Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. “So I guess what I’m trying to say is, the new workday should be three to four hours.“

“So I guess what I’m trying to say is, the new workday should be three to four hours.“

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
15 Posts 7 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

    “So I guess what I’m trying to say is, the new workday should be three to four hours.“

    Yup! That's what every worker knows and should have been fighting for with solidarity for decades. Every neurodivergent person knows that we can't do concentrated work for more than 3 hours, and that extended hyperfocus blocks drain our energy for the next day. It's not sustainable.

    Steve Yegge writes about how AI + Capitalism creates an energy vampire https://steve-yegge.medium.com/the-ai-vampire-eda6e4f07163

    boredomfestival@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
    boredomfestival@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
    boredomfestival@sfba.social
    wrote last edited by
    #2

    @saraislet ...did he write something sane this time? The last thing of his that I read was, uh, not good

    saraislet@infosec.exchangeS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

      “So I guess what I’m trying to say is, the new workday should be three to four hours.“

      Yup! That's what every worker knows and should have been fighting for with solidarity for decades. Every neurodivergent person knows that we can't do concentrated work for more than 3 hours, and that extended hyperfocus blocks drain our energy for the next day. It's not sustainable.

      Steve Yegge writes about how AI + Capitalism creates an energy vampire https://steve-yegge.medium.com/the-ai-vampire-eda6e4f07163

      ljrk@todon.euL This user is from outside of this forum
      ljrk@todon.euL This user is from outside of this forum
      ljrk@todon.eu
      wrote last edited by
      #3

      @saraislet I 100% agree... except this goes for any "speed improvement" tech. Although I'd say that AI has only slowed me down because I get to now review the shit people have been able to do own their own but now instead "vibe" their way through it with crappy results that I need to fix ^^'

      I'm a happy non-user

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

        “So I guess what I’m trying to say is, the new workday should be three to four hours.“

        Yup! That's what every worker knows and should have been fighting for with solidarity for decades. Every neurodivergent person knows that we can't do concentrated work for more than 3 hours, and that extended hyperfocus blocks drain our energy for the next day. It's not sustainable.

        Steve Yegge writes about how AI + Capitalism creates an energy vampire https://steve-yegge.medium.com/the-ai-vampire-eda6e4f07163

        doomsey@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
        doomsey@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
        doomsey@hachyderm.io
        wrote last edited by
        #4

        @saraislet know, sure. but not accept. it tore me apart and i’m still mad at myself that i only went back to the grind part time (cue brain worm saying that time spent writing this is stolen from $employer)

        saraislet@infosec.exchangeS 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • boredomfestival@sfba.socialB boredomfestival@sfba.social

          @saraislet ...did he write something sane this time? The last thing of his that I read was, uh, not good

          saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
          saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
          saraislet@infosec.exchange
          wrote last edited by
          #5

          @BoredomFestival this has at least some good points and some 🤔🤨🙄😬🫣🫠

          boredomfestival@sfba.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • doomsey@hachyderm.ioD doomsey@hachyderm.io

            @saraislet know, sure. but not accept. it tore me apart and i’m still mad at myself that i only went back to the grind part time (cue brain worm saying that time spent writing this is stolen from $employer)

            saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
            saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
            saraislet@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #6

            @doomsey what don't you accept about it?

            doomsey@hachyderm.ioD 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

              @BoredomFestival this has at least some good points and some 🤔🤨🙄😬🫣🫠

              boredomfestival@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
              boredomfestival@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
              boredomfestival@sfba.social
              wrote last edited by
              #7

              @saraislet OK, this one is actually readable and does have some interesting points, but the elephant in the room is that he asserts that it will 10x your productivity, but it utterly exhausts you to do so... without explaining why it's so much more exhausting than "ordinary" work.

              saraislet@infosec.exchangeS felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

                @doomsey what don't you accept about it?

                doomsey@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                doomsey@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                doomsey@hachyderm.io
                wrote last edited by
                #8

                @saraislet Ah, that’s the problem. There’s a big difference between knowing something is true and having that truth be something you can feel. I’ve known that being productive a few hours in a day was all I could manage for a really long time. But I didn’t ever accept it, at best coming to a detente with myself of sorts that blank-stare time was work.

                And then I ended up in a situation where I was told 40 hours is mandatory, and I fell apart.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • boredomfestival@sfba.socialB boredomfestival@sfba.social

                  @saraislet OK, this one is actually readable and does have some interesting points, but the elephant in the room is that he asserts that it will 10x your productivity, but it utterly exhausts you to do so... without explaining why it's so much more exhausting than "ordinary" work.

                  saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                  saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                  saraislet@infosec.exchange
                  wrote last edited by
                  #9

                  @BoredomFestival strong agree — if it exhausts you, then it isn't sustainable. That's why I think it's akin to trying to maintain hyperfocus 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, consistently. It's just not feasible for humans in the long-term.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

                    “So I guess what I’m trying to say is, the new workday should be three to four hours.“

                    Yup! That's what every worker knows and should have been fighting for with solidarity for decades. Every neurodivergent person knows that we can't do concentrated work for more than 3 hours, and that extended hyperfocus blocks drain our energy for the next day. It's not sustainable.

                    Steve Yegge writes about how AI + Capitalism creates an energy vampire https://steve-yegge.medium.com/the-ai-vampire-eda6e4f07163

                    saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                    saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                    saraislet@infosec.exchange
                    wrote last edited by
                    #10

                    This is an honest post about some of the practical challenges of being a software engineer using AI.

                    Siddhant shares concrete relatable examples of many common experiences among software engineers, from context switching and code review fatigue to tool churn and engineering perfectionism clashing with nondeterministic AI output.

                    Siddhant also suggests specific practical changes to help software engineers struggling with the daily habits around coding with AI. (These are probably most useful to early-mid career folks as they're lessons likely already learned by more senior folks, but could be worth sharing with colleagues!)
                    https://siddhantkhare.com/writing/ai-fatigue-is-real

                    saraislet@infosec.exchangeS webhat@infosec.exchangeW 2 Replies Last reply
                    1
                    0
                    • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

                      This is an honest post about some of the practical challenges of being a software engineer using AI.

                      Siddhant shares concrete relatable examples of many common experiences among software engineers, from context switching and code review fatigue to tool churn and engineering perfectionism clashing with nondeterministic AI output.

                      Siddhant also suggests specific practical changes to help software engineers struggling with the daily habits around coding with AI. (These are probably most useful to early-mid career folks as they're lessons likely already learned by more senior folks, but could be worth sharing with colleagues!)
                      https://siddhantkhare.com/writing/ai-fatigue-is-real

                      saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                      saraislet@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                      saraislet@infosec.exchange
                      wrote last edited by
                      #11

                      This is a clear, short explanation of some of the dynamics underlying software delivery velocity, and what does vs doesn't change with AI

                      While it's debatable exactly what or how much we need to understand about a system (when no single person can comprehend the entirety of modern complex systems) — we need to comprehend *something* about the manifested behavior of the software we deliver (with the security capabilities and infrastructure platform capabilities being nontrivial aspects of this).

                      Jesse Landry argues rightly that when velocity outpaces comprehension, fragility compounds on the gap between knowledge and reality. In other words, another form of tech debt.
                      https://www.devcuration.com/the-velocity-trap/

                      lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

                        This is a clear, short explanation of some of the dynamics underlying software delivery velocity, and what does vs doesn't change with AI

                        While it's debatable exactly what or how much we need to understand about a system (when no single person can comprehend the entirety of modern complex systems) — we need to comprehend *something* about the manifested behavior of the software we deliver (with the security capabilities and infrastructure platform capabilities being nontrivial aspects of this).

                        Jesse Landry argues rightly that when velocity outpaces comprehension, fragility compounds on the gap between knowledge and reality. In other words, another form of tech debt.
                        https://www.devcuration.com/the-velocity-trap/

                        lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
                        lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
                        lcamtuf@infosec.exchange
                        wrote last edited by
                        #12

                        @saraislet or more accurately, Jesse Landry's LLM argues.... it cracks me up, basically 100% of the opinion pieces about AI - pro and con! - in my feed are substantially written by AI

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        0
                        • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                        • boredomfestival@sfba.socialB boredomfestival@sfba.social

                          @saraislet OK, this one is actually readable and does have some interesting points, but the elephant in the room is that he asserts that it will 10x your productivity, but it utterly exhausts you to do so... without explaining why it's so much more exhausting than "ordinary" work.

                          felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF This user is from outside of this forum
                          felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF This user is from outside of this forum
                          felipe@social.treehouse.systems
                          wrote last edited by
                          #13

                          @BoredomFestival @saraislet one way I read this is that using these tools changed their emotional state (to "hyped") and therefore they are just working more and more consistently.

                          felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF felipe@social.treehouse.systems

                            @BoredomFestival @saraislet one way I read this is that using these tools changed their emotional state (to "hyped") and therefore they are just working more and more consistently.

                            felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF This user is from outside of this forum
                            felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF This user is from outside of this forum
                            felipe@social.treehouse.systems
                            wrote last edited by
                            #14

                            @BoredomFestival @saraislet a.k.a., placebo

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • saraislet@infosec.exchangeS saraislet@infosec.exchange

                              This is an honest post about some of the practical challenges of being a software engineer using AI.

                              Siddhant shares concrete relatable examples of many common experiences among software engineers, from context switching and code review fatigue to tool churn and engineering perfectionism clashing with nondeterministic AI output.

                              Siddhant also suggests specific practical changes to help software engineers struggling with the daily habits around coding with AI. (These are probably most useful to early-mid career folks as they're lessons likely already learned by more senior folks, but could be worth sharing with colleagues!)
                              https://siddhantkhare.com/writing/ai-fatigue-is-real

                              webhat@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                              webhat@infosec.exchangeW This user is from outside of this forum
                              webhat@infosec.exchange
                              wrote last edited by
                              #15

                              @saraislet "I had a prompt that worked perfectly on Monday. Generated clean, well-structured code for an API endpoint. I used the same prompt on Tuesday for a similar endpoint. The output was structurally different, used a different error handling pattern, and introduced a dependency I didn't ask for.

                              "Why? No reason. Or rather, no reason I can access. There's no stack trace for "the model decided to go a different direction today." There's no log that says "temperature sampling chose path B instead of path A." It just... happened differently."

                              This is why it's so difficult to work with AI. Why does it introduce dependencies I didn't ask for? Why does it not do things in a deterministic way? And what's more scary for me is: Why are some others not more worried about this?

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups