Hacker News Reader

Comment by chii | Hacker News Reader

> and there is only one rule, that you have to achieve.... achievement is performance and excess.

and yet, this is what led to most, if not all human achievements and progress. The modern quality of life that most people have come to enjoy is off the backs of people who _are_ doing their utmost to achieve performance and excess (aka, earn more than their spending).

If everyone lived an idyllic, and idle life, we'd have much less modern life amenities and conveniences; stuff would be more expensive, and less wealth all round.

View on HN

That's a very narrow view of "human achievements and progress". Did Mozart achieve because he was forced by peer-pressure to work around the clock? Picasso? Miles Davis?

It's pretty sad if we consider Facebook, Google or Apple as the pinnacles of human achievement. Sure it's useful to have a phone in my pocket that can tell me at any time of the day what's the weather in Hong Kong or how to cook Pork Hock. Sure it's nice that I can connect to relatives in Spain or Brazil through Facebook or search for the number of current Covid cases in South Africa. But I could live with those "achievements" having come later if that had not meant a work culture that forces me into burnout.

Same for space rockets bringing robots to Mars, electric cars for the upper class and drilling tunnels under some Bay Area city.

And for those claiming the climate catastrophe is here and we need to act now .. yeah, let's think for a moment how we got here and whether overachieving and overworking have something to do with it.

If Mozart had to spend more, or most, of his time gathering food and tending to his basic needs would he have had time to make music? What about the musicians who played it?

Wealth is the ability to do more with less effort. Some of that free labor goes to arts, science, or philosophy and advances humanity. Maybe too much goes toward building even more wealth or a fancier house/things but you would not have the former without the ability to get later.

I'm not saying we should all be artists and drop any work on improving science or technology. To the contrary, some people really thrive doing that, and who am I to outlaw it.

But this is about working 80+ hours a week to achieve that. Changing the world is possible in 40 hours a week. Or 30, or 20. It may happen more slowly, but it won't leave so many train wrecks of burnout in its path.

(Apart from overall total productivity not necessarily being lower with a 30 hour week than a 50 hour week as the increased energy and motivation can often times easily offset the fewer hours.)

Its a vast overstatement to say that "all human achievement and progress" is due to people working themselves to death.

Stuff like creative output suffers greatly if you push yourself to the limit, for instance.

I am reminded of a commend I read on HN a few years ago.

"Here lies marvin, who valiantly sacrificed his life in the name of progress.

Thanks to his heroic efforts, the trees in GTA 7 look very good."

I'd love to read a proper study on how people experience different types of hard work. I've worked overtime myself, and it's been a memorable experience when it's been for just a few weeks or months, and in pursuit of something that meaningfully advances the world.

But it would not be fun if it was only a peripheral advance, or it happened regularly. For me, it only works if it's something exceptional, to be done a few times.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com