←back to thread

996

(lucumr.pocoo.org)
1002 points genericlemon24 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Aurornis ◴[] No.45149578[source]
When founders put 996 in their job descriptions or Tweet about their 996 culture it’s a helpful signal to avoid that company.

The only time I’d actually consider crazy schedules was if I was the founder with a huge equity stake and a once in a lifetime opportunity that would benefit from a short period of 996.

For average employees? Absolutely not. If someone wants extraordinary hours they need to be providing extraordinary compensation. Pay me a couple million per year and I’ll do it for a while (though not appropriate for everyone). Pay me the same as the other job opportunities? Absolutely no way I’m going to 996.

In my experience, the 996 teams aren’t actually cranking out more work. They’re just working odd hours, doing a little work on the weekends to say they worked the weekend, and they spend a lot of time relaxing at the office because they’re always there.

replies(17): >>45149967 #>>45149995 #>>45150219 #>>45150354 #>>45150392 #>>45150411 #>>45150444 #>>45150629 #>>45150782 #>>45150842 #>>45150892 #>>45150984 #>>45151100 #>>45151102 #>>45151288 #>>45155515 #>>45155570 #
paulcole ◴[] No.45150842[source]
> When founders put 996 in their job descriptions or Tweet about their 996 culture it’s a helpful signal to avoid that company.

Or a helpful signal to join that company if it’s something you’re excited about.

It’s crazy to me that people are so arrogant to say that somebody else is “wrong” for being excited about something.

replies(4): >>45150927 #>>45151006 #>>45151182 #>>45152666 #
moron4hire ◴[] No.45151182[source]
If you were genuinely excited and cared about your startup, you'd do the right thing for it and get some sleep.
replies(1): >>45152693 #
paulcole ◴[] No.45152693[source]
Nobody ever said they were genuinely excited and cared about their startup, they said they cared about 996.
replies(1): >>45152856 #
moron4hire ◴[] No.45152856[source]
Plenty of people in this thread did say exactly that.
replies(1): >>45153470 #
1. paulcole ◴[] No.45153470[source]
But you replied to me? Was that in error?