• Zozano@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    3 people above the fisherman:

    • sales analyst
    • automation technician
    • software engineer

    Fisherman:

    • I operate a decentralized, sustainability-focused aquatic-resource acquisition methodology utilizing precision-guided line-and-lure interface systems to facilitate targeted biomass retrieval.
  • Tikiporch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Saying “I catch fish” is as descriptive as the first guy saying “sales analyst”. Second person is a software developer, third guy is a systems architect. So you catch fish? Sure. What kind? On a river? In the ocean? Do you really just press a button that rolls up a big net full of turtles and dolphins as well and you’re destroying the delicate balance of a fragile ecosystem? Are you a fishing guide?

    Anyone can describe their job in three words. Understanding it is on you, man.

    • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      The whole concept is more akin to whether or not you are working directly with the material fruits of your labor, or if you’re some secondary or tertiary job to the actual work being done.

      Basically, their view is that if you are not directly making the product or apart of the physical logistics for that product, then you’re in a bullshit job. I would not say I agree with the philosophy myself, but i kind of get it. ‘I farm Corn’, ‘I Truck frozen food’, and ‘I catch fish’, do exist in a very different realm from ‘I manage a team of QA specialists’, ‘I am an Advertisement Consultant’, and ‘I contribute to my company’s server backend codebase’.

      Also, yeah, the 3-word rule of thumb sucks.

      • Taldan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The problem, to me, is that not everyone on a boat is catching fish. There are plenty of different roles. It’s just that people outside the industry don’t have a concept of the nuanced differences between roles, so it gets simplified to “I catch fish” even if they aren’t involved in catching fish at all. Most people outside of tech have no idea between the different roles that exist in tech either. It wasn’t too long ago where no matter your role in tech, you’d tell laymen, “I work in IT” as a catchall for any technical role

      • Tikiporch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Thank you for your insight.

        The concept is still bullshit. You can describe any job in three words to the same extent that “I catch fish” is informative. That’s all I’m saying.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    9 hours ago

    So I either have a bullshit job “I design chips for isosychronous low-latency networks” or a real job “I herd electrons”…

  • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Is this really the message we want to send?

    Yes, our society makes lots of bullshit jobs. That’s because capitalism can only keep people employed by creating bullshit jobs, and unemployed people are six missed meals away from revolution. That is not the fault of the people who have bullshit jobs.

    And no, I won’t accept “this is just a shitposting sub, lighten up” as a response. This is just another form of kicking down, and it isn’t funny. The working class needs solidarity, not this.

    • Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 minutes ago

      Yes, our society makes lots of bullshit jobs. That’s because capitalism can only keep people employed by creating bullshit jobs, and unemployed people are six missed meals away from revolution

      Couldn’t be further from reality. Capitalist firms actively hire the least amount of people possible, because if they can get away with equal production and lower number of employees, that means higher profit.

      Capitalism is actually the only system in human history with unemployment: it wasn’t a thing in hunter-gatherer society, it wasn’t a thing in early agricultural societies, it wasn’t a thing during the times of slavery, it wasn’t a thing during feudalism, and it hasn’t been a thing in any communist nation such as Cuba or the USSR (both guaranteeing jobs to every citizen as a right, and the latter having 10% of all positions vacant from 1970 onward).

      Capitalism maintains an unemployed sector of the population because:

      1. Employing more workers costs more money to firms

      2. Having high unemployment decreases wages, improving profits of firms

      3. Having a pool of unemployed people allows firms to spawn, grow and mutate without difficulty of finding workers to do so.

    • VitoRobles@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      When I first saw this (maybe years ago), it was posted on sites to mock this thinking.

      Yeah, someone believes it to have made this. But yeah, that person sucks.