Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Besides the fact that work, even the must rudimentary kind can be very fulfilling and rewarding in many ways ...

The real problem is that play creates nothing. Play is just play. 'Creative output' is still 'work', just with a hint (maybe 1%) of creative input.

Those with the most ostensibly aspirational jobs are grinding!

Does anyone think Lady Gaga (or Bach), any tech development, any real research, making Star Wars, putting on a Broadway Musical isn't 'work'?

These things require immense work, stress toil in all sorts of ways by all sorts of people - most of whom had to 'work/grind' for 20 years in school in order to develop the applied intelligence, skills, knowledge, fortitude, maturity to be able to even work in aspirational/creative work. And then they still depend on the rest of us to make their food, cars, homes, and 'stuff'.

Even our current , relatively modern systems and knowledge requires work to simply maintain, let alone improve.

They are not magically self-sustaining, even if they are somewhat more intelligent and powerful.

If we 'do what we want' we will be materially poorer than aboriginals, poorer than neolithic peoples ... frankly we'll starve to death as even they had to grind it out just to make do.

There is no way out. Life requires a modicum of effort, point blank. Maybe ... maybe ... we can offers some the ability to 'opt mostly out' but even then I feel we'll be doing people a disservice, for how could a unsocialized man-child, still yet illiterate and completely untutored at age 18 from not having made the effort, even realize what he'll have missed out on?

We can make a better world but 'some effort' will be a perennial requirement. This seems to be a metaphysical constraint.



In practise none of this is correct. We already 'do what we want', what we want happens to be improving ours and others lives by making things. The great issue since the division of labour has been to figure out how to distribute products. If products are distributed to people who can then free up their time to 'play', in practise they free up their time to create things as this is what the author really means by 'play'. It's just an anarchists way of talking.


The person making coffee for a living is not 'doing what they want'.

If we were to distribute products and services such that this person could do something on the 'create side' - we'd all be poorer for it because their value is likely in 'coffee making'.

Anarchism is nonsense.


> Does anyone think Lady Gaga (or Bach), any tech development, any real research, making Star Wars, putting on a Broadway Musical isn't 'work'?

> There is no way out. Life requires a modicum of effort, point blank.

If I understand the author, you’re conflating effort with your own definition of work. People do, regularly, pour 10,000 hours into their hobby like music or sports or art or writing. Yes, there’s some market for all of those things, but most people are introduced to those outside the context of that market. [Some] People are driven. We crave mastery. Directed effort can be incredibly rewarding for the mind and body, ever the more so when you truly get to focus it at your wim (play) instead of according to someone else’s wants (I.e. the market; work).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: