing. (IMO, of course.)
Having more people always adds overhead. It’s not only software developers.
You don’t need to have two developers working on the same piece of code, you can have each one working on a feature. And different teams can develop different projects/products. If a project takes 1 year to complete but you want an output of 2 projects per year, you don’t need to overwork your current employees. You can hire a new team so there are 2 simultaneous projects being worked on at the same time.
I assumed that the VC is talking about small startups, the sort that have a dozen employees and just one project.
Can those be valued at 1Bn?
Ok, yes, there are these examples:
Instagram: When Facebook acquired Instagram in 2012, the company had only 13 employees and was valued at $1 billion.
WhatsApp: When Facebook acquired WhatsApp in 2014, the company had around 55 employees, but it had previously raised funding at a valuation of $1.5 billion with a much smaller team.
Duo Security: In 2018, Cisco acquired Duo Security for $2.35 billion. At the time of acquisition, Duo had around 10 employees.
Nutanix: While not exactly a small startup at the time of valuation, Nutanix was valued at $1.2 billion in 2013 with around 10-15 employees.
(disclaimer: I sourced these from gpt and have not fact checked them)
deleted by creator
This seems short-sighted. You want to hire enough people and give them what they need to grow their skills as they work. Invest in your employees a bit. Then you get the quality without the burnout and mental crises, plus you get a company that feels good to work for.
Plus the fundamental insanity of saying efficiency is a single monolithic thing that can only be effectively worked on by a single person. The only reason you have that is because the type of coder these people want to abuse is the same type of person who’s bad at designing code. They just keep stumbling on subsuming additional features into the monolith because encapsulation and code design is uninteresting to their reward centers. That’s why multiple people can’t work on it, not because there’s some fundamental inability to effectively partition work during the production of innovative software.
Given how much billion dollar start-ups are ruining our world, wouldn’t that be a good thing?
This guy’s upset you won’t break your back to make him richer.
What a piece of shit.
