Courrier International, in an article by Martin Gauthier, aggregates a series of English-language reports (New York Times, San Francisco Standard, Wall Street Journal, Wired) to document a cultural shift in California tech: the growing adoption of the "996" schedule — working 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days out of seven, i.e. 72 hours a week. The term, inherited from Chinese work culture, has become, according to the San Francisco Standard, "the hot topic of the moment" in a Silicon Valley "abuzz" over artificial intelligence. The NYT sets the frame: "working 9 to 5 is a way to make a living; working yourself to exhaustion is the key to getting ahead."
The phenomenon presents itself as an ethos more than a schedule. Daksh Gupta, chairman of the startup Greptile, describes the prevailing attitude among young San Francisco developers: "no alcohol, no drugs, 996, the gym, running long distances, marrying early, watching your sleep, eating steak and eggs." Named cases abound: Marty Kausas, founder of Pylon, claims on LinkedIn 92 hours a week for three weeks running; Emily Yuan, 23, co-founder of Corgi (financial infrastructure for AI), states: "Why would I go have a drink at a bar when I could build a company instead?" — and imposes the same pace on her employees.
996 spreads beyond founders to employees. Rilla tells Wired that nearly all of its 80 employees embrace it; Fella & Delilah (telehealth) incentivizes it with a 25% salary increase and doubled equity. Why this frenzy? The San Francisco Standard points to two drivers: the conviction that AI is "the biggest technological transformation of their lifetime," so market share must be won; and the urgency of getting rich before AGI arrives, for fear of sinking into a "permanent underclass."
The article does not shy away from the downside. Adrian Kinnersley, head of a recruitment firm, raises the alarm over companies "completely noncompliant" with US labor law. And recalls that the Cour suprême chinoise has already ruled it illegal to impose 996 without compensation — a practice that, in China, has sparked protests, accusations of "modern-day slavery," and been linked to worker deaths. Republished in July 2026 (originally published in September 2025), the piece documents a lasting cultural signal: the AI race rationalizes and normalizes overwork.