Sleep Is the New Status Symbol
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
The famed Keynes biographer, Robert Skidelsky (The Right Honourable Lord), has an intriguing book with his son, Edward Skidelsky: How Much Is Enough? Money and the Good Life.
Starting point is an essay by Keynes from 1930, Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren, in which Keynes predicted that 100 years from then, economic progress would have improved productivity and real incomes so much that everyone (in the developed world) would only have to work 2 days a week and be free to enjoy their leisure otherwise.
Now, it's still a few years until 2030, but it doesn't really look like that prediction will come true - and the book is an examination on why.
Makes you think. (And sleep. And take time off :-)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/books/review/how-much-is-e...
Now, of course, there's a chicken-and-egg thing going on where two-day-jobs largely aren't on offer, but I'd argue that's largely because there just aren't that many takers. Especially in IT, especially if you're above-average successful, it's conceivable that you could find and negotiate a two day a week remote position -- but even among the population that probably could do that, it just doesn't seem a lot are, or are even trying.
.. which doesn't have the kind of leisure that they want.
Two-day positions are very rare, but I'm seeing four-day arrangements becoming a thing as part of "flexible working".
I spend 1.25 days a week working just to afford rent (roommates, very crappy construction, no AC, no central heat, semi-decent area... ie can't find anything cheaper unless I were to add at least 2 hours to my commute every day).
These are the types of comments I just can't relate to on HN. I do not have many luxuries in my life (due to lack of funds) and I know I'm hardly doing poorly in modern America.
Adding two hours to your commute matters less when you're only doing it twice a week. Also, anyway, I'll bet that you can buy food for a week on less than 0.75 days wages. You could, if you wanted to, if five days of leisure a week was actually your life goal, most likely make a number of changes and achieve that. But it's not going to be a life of very many modern luxuries.
People on two days a week will generally be (money) poor, but they can live, and have a lot more leasure time. But that's the point: they don't want to, they want luxuries more, and that's fine.
Remember that Keynes was writing a century ago: two days a week can buy you a decently comfortable 1910s life, but that looks a lot like poverty today (you mention your lack of AC and central heating - well, Keynes never had any of that) - because we're spending our money on luxuries rather than leisure time.
There's really a lot of "Keeping up with the Joneses".
Having said that, in some areas in the USA you really pay ridiculous amounts for a rather basic quality of life (or in HK, London, Munich, etc. for that matter).
Startlingly accurate but rather than everyone living that way, we have a small and shrinking fraction of the population working full time or more, and longer "education" and earlier retirement/ageism than ever. As an economy that's about what we do, we're just not egalitarian about it.
Perhaps Ivanka could convince him to watch less TV and sleep some more...? An article equating sleep with status symbols is certainly a good start.
But these people are the exception not the rule. I think the reason they tend to be successful is because they are up before everyone else and have time to get a lot accomplished before they are thrown into the day with everyone else's schedules pulling on them.
Whenever the daydream talking point "what superpower would you have?" comes up, my answer is to not require sleep. I love sleep and I get seven to eight hours of it every night. But imagine what you could do with another eight hours of waking activity every single day. I think you're right that people who can get by on less have an advantage. But I'm not one of 'em.
President Obama was reported to have regularly taken Modafinil to reduce jet lag while on international trips. He's also reported to only sleep five hours a night. Why not just medicate to increase your productivity for a few years?
By the way, those few people who need less sleep most likely have certain genetic advantage that the rest of us don't: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/genetic-mutation-...
As I've said I haven't tried it yet will do some research before I do, right now I'm trying out other stuff and it wouldn't be wise to mix so many unknowns.
This might go some way to explaining why he comes across so batshit insane and authoritarian. Lack of sleep correlates with reduced empathy, increased aggression and loss of impulse control.
Margaret Thatcher too come to think of it. She claimed to only sleep four hours a night because any more was 'a waste of precious time'.
How do other HNers deal with this?
Source: Safety instructions on a box of melatonin pills.
Always take the smallest dose of whatever you need to supplant in your body, for the effect you need to achieve :-)
Lack of sleep, presumably?
The main thing is regularity. I had a paper round on Saturday mornings once, they made me forget how to sleep in in the mornings.
No, the status symbol of sleep is how little of it you've had.
Admittedly it'd probably be harder to sell sleep deprivation than something that ostensibly helps with the problem.
however it is only a middle class status symbol. And in quite a lot of middle class jobs it seems required that you do this to stay in the middle class, because if you do take the time to sleep how will you keep up with the Jones'
On the other hand if you're poor there is no status symbol associated with getting little sleep, it is just something you often have to do.
And if you're rich there isn't any need for you to brag about how you stayed up late on the Andersen case for 4 nights this week, and got that out the door yeah.
When you're rich you can afford to sleep as much as you want, and that is the real status symbol.
It’s associated with being “a hard worker” or “a go-getter”. I associate it with poor productivity or time management, bad planning or scope management, unrealistic leadership expectations, and/or weak-willed individuals (e.g., unwilling to push back).
Nailed it. It's the same individuals who browse Facebook all day at work that talk about being at work 10+ hours a day.
It's great that iOS/macOS now have night shift (and I've been loving F.lux for years), but it would be intersting to see how sleep patterns have been impacted by overall tech adoption.
On a side note: Earlier the tribals used to negotiate when there was a fight or crime,But once the police station opened the people seem to netgotiate less and use a third party to resolve the issue
Bottom line is that in order to go to sleep and get 8 hours, I have to be avoid device usage at night.
We all need money to live, but also optimizing for leasure time is important.