Geez, you're a tense bloke. Doesn't look like all those vacations are doing you any good.
Yes, why else would I post it? You're dodging the point. A nice vague attack on my argument, that does nothing to refute it.
You analogy was vague. The proper analogy would consider both of us smoking and getting paid for that, with me smoking more, and you arguing that more of my smoke is not good for you and I should stop.
No, actually it's very clear that you believe that anyone unwilling to put ridiculous hours into their job and give up their holidays and other interests doesn't deserve that job. That's pure rubbish.
Sure, it would be nice if we'd all be hired regardless of our personal predispositions and will to work. But it doesn't work that way, and if it does, it's not very efficient. One thing about this, though, and I can't stress this enough, and you seem to ignore this - I never said it's alright to make people stay long hours and not give them vacation if they don't want too. That would be insane. As I said, there are some people that do preffer to work this way. They're happy and I'm happy. As a manager, I much rather preffer to have a staff of people like that, then average workers. If it would be someone like you versus a person like that, then unless your knowledge and experience is much highier than his, he would get the job.
Oh yes I "demand" they leave the job market. Thanks for misrepresenting me so well. I demand they stop pulling down the minimum standards. I don't mind other people work in IT. I don't mind competition. But how about not dragging standards down so there's room for other things in life besides work?
I'm sorry i misunderstood. You correlate work time with dragging standards down. There are people out there, who work long hours, which results in a dropped work efficiency. However, some people work efficiently non stop. Heck, I start being efficient after 11 hours sometimes. These people are worthy emplpyees. Hiring people who botch jobs because they're too tired, but are willing to work anyway for minimum wage? I wouldn't be interested.
And by your logic if enough people can be found willing to work for less money you too are out of a job my friend. It's called outsourcing. Or have you been asleep for the last few years? The problem with your simplistic "all hail the free market" approach is that worker's rights and standard of living declines with time, as there is always someone less well off than you willing to work for less just so they can eat!
You want to ban the IT folks in India from working, or what? Government market regualtions, that sort of thing? It's a natural process. It sucks, but it's there.
So your argument is that never taking a vacation is healthy and balanced. What kind of drugs are you on exactly?
So your argument is that never taking a vacation is healthy and balanced. What kind of drugs are you on exactly?
I never said that. Take a breath, relax, and stop being an insulting prick. I said that in order to stay healthy, you need to put in some time excersizing. It works for me and many people I know. I don't vacation and don't need to. I relax after work by running and it balances the effectes of long work hours.
Who's telling who to get out of the job market now you hypocrite!
I have a good job, that I enjoy. I work on design, development and support including after hours and 24 hour support at a major financial institute that is essential to the economy. I have a 35 hour week. I get one rostered day off a month. I get 4 week paid vacation. My salary isn't going to make me rich but it's not anything I'd complain about either.
I also have hobbies and a social life. I'm into astronomy, fishing, chess, r/c planes if I get a chance. I take my girlfriend to see her parents 600km away occassionally, and socialise. I own and look after pets. I take time off to go to new places and see new things, or to be with fam
So being cautious is now a reluctance to go into space? Maybe they don't want to kill another seven astronauts? They are probably quite expensive to replace.
Ah, well, this is an interesting point. Exploration was always something very dangerous and it has killed many, many people. In fact, it's an extremely risk business. In the same way as business works, the more you risk, the more you can earn. Right now NASA is not risking anything, reducing its chances of moving forward. Now, Russians never fucked around with too much safety, and achieved slightly less, if not thesame, as the US, with a smaller budget. Maybe a Chinese-Russian space co-op program could achieve more? Some deaths are inevetible. Cost of exploration.
In any case don't you find it more than a little hypocritical "getting worked up" and telling me I'm being silly because I'm "getting worked up"???
Why would you think I'm getting worked up? I never wrote that I pity you or feel the urge to swear at your life choices. I haven't called anyone a fool either.
But back to the point - as far as smoking is concerned, sure, you're right. But do you honestly think your anology makes sense? One of the basic market mechanisms is that somebody that's willing to put in more time into a job will get that job. It's as simple as that - you work and you get paid. Now, I'm not a heartless capitalist sitting on a throne made out of udperpaid programmers. I believe in being justly paid. That's why I think, for example, that factory workers in Asia are abused. The difference is I get justly paid for my work, and they don't, even though they too work crazy hours. Demanding people to quit a job market because they're willing to put in more hours than you is something I disagree with completly. This has been attempted a number of time before - people in countless central and eastern european countries will tell you that it was not such a good idea. Unless you consider soviet Russia to be a succesful endeavour, in which case I rest my case.
As far as working being unhealthy in the long run - sure, anything is unhealthy. You just need to balance things out. Eat healthy, take a run every once and again and you'll be less like to die of a massive cardiac arrest while working late hours. We are not all the same - some of us are suited to work long hour and it takes less toll on them. Some of us are not. The end result - most people don't have the qualities to work in high stress enviroments. Maybe you're opne of them. Maybe you should switch jobs to something less demanding.
Funny to hear about this now. My new company, X Dimension Corp, is planning to colonize Alpha Centauri and mine fairy dust as soon as 2012. We are hiring lesbians and midgets right now, so all is coming along well.
/wish them all the best - honestly - but I just don't see it happening.
Oh come on - live and let live. Not all of us require to vacation. I enjoy my work and don't take holidays. Honestly, getting worked over somebody else's life choices is silly. While I understand only some people enjoy that lifestyle, there really is no reason for you to get all jumpy, is there? You work less, and you earn less (unless you're an underpaid child worker in Asia) - it's as simple as that and has always been.
All this seems so familiar. It's like listening to kids bragging about their latest toy. Right now it's Windows vs. Linux, but not long ago it was Atari vs Commodore, Commodore vs Amiga, Amiga vs PC, Game Boy vs Game Gear. And it's not only about computers - I've seen a number of instances where people would go to great lengths to prove that Coke is better than Pepsi. Ultimately, get whatever suits your needs. My company uses all kinds of OS and computers, depending on what job must be done. It's a bitch to integrate various elements, but it's possible. It's certainly not something I'd argue over (though it kind questions the point of this post and now my head hurts, ow.)
Well, as much as I understand your point of view, I'm not sure I would like to keep you as an employee once someone new shows up. The important thing, as some people wrote, is to like your job and if somebody puts in his 40 hours a week and then just disconnects from the whole thing, then there's something wrong with this picture. To put it another way - It's hard to be a great professional without putting in the extra time.
It's all got to do with the way you balance your life. Most of the time, you can have a happy family life by cutting down work time. If you want to earn more, you've got cut down your family life. Or you can hover somewhere in the middle, being mediocre at both of these things. Some very lucky people can pull off being excellent at their work and having great families - I think that's really impressive.
Homes for offices? I tried that and it didn't work for me. I know a number of people who also tried and prefer to work in an office. I agree with the article that modern office buildings are counter productive. The ad agency I work for is in a large apartment. Work hours are extremely flexible, there's no dress code and it's fun - that's why personally I don't mind working 45 or 50 hours a week.
For every one of these stories there must be a hundred kids who think "I could have done that, why didn't I get the chance?"
I think that a lot of kids might have read the story and thought "hey, she did, so could I". Unless, of cource, they're depressed and unsure of their own worth. But you can't blame Bill or the story for that.
Slashdot Mirror
Geez, you're a tense bloke. Doesn't look like all those vacations are doing you any good.
Yes, why else would I post it? You're dodging the point. A nice vague attack on my argument, that does nothing to refute it.
You analogy was vague. The proper analogy would consider both of us smoking and getting paid for that, with me smoking more, and you arguing that more of my smoke is not good for you and I should stop.
No, actually it's very clear that you believe that anyone unwilling to put ridiculous hours into their job and give up their holidays and other interests doesn't deserve that job. That's pure rubbish.
Sure, it would be nice if we'd all be hired regardless of our personal predispositions and will to work. But it doesn't work that way, and if it does, it's not very efficient. One thing about this, though, and I can't stress this enough, and you seem to ignore this - I never said it's alright to make people stay long hours and not give them vacation if they don't want too. That would be insane. As I said, there are some people that do preffer to work this way. They're happy and I'm happy. As a manager, I much rather preffer to have a staff of people like that, then average workers. If it would be someone like you versus a person like that, then unless your knowledge and experience is much highier than his, he would get the job.
Oh yes I "demand" they leave the job market. Thanks for misrepresenting me so well. I demand they stop pulling down the minimum standards. I don't mind other people work in IT. I don't mind competition. But how about not dragging standards down so there's room for other things in life besides work?
I'm sorry i misunderstood. You correlate work time with dragging standards down. There are people out there, who work long hours, which results in a dropped work efficiency. However, some people work efficiently non stop. Heck, I start being efficient after 11 hours sometimes. These people are worthy emplpyees. Hiring people who botch jobs because they're too tired, but are willing to work anyway for minimum wage? I wouldn't be interested.
And by your logic if enough people can be found willing to work for less money you too are out of a job my friend. It's called outsourcing. Or have you been asleep for the last few years? The problem with your simplistic "all hail the free market" approach is that worker's rights and standard of living declines with time, as there is always someone less well off than you willing to work for less just so they can eat!
You want to ban the IT folks in India from working, or what? Government market regualtions, that sort of thing? It's a natural process. It sucks, but it's there.
So your argument is that never taking a vacation is healthy and balanced. What kind of drugs are you on exactly?
So your argument is that never taking a vacation is healthy and balanced. What kind of drugs are you on exactly? I never said that. Take a breath, relax, and stop being an insulting prick. I said that in order to stay healthy, you need to put in some time excersizing. It works for me and many people I know. I don't vacation and don't need to. I relax after work by running and it balances the effectes of long work hours.
Who's telling who to get out of the job market now you hypocrite! I have a good job, that I enjoy. I work on design, development and support including after hours and 24 hour support at a major financial institute that is essential to the economy. I have a 35 hour week. I get one rostered day off a month. I get 4 week paid vacation. My salary isn't going to make me rich but it's not anything I'd complain about either. I also have hobbies and a social life. I'm into astronomy, fishing, chess, r/c planes if I get a chance. I take my girlfriend to see her parents 600km away occassionally, and socialise. I own and look after pets. I take time off to go to new places and see new things, or to be with fam
So being cautious is now a reluctance to go into space? Maybe they don't want to kill another seven astronauts? They are probably quite expensive to replace.
Ah, well, this is an interesting point. Exploration was always something very dangerous and it has killed many, many people. In fact, it's an extremely risk business. In the same way as business works, the more you risk, the more you can earn. Right now NASA is not risking anything, reducing its chances of moving forward. Now, Russians never fucked around with too much safety, and achieved slightly less, if not thesame, as the US, with a smaller budget. Maybe a Chinese-Russian space co-op program could achieve more? Some deaths are inevetible. Cost of exploration.
In any case don't you find it more than a little hypocritical "getting worked up" and telling me I'm being silly because I'm "getting worked up"???
Why would you think I'm getting worked up? I never wrote that I pity you or feel the urge to swear at your life choices. I haven't called anyone a fool either. But back to the point - as far as smoking is concerned, sure, you're right. But do you honestly think your anology makes sense? One of the basic market mechanisms is that somebody that's willing to put in more time into a job will get that job. It's as simple as that - you work and you get paid. Now, I'm not a heartless capitalist sitting on a throne made out of udperpaid programmers. I believe in being justly paid. That's why I think, for example, that factory workers in Asia are abused. The difference is I get justly paid for my work, and they don't, even though they too work crazy hours. Demanding people to quit a job market because they're willing to put in more hours than you is something I disagree with completly. This has been attempted a number of time before - people in countless central and eastern european countries will tell you that it was not such a good idea. Unless you consider soviet Russia to be a succesful endeavour, in which case I rest my case. As far as working being unhealthy in the long run - sure, anything is unhealthy. You just need to balance things out. Eat healthy, take a run every once and again and you'll be less like to die of a massive cardiac arrest while working late hours. We are not all the same - some of us are suited to work long hour and it takes less toll on them. Some of us are not. The end result - most people don't have the qualities to work in high stress enviroments. Maybe you're opne of them. Maybe you should switch jobs to something less demanding.
Funny to hear about this now. My new company, X Dimension Corp, is planning to colonize Alpha Centauri and mine fairy dust as soon as 2012. We are hiring lesbians and midgets right now, so all is coming along well.
/wish them all the best - honestly - but I just don't see it happening.
Oh come on - live and let live. Not all of us require to vacation. I enjoy my work and don't take holidays. Honestly, getting worked over somebody else's life choices is silly. While I understand only some people enjoy that lifestyle, there really is no reason for you to get all jumpy, is there? You work less, and you earn less (unless you're an underpaid child worker in Asia) - it's as simple as that and has always been.
All this seems so familiar. It's like listening to kids bragging about their latest toy. Right now it's Windows vs. Linux, but not long ago it was Atari vs Commodore, Commodore vs Amiga, Amiga vs PC, Game Boy vs Game Gear. And it's not only about computers - I've seen a number of instances where people would go to great lengths to prove that Coke is better than Pepsi. Ultimately, get whatever suits your needs. My company uses all kinds of OS and computers, depending on what job must be done. It's a bitch to integrate various elements, but it's possible. It's certainly not something I'd argue over (though it kind questions the point of this post and now my head hurts, ow.)
Well, as much as I understand your point of view, I'm not sure I would like to keep you as an employee once someone new shows up. The important thing, as some people wrote, is to like your job and if somebody puts in his 40 hours a week and then just disconnects from the whole thing, then there's something wrong with this picture. To put it another way - It's hard to be a great professional without putting in the extra time.
It's all got to do with the way you balance your life. Most of the time, you can have a happy family life by cutting down work time. If you want to earn more, you've got cut down your family life. Or you can hover somewhere in the middle, being mediocre at both of these things. Some very lucky people can pull off being excellent at their work and having great families - I think that's really impressive.
Homes for offices? I tried that and it didn't work for me. I know a number of people who also tried and prefer to work in an office. I agree with the article that modern office buildings are counter productive. The ad agency I work for is in a large apartment. Work hours are extremely flexible, there's no dress code and it's fun - that's why personally I don't mind working 45 or 50 hours a week.
For every one of these stories there must be a hundred kids who think "I could have done that, why didn't I get the chance?"
I think that a lot of kids might have read the story and thought "hey, she did, so could I". Unless, of cource, they're depressed and unsure of their own worth. But you can't blame Bill or the story for that.