Monitor output. No need for surveillance.

Surveillance = lack of trust and poor understanding of what counts as productivity. Essentially it's a great indicator of poor management.

I agree with this kind of... I did automate $4.5M/yr in labor, but I probably only worked 10 hours a week and billed for 40.

For 5 years everyone was happy, but I kind of knew what I was doing was wrong.

Not that I think I could have automated $16M/yr, but I def knew I was billing for doing dishes.

	▲	seanclayton 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Your employer does not think anything they do is 'wrong' and neither should you when your employer is the 'victim' of one of your 'immoral' actions. Strange that they leave morality to the employee like yourself to impose on yourself to make yourself work harder for your employer. "If I bill for 40 hours and only work 10 while saving them millions of dollars, it's actually immoral on my part." You are literally admitting your shame for your own self-described immoral actions against your employer while completely blind or willfully ignorant of their proud immorality. Hopefully you aren't one of those "well I signed the contract that let me be abused, I have no right to complain about my material conditions" kind of people. Under zero circumstances will your employer ever show you that level of empathy towards you, your coworkers, and your families. Under zero circumstances do they 'earn' your moral compass.
	▲	2ndorderthought 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You saved the company you worked for 4.5 million a year and I presume your salary was less than 300,000? Who cares how much you worked? You more than 10x'd their investment in you, possibly 45x'd it. I've worked with people at the computer all day who 0.1'd their salary in a year and they were promoted. I have also worked nearby guys at their computer for 80hrs who tanked entire teams by making terrible decisions at 2am when no one else was around.