[HN Gopher] Poor Charlie's Almanack: The Essential Wit and Wisdo...
___________________________________________________________________
Poor Charlie's Almanack: The Essential Wit and Wisdom of Charles T.
Munger
Author : fadymak
Score : 56 points
Date : 2023-11-22 20:21 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (press.stripe.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (press.stripe.com)
| cactusplant7374 wrote:
| Love listening to Munger. He feels more genuine than any other
| successful businessman I have come across -- other than Buffett.
| johnwheeler wrote:
| I like the part in the book where he talks about getting rich by
| doing nothing "sit on your ass investing"
| readyplayernull wrote:
| Lottery?
| WJW wrote:
| Decades-long buy and hold investing. Buy once then sit on
| your ass for 40 years. This works quite well but is actually
| surprisingly hard to do for most people.
| mihaic wrote:
| Yes, because it's getting harder to get enough money to buy
| anything on which you'd sit for 40 year.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| It will be interesting if it repeats. He may just be a guy that
| existed in one of the most privileged eras in human history for
| making money like that, like a colonist writing a book about
| how easy it is to get free land in America.
|
| https://www.cold-takes.com/this-cant-go-on/
| oh_sigh wrote:
| If it was just luck, shouldn't we expect a bunch of
| billionaires who followed a similar easy path?
| jilko wrote:
| Not necessarily. For the record I'm in the camp "they
| didn't just get lucky," but it's totally plausible to argue
| that they did.
|
| Taleb does this exact thought experiment in "Fooled By
| Randomness." He imagines a pool of investors who are weeded
| out purely by random luck each iteration of some process.
| You still end up with people that get some insane track
| records, purely by chance. In fact, he spends quite a bit
| of the book talking about barely fictionalized people he
| knew in the trading world whose strategies made money for
| long periods of time before blowing up simply because they
| happened to be in the market at the right time.
|
| I suspect the nuance we need to add to OP's comment was
| "they were there at the right time AND won the iteration
| game purely by luck." So they were the tippy top of a
| cohort in a generally advantaged time where their strategy
| happened to be optimal. Again I don't personally think
| that's the case (I believe there's something more
| fundamentally correct in their approach), but it's a
| totally reasonable thing to argue even in the absence of
| other examples.
| creddit wrote:
| Easy buy. Stripe Press has a fantastic aesthetic and quality to
| their books and this is a classic.
|
| Less than $25 with taxes on Amazon.
| simonebrunozzi wrote:
| Why I see $30?
| soneca wrote:
| On Amazon I see $22,49 (despite the Stripe page's link
| stating $30).
|
| I am in Brazil though, so the shipping adds more $25,53
| creddit wrote:
| $22.49 is what I saw (and paid) as well.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Your prime isn't as prime as theirs? Some are just more prime
| than others. It's the natural way
| creddit wrote:
| Did you go to Amazon from the linked page? Mine was lower
| than the claimed $30 but maybe it was targeted? $22.49 before
| tax.
| bulbosaur123 wrote:
| OG HODLER
| Luc wrote:
| Great book, I am glad it is now easier to purchase worldwide.
| jebraat wrote:
| Love Charlie, love his insights, love listening to the little
| nuggets he has to say in the shareholder meetings.
|
| But holy moly, this book has been a drag for me to read. I
| actually stopped about half way through. This is 100% on me, of
| course. I highly recommend reading a sample before buying.
| tquinn wrote:
| I've read it a few times. I would recommend reading:
|
| Talk One: Harvard School Commencement Speech (aka Prescription
| for Guaranteed Misery in life)
|
| Talk Eleven: The Psychology of Human Misjudgement which is the
| most important talk in the book. Interestingly enough it
| doesn't have any illustrations or sidebar notes like the other
| talks.
|
| Then go from there.
| 6stringmerc wrote:
| So basically a Norm Macdonald perfect joke?
|
| It's reflexive and a tautology - Munger's best point is
| actually the point of the existence of the book it is
| contained within.
|
| Turtles all the way down.
| jebraat wrote:
| Thanks for the recommendations! Will have a look
| kaycebasques wrote:
| I have the unwieldy hardcover version [1] published by Walsworth
| in 2005. It's a great read. It's hard for me to hate a guy who
| ascribes his success to being _fiercely_ curious about
| _everything_.
|
| [1] https://www.amazon.com/Poor-Charlies-Almanack-Charles-
| Expand...
| gizajob wrote:
| Why, what's wrong with being like that?
| mpalmer wrote:
| Does it cover the prison-like windowless monstrosity of a dorm he
| designed for UCSB?
|
| https://www.dezeen.com/2021/11/02/architect-resigns-grotesqu...
| orzig wrote:
| I don't have a horse in the race, but maybe before jumping to
| conclusions people should read the reactions of students
| themselves? They're very easy to find:
|
| https://www.independent.com/2022/07/27/mixed-reviews-ucsb-mu...
|
| It's no puff piece, and students aren't uniformly positive, but
| it's a reminder that there are many trade-offs in life, and
| some are pretty open to it
| spondylosaurus wrote:
| UCSB is notoriously sparse on housing, so it sounds like a
| lot of students _do_ prefer the privacy and quiet of Munger
| 's dorm to the more fratty atmosphere of IV. But if options
| were better...
| foobarqux wrote:
| The question isn't whether windowless dorms are good or bad,
| it's whether the students who live in dorms should decide or
| should it be dictated by the richest people in the world.
|
| The common retort is that it's the rich people's money so
| that they should be able to impose whatever living conditions
| they want on the deprived.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Is Charlie a licensed architect? If not, the final
| decisions still come down to an architect.
| prepend wrote:
| I suppose students are welcome to use their own money to
| buy buildings. There is a university governance board that
| can design whatever they want.
|
| In this case, Munger proposed an efficient donation (in his
| mind) to help the most students possible with his donation
| and the university accepted.
|
| Since only billionaires are likely to donate buildings, I
| think it's going to be common to have donors influence the
| design.
| mpalmer wrote:
| Every student quote in that piece is either overt criticism,
| or qualified praise ("I personally would not want to live
| there," he said. "I would feel trapped").
|
| It does have positive quotes from a number of people on the
| UCSB payroll who would never live there.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Yes, no one praises the lack of windows, because it'll be
| weird to be thankful for something normal that is missing.
| But the lack of windows aren't just a middle finger to the
| students, their absence allows for greater freedom in
| design of the building. So you have students praising the
| relatively large private rooms. Which would not be possible
| without the lack of windows.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Every time Munger is mentioned here, this comes up.
|
| If it's so obvious to every random joe with exactly zero
| experience designing buildings, why did Charlie ignore it?
|
| Have you actually considered his design, or is this just a
| kneejerk reaction?
| foobarqux wrote:
| Should students who live in them decide or should a
| billionaire make them live where he wants them to?
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Has any group of students ever decided how to design their
| on campus housing, or has that 100% of the time fell to a
| licensed architect?
| foobarqux wrote:
| I have no idea what point you are trying to make.
| Normally students would be able to say that they don't
| want windowless dorms. In this case Munger said that if
| they didn't build windowless dorms they wouldn't get
| dorms at all. What does this have to do with architects?
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Students generally don't have much say over the design of
| their dorms.
|
| And 80% of students who toured a demo space were positive
| or neutral on it.
|
| No, Munger didn't say they would get no dorms at all if
| they didn't build it. He said he would not give them
| $200M if they didn't follow his plans. I'm not aware of
| his ability to unilaterally prevent the building of dorms
| on any campus.
|
| What this has to do with architects is that architects
| don't sign off on unlivable spaces.
| foobarqux wrote:
| > Students generally don't have much say over the design
| of their dorms.
|
| They generally don't care that much. If they care a lot
| about windows in the dorms should they be able to decide?
|
| > And 80% of students who toured a demo space were
| positive or neutral on it.
|
| Are they deciding if they get windows or not?
|
| > He said he would not give them $200M if they didn't
| follow his plans.
|
| Right, they needed dorms, Munger said I will give you
| dorms but I will make you live without windows because it
| pleases me. As far as I know they didn't have any
| alternatives.
|
| > What this has to do with architects is that architects
| don't sign off on unlivable spaces.
|
| The issue isn't whether the space is unlivable, it's
| whether the students are deciding on what spaces they are
| living in or are the subject to the depravities of a
| billionaire. By your logic why can't Munger mandate that
| full sized murals of himself be painted in every room, or
| that they have to eat gruel or whatever else entertains
| him?
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| Who, it should be said, have done some atrocious student
| housing.
|
| I lived in dorms that were, to put it as a roommate did,
| designed in the same tradition as the Albuquerque jail.
| mpalmer wrote:
| I can see I've touched a nerve among Munger fans.
|
| I don't know where you're getting random Joes. The bulk of
| criticism for this design is from _architects_. Why did
| Charlie ignore it? Great question. Anyway, they cancelled the
| building a few months ago.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| No, I don't give a shit about Charlie. I do dislike
| uninformed kneejerk reactions though.
|
| No, the bulk of the criticism has come from uninformed joes
| like yourself. _Some_ architects have spoken out against
| it, and some have spoken for it.
| mpalmer wrote:
| > I do dislike uninformed kneejerk reactions though.
|
| Your strength of feeling on the matter is literally
| incredible.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| It's incredible that I don't like uninformed knee jerk
| reactions? Okay, to each their own.
|
| In any case, how much or little I care about it is
| irrelevant to whether it is an uninformed kneejerk
| reaction.
|
| But hey, however strong I feel, it must be less than how
| much pg does, since he wrote an entire essay on
| middlebrow dismissal
| mpalmer wrote:
| Oh, are you the same person as oh_sigh? Good to know.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Yup, sorry. I started responding on my phone which has a
| different account logged in.
| mpalmer wrote:
| "Our collective response to this proposal is not a
| critique of style, rather this is a critique of the
| unacceptable, inhumane living conditions that will no
| doubt have a psychological impact on its inhabitants and
| the community at large," the letter reads. "This project
| shows complete disregard to the building's scale and
| proportion in relationship to its immediate surroundings
| and the negative impact it will have to the community in
| which it's located."
|
| [...]
|
| "We are grateful to Architect Dennis McFadden for his
| service on the University Design Review Committee and for
| standing up against this project," the letter says.
| "AIASB strongly agrees with Mr. McFadden and the many
| other voices of opposition and urges the University to
| take immediately action to halt and reconsider this
| project in its entirety."
|
| - Open letter from the the Santa Barbara chapter of the
| American Institute of Architects
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Meanwhile, the windowless form Charlie designed for
| UofMichigan is one of the highest rated dorms there: http
| s://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/11/02/busi.
| ..
| jhbadger wrote:
| Munger is not a trained architect. Just as I would not want
| to undergo surgery by someone without a medical degree, I
| wouldn't want to live in a building not designed by an actual
| architect. Being rich doesn't suddenly make you an expert in
| all fields.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Large buildings cannot be built in America without the sign
| off of licensed architect. No architect would sign off on
| the building of it was an unlivable monstrosity.
| jacobr1 wrote:
| Did he not get professionals to translate his designs into
| something firmer?
| boh wrote:
| Charlie isn't as effective of a philosopher as Warren(Charlie).
| When Warren cites Charlie he tends to filter out the more
| impulsive or outdated ideas.
|
| No filter Charlie tends to get cringey at some point.
| epolanski wrote:
| One of the most brilliant pieces of wisdom I got from Munger
| comes from his early years when he was a flight operator at some
| navy or air force base.
|
| At the beginning he felt the job to be difficult and stressful,
| he had to know how to assist planes fly safely and it wasn't
| always clear what had the highest priority.
|
| So he inversed the problem: what could he do to make the planes
| crash?
|
| It was easier to do his job by focusing on the things he could do
| wrong and just avoid those.
|
| It's a powerful framework I use consistently in my life.
|
| I really like Munger. I also love how unfiltered he is.
| blueridge wrote:
| Yeah, I like this and I think the same way. Except it's not
| popular at work, where everything has to be polite and pleasant
| and delivered gently. I'm constantly thinking about what could
| go wrong, poking holes in plans, trying to minimize bad
| outcomes. People don't like this.
|
| But in general this is how I've always learned. And some of my
| best teachers and mentors over the years have been laser
| focused on what _not_ to do. This really resonates with me,
| though I find most people aren 't built this way. It comes
| across as a "negative" mindset.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| A better way to frame this for colleagues might be: if we
| want this project to fail, what would we do?
| taneq wrote:
| This kind of adversarial design work is great if you can get
| the right people involved. The problems I've seen when you
| get the wrong people, though, are:
|
| 1) Often it's much easier to point out potential issues than
| it is to properly address them. It can end up as a Gish
| gallop of low effort criticisms which must be countered on
| the spot or the initial idea is deemed entirely wrong.
|
| 2) If roles aren't rotated regularly, some people settle into
| the "problem finder" role and start to prioritise finding
| problems over the success of the overall project, and now you
| have a saboteur on the team.
| tasty_freeze wrote:
| Obviously, I don't know the specifics about you. However, one
| thing I have witnessed many times is the following.
|
| Just about every decision a team considers involves
| tradeoffs; if not, then it would be a no-brainer and there
| would be no need to convene a team to discuss it. Getting to
| the point now, some people will, no matter which alternative
| is under consideration, do nothing but point out the downside
| of choosing every option, even if that downside is obvious
| and known to everyone. Such people aren't insightful
| contrarians, they are a drag on problem solving. It is also
| politically safe: no matter which decision is arrived at, if
| things go wrong they can tsk tsk and say I told you so.
|
| Usually the quickest way to shut them up it to ask them: OK
| what is your suggestion for what we should do?
| smilebot wrote:
| When in doubt, always invert.
| EdwardCoffin wrote:
| I read this book fairly carefully a number of years ago, found a
| lot of good stuff worth taking notes on. I'm glad to see it
| becoming more easily available. Stripe is also good. I have their
| printing of Hamming's _The Art of Doing Science and Engineering_
| and am quite happy with the quality of the printing and binding.
|
| In a discussion thread [1] on this same book, on this same
| website back in 2016 I was able to find a citation that the book
| does not give, for a book Munger did not specify, only described,
| when I quoted the bit from the book [2] someone was able to come
| up with what was almost certainly the book Munger had in mind
| [3].
|
| Reproducing the essential bits of that thread to save the click
| throughs:
|
| _In section 17, Stress-Influence Tendency (p21-22), he mentions
| some final work by Pavlov, but doesn 't provide a citation. I
| spent some time trying to find it when I first read this years
| ago, but was unable to. I'm wondering whether it's even reliable:
| I'd think that work by Pavlov could be found with him as an
| author, rather than in a "popular paperback" written by an un-
| named psychiatrist. If anyone knows what book he must have been
| talking about, or can point to the particular papers by Pavlov,
| I'd like to know._ [1]
|
| _" "...popular paperback, written by some Rockefeller-financed
| psychiatrist, when I was trying to figure out..""_
|
| _Battle for the Mind: A Physiology of Conversion and
| Brainwashing - How Evangelists, Psychiatrists, Politicians, and
| Medicine Men Can Change Your Beliefs and Behavior - William
| Sargant_ [4]
|
| _" In 1938 Sargant was awarded a Rockefeller Fellowship" says
| author's wiki. I think this book fits the bill."_ [2]
|
| _It does indeed seem to be the book. Thanks._
|
| _The author seems to be controversial. The Wikipedia entry on
| him [1] says things like "his reliance on dogma rather than
| clinical evidence have confirmed his reputation as a
| controversial figure whose work is seldom cited in modern
| psychiatric texts.", and others "described him as 'autocratic, a
| danger, a disaster' and spoke about 'the damage he did'"._ [3]
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12159242
|
| [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12159503
|
| [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12159809
|
| [4] https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Mind-Brainwashing-
| Evangelists-...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-22 23:01 UTC)