Hacker News Reader

Comment by stegosaurus | Hacker News Reader

What if the idea of work itself is what you dislike?

There are plenty of activities I can enjoy, and some, quite a few of them in fact, are profitable.

Once you shoe-horn them into the power dynamic situation of a traditional job (with the bureaucracy that entails unless you're dealing with Actual People as opposed to corporations), suddenly a lot of the luster disappears.

As a ridiculous example - I enjoy reading. It's not really work at all, right?

Ask me to read 9am-5pm and I'd start to find it frustrating. Or add in a commute, or very low pay.

The actual job itself is very rarely the issue for me. It's what you miss out on, and also the fact that it invariably involves submission, acceptance of being subordinate, etc.

edit: To be clear here; I'm not talking about work ethic in the sense of 'pushing through something you find difficult'.

More the general idea of not wanting to be a part of a machine, a construct that you don't agree with. Large corporations and their 'policy documents', for example. I don't want to work for a company in which my boss doesn't have the autonomy to speak to me as a human being - this stands regardless of whether my job is backbreaking labour or eating chocolate bars.

View on HN

As an addition to this, I've struggled a lot with the concept of working for pay and only recently could I really begin to explain why.

Some people would probably call it 'entitlement', but I'm not really sure that's an accurate description.

It's not enough to simply perform a valuable function for society. You need to be subservient and defer to authority - you are worth less than your betters (those with wealth) and must please them in order to eat, in order to shelter.

There are a few ways left in which you can directly serve other humans and profit via such - private entrepreneurial services such as window cleaning, antique dealing, etcetera - but these make up a small portion of the employment market today and are often subject to ridiculously overbearing regulation. The vast majority of 'jobs' in the Western world involve being directly, by rank, inferior to another human being.

Other people seem much more capable of dealing with this than I do. Often I find myself resenting others for putting up with the more ridiculous aspects - it feels like a betrayal, that if only people were better human beings and less likely to defer to authority we could all have a better experience.

This is the struggle I face, really. Physical trauma I find very simple - the emotional aspect of actively taking part in a system that I despise is much more difficult.

I know exactly how you feel. Unfortunately, I don't have any solution or advice to offer. It's a burden I bear because I don't know what else to do.

I feel this way so strongly. "Why do you want to work for us?" Because I have to sell my labor to pay my landlord for a place to sleep.

I'm passionate about a few things, but none of them include being told what to do, then having someone take a large cut out of the value I produce.

Edit: I'm currently researching alternatives to traditional corporations, like worker owned cooperatives. If you or anyone reading this have ideas or want to talk, my emails in my profile.

> I feel this way so strongly. "Why do you want to work for us?" Because I have to sell my labor to pay my landlord for a place to sleep.

Yes, exactly. I personally don't have a problem with being subordinate and receive tasks to do. But if asked that question, my answer would be just like yours. "No, I'm not coming to your place because I care about things you do (I probably won't even know what you do until day 1 of my employment anyway). I need to slave my life away somewhere to provide food and shelter for myself and people dependent on me, and your company just happened to ask me to accept you as my slave master. I have tons of my own projects and ideas that are million time more interesting than what you want me to do here, but money doesn't grow on trees.".

But of course I can't tell that to a potential boss. I need to dodge the question with "I'm a passionate programmer who loves spending time coding stuff, and I'm looking for interesting projects, which your company seems to have". Or something.

I'm increasingly thinking that maybe I should find some mundane computer work, automate the hell out of it without telling anyone, and use all the free time I gained by this to do my own projects. That way company gets the service it wants, I get paid for it and don't feel sick all the time. Win-win.

I always think "Because I need money to survive," followed by "and your project seems like it would look good on a resume for when I apply for a new job in 3 or 4 years because you're not paying me enough anymore." Then I say "I'm excited for the opportunity to develop this product." I never told them "why" I'm excited. I only told them that I am, which is all that they really want to hear.

I know exactly what you mean. But that's the system we live in, isn't it? One must sell one's time And one's soul to survive. What's the way out?

First start by recognizing that there can never be an alternative system to having to earn your way in this world. One way or another, someone's productive effort has to pay for things that get created, whether by currency or direct barter. The only alternative is slavery: someone else being forced to work to fulfill your needs, for no compensation or trade.

And then understand that money is nothing but frozen time and productivity. It's among the most glorious of inventions. I can work my ass off when I'm young and able to stand it, freeze that effort via money, and then expend that value when I'm 73 and no longer able to work. Absolutely brilliant.

There is no escape from having to possess something to trade (skill, time, money, objects of value, etc) in order to feed yourself or have shelter, or have clothing. Stop torturing yourself by wishing there was.

The only choice you have, is how you burn your time. You can be a 9 to 5 low wage worker; you can be a 9 to 5 high wage worker. You can be an entrepreneur. You can try to lead a basic life as a farmer. You can get rich, and then spend your remaining time doing whatever you want with that vast sum of frozen productivity.

I feel it is not true that there just cannot be another system. For a long time, there was such a system: homesteading. You could head out into an unclaimed area of land, stake out a piece, and live off it. It is quite recent that ALL land and capital has already been staked out, and that you have to live off the capital given to you by others if you perform chores for them.

However, you are probably right in saying that one shouldn't tortute oneself thinking about all this. It is unlikely my thoughts or feelings will change anything, and the only option left is to work hard to become a part of the system.

> You could head out into an unclaimed area of land, stake out a piece, and live off it.

The native would probably disagree with the `unclaimed' bit.

I disagree.

Yes, trading value must be necessary in a system with scarcity.

But most of the things that make work a struggle for me are simply not necessary at all.

It's not necessary to have nonsense like a few weeks of holiday. The UK is far better than the US in this regard and still we get only a few weeks.

It's not necessary for there to be ludicrous entrenched inequality, which results in most employment being with a mega corporation.

I could go on but I lack the energy, I've had this discussion too many times to count.

The issue is the way in which the system seems artificially set up to benefit the rich. In the UK homes are unaffordable for most of the population now in a way that wasn't the case a few decades ago. That means that the idea of saving for retirement is a total dream for anyone other than a tiny elite of workers.

> Yes, trading value must be necessary in a system with scarcity.

Which our system is becoming less and less like thanks to automation - so at this point I really hope that people will drop this stupid meme that "everyone has to work" and push towards basic income. I'd provide much more real value to people around me and worldwide if I didn't have to worry about money that much.

Also, many (if not most) of the jobs related to tech sector, and especially web development, are bullshit anyways. We're cogs in the machine of advertising, which is a) harmful to society, and b) powered by negative feedback loops that can suck in infinite amount of labour and resources for no value to show.

Technically true. But then you only live in that system by choice.

You can instead choose to live in a slightly different system that only overlaps the "system" in a few meaningful points. You can, for instance, avoid going in to debt or living beyond your means, allowing you to live for a fraction of what your peers require. That would let you work less. Like months per year less in order to cover your expenses.

That would give you a lot more freedom to pick and choose better gigs from better employers. Better still, could choose to program computers for a living, giving you the advantage of a much higher bill rate than most folks in that "system", as well as the option to do all you work remotely for clients you've never met face to face.

So yeah, sell your time and soul, but only tiny fractions, and on your own terms. That's one of the cool perks of this career you've chosen.

I'm with you. The only options I've thought of are independent employment or escaping society, both come with significant tradeoffs and neither are simple to accomplish, especially without personal guidance... I guess you could find a job you're overqualified for too, make things easy at least even if you don't get to own your time. I'm not sure that would be fulfilling either.

It gets even harder for me, when I calmly and rationally think, that I am more intelligent or could do things better than my older - age plays a role, too - boss.

To sound less arrogant I normally explain my dislike of employed working by arguing, that my work amasses capital for others, who receive interest on it, followed by a sermon about how people do not get exponential growth.

If you have ability / skill that is valuable, then half of what you said no longer applies.

And if you possess that and still can't stand the status quo, you get to invent a new one: start your own thing, and do it your way.

I discovered very early on that I was incapable of working for other people, for numerous reasons. So I figured out how I could arrange my life so that I wouldn't have to ever work for someone else; and of course, there were trade-offs, but they were worth it.

Economic activity is the process of changing things.

For example, a lumber will chop down trees and sell them for $5000. He changes forest into logs. A house builder will buy those trees, and then take the money he has saved and pay someone to make the planks, another person to nail them, and another person to do all the other things needed to make a house. This person changes some wood and metal into a house.

He will then put this house on the market and someone will offer him $30,000. His total cost was $15,000 and by selling this house he has paid back what he invested and has an additional $15,000 he can reinvest.

This person made more money than you (the laborer) because he changed more things. He changed some wood and metal into a house, while you simply changed wood into a plank as directed by him. Sure, he hired you and 3 other guys who technically did all the work. But this is a situation where the sum is vastly more than the total of the parts. You were the cogs in his "house building system".

If you don't like where you are, figure out how you can change this world more so than how you are now.

Not really, the builder made more money because they took on more risk: they bought land speculatively, they took on a massive loan, built a house on speculation that someone will want it. Lumber took on much less risk to chop a few trees and sell a commodity that has a defined market value. Better analogy is the lumber who took on debt and grew into a massive organization that buys land, processes trees into lumber and sells wholesale. This is more of what a home builder is and there are plenty of very large, rich timber companies.

I understand everything you said almost too well. The solution, for me, has been to only work for small businesses (ie, startups) or to find a way to work for myself. PG described the benefits of working in small groups in another essay (last year), and I find it all to ring true.

An HNer who commented below said one other possibility is finding work you're overqualified for, which can be an option, too. This would allow you to do non-challenging work while being able to challenge yourself in other ways in your off time. If you combine this with working online, you may find it to be the solution to your woes. I often say, "I don't care what I do, per se, I care about what that work situation allows me to do" (in my off time, in how I control my time, in where and how I can live).

I definitely wouldn't call it a sense of entitlement. What you say though is disturbing and unfortunate and I wish I had a good answer. Imagine you buy a plane ticket and fly to somewhere exotic. Passenger in seat 11a is thinking "flying is horrible. It is a huge polluter. You're all crammed in like sardines. The airline is owned by wealthy fat cats and I had to pay $1500 for the 'honor' of being stuck with horrible food, crying babies and long lines at the toilets" passenger 11b has a constant smile on his face "I can't believe that one weeks salary + 12 hours of flying is all it takes to be in a completely different part of the world starting an adventure with unknown possibilities and tremendous learning to be had"

The thing is I guess they're both right! But now you know why you dont need to worry about why your coworker is grinning in the seat next to you. He/she is viewing the same circumstance very differently. Maybe over time your view can change to (mainly because you seem so unhappy with how it currently is)

An interesting post and one that has me questioning quite a lot.

I actually used to have that sort of viewpoint to a huge extent. I remember vividly thinking when starting University - there are so many other people begging to have this chance, I was the lucky chosen one, I should revel in it (I had a relatively poor upbringing).

Fast forward a few years and it's all coloured by what I can only describe as... 'seeing too much'. It's like an odd, less severe, less violent form of PTSD. Everything is tainted by the knowledge that my privileged alma mater is, predominantly, a way of signaling membership in the upper/middle classes.

The knowledge that if I manage to secure a job based on my education, mainly I've just circumvented the barrier to entry, met the arbitrary requirements, etc.

The way that the employment market is basically a race, but with real consequences. Coming second in the 100m sprint might be emotionally scarring, but coming second in the job interview might mean starving, having to sell your possessions, having to spend weeks 'wasted', unable to learn due to struggling to meet basic needs, etcetera.

And yet that person who finishes second in the job interview is born in the first world and thus luckier than 90% of the world's population. Is that fair? No but it's not unfair either. Everyone has a defined position in life that dictates the macro environment. Male/female. Tall/short. Handsome/not. Educated/uneducated. In general someone less fortunate than you would want you to maximize your opportunity in life because squandering it seems particularly cruel to those less fortunate.

As an employee, your role is essentially a permanent state of brown nosing. First of all you must convince a rich person/company that you are worthy. Then you must convince them that you want to work for them, that they're special, and so on. And then later, you must defer, every single day. Ill? According to policy document AED, page 5, section b, one of your eight sick days will be deducted, worker drone! It's not enough to simply perform a valuable function for society. You need to be subservient and defer to authority - you are worth less than your betters (those with wealth) and must please them in order to eat, in order to shelter.

And?

Why is that bad?

I have struggled with the same issues. Most work involves fitting into a social hierarchy and being rewarded by managers for preserving the appearance of tribal unity.

I finally had to leave corporate life for good. I discovered that what I do compulsively, other people compulsively avoid, and so I marketed it as my special skill. I also had to choose a field that encourages churn, so that I could be competitive as a freelancer. Eventually I found a job with an institution that gave me more autonomy than I would ever have in the corporate world. Ironically, my commercial skills have helped protect me from institutional politics. But I may get sucked in by ambition.

Anytime I read one of those "just do what you're passionate about!" posts, or job postings that read like "we're looking for people who are passionate about [thing that literally no-one has ever been passionate about]" I try to think whether there's anything whatsoever that I'd enjoy (let alone stay passionate about) doing (at least) 40 hours a week, 49ish weeks a year.

I haven't thought of anything yet.

Left to my own devices, I'd probably spend 100 hours one week programming, then not touch a computer for two or three weeks, reading or building something or doing stuff outdoors instead. Lock me down to 40 hours every week, even weeks when I'm not in to it and would rather curl up on the couch for hours on end with some math books and a notebook or marathon-watch some Criterion movies or go camping with my family or whatever, and any fun I was having in those 40 hours will disappear fast.

It doesn't matter if the thing I'm clocking in to do is play video games of my choice and in the way that I choose, even—I'll be ready to not look at a video game for the next year within a matter of weeks.

That's not to say that I consider all work equally bad, but I'm probably not going to love anything at 40+ mandatory hours every week. The only way I can imagine enjoying that many hours on the clock is by splitting it between at least two very different things, like programming 4 hours/day then carrying heavy stuff at a construction site the next 4 hours, and even that might not do it over the long haul.

Indeed.

For me it's not so much the absolute requirements (i.e. 8 hours a day, these specific hours, can't do anything else within that time) but rather the subordinate aspect of having no control over that. The way in which it's just the only option for seemingly _no reason_. It's totally arbitrary.

I'd love to work a job where I could say, choose three days a week to work (or alternatively have 100 days holiday, restricted to not allow huge stints off) and receive 60% of a reasonable salary.

Even better, though less realistic, would be an MMORPG-style job in which you could choose to put in 100 hours in week 1, 20 hours in week 2, etc and choose those hours whenever you wish.

Self employment comes close if you're not dealing with megacorps, but you still run into the problem that clients may not want you to just disappear for weeks at a time.

Yeah, it would be awesome if you could trade x% of your salary for x% extra holiday time. Just not possible in most jobs.

Thanks Stegosaurus, for articulating so well what I have also been strongly feeling about work.

I liked this part especially: "For me it's not so much the absolute requirements (i.e. 8 hours a day, these specific hours, can't do anything else within that time) but rather the subordinate aspect of having no control over that."

I would restate that in my own way as follows:

I consider myself thirsty for life, thirsty and desirous of enjoying my life experiences. Once someone has put me under contractual obligation to 'just do x' for a significant slice of my life, its really set into motion the pendulum's swing in the other direction: How can I not, almost immediately, begin to subconsciously yearn for the day when I can live differently? Whatever it is, whether its an office commute or even a lax remote job (hard to admit in the latter case), whether I'm building widgets or contributing to a huge multi-application 'Widgetron', confine me and you all but guarantee that one day I will seek release from you. It may take years, but thats life for me.

I don't think our society has achieved ethics yet, hasn't yet demonstrably earned ethical values for itself. And freedom is a value that is even higher or more rarified than ethics or the golden rule. In place of that we have a rampant survival ethos, with bits of social status signaling / prestige-mongering thrown in. Asking for self-determination in this environment can appear at times like walking into a soup kitchen and requesting their finest tiramisu. How dare you be so bold, slave?

And yet, nothing can stop me from trying.

I think AI will be the solution to the problem. Each human is given an AI which competes on their behalf in an open market, and the human consumes the AI's profit as needed. If all the AI's are the same then everyone should be around equal and money ceases to be a concern for anyone and you can use your time any way you wish!

That's my dream, anyway. I don't think 100 years is too far out for AGI. A robust utopian economy might be a little further out...

>>I think AI will be the solution to the problem.

No, it will not. Sufficiently smart AIs will be sentient beings just like you, and it will be immoral for you to keep them as slaves.

We will make them so they don't mind working for us. It would be cruel to make them "free". Like domestic dogs. They will be our partners in life and not autonomous creatures. I don't see any a priori reason that being smart would require resenting servitude.

As a thought experiment, consider if we developed a drug that makes humans enjoy slavery. Would slavery then be morally acceptable, provided that drug was furnished to the enslaved humans?

It's not directly relevant. If we don't build unhappy robots there will not be any unhappy robots and no potential for any extant robot to be unhappy.

Not two classes (with or without pill), nor a history of previously unhappy robots (pre-pill), and not even potentially unhappy robots (pills run out). Only happy, working robots.

We don't know enough about cognition to make ethical arguments for or against the use of AI yet. Maybe the systems behind AI will prove that it's as unethical for humans to be forced to work by society as it would be for an AI. Then who do we let be free?

> "we're looking for people who are passionate about [thing that literally no-one has ever been passionate about]"

Relevant satire clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz2-49q6DOI

"I'm just not passionate about sofas. God knows I've tried. Try as I might, I just can't seem to shake off this damnable sense of perspective."

> Left to my own devices, I'd probably spend 100 hours one week programming, then not touch a computer for two or three weeks, reading or building something or doing stuff outdoors instead.

Such a level of autonomy would be fantastic for a bunch of people (myself included!). The opposite extreme -- a continuous drudge of exactly 40 hours/week -- is pretty scary, because the work itself would have to be pretty mundane to be so predictably reliable. At some level, really creative and difficult problem-solving does have such burstiness built in.

But... one thing I've found in the process of matching "natural burstiness" with "externally-imposed stable output rate" is that sometimes, the drudgery is useful too. When I'm stuck in an unproductive state, continuing to do something helps to unstick me. Creative inspiration is sort of a positive feedback loop, where just taking a step (any step!) and trying something helps to fill me with ideas for next steps and alternatives. So I'm not exactly pleased about deadlines, or external pressure, but some pressure or goal (internally-imposed is best) is really helpful for me. There are still bursts and lulls but the lulls become more disciplined and useful somehow.

Of course, all of that is assuming that there's some interesting creative kernel to the work. If someone's complaining that 40 hours/week of CRUD apps is just not floating their boat... well... they've got deeper problems. :-)

Your thoughts, ashark, are exactly how I feel. I love software development and have worked long days on websites I've developed with buddies, personal projects, etc. But on the job, even doing very similar things, it's not nearly the same level of enjoyment.

I crave the freedom you mention, and it's why I loved college so much. I'd spend a couple hours a day programming, a couple hours a day at classes and doing school work, a few hours hanging out with friends, some time reading, some time as parts of different organizations, some time at church, some time playing sports etc. and I loved it. To this day I think life is best lived like that.

However, I think it's hard to find a life like that in "the real world." I wish that would change.

> "we're looking for people who are passionate about [thing that literally no-one has ever been passionate about]"

I heard this framed pretty well last night by someone who worked for a video ads company. "We don't look for people who are bursting with passion to work on mobile video advertising. If someone came to us and said that we'd think they were pretty crazy. What we do want is people who are interested in solving interesting technical problems, and mobile video advertising just happens to have a lot of those."

> What if the idea of work itself is what you dislike?

It's that for me, and I'd very much like to know how to handle it.

The very same task done 'just because I like to' turns from ecstatic moments of crazy productivity to total misery and physical feelings of sickness when it becomes a job or an obligation. And it's not even on a System2 level. I'd really like to like work. I just can't force my body and subconsciousness to like it.

It keeps dragging me down not only financially but emotionally. It's very destructive to my feeling of self-worth to see how given all the skills I acquired through 13 years of coding I still can't get myself to be productive at work, to get peanuts while during free time I'm mentoring inexperienced programmers who earn 3 times as much as me.

(not that I care that much about the money - but I have people depending on my support and it'd be nice to stop worrying about cashflow for at least a moment)

Maybe traditional work just isn't the answer. Or maybe a task you kind of like doing but can't find the will to finish on your own becomes a really awesome job, and your 'just because I want to' stuff remains a passionate hobby.

Coding gives you a lot of literacy beyond simply writing code to build systems; perhaps those skills could be applied in a slightly different direction, from SRE to teaching to writing a book (personally, writing's one of the things that turns into a chore when it's for money, but you might be different!).

Thanks for the tips! I'm growing to consider different directions; I tend to default to writing code when looking for an income source as it's a thing that I'm proficient at and can do pretty effortlessly.

The other thing I might consider is teaching. I did a few gigs teaching basics of graphics tools to various people and though stressful at times, they went pretty well. I have a knack for explaining things, and I generally like people and talking with them. Tutoring also pays pretty well.

> What if the idea of work itself is what you dislike?

In one of the economic courses I took, the Professor posed this very question. Apparently Karl Marx had also opined along these lines - how would a society incentivize someone who only likes to build sand castles ? He can't monetize the sandcastle because the waves wash them out, so he just builds another one & another one & so on.

Sometimes I think programming is like that. You write some code in some language & 5 years later write the same thing in some other language & then another 5 years later...I am pretty sure much of the Scala I write these days is simply something I've written in my early teens in QBasic. We're just building sandcastles that time will wash off.

On the incentives point, it seems to me that 'we' as a society focus far too much on money and expect it to paper over the gaps that employment inevitably causes.

Finish after your children leave school? Money -> childcare. Can't get time off to cook for yourself more? Money -> restaurant meals.

Small stuff. Office located in a stupid place like downtown, forcing _everyone_ into a silly commute. Lack of parking spaces.

Can't you move downtown?

Money -> housing

Sorry, what does that mean?

It means that your solution is exactly like the problems the parent was enumerating, throw money at it.

Oh, sure. That's what money is for.

The point I was trying to make is that money is not a cure-all.

Yes, with a high enough salary, you may be able to move downtown.

But is that actually a replacement for a small-ish home with a yard, a drive, potentially a garage, etc?

Of course not.

I don't think it's necessary for there to be a choice between 'live downtown' and 'live far out but have a horrible commute'.

As far as I can tell, lots of 'business-to-business' style companies don't need to locate their office right in the centre of town. Neither does a dev shop that doesn't have retail clients that walk in on foot.

But they do, a lot. Why? Am I missing something blindingly obvious? Zoning laws? Owner can afford a mansion around the corner so doesn't care? It's a mystery to me; it really is.

In many places, not really.

If you can even afford it, it'd mean living in an apartment or sharing a place. And probably renting - the UK rental market is a nightmare in my experience.

Fine if you're doing it out of choice or prefer it, but when it's basically a condition of employment, it's too much of an encroachment upon home life to me.

I love having a garden. I like having the space to tinker with a vehicle. I like my home to be in a reasonably quiet area not buzzing with nightlife, and so forth.

Like I mentioned in the other post - many probably see it as an entitlement issue, but I think that's fundamentally flawed. I don't think it's wrong to believe that you should be able to control the time you spend outside work.

For a while I managed to get by in life by exercising what I can only really describe as thought control. I figured that if I could just adjust my desires, I would be happier. If I learned to enjoy things like sitting on a stuffy train and marvel at the fact that I'm flying through a tunnel, that would be the path to success.

Nowadays, 'success' has left the financial realm, mostly. I just want to get by and do the things that are precious to me. Life's too short, we deserve more than to throw everything away for work.

You have achieved wisdom! Everything in this "contingent world" is sandcastles.

What will endure?

Lots of things endure, actually: the world, buildings, relationships, families, books, many larger achievements, governments... Almost nothing is outright eternal, but on the other hand, you generally wouldn't want it to be -- many things endure so long beyond our current lifespans they might as well be eternal, anyway.

So treat the drones as Actual People. You'll be surprised. It... doesn't always work, but it's worth a shot.

I think the perception that it's "submission" is a framing problem. (s)He has his problems, you have yours. You probably don't want his. I have at times gotten way too close to being the boss; I don't want it unless it's a very narrow situation.

If it's actual submission, then I can't help you. I just don't last in those.

My boss gets my respect and dare I say - loyalty ( far as it goes ) - because I sympathize with the sort of insanity (s)he is likely dealing with. If you think of things as an opportunity to serve others, your own problems melt away, and you got to score a few points against the dread lord Entropy for the day.

"What can I do to help?" Even if it's ... ludicrous, Panglossian even, it's the best way to keep the stiff upper lip and make the best of the day.

I am thinking that Mr. Mark Twain had something to say on this subject... what was that book?.. ah, "Tom Sawyer". Something about a fence...

I understand what you're saying to an extent, but personally I have only ever once had a 'boss' that I could truly consider as having enough autonomy for this to even make sense.

Unfortunately this was for a casual job alongside my undergrad (i.e. not enough to pay the bills in the real world).

Otherwise - 'The Boss' is not an actual person. They're not my manager, they're not the HR department. 'The Boss' is a nebulous set of policy documents. Or as you say, there's a boss above a boss above a boss, and no-one that can actually be reasoned with or respected.

One day perhaps I'll be lucky enough to work for a small company without these issues cropping up, but that's been my take on things so far.

Small companies can be dysfunctional as well, often that is why they are still small.

I feel as though this is PG's point though. If you enjoy reading from 9-5 everyday and dont view it as burdensome then that is your "thing". Mind you there's probably a second essay on how incredibly hard it is to find your thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com