Workfree societies have existed so it is incorrect to claim that work is required for society to exist. For example, the free software community exists and is workfree. However, it seems you and many others are incapable to rationally reason about these issues since you implied that "people with this particular anti-work view" (i.e. me) just wants to be the ones doing the exploiting. It's plain as day that a massive number of jobs are not necessary. The conclusion should be that people shouldn't be coerced to do them.
If the jobs are truly unnecessary, the company and society will stop paying for them.
If no one will do that work at a wage that the market will bear, then that job goes away.
And from other comments it appears you only believe work happens when there is An exchange of money. Raising a kid is the hardest job and work that I’ve ever done. I don’t get paid money for that…
Volunteers still “work”. The fact that they are volunteering shows they could be paid for their time and effort, but instead are doing it for free. But it’s not like they weren’t adding value as soon as the exchange of money is removed.
> If the jobs are truly unnecessary, the company and society will stop paying for them.
This is a circular argument, isn't it? Why is the work necessary? Because society pays for it. Why does society pay for it? Because the work is necessary.
I reject it. Money != value.
> Raising a kid is the hardest job and work that I’ve ever done. I don’t get paid money for that…
That's a good example of a task that is valuable (in the real sense) but not work (since it is voluntary). Here is how I define "work": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30127704
Many free software developers work for organisations who have chosen to share their work freely because their revenue stream comes from support or hosting.
There are free software projects where hobbyists build things to scratch a personal itch, but most of these people are contributing their free time and have another job.
You keep repeating the point that ‘a massive number of jobs are not necessary’. Can you define what is ‘necessary work’ and how society can determine a priori what that work might be?
Yes, free software is workfree as tasks are executed without there being monetary gain. Time is not traded for money. Read my other comments in this thread for examples on (worse than) useless jobs.
I dispute that. Many contributors to free software are doing so in exchange for money, either directly by being paid by their employer or allowing ‘sponsored features’, or indirectly by soliciting donations or through monetising their software through support contracts etc.
I agree there are hobbyists who do give their time without expecting any financial return, but the free software community does include a significant proportion of people who are paid directly or indirectly for the time they spend on any particular project.
> I dispute that. Many contributors to free software are doing so in exchange for money, either directly by being paid by their employer or allowing ‘sponsored features’, or indirectly by soliciting donations or through monetising their software through support contracts etc.
Sure, in the same way that an Amnesty volunteer could be an undercover CIA agent paid by the government. That, however, is not the community's main mode of operation.
It’s impossible to tell for sure, but it looks like approximately half of open source contributions take place during working hours, and workdays have twice as many contributions as weekends, so I would say that yes, it is at least one main mode of operation.
You mention Linus Torvalds in another comment, but did you know he has been paid to work on Linux since around 1997?
Such stats are notoriously noisy. Ohloh only analyzes the most popular free software projects so there is a long, long tail of projects that is unaccounted for in the statistics. Furthermore, even if most commits are submitted during office hours (in what timezone?) how can we know that they are paid specifically for contributing? E.g. could be some bored developers commit to their own personal project.
Regardless, the amount of companies involved in free software could be evidence of the superiority of voluntarism over "workism" for complex human systems.
I agree it’s noisy, just offering it as some evidence.
I think the statistic that half as many commits are on weekend days is particularly interesting, because people who are really doing it for free would likely contribute MORE outside their working hours.
