Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

54% Positive

Analyzed from 6734 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#tech#more#don#job#lot#things#years#going#everyone#something

Discussion (157 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

dec0dedab0de7 minutes ago
This dropped off the front page in the time I read it, I assume because of the controversial gate that favors upvotes to comments. It is a shame, because this really resonated with me.

I've been working in tech for over 20 years now in various roles, and this is the least I have cared about it. I used to want to get better, and was constantly excited about learning new things just for the sake of it. Now I daydream about being homeless. I look around at all the meaningless crap I have accumulated, and feel shame that I didn't use that money to retire early.

I am surprised that remote work didn't get a bigger mention in the article. In a few weeks I will have been working home for 12 years, and I believe it is the cause of most of most of my angst. At first, the convivence was such a relief, but it has become a trap. The effort of the commute, forcing me to go out every day and talk to human beings face to face, even just little things like making sure I was showered and dressed every day, they all felt like a burden at the time but they were good for me and I didn't realize it. Not to mention that it makes my house feel like work, and I now I hate it here.

I will say as an anecdote counter to the AI examples giving in the article. I have a young co-worker who is very excited about AI and using it way more effectively than I am. Talking to him gives me hope for the future, the kids will be alright.

But to the point of the article: I have many friends my age that are making less than half of what I do working objectively harder jobs for way longer hours, but they all seem so much happier than I am.

ang_cireabout 3 hours ago
Because we see what's coming?

Because we watched our careers go from being in service of an industry of tinkerers and designers, to being in service of the worst people attempting to maximize wealth extraction no matter the human cost?

Because Snow Crash wasn't supposed to be the goal?

Because our daily complicity in what's happening is also a daily reminder that we're not brave enough to be a Mangione?

Take your pick.

dspillettabout 2 hours ago
In some cases being told "just treat it like you are a manager", when we've always done our level best to avoid anything vaguely like management because we like doing things particularly the nitty gritty details.
JohnFenabout 2 hours ago
So much this. I've spent my whole career avoiding being promoted into management because I don't want to be or enjoy being a manager.

So it always amuses me when genAI advocates say things like "your job isn't going away, you're just going to be doing management" as if that is a good thing. To my ears, that reads as "you'll still be getting a paycheck, but your job is going to shitty."

9rx29 minutes ago
The last time a programmer wasn't a manager was when they were handed a piece of paper with toggle combinations and their job was to flip the toggle switches as detailed. AI doesn't seem to have much applicability in any other profession, other than maybe graphic arts, but the same holds true there. Artists are also always managers.

So, what is this magical not-a-manager but also at risk of AI taking it away career? Are you sure it actually exists?

spicymakiabout 2 hours ago
> Because our daily complicity ...

Exactly this. We were (still are) complicit in our own destruction and worst yet when other courageous people spoke up we shout them down, hid away, laughed at their folly, or shunned them outright.

pc86about 2 hours ago
"Not brave enough" to shoot an innocent person in the back and then run away?
scottLobsterabout 2 hours ago
He murdered a guilty man, not an innocent one. Still murder, and murder is wrong, but let's not get things twisted
pc86about 1 hour ago
What crime did he commit? If he's guilty of something for which the just punishment is death, then how can you say it was wrong?
scottLobsterabout 1 hour ago
As a mid-career software dev I'm just sick of most of my job being a highly paid technical janitor mopping a floor that never gets clean.

I've had maybe 2-3 years combined where I actually got to build something I could be proud of, and made all the red tape worth it. The rest has been navigating/paying down other peoples' technical debt and being forced to add some of my own when there's no budget for maintenance and the band-aid becomes permanent.

At the start of my career I wondered why anyone retired early when there was so much cool stuff to work on... now I get it. The cool stuff is the extreme minority of available work, and the odds of you getting to work on any of it are down to being in the right place at the right time. As for the rest of the job, I'd sooner step on a nail if it didn't come with the pay and benefits.

ThrowawayR2about 1 hour ago
> "a daily reminder that we're not brave enough to be a Mangione"

Sure are a lot of wannabe murderers on HN lately. Mangione, guillotines, what other thinly veiled incitements to violence are HNers using these days?

I fault the HN moderators for not following their own stated guidelines on most political submissions being off topic. "Most" needs to become "nearly all" since the submissions they allow through (or even explicitly unflag at users' request) are nurturing a very unpleasant breed of HN users.

ang_cireabout 1 hour ago
Is discussing offshoring that takes away American jobs and has driven much poverty in the heartland equally political and unacceptable, or is it just the political discussions you don't like having that shouldn't be allowed?

The "no politics" rule is about not posting constant "x politician said this about tech" articles, not about banning all discussion of real-world consequences of the tech industry.

throw-the-towel33 minutes ago
Even by your definition, HN is still full of off-topic politics these days.
akagusuabout 2 hours ago
Can I pick all?

All options are good because they are all true.

I think you can extend them.

brandonagr2about 2 hours ago
Are you really holding up a murderer as a role model?
Multicompabout 2 hours ago
I'm not happy they do it, but I'm not surprised. There's a lot of media echochambers where Luigi M is lionized and his heinous actions dismissed or celebrated because it advances a grievance/covetousness/envy political narrative, and for the same kind of people who have to be atheist to be fashionable tend to be the ones who can fall into workism as described in TFA and also have a non-trivial chance of falling into media spheres that want to drive that anti-healthcare-exec animus crowd.
scottLobsterabout 2 hours ago
Anyone who's lost a loved one over a denied claim can sympathize with Luigi even if they disapprove of his methods. Sounds like you haven't gone through that experience, but a lot of Americans have.
ang_cireabout 2 hours ago
That's only okay if they're a politician or business exec, right? It's fine to hold those murderers up as role models, apparently.
wonderwonderabout 2 hours ago
"not brave enough to be a Mangione" If you idolize a man who murdered an innocent then perhaps you should seek mental help. This is a you thing, not a society or industry thing
NicuCalceaabout 2 hours ago
A quarter of Americans (and 40% of young Americans) see Mangione favourably, so it definitely is a society thing.

https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/51189-presidential-pardons...

scottLobsterabout 2 hours ago
The only reason in my mind to view Mangione unfavorably is that vigilante justice, however justified, does not result in a civilization anyone would want to live in. It's the same reason we can't just go around killing everyone in the Epstein files. It's not that they don't deserve it, it's that the resulting corrosion destroys the entire system, including the good parts.

If Mangione had killed the UHC CEO by being his insurer and denying his claim for cancer treatment that his doctor said he needed, nobody would be saying anything.

wonderwonderabout 2 hours ago
Be attractive Don't be unattractive
pixl97about 2 hours ago
>an innocent

Remember murder is only bad when it's not done with an algorithm and a bureaucratic process.

wonderwonderabout 2 hours ago
Is your argument that every new health care ceo should be gunned down as soon as a single claim is denied in perpetuity until all claims are approved and all health insurance companies go bankrupt and then no one gets health insurance?
komeabout 2 hours ago
he didn't murder an innocent man.
akagusuabout 2 hours ago
Mangione is a murderer but that "innocent man" he killed was not innocent at all, he indeed was a murderer too. The only difference between then is they used different tools. No... Mangione murdered one, the other guy killed much more.
baggy_troughabout 2 hours ago
That is a reprehensible claim of which you should be ashamed. Being a health insurance executive in no way makes you a murderer, yes, even if you deny some claims. Do you think that there is some health care system in which all requests for care can be approved without limit? I should hope you would see that this is impossible. And therefore, someone must decide what claims are reasonable. That can either be government bureaucrats or it can be done via the insurance marketplace, giving patients some choice in the matter. In a socialized medical system, are the bureaucrats the "murderers" then?
stego-techabout 2 hours ago
I mean, yeah.

I got into IT because I loved working with technology, building communities and game servers and chatrooms and computers and the like. I got lucky that someone found me, my interest in these things, and showed me how it could be a career.

Nowadays though, so much of my time isn’t spent building so much as debunking the latest grift, scam, or lie. It’s spent unfucking arbitrary vendor changes that didn’t fix any actual problems but created a slew of new ones. It’s bristling at the notion that SAML, SSO, and SCIM remain Enterprise options so that a fraction of players can have total control over identity, instead of letting customers and users build solutions that fit their needs. So much time spent talking, not doing, and almost always in service of making some rich old billionaire fuck that much richer while I struggle to buy a home.

I got into this field because it brought disparate people together. People from all over the world, all walks of life, all backgrounds and belief systems and ideologies into a giant melting pot of community. Nowadays there’s so many corporate and nationally-erected fences that everyone is so carefully siloed into approved areas, and any attempts to cross imagined digital borders is viewed as suspect or criminal by default.

The technology of today does not enable, or empower, or bring us closer together. By design, it keeps us apart, distanced, agitated at difference or unbalanced from change. The stuff that fucking works - Home Assistant, the Pi-Hole, my Docker containers - are what is good, and leaves me time to deal with shitty OS updates breaking familial devices, or “smart” appliances that get unprompted updates that break connectivity.

We are miserable because those in charge of the direction of technology - the shareholders, the Boardrooms, the C-Suites, the VCs - all demand it be miserable and extractive, rather than empowering and liberating.

For a lot of folks, AI was the final canary in the toxic coalmine. The realization that this is not a noble cause or profession anymore. That we’re not helping people do better, at least not en masse, but instead making life actively worse for disproportionately more folks than those whose lives we make better.

And it’s a goddamn tragedy.

Der_Einzigeabout 2 hours ago
Ah yes, freely admitting that you want or want others to shoot AI researchers/workers.
ang_cireabout 1 hour ago
I don't know where you got the idea my comment is about AI from.
Der_Einzigeabout 1 hour ago
"The Librarian"

Oh didn't you realize that some people actually READ the books people reference here?

marginalia_nuabout 2 hours ago
Saw a meme on mastodon the other day contrasting people of the '90s going online to escape from offline reality, and people of the '20s going offline to escape from online reality. There's something to that.

I think a big part of it is just how incredibly toxic the web has become. If you spend any time online, as most tech workers do, you have exceptional resiliency if you're able to stay sane and level headed.

Going online it's like everyone is really angry and tired and sad all the time, and it's getting worse every year. This really took a nosedive during the pandemic, but looking back this had been going on for several years before. Every election cycle makes things worse too.

It's just been spiraling in a very dark direction for a long time. You have these blackpill depression cirklejerks everywhere. Astroturfing is getting worse every year. Like what Bannon did with gamer gate is an amateurish precursor to what everyone with is doing everywhere now. With AI you can even run these campaigns with a very small budget.

All the news is just outrage porn and non-stop predictions of impending doom. Used to be more tabloid territory but now I don't know if anywhere is spared. A lot of the focus now is on AI, but when it isn't the world is burning in some other fashion. Reading the news, we've been in a permanent state of crisis for years now.

This information diet just isn't good for your mental health. It isn't just tech workers, but they're probably more exposed than most.

Candide's closing remarks spring to mind. Tend your garden.

MarkusQabout 2 hours ago
"It's just been spiraling in a very dark direction for a long time. You have these blackpill depression cirklejerks everywhere. Astroturfing is getting worse every year."

Agreed.

From TFA: "This disillusionment is infectious."

I would suggest it is in part being spread by articles like this one. If you look at the press surrounding earlier advances, it was largely neutral to positive. Nowadays, as you note, it's doom stew everywhere, and the beacons of solace are pieces like this one driving home to anyone who's missed it how demoralized their peers are.

Multicompabout 2 hours ago
TL;DR: We won't stay here in blackpill-as-entertainment long term, tech/HN will proxy the way forward, but it will take time and will be messy.

I think you make a strong point here. I will add a note of hope.

In my opinion, besides the 'this too shall pass' nature of life meaning this outrage-focused moment, we on HN have hope here.

I've been a lurker for a while around here, IDK when this account was made and I don't care, I feel confident that I've been watching the great techies of our era and HN celebrities and dang and other mods presiding over it all for at least a decade.

It's probably my own media bubble bias, but I have noticed this trend where HN is discussing a given subject that the general public is not aware of, and it after years filters into the greater consciousness. I don't think HN is necessarily magically head of the curve, but I do think it concentrates where curious and possibly-open-minded people's thoughts are at, before internet-point-seeking/popularity echo chamber communities like Reddit/FB/Twitter or algorithm-driven hivemind homogenziers like YT/Reels/TikTok/Periscope all become aware of something.

HN saw the centralization of control with the SOPA/PIPA/encryption in public fight, that has been ongoing since the clipper chip and before, but in this modern form with end-users not needing PGP and friends and just getting to have e2ee with Signal, HN was talking about and using Signal for years before now our government figures and traditional + social media companies have talked about Signal.

Similarly, the broader privacy questions, turning off Google Location History was happening on HN (and XDA back when custom android ROMs were more popular) as soon as Google Reader was axed, people only now have learned to fear 'the internet' because of how many more egregious things have happened across all powerful web platforms.

And of course we can't ignore HN playing with cleverbot and that dall-e precursor who's name I forget, ML models and markov chains and tech beyond my ability to teach about, before OAI ever released a single product like ChatGPT.

HN still has heavyweights of each industry and titans of tech who pop by on occasion to grace us mere plebians, pushing back the Eternal September for just a few happy moments (looking at you BWK, Walter Bright, and other famous names I can't rattle off) to share with us what happened 'in the room'. Just the other day someone posted 'I was the guy who controlled the rollout for Apple MacOS X Snow Leopard, it was a bugfix only release no really' ... only on HN by the power of the internet do we get that, we don't get that on a TikTok. So HN has still got 'it' at least for now, and therefore I can make a broad observation.

If the HN being directionally appropriate even if getting particulars wrong is true, I'm seeing future trends that will lead us out of this populist/blackpill moment.

People will get emotionally overwhelmed/numbed to overwrought angry moments, they will want to move forward. Americans tend to be keen as a people, whatever the 'thing' is. 90s tech utopia optimism was a keen-thing. Support for or opposition to the Iraq War was a keen-thing, whatever we Americans do, we do with gusto.

So right now, we are all in on outraged doom/gloom/anxiety/this sux!! feelings.

I'm hopeful that perhaps we as a people go with a decision to move in what a figure from my current media bubble named Aaaron Renn says where there are New Constructivists, who are intellectuals on all sides of American political aisles looking to revitalize and create new institutions.

I'm fearful that we will have to fall down hard to learn our lessons first and/or learn the wrong lessons where we decide the fix to ennui is to blame 'those' people over there (whoever that happens to be). The fix to the fear and ennui won't come from us fighting with our families, community members, internet strangers, or political opponents, it will come from us choosing to change our media diets away from garbage in/garbage out (I Know, I know, you who read this and disagree with everything I say and my media diet sources want me to change my media diet, that may very well be true) that is focused on emotional inflammation (didn't we used to ban people from our forums for flaming?) instead of genuine debate and encouragement and online civility.

It's boring and its lame, but circling all the way back to the parent comment: the web used to be a homogenous unified place made up of professionals and nerds and group think. We need more diverse opinions than that, but what has happened is that the internet (and its mobile app/web/private chat mediums) has become a borderless place where people who never encounter each other have diametrically opposed views constantly, and so retreat into echochambers and don't get the media literacy experience needed to peacefully coexist with the rest of the online anglosphere without constant acrimony. Grifters feed the flames for likes/subscribes/patreon subs/etc.

rob74about 2 hours ago
If you also consider that many of us, via the companies we work for, actively contribute to making the Internet (and by extension, the world) a worse place, the question in the article's title kind of answers itself. It also makes "quiet quitting" seem almost the right thing to do: doing only the least possible to advance your company's goals while keeping both your job and your sanity, hoping that you will one day be offered a buyout package and then maybe find something more fulfilling...
marginalia_nuabout 2 hours ago
A counterpoint would be that you don't really ever see investment bankers reacting in this fashion.
Gud32 minutes ago
Because engineers and investment bankers are wired differently.
FLeXMurphyabout 3 hours ago
This article is too inward, clique referential looking. It uses too many "known" things to frame and validate its points, but has very little contributions of its own.

The way that people are described, and the conditions portrayed, have been this way for quite some time. The only thing that is changed is now there is a clearly defined boogeyman to point to that justifies it. Because the other boogeymen make the usual authors too uncomfortable to bring up.

VCFundedGenYer2 minutes ago
I feel you had ChatGPT make this comment.
chrisjjabout 2 hours ago
> This article is too inward

Too inward for what?

xliiabout 2 hours ago
Long long time ago people in tech were in tech because of the tech.

Then, at some point, being in tech became a gilded profession and everyone: salesmen, artists, clerks etc. joined in. Not because they wanted to be in tech.

They wanted gold.

For years it was working, but right now things shifted. You can no longer just do the thing you learned for a job and continue doing so, because landscape shifted. So they're miserable and they want to get back to knitting, pottery or whatever thing they want to do but not tech.

For people I know who are in tech for the tech nothing changed. There's new tech in town, one has to adjust, and it's still possible to discover new things and pave new paths. Tech was always shifting and I suppose people who worked in it for it always knew it, and it doesn't derail them.

cholantesh33 minutes ago
Quite a lot of folks who got into tech for the tech are also miserable, because, as the byline rather aptly puts it, a lot of it is pointless. It does not serve a public good, or even a public desire, and 'work for its own sake' is only engaging up to a point.
MarkusQabout 2 hours ago
100%.

I noticed it most when the slurs they used against us became status symbols, as a hoard of grifters traded in their ties (remember ties?) and golf doodads for SF franchise bling and proclaimed themselves "geeks" and "nerds".

agysabout 3 hours ago
Side note: a half an hour call on a commute train (or in public spaces) is considered extremely rude in many parts of the world.
mattcantstopabout 1 hour ago
It's rude to me as well. But I think we are wrong about this.

I was in the doctor's office and a person was on the phone talking in the waiting room. I thought it was weird. But then I thought "if a person was sitting in the seat next to them and they were talking, would that be weird?"

I don't think we'd see two people talking as being weird. Why is it weird if someone is by themself speaking to someone that isn't around on the phone? If two people can speak in that place, it's not weird for someone to have a phone discussion.

Now playing music speakers or watching TikTok videos on your phone in a public place...psychotic!

elricabout 2 hours ago
It is rude and annoying in general. But even in quiet cars it seems like many people just don't give a fuck and will simply jabber on obnoxiously without any care for anyone else.

Would be nice if people could keep their noise levels down in general.

Der_Einzigeabout 2 hours ago
These kind of social rules are why I’m very glad that America has garbage public transit culture. Actually I am going to jabber on talking to folks during transportation events. I’m going to do it in my personal vehicle so I don’t have to deal with others crying about my behavior.

Only poor people are required to humiliate themselves by asking every tom, dick, and harry for their opinion on if their behavior is acceptable.

arendtioabout 2 hours ago
I think it depends not just on culture but also on the volume of the conversation. Some people manage to have a conversation when you can barely hear them; others seem to have a conversation with everyone on the train.
swat53528 minutes ago
I don't mind people having conversations, just don't blast the volume up or put it on speaker for the whole train to hear..
neomabout 3 hours ago
From my experience, (outside of the quiet car), "extremely rude" - only South Korea and Japan?
left-struckabout 2 hours ago
Having lived in both Australia and Japan and visited SK, for me it seems like it’s rude in all those places but only in some places do almost all the people care what strangers think enough to modify their behaviour. Which is not as judgmental a statement as it sounds like, because that care, or some might call it pressure to conform, has upsides and downsides.
neomabout 2 hours ago
Yeah, to clarify my comment, I think it's rude everywhere and I suspect many others generally also, but I've only experienced feeling I couldn't do it/people will absolutely stop you in SK/JP. I've been on trains all through Europe, the UK, almost all of North America and usually hear someone on the phone, but nobody ever says anything.
dspillettabout 2 hours ago
UK, unless you are quiet about it. Though you might not notice as our reaction only tends to be in body language, or for particularly loud speakers (particularly those who are GOING INTO A TUNNEL or otherwise think shouting will help with bad reception) we might tut.
boelboelabout 2 hours ago
It's considered rude in Belgium, at least when I commuted there by train. People would leave the wagon to take a call. Maybe it's changed in the past few years. There were also signs that it's prohibited to call in the trains.
margalabargalaabout 2 hours ago
Leave the wagon to where? Like get off the train? The trains are all wagon, no?
ausbahabout 2 hours ago
i’m in the US, if you took a call for more than a few mins a busy metro car I’d tell you to knock it off
nikole9696about 1 hour ago
Unfortunately, these days, most of us won't do that because there is a high likelihood it could incite violence.
serfabout 2 hours ago
My dad speaks loudly on speakerphone phones in restaurants and public spaces daily because he's a rude old asshole.

No one beside myself has ever told him to stop because I think being old gives one a bit of a 'get out of jail free card ' with regard to social behaviors.

I would love for you or someone like you to happen upon him and tell him to knock it off, but alas that seems fleetingly rare.

qbit42about 2 hours ago
People talk on the phone all the time on every US metro I’ve tried. Seems fine if they’re not on speaker or raising their voice
chrisjjabout 2 hours ago
UK included.
olooneyabout 3 hours ago
Scholars and academics have been bemoaning the pointlessness of what the article calls "knowledge work" for centuries. A few of my favorites:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Scholar

https://andrewmbailey.com/papers/Higher-order%20truths%20abo...

ComputerPersonabout 2 hours ago
There's a well-known book that labels programmers as a specific type of pointless job. "Duct tapers" is the category. Also task masters, who would have a foot under the software development umbrella, have space in the book.

"Bullshit Jobs"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

Der_Einzigeabout 2 hours ago
We are socially punished for our extremely cushy jobs

SWE has negative social value. Saying you’re a SWE or god forbid anything in AI in a dating/courtship context is basically suicide.

We are paid so well as compensation for debasing ourselves socially. A lot of normies intuitively understand the concepts in that book even without reading it and either see you as evil or a grifter, maybe both, when you say you work in tech/AI.

A lot of people are going to have extreme schadenfreud as they watch tech workers take L after L. They really hate us, they want us bullied or dead or wishing we were.

Still, it was totally worth it because the blue collar pricks that dislike tech workers are even worse in so many ways. At least I’m not a shitty construction worker responsible for contributing to the pathetic state that our housing industry is in.

ComputerPersonabout 1 hour ago
Woah, bad day?

I've noticed or experienced absolutely none of this. The closest thing I can relate to is that I operate on a different intellectual plane from some of my blue-collar friends. This causes a divide and probably limits intimacy, but does not result in negative relationships.

Regarding the dating world, it impresses people that I'm an SWE. My role is a boon, maybe because it signals intelligence; I'm not sure.

Strongly disagree here. Would encourage you to try to reframe some of that. Sorry if that comes across as patronizing.

lostaccountabout 2 hours ago
This is basically office space but for the modern era. Peter found happiness in construction work, but when something physical like that is your job… I don’t know. A lot of those guys have back pain, inflexible schedules, working in extreme weather, and the pay isn’t even that good. Is tech so bad? Or is the world of work broken?
pc86about 2 hours ago
> A lot of those guys have back pain, inflexible schedules, working in extreme weather,

And a lot of them don't?

A lot of people who work on a computer all day also have back pain and inflexible schedules. Hell, I'm sure a lot of knowledge workers in other countries work in places with no air conditioning, for example - not exactly "extreme" but not climate-controlled, either.

jonahrdabout 2 hours ago
There are definitely downsides to office work, but this post really implies to me that you don't actually personally know anyone who works in the trades. The amount of body pain/damage, extreme conditions, and ridiculous scheduling (as in, last minute decisions that you must be on site at 5:30am the next day, not as in overall hours) are pretty much incomparable to tech work.
pc86about 1 hour ago
I didn't say they were comparable. But there is a common refrain that every single person who works in the trades has their body basically destroyed by the time they're 40, which isn't remotely true, and that nobody who works in an office (or a number that is essentially a rounding error) has any physical effects directly caused by that, which also isn't remotely true.
nancyminusoneabout 1 hour ago
Office workers get chronic conditions from sitting around all day too. Yet vary few jobs provide any such balance.
Multicompabout 2 hours ago
> In my experience, there are two broad categories of Knowledge Workers. The first are outcome-first workers. Their focus is on the business, on winning, on efficiency. Human needs and faults and emotions are an obstacle to be overcome.

> The second group has an experience-first perspective. These workers love the messy middle. They value the journey. They want their organizations to perform well but as a natural consequence of collaboration, debate and shared struggle with people they actually like. Many experience-first people are artists outside of work. Photographers, directors, screenwriters, sculptors, painters, poets, writers. Many are active volunteers. For these people, to be pulled away from their economically unviable passions requires something in return: a company experience with freedom for exploration, creativity, problem solving and cool colleagues.

The first group appears to be correctly compartmentalizing work into its correct location, this is a job I do to meet a goal, how are we doing on that goal, they have healthy limited expectations of the experiences there.

The latter group sounds childish or unprofessional or at least unrealistic in their expectations that a job you do for a living will be all you want it to be. I laud people who volunteer, I do as well, I laud creatives, we need more of them, not less of them, but somewhere along the way, people need to work at the sucky starter job so they grow out of wild-eyed views that all jobs will bring one satisfaction. Some jobs are more cushy and give you more of a sense of fulfillment, true, and those are vocations in the article's sense, but most jobs are just jobs, therefore it seems unrealistic to me to expect them to make one happy.

Satisfaction in life comes from service to others, because said service drives strong trusting relationships with people, you love what you serve, and those trusting relationships mean you get to see more people and they often reciprocate, thus families (in the nuclear, community, and found senses, all apply) are formed and meaning arises as the gestalt of that support and forward progress gets us what we can handle for this-side-of-life eudaimonia.

Beyond that? That's the nature of religion and I know I'm already annoying someone with my too-strong opinions as is, so I will spare you my thoughts there this time.

thisisauseridabout 3 hours ago
Most of the people in tech I know that have interpersonal relationships and go out and look at a tree every once in a while are not often sad.
robofanaticabout 1 hour ago
Because most of us are middle aged with mortgages, kids etc. Not old enough to retire and live off of savings or 401ks, not young enough to start all over again.
Advertisement
pm90about 3 hours ago
Tech has always had an unhealthy streak; it was ok while workers were being compensated well and treated amazingly. The end of zirp has cut comp and benefits massively so there’s a lot less upside to this lifestyle.
SirFatty34 minutes ago
cybersecurity has taken over my life as a IT Manager. Security was always important, and always something I worked on, but now it's all I work on and it's exhausting.

Managing patch management)software and firmware. Users who cannot help but enter credentials via phishing regardless of training.

Chasing the next best practice (SSL VPN out, IPsec is back, etc).

ghm2199about 2 hours ago
On a personal level to remain as a SWE/Dev maintaining your sanity comes down to a few choices:

1. Do I want to have the kind of lived experiences that the field has to offer? The answer can come through some introspection to questions like: "Do I have a good devx talking to AI and understanding how it works? If not am I willing to learn how to?" or "Am I ok if development has become more intense than it was — because you will talk to AI/Machine more than before?".

2. Whatever your introspective questions are, if there answer is: "Yes I am more or less ok.", then pick a goal that lets you get those experiences and hack away.

I feel this decision making is more important than ever for people who are banked on more their skill to write decent code and not much else in the recent past. And also people with mental health issues should be more deliberate about their choices.

arendtioabout 2 hours ago
I think we shouldn't be depressed, but work on ideas and concepts of how this could be changed into something good.

I see a lot of people hyping AI and condemning it, but very few seem to be interested in working on what our future should look like.

JohnFenabout 2 hours ago
None of that is the reason I'm sad. I'm sad because I realized that this industry had grown from something that is a benefit to everyone to something that is the opposite of that.
rarismaabout 2 hours ago
"It's good to be in something from the ground floor. I came too late for that and I know. But lately, I'm getting the feeling that I came in at the end. The best is over."

I feel like this can be applied to a lot of things, but this is pretty much how I've felt working in tech for the last 2ish years.

jebarkerabout 2 hours ago
What makes you feel like that? Is it AI specifically?
dgabrielabout 3 hours ago
I'm not sad. As an engineer with decades of experience under my belt, I'm really excited about how AI can democratize software and help me finally complete long-simmering side projects, create value for the greater good, and be a generally fun thing. So far, I have not found myself even remotely replaced by AI at work.
echelonabout 3 hours ago
I have never been happier.

I flipping love AI.

This is literally what I dreamed about as a kid. I feel like we might get to witness the singularity, and that's exciting.

To live and die under cellphone incrementalism is what's depressing. I hated where we were. I love where we're going.

hackeraccountabout 2 hours ago
I read about an experiment with pigeons. The birds were given a target. For one iteration if a bird pecked a target it would get a piece of corn. For another it got nothing and for a third... sometimes it would get piece of corn and sometimes it would get nothing.

Tech for me is that third variation. Sometimes you get nothing and sometimes it totally delivers (and more!) on what it promises. This is as a user and even as a provider. You take various bits and bobs and suddenly with a slightly clever idea and you've got something that's more then the sum of the parts. Sometimes. Other times it just never comes together.

I'm not sure if that makes me happy or sad. Bit of both I suppose but I keep going back to the well because you never know.

andsoitisabout 3 hours ago
> knowledge work is mostly pointless

Really, noemamag?

aogailiabout 3 hours ago
That sums up the depth of the author understanding.
my-next-accountabout 2 hours ago
Doing pointless things is wonderful, anyway.
dreadnipabout 2 hours ago
Do you like increasing shareholder value?
eahmabout 2 hours ago
Because everything is ads, lots of propaganda and too much politics.

Flame wars used to be about distros and code and now it’s about how people think and opinions.

Everyone needs to go outside for a second, smell the flowers, hear the birds chip and calm down.

Advertisement
deancabout 2 hours ago
I wrote a little bit about this a few weeks ago [1]. For me, programming, building software has always been a creative expression based on fundamentals. AI sucks all the joy out of it.

[1] https://deanclatworthy.com/2026/02/09/the-joy-of-programming...

mrjay42about 1 hour ago
Because of the *gap* between the enjoyment of "discovering, learning and practicing tech" and the capitalistic use of tech and the consequence it has on people AND how tech is used.
twodaveabout 3 hours ago
Yeah, it probably is sad to be so unimaginative or pessimistic about your skill set that you see AI as an impediment and not a boon.
logicchainsabout 2 hours ago
It's the same as the old "As hire As, Bs hire Cs".
MarkWayneNewtonabout 3 hours ago
Standing on the precipice gives all a new perspective.
Grombobulousabout 2 hours ago
Everyone in tech isn’t sad, the people who are vocal about being sad are sad.

This is a universal concept across the Internet.

If you’re on your phone all day doom scrolling you’ll only encounter sad people.

zitterbewegungabout 2 hours ago
When have people in Tech been happy? (Serious question).
Balinaresabout 2 hours ago
There was a time when Google SREs were inventing the profession from the ground up, and it was the stuff of legend.
david927about 2 hours ago
The 1990's
mikert89about 3 hours ago
You used your most prized mental faculties to build software: logical intelligence, creativity, etc to make someone else rich
trgnabout 2 hours ago
> logical intelligence

it's this that AI is stripping. the work is becoming systems thinking. not bad per se, but removing the small scale puzzle aspect of the job

seydorabout 3 hours ago
Having just installed the world's most popular software (MS windows), i think they should be.
dec0dedab0deabout 3 hours ago
Surely android and ios surpass windows in usage. Though I would argue that none of them are popular.
alansaberabout 3 hours ago
Fair enough.
sri9sabout 3 hours ago
good one
matheusmoreiraabout 2 hours ago
Because society sucks so people enable Daniel Plainview mode.
jgbuddyabout 3 hours ago
I'm pretty happy I think
knicholesabout 2 hours ago
How long have you been working in tech?
Advertisement
swasheckabout 2 hours ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

the theory is not without flaws but it seems relevant to the topic and conversation

win311fwgabout 2 hours ago
The glaring flaw in the theory is that it hypothesizes that jobs are pointless, but in fact they do have a point: Companionship. There are always exceptions, but overwhelmingly those with resources don't like being alone and without social standing and so they use their resources to buy friends, so to speak.
luciana1uabout 2 hours ago
we spent a decade being told we were building the future, and now the future is a subscription fee and a quarterly layoff email
ieie3366about 2 hours ago
Because they don’t exercise, have a terrible diet, lack of socialization, and no family to speak of
paulcoleabout 3 hours ago
> people who want to pick up pottery, painting, crochet or other old-timey analog hobbies. In coffee shops and in the low-lit corners of bars, professionals are sharing dreams of “disappearing” or “living on a farm somewhere” or “going off the grid.” These aren’t fantastical daydreams…

Things people say they want to and then don’t do is the dictionary definition of fantastical daydreams.

zabzonkabout 2 hours ago
Too much web stuff.
wonderwonderabout 2 hours ago
'professionals are sharing dreams of “disappearing” or “living on a farm somewhere” or “going off the grid.”'

This has been a meme in tech for decades. I seriously considered farming 20 years ago due to my dissatisfaction with tech, its nothing new.

I fall into the group of tech workers that never enjoyed their work, I still loathe it but it pays really well. Standups are the worst, every day its "what did you do yesterday". The number of hours worked are far above a normal 9 - 5.

Sections of sociery spent years telling people to learn to code and they did and they do. The issue is that for many people that just work to live and don't live to work, code is souless and there is nothing to show for it after decades of grind.

This negative outlook is not universal of couse, I am sure this site is full of people that love software and more power to them. For a good deal of us though, its just how we pay the bills and there is nothing else that will come close to paying them as well.

Now to add to the general malaise we see companies laying off tens of thousands of engineers to justify their token spend. The feeling of living on borrowed time is prevelant especially for those that never got RSU's or SF salaries

surgical_fireabout 2 hours ago
I enjoy coding, but I always sort of hated working in tech. It's something I do because I get paid well to do it, I happen to be good at it.

It was ironic that I was at my most miserable when working for FAANG. Allowed me to save to buy a house, but man, I hope I never have to go through one of those again.

Things got better after I started avoiding startup and US companies.

surgical_fireabout 2 hours ago
Everyone is sad?

I'm pretty neutral. I was pretty neutral before too.

catigulaabout 2 hours ago
The idea that "knowledge work is mostly pointless" is absurd and only literally true specifically if AI can do it... which it seems to be able to.
diogenescynicabout 2 hours ago
Because the entire career or job experience is like a never ending marathon where the only reward is keeping your job and not becoming destitute. You never have true job security and if you work at a company long enough to go from start up to mature company then they eventually start trying to outsource or automate your job etc. It's nothing but stress and fake positivity for years and years and hopefully your lottery ticket/RSUs actually increase in value and you're eventually able to afford your freedom. It's brutal. I keep fantasizing about cashing out my retirement and running some kind of small business. I am sick of the corporate world and being a hostage to some corporate executives whims.
asjh15about 1 hour ago
Everyone is so sad because comments that follow the AI money are flagged, everyone knows that there is marketing and censorship and 50% of commenters are useful idiots that swallow the propaganda.

Noemamag is a propaganda rag for Berggruen.

Advertisement
rvzabout 3 hours ago
Because the free ride and the day-care rest and vest ZIRP tech life style is over.

In 2012 - 2023, this lifestyle used to be at Google, and Facebook and everyone outside wanted to join.

In 2023 - present The day care lifestyle is at NVIDIA, OpenAI and Anthropic and everyone outside wants to join (they are too late) after getting laid off.

It's that simple. There will be a new day care somewhere but it if you are looking for a safe and stable job, it does not exist.

8by3about 2 hours ago
It doesn't have to be _that_ extreme,

Many of us just wanted vaguely what the promise of a good job was supposed to offer. A decent wage, the ability to afford a home one day, support our families etc.

Maybe not everyone but up until about 2022 I had great job security and loved my work. I knew I was extremely lucky. I didn't have a crazy silicon valley salary but I was doing pretty well on any kind of global scale.

Job security went quickly out the window, with it came a sense of insecurity and the dread that most other working people live under. So I'd argue we aren't more sad than most people, just lost the warm bubble of being paid well to sit in a comfy chair and daily get the reward of solving interesting problems.

pixl97about 2 hours ago
>what the promise of a good job was supposed to offe

So did the people at car factories, at steel mills, at any number of places that no longer have that either.

Your last sentence is correct, we're just coming down to the reality that everyone else is suffering. But hey, tech unions are socialism, we'll pull ourselves up by our bootstraps at any moment now.

kittikittiabout 2 hours ago
Objectively speaking, I'm less miserable than before, even though I am still miserable. I think it's because I always found Workism to be very cringe. Now that the workplace has a good amount of fascism mixed in, adherents to Workism realize their free trial is over. The price to pay is their soul.

I really enjoyed reading this article. Thank you for sharing.

gverrillaabout 2 hours ago
Debord without Marx...
tossitawayplzabout 2 hours ago
A lot of people truly enjoyed the craft and creativity of building something. That is being stripped away. The building is being outsourced now. In some cases, the design too. Everything they once enjoyed and took pride in is being done by machines now. That is not a good feeling.

Imagine you are a master craftsman, a furniture builder. You sourced the wood, designed the furniture, built it by hand, took pride in your work. You adjusted your design or how you used wood based on a knot present in the lumber you got, made custom jigs to improve your efficiency or accuracy. You built skills, you were mastering a craft.

Now, suddenly, you manage a factory of outsourced workers who mass produce cheap particle board furniture. At the end of the day both the hand made dresser and the particle board one store your underwear, one is significantly cheaper (even if it falls apart on you after a few years.) so the cheaper one wins and that is what everyone starts producing. Good enough often wins, especially when cost is involved.

Some of these crafts people may have never got to the point of being masters yet either, they were working their way towards it, but now it looks like those skills may not be valued by the market, did they waste their most valuable years working towards a goal that no longer exists? A lot of these people in this situation are also millennials that are currently or nearing mid-life, hard to pivot to a new career at this point. That is not a good feeling. Perhaps a new kind of mid-life crisis.

A lot of the people I know that are excited about AI weren't craftspeople in the same sense, the process of designing and writing code was just a means to an end, they just wanted something to store their socks at the end of the assembly line regardless of how it was made, the cheaper the better.

The worse part is not only is it a craft, its a living and so even when the times are rough you still have responsibilities, housing, family, healthcare so you are forced to use AI even when you know you are feeding the very machine that will grow big enough to eat you.

Some craftspeople will say that the AI makes them better at their craft. They can understand and learn things they never could have done before. I think this is the ideal scenario and believed this at first as well but four problems emerged for me:

1. I kept getting lazier and lazier, letting the LLM do more and more until I wasn't learning I was just trying to get to the end goal.

2. The majority of my team pressed the easy-button slot machine and wholesale let the AI do everything, its practically impossible to keep up with the massive PRs and unbelievable code churn in a team like this especially with every level of management (who are not code crafts people) want that outcome.

3. I forgot how to do simple things, syntax, standard library functions, useful libraries. I started forgetting it, I kept finding myself reaching to ask the LLM how to do this or that, things I knew how to do by muscle memory only months prior.

4. You are giving immense amounts of training data to the LLM companies. Its already been proven they give 0 fucks about copyright in any sense, your code, your ideas, your products go right back into the LLM code blender in some shape or form.

Anyone reading this far that is the same kind of crafts person that I'm describing I will tell you what I'm doing about it. I'm going to starve the machine. I've cancelled all my LLM subscriptions, I've deleted the apps. I'm going back to hand coding. I don't care about the consequences. I will find a way to provide for myself and my family. I might get "left behind" but so be it, I'll do it on my own terms. I will no longer lose the sense of who I am for companies and people that don't care about me, or even humanity in the first place. Guess who's with us? Artists and Authors other creatives hate this shit too, software is a mix of creativity and engineering so its not as black-and-white as other fields but you get to choose what it is for yourself.

Good luck out there.

marioptabout 2 hours ago
Let's see.... Unemployment, AI Lunatics, forced to use AI, AI Slopping...

Much of joy we got from coding was taken way, I can not even imagine anyone wanting to get back to a coding role to vibe slop all day long.

I even heard from colleagues that presented algorithms better than the AI slop and heard verbatim from their boss: I prefer the AI solution instead of your.

So yeah, AI lunatics are ruining tech

pixl97about 2 hours ago
>So yeah, AI lunatics are ruining tech

Eh, this is just the latest rendition. Before that we were still complaining about tech bros ruining tech.

With all this said, the demand for ever increasing profits squeezing everything that exists till it bleeds out will eventually ruin anything so even without AI tech would have reached that point.

sri9sabout 3 hours ago
tech people need to become business owners
dgellowabout 2 hours ago
how about just letting us behind? You go on your AI futuristic trip, don't force it on others, and you can then come back and tell us how fantastic your life is while we all missed the boat. That's fine with me. But that's not what will happen, right? AI is being forced on everybody, everywhere. Which means it really doesn't matter if we jump in right now, agentic stuff will still be the norm in 5 years, and at that point you can show us all the magical things you're doing. I'm sure that will convince way more people than the current approach of "join right now or be left behind!!!"
hostyleabout 2 hours ago
how will that help? being a business owner magically makes you immune from ai stealing your job?
gverrillaabout 2 hours ago
there's no space for everybody. not even near. free market is inherently oligopolic for most cases..
win311fwgabout 2 hours ago
Oligopolies are unlikely in a free market because as soon as you do anything interesting a million other people will copy what you are doing wholesale and you will have no advantage to see you rise up to form an oligopoly. We find oligopolies in our regulated markets because regulation, such as copyright, patents, tariffs, etc., legally hinder that competition from emerging.

However, even if we accept oligopolies as inevitable, that doesn't mean the tech people cannot collectively own those oligopolies. A business does not have to be owned by just one person. Cooperatives are a thing.

peakdunningkrueabout 2 hours ago
Its because everytime they see Zuck or Musk punchable face and they see the world becomes worse because of what they did and the tech workers helped made that.
VCFundedGenYer4 minutes ago
When every other website (or its content) is AI-generated and not made by humans, we can't buy computers anymore, we're being forced to use AI at work (for no tangible benefit either other than "It's the future! You'll be left behind [citation needed]!!"), endless security vulnerabilities caused by AI burning IT/Infosec out, do you HAVE to ask?