In Defence of 'Productivity Crap'

As an autistic individual, I find task management systems invaluable not for their own sake, but because they help me overcome my natural difficulty in switching between detailed and big-picture thinking. While I excel at focusing on details, I can struggle to identify true priorities. My simple system (voice memos processed through Claude) helps me intentionally zoom between granular tasks and high-level priorities. This isn't about getting lost in productivity tools - it's about having the right support structure for how my brain naturally works.

When you know what needs to be done, you don't need "productivity", you just need to work.

When you don't know what needs to be done, no amount of "productivity" will compensate for the fact that any work you do is meaningless and any result thereof accidental.

First, 'doing the damn work' all day feels horrible. You need to do some self-assigned and self-guided work during the day to not feel like an assembly line worker.

Second, tweaking your local setup is more like 'ergonomics' then 'productivity'. Working with more ergonomic setup may yield the same output, but it's more enjoyable.

Reading both posts it sounds like they're in violent agreement rather than disagreeing. There is a lot of FOMO in the aesthetics of productivity but at the end of the day everyone needs a system. It's wise to balance trying to improve the system with getting work done.

Personally I run with a very minimalist setup, am unlikely to change software defaults unless I need too, keep a todo list for myself and use whatever we're using this week to work with others.

I do wonder how much the more productivity systems optimizing people are measuring the actual result versus chasing aesthetics but at the same time I've not noticed it being a net drain so don't particularly care. In part I think it's a case of doing what works for you unless it becomes detrimental. There's a lot to be said for ritual making you comfortable.

The idea of having a system or process is to be able to;

- be intentional, consciously engage, and be present.

- participate by being active rather than passive.

- be consistent and reliable in timing, expectation, and quality.

- be finite by constraint around time, effort, or action.

If one wants just to keep winging it, it is still a choice and OK to be that.

The most consistently productive I've been was using the most stripped down physical bullet journal I could. I needed to write things to organise my thoughts a bit but other than that, anything else was literally a distraction and not a system. Basic, basic, bullet journalling and google calendar reminding me of events. That's all I actually need. The only thing holding me back is my brain refusing to use these things consistently these days and avoiding work.

In my mind all these productivity systems cook down to creating a list of tasks. The list can be between 4 and 10 items. You do one task at a time and when you are finished you can cross out the task. This is the extent of focus my brain is capable of. Creating giant backlogs and plans is just | /dev/null in my case.

> CGP Grey has a monolithic OmniFocus build that uses perspectives to really nail down what needs/can be done this second.

I highly recommend the early episodes of the Cortex podcast where CGP Grey talks about his system. I discovered that his brain works in roughly the same way as mine, and so I was able to apply a lot of his insights to make my own system better.

I suspect the dichotomy of the two posts is because productivity comes naturally to many people. Others need a system. Although I do agree that a lot of people tend to overdo it and track meaningless metrics.

> our grandparents [...] woke up, put on their boots, and got to work, no excuses, no distractions, no bullshit.

And mostly, I suspect, they saw tangible results for their labour. The house got built, the dress got made, the bread got baked. Its easier to get yourself to do things when the things are there, in front of you. Nowadays many of us sit at a desk building or wrangling systems that are intangible and almost un-visualisable. I think its not surprising that our motivation can be lacking.

I'm a developer, but for me my most productive (and rewarding) day of the last year was the day I spent with friends chainsawing and chopping and carrying twelve tonnes of logs for fuel for our climbing hut. Didn't need to get in the zone for that, and at the end we knew what we'd done and it stayed done.

It seems like a lot of the productivity crap is that people feel that they're being productive when they're working on the stuff to make them productive, when in actuality while yes they're working, they're not working on what needs done.

An example to me is note taking, it seems like the productivity people seem to fixate on doing it perfectly and in the exact right way to maximise productivity, instead of just taking the notes in a good enough fashion and doing something else with the saved time.

"Productivity isn’t about shiny tools. It is about getting things done."

Earlier in my career I went on all sorts of productivity boosting courses and read loads of books...in the end only one thing has stuck and that's the 2 minute rule from David Allen.

In short, if a tasks hits you and you can get it done in 2mins or less just do it there and then.

Explained in his voice here for those interested - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_-YOdwUDsg&t=37s