Only issue was nobody sends mail anymore -- the elderly, Christmas and spam -- so when there was no mail, you'd work an hour and then you'd only get paid one hour. So most people were students, or their spouse did the heavy lifting.
Other than the pay, it was a great job though. I worked in snowstorms (and regular storms!) and in >37C (~100F) -- I got a big sombrero which looked a bit silly but did the job.
Then I'd go home and work on genetic algorithms. And then when the pay arrived at the end of the month -- 800 Euros (909 American), I had to wonder if I wasn't doing it backwards -- I should be getting paid to work on genetic algorithms all day, and then at the end of the day I should run up and down staircases for several hours for free.
Surely the irony isn't lost upon you that they literally are advocating for getting a life.
> the best writers have said very little and the worst, far too much. > bag over his head in a bathtub full of water. what Hitler couldn’t do, he did to himself. happy journey.
Throughout reading the "Betting on the muse", I had plenty of "what an asshole" moments.
Cursor: Do you wanna mess me up? Do you wanna screw up the works? You wanna blow my token sales in Europe?
—Philip Pullman
Wouk elaborated on that predicament. He said that writer William Faulkner was asked, ‘Mr. Faulkner, do you write on inspiration or do you write on a schedule?’ Faulkner replied. ‘Well, of course I write on inspiration. Fortunately, it strikes every morning at a quarter past nine.’
This is the natural continuation of "90 hours a week and loving it!" https://www.folklore.org/90_Hours_A_Week_And_Loving_It.html
Judging by his writing, I get a sense that he became a bit more socially pleasant towards the end of his life?
I think this comes down to getting paid per effort invested (measured in time) vs getting paid for the result.
If the average person were self-employed and received income proportional to their economic output, then they would be rewarded for working faster, instead of punished.
If they increased their productivity, by means of technology, they could then simply choose to work fewer hours.[0]
I noticed this before AI. If someone does the same job twice as fast, do they deserve half as much compensation?
What if they find a way to automate an entire process? What if they replace months of "manual labor" (tedious refactoring) with a perl script that produces the same result, deterministically?
A friend of mine once automated a woman's entire job away. He thought he was doing her a favour, freeing her from the drudgery, so she could focus on the other parts of the job. She wasn't so happy, when she revealed to him, that there weren't any.
---
[0] But most people aren't in such a position, and have to stay the required number of hours regardless of how much has been achieved. And I'm increasingly hearing reports of some kind of burnout resulting from being expected to keep up with machines that work a thousand times faster than you.
And that's now... Just wait until the big providers switch to Cerebras in a week or two!
(Though at that token speed, the silver lining is the work becomes interactive again, so if you use it correctly, your mental model does not desynchronize from the codebase, i.e. you don't need to spend extra time later catching up. But that deserves its own thread, I think :)
I'm still building the discipline to put the important stuff first!
freejazz•53m ago