> I don't have a BS job, I'm a programmer.

Honestly I have to suppress the urge to laugh heartily at this statement while I recall all the times over my career that I've seen software rewritten and reinvented not only for no tangible gain, but often to its determent!

I mean, my god man, we currently work in an industry where it is considered reasonable to have a chat program take seconds to load and occupy gigabytes of memory, where the addition a one-off uncustomizable theme is a headline worthy event, and a 1.5Ghz proc with 8GB RAM that runs off <5W is considered 'woefully inadequate' to run desktop software.

I'll say this for current tech though: the high-end computer games look really really good.

> we currently work in an industry where it is considered reasonable to have a chat program take seconds to load and occupy gigabytes of memory

Poor quality output of the field being viewed as valuable in the market is the exact opposite of a BS job.

When it comes to programming, a lot of the higher-paying positions are mostly bullshit around advertising/marketing or the infrastructure supporting that.

There is non-bullshit programming out there, but it's usually hidden away because it's about supporting existing, real-world projects that often use "legacy" technologies that aren't considered cool anymore.

Maybe you're one of the few lucky programmers who actually build something useful.

But I think a lot of developers actually build software that is used by the same people mentioned in the book/article to be more productive at doing their bullshit jobs. And they're happy about it because it feels like they're providing real value to real people.

Also, most of the "enterprise" code I've seen written in the past couple of years was written to justify some big budgets and salaries, while the actual value provided by the related projects was questionable at best.

It's just that when you're a developer focusing on solving a problem you've been assigned, you're just to happy playing with your new toy to even ask yourself if you're actually solving a real problem or that shiny new feature is just something added by someone in a backlog to justify his salary.

> But I think a lot of developers actually build software that is used by the same people mentioned in the book/article to be more productive at doing their bullshit jobs.

I believe Graeber calls it second-order bs jobs.

I certainly felt like my programming jobs were bullshit at times. I've worked on tiny, abstract parts of gigantic businesses, and had long meetings to discuss even tinier aspects of that work, only for the department to be axed or the project shelved.

Now I run a website that tells people how to solve problems that are important to them. I find it a lot more rewarding.

Eh. That depends what you're programming. I've definitely worked on some projects that left me wondering why it was considered useful.

I second that: Outlook forms design and it's VB 'macros\programming' circa 2001.

Still gives me nightmares.

I and other people in my team work pretty hard but I have the feeling a lot of the projects we am working on are ultimately BS. A lot of companies are probably BS in total.

What if you work at social media company? i.e., Facebook newsfeed algorithm.

Be thankful. Most of us aren't that fortunate, but I haven't met many that would be OK with admitting that - work makes too big part of our lives, and admitting that it doesn't have any big meaning takes some guts

I’m a programmer but I do the exact job mentioned in the article as the most bullshit: call centers / IVRs. But at least mine don’t suck and pass information back and forth unlike the example.

Plumbers and electricians are a lot more useful than programmers.

That depends on what it is you're programming, surely.

Yeah, doctors save lifes but it isn't as useful as being a programmer.

Bullshit has real jobs hanging off it. You can be a hedge fund day trading, and have real cleaners cleaning real toilets.