Re:Science confirms what we all suspected: Four-day weeks rule
by vouaobrasil on Tuesday July 22, 2025 @05:56PM
(#44653463)
Well, I think that's part of the lock-in. Not kids exactly, but the fact that society has made raising kids over time a hugely expensive activity (whereas once it was not in much earlier times). Because in modern society, having a family means paying for services to keep them functioning (extracurricular activities, romantic vacations for the parents, daycare), and that was encouraged by the system not because it makes us the most happy, but because it is the most efficient for technological innovation.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Science confirms what we all suspected: Four-day weeks rule
by Qem on Tuesday July 22, 2025 @06:22PM
(#44653667)
> because it is the most efficient for technological innovation
Probably more efficient for rentism. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking
It destroys the very conditions for the next generation of scientists being raised.
Re:Science confirms what we all suspected: Four-day weeks rule
by vouaobrasil on Wednesday July 23, 2025 @04:26AM
(#44656923)
One does not necessarily need a healthy environment for the next generation of scientists if there is already a surplus of them willing to work in rather sordid conditions, and if there is a surplus of scientific discoveries that can be easily capitalized upon with few workers. Or if there is a surplus of science being done elsehwere. The system optimizes for short-term production and growth, and a good environment for science everyhere is not necessarily optimal for that.