[HN Gopher] "Be Useful"
___________________________________________________________________
"Be Useful"
Author : lxm
Score : 140 points
Date : 2023-10-07 01:42 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.npr.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.npr.org)
| lottin wrote:
| When I was young I struggled to fit in with others. I didn't know
| what to do so that other people would like me. As an older adult,
| I understood that everyone respects and appreciates someone who
| can deal with problems and get things done, in other words, a
| useful person. This is all there's to it. A big part of it is
| getting physically in shape. A big strong man is perceived as a
| useful man. I wish I figured this out earlier.
| pchristensen wrote:
| The interviews on Tim Ferriss and Rich Roll podcasts were very
| good.
| runjake wrote:
| The second interview on TF, released this month, was good.
|
| But Arnold's first interview with Tim back in 2015 was much
| better (IMHO).
|
| https://tim.blog/2015/02/02/arnold-schwarzenegger/
| padolsey wrote:
| _> I hate when someone says, "Oh, Schwarzenegger is the perfect
| example of a self-made man" because I'm not. I'm a creation of my
| parents. I'm a creation of my coaches, my teachers. I have been
| helped by my training partners, by my friends. Especially when I
| think about coming to America, it was Joe Wheeler that helped me
| to come over here, got me the airline ticket, helped me get the
| apartment and the car. The people of California voted for me to
| be governor of California. So I didn't become governor because
| I'm self-made; I became governor because people voted for me._
|
| I love this humility and wish more people would have it. Even if
| you weren't supported by individuals, it is due to the society
| around you, its infrastructure, its structure, its technology,
| that you are able to be a "success". We are the product of things
| we had no control over initially. Yet people still say "self
| made" -\\_(tsu)_/-
| [deleted]
| ralph84 wrote:
| Contrast to Vinod Khosla who couldn't have been anywhere near
| as successful anywhere other than California. As a thank you he
| tries to restrict public access to California beaches.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| This is sort of a crippling mindset though. If we tell
| ourselves others succeed because of what they were given,
| that's not really putting yourself in a position where you're
| likely to take control over your own life. It becomes a self-
| fulfilling prophecy. Whether you tell yourself you're destined
| for greatness or be a deadbeat and fighting against this
| destiny is pointless, and you're more than likely to be
| correct.
|
| I don't think this is particularly informative. You gotta play
| the hand you're dealt and make the most of it. It's not fair in
| the sense everyone has the same opportunities, but there's
| still a spectrum of accomplishments that can be achieved by any
| given person.
| zlg_codes wrote:
| I disagree. Equal opportunity is a lie. Our options ebb and
| flow with the fickle sensibilities of our communities. Having
| the 'wrong' hair color can disqualify you from opportunity.
| kaitai wrote:
| This response, to me, misses the point. Yes, you gotta play
| the hand you're dealt. It's not crippling at all to
| acknowledge the cards in your hand. If you don't have any
| pairs or face cards or whatever, it is not crippling to
| acknowledge that. Acknowledging the help of other is not
| telling ourselves we're succeeding because of "what we were
| given", and acknowledging the role of chance isn't
| denigratory either. To me, acknowledging what others helped
| us with, the chance encounters that helped, etc can help us
| seek out more chance, more help, and then provide that to
| others as well. Then we can indeed make our own luck and
| create luck for others.
|
| Acknowledging the help of others is just not at all the same
| as lessening our own contributions.
|
| I guess it is true that some folks see it that way, that if
| you ever thank or acknowledge anyone else then you're weak,
| there is this pressure to pretend that everything is original
| and done alone, but... that's just lying.
| sfink wrote:
| Both points are valid, and I agree with both. It's ok,
| they're different points.
|
| First, it is a problem that people don't recognize and
| acknowledge the external factors behind success. It leads
| to poor decisions, helplessness and other negative
| feelings, and reactivity ("why didn't you just save more of
| your minimum wage like I did with the interest from my
| trust fund?").
|
| Second, it is a problem to see success as _only_ determined
| by external factors, then you lose agency and are less
| likely to do as well as your opportunities allow. You are
| permanently "bad at math", you can only get somewhere if
| the Man stops pushing you down. It's the opposite of a
| growth mindset.
| jvalencia wrote:
| I would argue that true maturity is when someone can take
| care of themselves, recognize their inputs with gratitude,
| and ask for help when needed with humility, not expecting
| that someone else would take care of them AND being grateful
| even if they don't get it.
|
| The polarization of our arguments leads us to pretty shallow
| poles.
| Aurornis wrote:
| I worked with high school kids and college kids for a while.
| I saw this exact mindset far too much.
|
| Students were obsessed with picking apart people's success
| stories and attributing all of the success to some external
| factor. I can't tell you how many times I heard someone bring
| up Bezos just so they could tell me about the $300K loan he
| got, or Musk so they could talk about the emerald mine story.
| We tried to discourage using celebrities like Bezos or Musk
| as role models anyway, but people were drawn back to them
| because they enjoyed picking them apart.
|
| There's something satisfying about this mindset that can
| explain away every success story as the result of factors out
| of their control. It's comforting to tell yourself that the
| only reason you didn't become a billionaire is because your
| parents didn't give you a $300K business loan or own an
| emerald mine or whatever other justification they could come
| up with.
|
| It was a lot of work to try to defeat this mindset and get
| students focused on what they could incrementally accomplish
| within what they were working with. Honestly, getting them to
| let go of the celebrities like Musk and Bezos and others was
| half of the battle, but they also couldn't care less when we
| tried to introduce local successful business operators who
| ran companies they had never heard of.
|
| It's tough. Social media makes it harder, and honestly the
| people who read Reddit seem prone to the worst of it.
| corimaith wrote:
| That kind of mindset is arguably the norm for the rest of
| the world. Tall Poppy Syndrome in the UK and Australia, or
| worse, the extreme bullying in Japan and Korea. It's
| perhaps what made the USA so unique in having a culture
| that was opposed to that and willing to take risks. So it's
| pretty sad to see the USA drop it's own individualism in
| favour of collectivism.
| oliveshell wrote:
| If you find it crippling, you haven't at all understand what
| he meant.
|
| It's just _gratitude_.
|
| Nothing "crippling" about that.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| It depends on the perspective. If you look at yourself and
| see you got where you are because of the help you got,
| that's great.
|
| If you look at someone else, and see they got where they
| are because of help available to them but not you, that's
| crippling.
| slothtrop wrote:
| I agree that self-efficacy is a predictor of success and
| taking initiative. While it's not mutually exclusive with the
| recognition of social support, I think that rationalization
| espoused by Arnold is used by some as an instrument for self-
| defeat/self-pity and a defense mechanism against taking
| action. Example beliefs: "I probably couldn't become a world
| champion bodybuilder, because I don't have the support
| network Arnold had, so I won't bother"; "people who create
| successful startups all come from rich parents and stable
| households, I shouldn't even try"; "I'll never lose weight
| without a super-pill".
|
| So I agree with you and somewhat with those who are
| responding to you.
| nazgul17 wrote:
| It's a mindset more based on reality than the opposite
| mindset. It keeps you grounded, which is a good thing, imo.
| hackernewds wrote:
| There are ample examples of people who are supported similar,
| if even better (privilege) by society and do not reach that
| level of success. So I guess if there were a regression model,
| you would find his own hard work elevated him above the others.
| isleyaardvark wrote:
| It reminds me of Mr. Rogers' wonderful lifetime achievement
| award acceptance speech:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Upm9LnuCBUM#t=1m24s
| yibg wrote:
| Maybe it's the language and phrasing that implies 1 of the 2
| extremes.
|
| 1. Self made, implying it was solely the efforts of a said
| persons OR
|
| 2. Product of timing, luck, circumstance, implying there was
| nothing special about what the said person did.
|
| Reality is it's probably often a mix of both. The person had
| help, the right environment etc but also talent and put in hard
| work. Maybe there is a better phrase than "self made". "Through
| effort and circumstance", but catchier.
| chmod600 wrote:
| Both concepts can be true. A lot of people, especially in the
| developed world, have way more opportunities than they realize.
| Those that take on some (often very modest) risk to exercise
| those opportunities are self-made.
|
| It would be ridiculous to say that Picasso didn't make a
| painting because someone else supplied the paint. He's the one
| that saw the paint and the canvas and put them together in a
| unique way.
| lisper wrote:
| But Picasso was also lucky enough to be born in a place and
| time where he had access to enough economic surplus that he
| could spend time painting rather than having to spend all his
| time working the fields just to survive. He also had the
| extra good fortune of being in a situation where those around
| him had access to enough economic surplus that they could
| afford to buy his paintings at a pretty substantial markup
| over the actual cost of production. None of these things are
| givens.
| wouldbecouldbe wrote:
| I don't even know why people bother argue such things?
|
| To not feel bad others have accomplished more?
| __rito__ wrote:
| There are many examples in life where I have seen people
| and recognized that if this person were born in a
| slightly different household, slightly different time,
| slightly different economy, etc. - this person would have
| made it big!
|
| I have actually seen this in many places.
|
| One example on top my head- my neighbor was a talented
| video editor. Not legendary level, but okay. He
| eventually set up shop for editing wedding videos and
| such. He got contracts, he got praises and contracts in
| affluent families- all of this was not enough for
| sustaining a middle class life for an adult. He
| eventually set up a convenient store with the help of his
| father in law. He was quite old and had to move on to
| earn a middle class income. He did not have access to
| internet until early 2010s.
|
| Now, his nephew, who is also my neighbor is also a video
| editor. But he got internet since he was born. He has all
| the resources. He has discord servers where people guide
| him and share resources. He is also an online gamer, and
| edited his own videos and posted them online. That led
| him to international contracts. Last month he earned
| US$120 working a single night.
|
| That's HUGE for a 19 YO in small town India. Had his
| uncle (now in his early 40s) had all these, he would have
| made it big.
|
| Circumstances do influence heavily how much a person
| succeeds.
|
| I don't hold the line that equal opportunities lead to
| equal outcome- that doesn't happen.
|
| But do think about the child that was born today in
| slavery in Libya, and a child born to a FAANG worker
| parent in Bay Area.
|
| Do you think that they have equal chances of success?
|
| And, I will also mention that Picasso had neighbors and
| peers. They didn't become as famed. Talent and
| individuality matters, too.
| skullone wrote:
| It makes me feel even better looking at accomplished
| peoples work. Seeing the whole thing come together,
| everyone's contributions that lead to works of art,
| science, engineering, etc. It would make me feel shitty
| that "accomplished people" were standalone in their
| works, where no one along their life was ever helpful or
| interested or supported or bought their works. It takes a
| village (or a planet/solar system/galaxy/universe worth
| of everything going right for a single accomplishment to
| have happened)
| nemothekid wrote:
| > _To not feel bad others have accomplished more?_
|
| No; I think the self-made man is dangerous because it
| leads people to believe 2 things:
|
| 1.) You can and should go it alone
|
| 2.) Other people shouldn't need your help.
|
| I don't think Arnold tells his story the way he does in
| order to diminish his own accomplishments. It's used to
| highlight all the people that helped him along the way to
| get him to where he is. It's important to ask for help,
| to ask for guidance and depend on others. There's no
| glory in going it alone and you can be propelled
| immensely by relying on others to support your efforts.
|
| Furthermore, it's important to provide a lending hand to
| others. Great men are built with the help of others and
| you have a responsibility to help others excel when you
| can. I think telling these stories help break the hyper-
| individualistic ethos of the American self-made man. Once
| you break this myth that so-and-so is self-made, we can
| make steps into re-examining how we treat our families,
| friends and fellow Americans (and/or countrymen). Common
| adages such as "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" will
| become more and more asinine once we understand no one is
| fully self-made; and I think that change in social psyche
| will have societal benefits.
| 0xcde4c3db wrote:
| Picasso was the son of an accomplished painter and art
| professor, who tutored him from a young age. That's not the
| sort of opportunity that's all around average people.
| johnny99k wrote:
| Because what you are describing is literally what happens in
| all situations for everything, it shouldn't even factor into
| success. It's a given that to be successful, there are
| external entities involved (infrastructure, people).
|
| I suppose if you get a PHD, you should be thanking the
| factory worker that was responsible for the paper in your
| diploma. Should you also thank Bill Gates for providing the
| operating system and software that allowed you to write your
| thesis?
|
| Instead, it's being used as a tactic to cut down anyone that
| is successful (you didn't earn that success, it was the
| people around you).
|
| If success were that easy, everyone would be successful..but
| this just isn't reality.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| My father thanked the typist who prepared the final copy of
| his PhD thesis.
| apsurd wrote:
| Thank the factory worker for the paper and Bill Gates for
| the OS sounds like a lovely idea! Marie Kondo vibes.
|
| I agree "success is not your own" can be weaponized, but
| also let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. The
| paper - and this humanity team we are on - did help!
| EGG_CREAM wrote:
| People hear what they want to, to be honest. Most of the
| time, in my experience, people aren't trying to "cut down"
| successful people, they are just trying to show that it
| wasn't all skill and good decisions. Its a response to the
| idea that people who are successful, and especially those
| with financial success, are somehow morally superior to
| those who are less successful. This idea is pervasive, at
| least in the USA, and that's the context people are usually
| coming from when they talk about the externalities that
| lead to success. And honestly, if successful people don't
| recognize the luck that also went into their success, they
| become delusional.
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| There's definitely a subset of people who have achieved
| nothing in their life, and instead of changing simply
| resent others who've done something.
|
| Invariably, these people spend more time in online
| communities like Reddit and come to dominate the
| conversation there. They also (surprise, surprise)
| congregate in low skilled jobs where you can phone it in
| a bit.
|
| Depending on your circles, you might not come across them
| much, but they are absolutely everywhere.
| EGG_CREAM wrote:
| Most of what you've said is nonsense that capitalists
| feed the middle and lower classes to keep them fighting
| eachother. The "low skill" jobs are generally the ones
| you can't phone it in as much, because there's actual
| work to be done at all times. I say that having worked in
| many different environments, from gas stations to a large
| cap tech company. The cashiers at the gas station were at
| least as busy and hardworking as any devs I ever worked
| with, and both are much, much harder working than
| basically anybody with an MBA, who are generally the
| people most likely to talk about how they are "self-
| made."
| alexvoda wrote:
| The Picasso analogy really doesn't work, it makes no sense.
| jasfi wrote:
| I'm quite sure that was Joe Weider.
| MrPatan wrote:
| He's a (successful) politician. I wouldn't expect him to say
| that of course he's self-made and his listeners (whose votes he
| may or may not need) are a bunch of not-self-made losers. That
| sentence doesn't give me a lot of information about what he
| actually thinks.
| slothtrop wrote:
| We aren't strictly the product of environmental determinism.
| That has an influence, but we don't all make the same choices.
| There's a social expectation among public facing individuals to
| downplay their efforts and investments and chalk everything up
| to privilege, luck or divine blessing, and they're punished for
| deviating from that.
| [deleted]
| suoduandao2 wrote:
| In practice, there's no conflict between feeling gratitude for
| the positive things in one's life and having an internal locus
| of control. In theory, those feelings are hard to express in a
| single narrative
| zlg_codes wrote:
| Will you stay consistent and blame failures on society as well?
| Many are quick to take away one's successes as earned but then
| make some BS up about all bad things being deserved.
|
| The just world fallacy is one of the most harmful.
| mr_mitm wrote:
| I'm a fan of Arnold, but I think it's pretty clear that he
| suffers from issues stemming from his rough relationship with his
| father. How else could you become the embodiment of success and
| hard work if not for a pathological need to succeed and impress?
| It seems to have worked out for him, but in any other person I'd
| consider his insane work ethics to be toxic and unhealthy.
| slothtrop wrote:
| Validation isn't something you only get from your parents.
| Notwithstanding, it's not the only motivating factor for
| achieving and taking risks. Arnold's charisma and charm helped
| him go far rather early (he made his first million in
| construction with a fellow bodybuilder). He seems to delight in
| competing and new challenges. Some people are built that way.
| pkaler wrote:
| > I'm a fan of Arnold, but I think it's pretty clear that he
| suffers from issues stemming from his rough relationship with
| his father.
|
| Read the book and watch the Netflix documentary. I'm pretty
| sure Arnold is self-aware of his father issues. For a concrete
| example, Arnold's brother dies drinking-and-driving at the age
| of 24. Arnold contrasts the way he was able to handle his
| relationship with his father compared to his deceased brother.
| mr_mitm wrote:
| I did both. Hearing and reading about his relationship with
| his father led me to my position.
| dboreham wrote:
| I saw him having lunch at a rooftop restaurant in Beverly Hills
| a few years ago. He seemed pretty chill and not working at the
| time.
| Etheryte wrote:
| I don't think that necessarily holds. It's a common trope to
| look at someone who's had a rough childhood and then become a
| success and say that it's because of their rough childhood. But
| this overlooks all the people who had a rough childhood and
| didn't become a success, why doesn't it hold there? Similarly,
| many people are successful without having a rough childhood. In
| essence, if you can easily make the same argument either way,
| that the childhood did/did not matter, then it's hard to say
| that it holds any bearing.
|
| Of course, I don't disagree that coming from that background
| comes to define many parts of one's character, but to say that
| that's the reason for where they ended up is in my opinion a
| bit too reductionist.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Arnold is a nice guy, certainly, but his political legacy is a
| bit questionable. He was a useful tool for certain energy
| interests, but it's not that laudable:
|
| > "On May 17, 2001, future Republican governor Arnold
| Schwarzenegger and former Los Angeles Mayor Republican Richard
| Riordan met with Enron CEO Kenneth Lay at the Peninsula Beverly
| Hills Hotel in Beverly Hills. The meeting was convened for Enron
| to present its "Comprehensive Solution for California," which
| called for an end to federal and state investigations into
| Enron's role in the California energy crisis."
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%E2%80%9301_California_ele...
| avalys wrote:
| So he had a meeting? What's your point?
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Takes a little digging, as the corporate media is mostly
| owned by the same shareholder conglomerates that own the
| utilities and their providers... but Schwarzenegger dropped
| the lawsuit against those who rigged the California energy
| system. (2003):
|
| > "According to the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer
| Rights of Los Angeles, the biggest single threat to Ken Lay
| and the electricity lords is a private lawsuit filed by
| California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante under California's unique
| Civil Code provision 17200, the Unfair Business Practices
| Act. This litigation, based upon rock- solid evidence of
| alleged fraudulent reporting of sales transactions, megawatt
| "laundering," fake power delivery scheduling and straight-out
| conspiracy, is headed to trial now in Los Angeles. The
| lawsuit would make the power companies return the $9 billion
| they filched from California electricity and gas customers."
|
| > "The prediction is that Gov. Schwarzenegger will now bless
| a sweetheart deal with the power companies that short
| circuits the lawsuit by way of a "settlement" of 2 cents per
| dollar negotiated by Bush's Federal Energy Regulatory
| Commission, headed by a guy originally proposed by former
| Enron CEO Ken Lay."
|
| https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/2003/11/19/hell-
| wor...
|
| Arnold then dropped the $9 billion lawsuit once in office, I
| think the eventual settlement was only a few hundred million.
| I guess he was useful.
| rnrn wrote:
| There were 2 cases filed by Bustamente.
|
| May 2 2001 https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2001
| /04/30/daily...
|
| > California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante today filed suit
| against five out of state power generators, accusing them
| of price fixing.
|
| > Named as defendants are Dynegy, Inc.; Duke Energy;
| Mirant, Inc.; Reliant Energy Inc., and Williams Energy
| Services.
|
| > The suit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, was
| joined by Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews, D-Tracy. Both
| entered the suit as private citizens.
|
| Nov 26 2002
| https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1037917427814504588,
|
| > A class-action lawsuit was filed by California Lieutenant
| Governor Cruz Bustamante against McGraw-Hill and a number
| of energy companies for allegedly conspiring to inflate
| natural gas and electricity prices in the California by
| publishing false natural gas prices. The suit was brought
| by Mr. Bustamante as a ratepayer and on behalf of the
| general public.
|
| The initial 2002 case was dismissed:
|
| > On November 20, 2002, California Lieutenant Governor Cruz
| Bustamante ("Bustamante") filed a claim against several
| sellers and marketers of natural gas and gas price indices
| publishers in ... After the court granted a motion to
| dismiss filed by defendants, Bustamante filed an amended
| complaint on August 13, 2003 ..,
|
| https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1010775/00011046590
| 5...
|
| Hard to believe that "the biggest single threat" to Lay in
| 2003 (during the Enron bankruptcy proceedings and criminal
| investigations) was one of these Bustamante lawsuits (which
| did not include Lay or Enron as defendants) that the court
| initially agreed to dismiss.
|
| > Arnold then dropped the $9 billion lawsuit once in
| office, I think the eventual settlement was only a few
| hundred million.
|
| This is the part that needs a source ...
|
| These lawsuits were filed by Bustamante as a private
| citizen while he was lieutenant governor, so please also
| explain the mechanics of the governor of California
| dropping a lawsuit filed by a private individual in the LA
| Superior Court.
|
| I don't doubt that Bustamente's cases settled for millions
| rather than billions, but I would tend to attribute that to
| Bustamente overstating the strength of the cases and
| potential settlements for political purposes while
| campaigning for lieutenant governor in 2002 and for
| governor in 2003 rather than Schwarzenegger somehow
| intervening in the California judicial system, and there
| being no shortage of lawsuits against these companies and
| money preferentially going to claims from entities with
| stronger cases (i.e. not attempted class action lawsuits by
| private individuals)
|
| > Bustamante's lawyers have agreed in principal to the
| deal, saying they would accept a settlement of $20 million
| -- though that is a fraction of the money, perhaps $1
| billion or more, Bustamante hoped to recover when he filed
| the case on behalf of overcharged California consumers.
|
| https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-nov-21-me-
| busta...
|
| See https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05/comm-
| respon... and https://www.ferc.gov/industries-
| data/electric/general-inform... for details on some of the
| litigation that actually resulted in refunds from some of
| these energy companies ($4.5 billion by 2005, and the cases
| continued long after that - maybe still going)
| rnrn wrote:
| Maybe a tool for energy interests, but apparently not a very
| useful one given the fate of Enron and Lay in the months and
| years following that meeting. There were plenty of
| investigations into Enron after Schwarzenegger was elected
| governor.
| suid wrote:
| Arnold the Tank Engine.
| [deleted]
| shipscode wrote:
| He'll always be Arnold "Screw Your Freedom" Schwarzenegger to me.
| dopeboy wrote:
| If you're a founder or just someone who wants to be inspired,
| read his book 'Total Recall'. It's a fantastic story of his life
| and I came away really motivated reading it.
| maxverse wrote:
| Same. I also enjoyed the wonderfully-narrated audiobook. Just
| listening to it makes me want to get out into the world and do
| something.
| gardenhedge wrote:
| [flagged]
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| In that article it said he did it under the supervision of a
| doctor, and the stuff was legal at that time.
| geraldwhen wrote:
| All professional bodybuilders and powerlifters, and most
| athletes, use steroids.
|
| The US Olympic teams have team doctors to help the athletes
| cycle off in time for the drug test.
| monooso wrote:
| It wasn't steroid "abuse", it was completely legal (and common
| practise) at the time. The article you linked to makes this
| perfectly clear.
| codemiscreant wrote:
| It might have been common practice, but _everyone_ denied it,
| including Arnold repeatedly. It was and is considered
| "cheating", so the claim that it was normal should be
| asterisked. It is "normal" the way affairs in marriage are.
|
| And his recollection of his usage seems suspect. Both his
| dbol and test are seriously on the low side. I hugely doubt
| he is being forthcoming.
|
| To be clear I am a big fan of his and think the use of
| steroids is a personal choice, weighed against risks. It's
| just that the post-facto fictions presented are seldom
| honest.
| ericmcer wrote:
| He talks pretty openly about using steroids in "Pumping
| Iron" which came out in 1977. He was very candid about it,
| probably because you would have to be a moron to look at
| professional body builders and think they were natural.
| doix wrote:
| > It might have been common practice, but everyone denied
| it, including Arnold repeatedly. It was and is considered
| "cheating", so the claim that it was normal should be
| asterisked. It is "normal" the way affairs in marriage are.
|
| Maybe I am naive, but having an affair isn't a prerequisite
| for marriage. Whereas everyone in bodybuilding is on
| steroids, it's a prerequisite for the sport. It was back
| then and it still is now.
| [deleted]
| AlecSchueler wrote:
| Legality doesn't preclude abuse potential. Plenty of people
| abuse legal things like alcohol every day.
| slothtrop wrote:
| That still doesn't reflect a moral blight, let alone for
| the fact that it's a "potential".
| gardenhedge wrote:
| Use/abuse - still a negative for me. I didn't read his book
| but I doubt it's one of his tools..
| meesles wrote:
| Then don't reply? This isn't reddit, your replies need
| substance and every passing thought isn't worth submitting.
| Just a tip.
| infinitezest wrote:
| Replying to the reply that shouldn't have replied.
| gardenhedge wrote:
| Why shouldn't I reply? The link is promoting a person's tools
| for life. It's totally relevant to analyse the character of
| that person.
| monero-xmr wrote:
| What's wrong with using steroids? If it's your own body you
| should be able to use them. I won't, but I don't put a lot of
| things in my body that others do.
| tayo42 wrote:
| In personal use it's fine, when competing it raises the bar
| to you needing to use steroids to compete. Anyone not
| comfortable with messing with their hormones and dealing with
| the effects will never keep up
| geraldwhen wrote:
| Nearly all athletes are on PEDs, many even at the
| recreational level.
|
| That ship has long sailed.
| tayo42 wrote:
| Idk people always say that but athletes get suspended
| when their caught and it's always a decent sized scandal
| when it happens
| gwd wrote:
| This is why (according to lots of videos I've seen on
| youtube) there are two "tracks" for body-building
| competitions. One "track" has rules that prohibit steroid
| use, and do regular testing to enforce the rules. The other
| track has no rules prohibiting steroid use. They're not
| required, naturally, but it's basically understood that if
| you want to use them it's fine... which means you'd have to
| be a freak of nature to compete effectively on that track
| without taking them.
|
| Might be interesting to see what it would look like to have
| two tracks for other sports as well.
| moe_sc wrote:
| _Every_ bodybuilder in any competition that isn 't labeled
| as a natural competition uses them. That's just how
| bodybuilding turned out. Sure, you could debate on if that
| is good, but then don't argue about the athletes using
| them, but the orgs allowing it.
| ws66 wrote:
| Are you professing that we should pass on everone that doesn't
| have a perfect record?
|
| I mean, is there someone with a perfect record?
|
| I think you learn and grow to be good, to take care of others,
| and this process goes with mistakes that impact yourself and
| others... You cannot expect someone to be always 100% perfect
| all the time.
|
| As for myself, I did tons of shit that I am not proud of, so
| you should pass on this comment as well...
| gardenhedge wrote:
| Your comment is excusing groping people as not being
| "perfect"? Please explain.
|
| If you've done tons of shit that you're not proud of, I'll
| probably pass on your book too.
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| >Are you professing that we should pass on everyone that
| doesn't have a perfect record?
|
| This is the entire focus of western American Christianity.
| The pervasiveness of this is built into our culture, and as a
| result the world culture (because we exported this insanity)
|
| So what you get is a worldwide society of people who will use
| any human failing of a leader as proof of why all of what
| they did is wrong.
|
| Pillaging Christians starting with the Inquisition created a
| perfect reference person for which everyone should be
| compared to which makes everyone not good enough ever. Only
| through the weekly blessing that you have to attend and
| confess to can you be temporarily saved from certain forever
| death
|
| It's just so embedded into western culture that the source is
| not even recognized as the source.
| drewcoo wrote:
| > Pillaging Christians starting with the Inquisition
|
| Not sure what that's supposed to mean. Strange spell-check
| error?
|
| I'm not a Christian, but I think that Protestant purity
| culture is a likelier culprit than Catholicism. Claims of
| moral pollution and calls for banning don't come from the
| pulpit, but from an "enlightened" public that can "think
| for itself."
| runjake wrote:
| He does a decent job of addressing the above in his Netflix
| mini-series. A good watch if one wants to know more about
| Arnold.
|
| https://www.netflix.com/title/81317673
| ARandomerDude wrote:
| > Champion bodybuilder. Hollywood superstar. Governor of
| California.
|
| I would question whether any of those count as useful.
| gardenhedge wrote:
| Unfortunately there's no room for critizing him here. HN
| hivemind has become reddit-like and decided who is good and who
| is not.
| cpach wrote:
| It's fine. If you don't want to like Schwarzenegger, you
| don't have to. But I would still recommend reading the
| interview. I found it thoughtful.
| 39 wrote:
| But this snark is truly something...
| inglor_cz wrote:
| IDK about bodybuilding, but:
|
| a) Entertainment and arts _are_ useful, even Stone Age hunters
| and gatherers left some art behind. It is part of our humanity.
| We obviously feel need to produce and consume art. (Maybe not
| you, but we the people in general.) And movies are art.
|
| b) Big sets of people, like California is, need to be managed
| somehow. Individual politicians might be useless, but the
| office of the governor is useful.
| maxverse wrote:
| What do you consider useful?
| avalys wrote:
| Are you useful?
| vore wrote:
| Well, I'm not doing anything useful with my life either, so
| that makes two of us.
| hcks wrote:
| This is why he decided to be a body builder > actor > politician
| of course, makes perfect sense (people usually profess the
| beliefs their actions contradict the most)
| neontomo wrote:
| Entertaining people can be useful to society, without fun we'd
| simply be worker drones living miserable lives.
|
| That said, I also struggle to see how how this guiding
| principle of "being useful" led him to take these actions. More
| likely, his real principle is, "be successful" in the dominant
| media view of "be famous, by doing anything you can to get
| there". He's selling a book with the same title as his
| "philosophy" so there's the real answer. I don't mean to be
| negative towards him, but this article reads like bullshit to
| me.
| detourdog wrote:
| Being useful is another way to express moving through life in
| a way that doesn't cause more effort from those surrounding
| you.
|
| I see that as a path to success.
| jawerty wrote:
| true the most useful people I know you'll never hear in NPR
| they're typically highly skilled workers who just do their job
| everyday.
| booleandilemma wrote:
| _people usually profess the beliefs their actions contradict
| the most_
|
| Why is that?
| hardlianotion wrote:
| And is it true?
| marckohlbrugge wrote:
| Arnold kept inspiring people from all walks of life that
| through hard work you can, in the case of body building quite
| literally, shape your own reality.
|
| I'd call that being useful.
| rafaelmn wrote:
| Bodybuilding is something where you cannot shape your reality
| - no matter how hard you work - if you don't have the right
| build for it (genetics). Any elite BB will tell you as much
| (I've heard multiple give advice to guys that don't have the
| right built to not even bother with the sport).
|
| It also built a fitness industry that sells steroid gains as
| "hard work". I was shocked recently talking to my coworkers
| about Arnold, they didn't know he was on roids... The
| perception of what an average person thinks is achievable
| with "hard work" is highly distorted in this regard.
| asynchronous wrote:
| Realizing just how much of Hollywood is the result of
| pharmacology genuinely depressed me as a male for a bit,
| knowing those results are actually unattainable naturally
| rafaelmn wrote:
| If the physique is all you are after then it shouldn't be
| depressing since the solution is easily attainable
| (unlike many other physical attributes)
| SoftTalker wrote:
| As GP said, you need the genetics, and to get the sort of
| body that Arnold or other top bodybuilders have you can't
| do it naturally.
|
| However none of those things stops you from lifting
| weights for strength training, which is good for your
| body, your skeleton, your appearance, and your mental
| health. If your goal is to get strong, that is attainable
| naturally by anyone. You just need to do it.
| jef_leppard wrote:
| I grew up in the 80s and it's hard to overstate how dominant
| Arnold was back then. Every little boy wanted to be Commando or
| Conan.
|
| I also remember when he was governor (I live in cali). Those
| years I remember less fondly. He was not very good imo but it's
| impressive nonetheless that he achieved that milestone.
|
| Once in a lifetime phenomenon. I'm really enjoying this new more
| thoughtful and reflective era he's having.
|
| EDIT: moved some words around for clarity.
| appleiigs wrote:
| My recollection was that he was a good governor but tied up
| with political red tape. Also, compare him to other California
| governors since then and he doesn't seem so bad.
| hackernewds wrote:
| you think he has been better than Newsome?
| SoftTalker wrote:
| I don't live there, but my perception was that he was a
| Republican so hated by the left, but he was a fairly moderate
| Republican, so not liked all that well by the right either.
| This left him without many powerful allies on either side.
| maxverse wrote:
| One of the things I love about his autobiography is that he
| talks with the same sense of wonder about the people he wanted
| to be growing up, and reflects on meeting his heroes. In one of
| my favorite passages in the book, he talks about growing up on
| on Joe Weider's bodybuilding magazines:
|
| > "Other pictures in the magazine showed scientists and
| technicians in white lab coats developing nutritional
| supplements in the Weider Research Clinic. "Weider Research
| Clinic," I would say to myself, "this is unbelievable!" And
| there were pictures of airplanes with "Weider" painted on the
| side in big letters. I'd imagined an outfit the size of General
| Motors, with a fleet of planes flying around the globe
| delivering Weider equipment and food supplements. The writing
| in the magazine sounded fabulous too when my friends translated
| it for me. The stories talked about "blasting the muscles" and
| building "deltoids like cannonballs" and "a chest like a
| fortress."
|
| > And now here I was, six years later, on Venice Beach! Just
| like Dave Draper, only now it was me with the dune buggy and
| the surfboard and the adoring girls. Of course, by this time I
| was aware enough to see that Weider was creating a whole
| fantasy world, with a foundation in reality but skyscrapers of
| hype. Yes, there were surfboards, but the bodybuilders didn't
| really surf. Yes, there were pretty girls, but they were models
| who got paid for the photo session. (Actually, one of the girls
| was Joe's wife, Betty, a beautiful model whom he didn't have to
| pay.) Yes, there were Weider supplements and, yes, some
| research took place, but there was no big building in Los
| Angeles called the Weider Research Clinic. Yes, Weider products
| were distributed around the world, but there were no Weider
| planes. Discovering the hype didn't bother me, though. Enough
| of it was true."
| metabagel wrote:
| Schwarzenegger was a perfectly fine governor of California. He
| actually created a mobile pandemic response capability for the
| state (instant hospital beds), but it was dismantled before the
| pandemic happened. Would have been handy when hospital beds
| became scarce.
| metabagel wrote:
| As I recall, the capability which was created included a lot
| of spare ventilators, which again would have been super
| handy.
| Animats wrote:
| That sounds so Thomas the Tank Engine, who is Really Useful.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-10-07 23:01 UTC)