

If Your Job’s Just a Job - bensummers
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/06/14/The-4-Hour-Workweek

======
RKlophaus
If anyone who read Four Hour Work Week came away feeling slightly dirty about
Ferriss's route to success, I'd recommend reading "The Art of Learning" by
Josh Waitzkin. Josh is the chess prodigy featured in the movie "Searching for
Bobby Fischer" and later became a world champion in Tai Chi/Push Hands.

Where Ferriss finds ways to quickly exploit weaknesses in the system to win,
Waitzkin wins by constantly analyzing _himself_ to find weaknesses and
improving until he is truly the best at what he does.

Both books were good, and both strategies have their time and place, but "The
Art of Learning" resonated with me a little more, and I suspect it might do
the same with other folks here. It feels a little more "noble".

On a side note, I think "resourcefulness", the desirable trait in a startup
founder, is probably a 50/50 split between the two: recognizing and exploiting
weakness/opportunity, backed up by substance and hard work.

~~~
GavinB
The best players play to win. <http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-
part-1.html>

~~~
iron_ball
That's exactly what I thought of when I read that. However, it's possible to
find your own satisfaction in less ruthless codes... as long as you accept
that others may do whatever the letter of the rules allows.

For instance, I play Gen, but accept that I must fight a lot of Ryus and
Sagats.

------
petercooper
_If you’re not happy with your job, instead of re-organizing your life so you
can be a vagabond, consider looking for a more interesting line of work._

Why? This statement makes the fallacy that happiness comes from the _type_ and
_duration_ of labor, rather the overall _fruits_ of any labor you choose to
do. If being a "vagabond" (in the Tim Ferriss sense) results in more net
happiness than that attained by someone who loves their "interesting line of
work" then being a vagabond is still advantageous.

 _I also have grave doubts that there are that many business models out their
that will support this sort of hands-off management._

The most popular business models clearly do. The majority of large and mid-
sized companies - as well as many small ones - operate with "hands-off
management" from the people who take most of the profits. Shareholders do
little work for the corporations in which they hold shares but still, often,
collect the largest profits. Even ignoring shareholders, well structured
companies over a certain size are not reliant on _obligatory_ day-to-day
management by a single person. That's what tiers of management and boards are
for. If Steve Ballmer chose to run away to Thailand for a few months to go
kick boxing, Microsoft isn't going to stop producing a tubload of cash each
month.

 _Among other things, the people doing the actual real work may become
disgruntled at the absentee landlord. But hey, if it works for you..._

Why? There's almost no precedent for this except in situations where the
workers are being mistreated or underpaid. Larry Ellison spends lots of time
on his yacht, flying planes, and whatever, but are Oracle employees generally
"disgruntled" by this? If so, what rationale would they have unless they
believed Ellison's permanent presence were to have a significant effect on
their paychecks or job security?

~~~
vinutheraj
How can you be sure that you will _love_ some kinda work, I mean, can't there
be people who may not love any kinda work. Why is it a given that there is
some work/profession which has been ordained for you !

------
physcab
I haven't read the 4 hour workweek book, but the two pieces of advice 1) Money
is a means not an end 2) Doing less e-mail, are good bits. But I'm not sure
why this is worthy of repeating. Doesn't everyone know this? Personally I'm
way more interested in how people discovered their passions. I love reading
biographies of people on Wikipedia that shows chronologically how they came to
realize or produce something great. What was it that led them to their ideas?
How did they become so productive? Did they meet someone, read something, or
had some other type of epiphany? If you love your job and want to do more,
then I doubt money and e-mail are the things that hold you back. If you love
your job you will be in the office everyday because it is an essential part
that brings you happiness.

~~~
davidw
> I'm way more interested in how people discovered their passions.

I found mine between the couch cushions.

> But I'm not sure why this is worthy of repeating.

I think that this piece is basically a dig at the book, with a few nice things
being said to make a small effort at "balance".

------
ianbishop
> He accomplished this by gaming the weigh-in rules to compete in a division
> two below his actual weight, and gaming the scoring rules to win by pushing
> lighter opponents out of the ring.

Heh, someone has never played competitive sports with weight classes before.

I find this (very short) review comes off more or less that the author wasn't
comfortable with Ferris himself and the manner he 'plays the game' so to
speak, therefore making the book itself of little value.

~~~
discojesus
_Heh, someone has never played competitive sports with weight classes before._

He wasn't referring to the standard process of cutting weight and rehydrating
after the weigh-in - he was referring to the fact that Ferriss won a
kickboxing championship without actually doing any kickboxing, but rather
exploiting a bit of a loophole in the rules that said your opponents forfeit
if they fall out of the ring.

The way he won it is tainted with significant doucheitude, and I cannot
imagine anyone I respect doing it. On top of that, how could you feel any
pride whatsoever having won the title in such a way?

It seems like everything the guy writes should be suffixed with "but not
really": "How to Gain 30lbs of muscle in a month (but not really)", "How to
Learn a Language in 3 Weeks (but not really)", "How to Win the Chinese
Kickboxing Championship (but not really)."

~~~
HeyLaughingBoy
That's ridiculous! You can't claim that someone isn't "playing fair" if they
are playing by the rules! If you don't like the rules, then either change them
or don't play the game.

In Kendo (japanese swordfighting) I was taught that if for any reason my
opponent was able to knock my weapon out of my hands, I should immediately
body-check him so he couldn't use his sword and try to force him outside the
combat area. It's a fighting technique: you do what you need to do (within the
rules if it's a game) to win!

~~~
discojesus
_That's ridiculous! You can't claim that someone isn't "playing fair" if they
are playing by the rules!_

I didn't claim he wasn't "playing by the rules"; I claimed he was "playing
like a douche."

------
zmimon
I think the post is just a cheap shot based on the title of the book.

We all have to do things that we don't like as part of our jobs. The point of
the book is that by becoming more efficient and effective at what you _don't
like_ you can spend more time doing what you _do like_. If you classify what
you like as "work", that's fine, do more of the work you like. I doubt the
book author would have a problem with that.

------
NewWorldOrder
If the only two things the author got out of the 4HWW was (1) money is a means
not an end, and (2) do less emailing, then the author should try actually
reading the book instead of skimming it.

You can't "review" a book you haven't read.

~~~
ggruschow
... but you can "comment" on an article you haven't read.

------
arebop
This seems to be a sort of afterthought from his "On Carving Your Initials"
speech:
[http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/06/12/Convocatio...](http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/06/12/Convocation)

------
GrandMasterBirt
One way to have a 4 hour work week is to sell a self help book like 4 hour
work week and watching the suckers dig in while you reap the benefits.

Success! At least one person has done it so you know it works.

As a criticism I've seen at least one person who got to the top by being
honest. Just don't follow every rule to the letter till it gives you a
dissadvantage.

