Isn’t the grander question why on earth people would tolerate, let alone desire, more hours of work every day?

The older I get, the more I see the wisdom in the ancient ideas of reducing desires and being content with what one has.

---

Later Addition:

The article's essential answer is that workers voluntarily embraced (and therefore tolerated) the longer hours because of the novelty of it all. Reading between the lines, this is likely to cause shifts in expectation (and ultimately culture) — just when the novelty wears off and workers realize they have been duped into increasing their work hours and intensity (which will put an end to the voluntary embracing of those longer hours and intensity). And the dreaded result (for the poor company, won't anyone care about it?!) is cognitive overload, hence worker burnout and turnover, and ultimately reduced work quality and higher HR transaction costs. Therefore, TFA counsels, companies should set norms regarding limited use of generative language models (GLMs, so-called "AI").

I find it unlikely that companies will limit GLM use or set reasonable norms: instead they'll crack the whip!

---

Even Later Addition:

As an outsider, I find it at once amusing and dystopian to consider the suggestions offered at the end of the piece: in the brutalist, reverse-centaur style, workers are now to be programmed with modifications to their "alignment … reconsider[ation of] assumptions … absor[ption of] information … sequencing … [and] grounding"!

The worker is now thought of in terms of the tool, not vice versa.