Depressed tech workers can't stop talking about Zuck and Musk, therapists say

&quot;over identification&quot; will always lead to depression<p>“The action of identifying oneself to an excessive degree with someone or something else, especially to the detriment of one&#x27;s individuality or objectivity.”<p>Its a common theme in the tech world.<p>Therapists always work within boundaries of confidentiality when considering any and all client disclosure.<p>Even during supervision client names and contact details are not disclosed.

The growing trend of Corporate Brutalitarianism - performative cruelty for the sake of demonstrating the capacity for it to leadership and investors. If all obstacles to profit have to eventually be eliminated then you better be signalling that you&#x27;re willing to kill the baby to make the quarter.<p>Ramping up cruelty serves the convenient secondary purpose of psychological layoffs - burning people out into quitting en masse (or providing opportunity to mark them Bad Leavers and retain shares) in preparation for the supposed AI productivity gains on the remainder.

This seems like something therapists shouldn’t be sharing, even if in a general way.<p>I find it unlikely many (as a percentage of them all) tech workers are really doing this thing.<p>Weird article….

I feel sorry for these people, but they really shouldn’t be surprised. These tech leaders crave power and will follow whatever trend that will help them attain it.

For some I feel sorry. For others I don’t. The lower ranks shouldn’t complain as much as it feels like…in the end they just act like their superiors: They bite their tongue because of money. CEOs do it. I’m sure some align with the current administration‘s values, but not all. They do it cus they are afraid of fighting and losing profit. So are the software engineers. How many people do I know that cannot imagine life with a salary lower than 200k?

&gt; Zuckerberg’s name has become shorthand for the sector’s new “aggressive” direction, away from “doing no evil”<p>I mean, when was _Facebook_ in any way credibly doing the &#x27;do no evil&#x27; thing? I can kind of see how people could buy it, and how it might even have been somewhat true for a bit, about Google, but Facebook&#x27;s whole basic thing seems inherently... well, morally ambiguous, at the very best, from the start.