zlacker

> supposedly works like 80-100hrs a week

if theyve been doin that for a while, no wonder the board wanted them gone. eventually you cause more work than you put out.

>>lazyst+(OP)
Not to mention 100 hours not even being logistically possible. Working 100 hours a week with just 5 hours of sleep per day leaves only 4 hours in the day for the other parts of living and getting from a to b. Anyone claiming that, much less for an extended period of time, or either lying or is in slavery against their will.

>>lazyst+(OP)
He’s putting in crazy hours because he doesn’t have a formal background in ML—his background is software engineering.

He talks about how learning ML made him feel like a beginner again on his blog (which was a way for him attract talent willing to learn ML to OpenAI) https://blog.gregbrockman.com/its-time-to-become-an-ml-engin...

>>bmitc+5i
My impression is that people don't measure the time they work, but judge it by their impression. First, they think that they work for, let's say, 40 hours per week. They don't consider how much meals, coffee breaks, mental breaks, off-topic office discussions, checking social media, visiting restroom take. Second, when they work overtime, they get tired and overestimate the amount of time they worked. 10 hours of overtime probably feels like 20 hours.

100 hours is equal to 2 full-time jobs and a half time. People believing that number should consider how they would live going to their second job after their day ends (second full-time job) and working on weekends as well (half-time one).

Under ideal conditions, someone might be doing it. But, people shouldn't be throwing around these numbers without any time-tracking evidence.

>>laserl+8l
Agreed. And even if someone is doing it, it isn't something to be proud of. It shows a major gap in management and process and potentially reveals the business to be unviable.