[HN Gopher] When To Do What You Love
___________________________________________________________________
When To Do What You Love
Author : underdeserver
Score : 101 points
Date : 2024-09-29 13:16 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (paulgraham.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (paulgraham.com)
| fjordingo wrote:
| > if you're young and good at technology...
|
| > ... but if you want to become super rich, and you're young and
| good at technology, working on what you're most interested in
| becomes a good idea again.
|
| It's sad to me that the wealth inequality manifested and upheld
| by the current structure of capitalism, that people like Graham
| full throatily endorse, creates this mentality.
|
| "If you're young" is a euphemism for "if you are free from the
| necessities of responsibility, and so are able to forego the lack
| of consistent income (and if you're in the states, a lack of
| employer provided health care".
|
| pg, encourage the companies you give money to pay an equal
| portion of profits to their employees, and maybe even the "olds"
| can be free do what they love; rather than the fear induced
| indentured servitude currently so predominant.
|
| May even give us better products and solutions, or as you say,
| allow people to do _actual_ "great work".
| slowmovintarget wrote:
| > wealth inequality manifested and upheld by the current
| structure of capitalism
|
| I've been having this conversation over dinner with my wife for
| the last few years. What else is there? Here are the broadly
| categorized economic systems that I'm aware of (I sincerely
| request correction if I'm incomplete or mistaken):
|
| - Subsistence (hunter/gatherer, limited farming... etc.)
|
| - Despotism, feudalism, and other ruler-based economies that
| mix governance with economy by fiat
|
| - Marxism (and it's entanglements into governance: socialism
| and communism)
|
| - Capitalism, though it eventually captures governance as a
| failure mode
|
| Of these systems, with the possible exception of subsistence,
| only capitalism really works. All forms of Marxism ever
| practiced lead to despotism, which most of us can agree is a
| bad thing. Even with a benevolent dictator for life, that life
| ends and the system degenerates at most in two generations of
| hereditary leadership.
|
| How do you reset capitalism so that we refresh to healthy
| markets (a prerequisite for capitalism to act as a force for
| societal welfare)? How do you turn back the clock on regulatory
| capture, and monopolized consolidation where firms move to
| become parasitic instead of exchanging value?
|
| Is there something else?
|
| And no, Marxism and collectivism is not it. Drowning the
| individual is not it. Marxism hasn't lost its appeal precisely
| because it's one of the few models that addresses dramatic pay
| disparity. But it was created in Britain thinking about the
| factory workers of the time. We know now that it includes
| errors and misunderstandings of fundamental human behavior that
| make it turn into tyranny every time. We also know that it
| necessarily leads to central planning which is fragile and
| collapses. So that's not it.
|
| If not Marxism, and not capitalism, then what?
| feedforward wrote:
| > All forms of Marxism ever practiced lead to despotism,
| which most of us can agree is a bad thing.
|
| What you call a Marxist system is something that Marx said
| could only work in the most advanced country if it was ready
| for it, which in that time was Germany. He said such a system
| would not work elsewhere.
|
| So what form of Marxism failed? Even Lenin, who many Marxists
| did not consider Marxist, was a Marxist enough to say that
| Russia would not establish communism. That the Russian self-
| described Marxists had the chance to take power in Russia and
| they took it. That Lenin wanted to take power in early 1917
| came as a surprise to Stalin, Trotsky, Kamenev etc., in fact
| Trotsky was not even with Lenin then. It surprised them
| because it was not a Marxist idea. Then Lenin introduced the
| New Economic Policy, i.e. capitalism. Then he died.
|
| Marx clearly spelled out what not to do, and some did what he
| said not to do, then people attribute the failures of those
| who did what Marx said not to do, to Marx.
| mionhe wrote:
| This kind of argument seems to always pop up in this
| context.
|
| There have been 17 attempts that I'm aware of to create a
| government based off of the ideals that Marx preached.
|
| Of those 17 attempts, every one has ended up creating
| extreme poverty for the masses. Every one has led to
| massive amounts of death and abject misery. Every one has
| led to a dictator that sees his people as just cogs in a
| machine, easily replaced.
|
| No matter how great Marx's system is (and having seen the
| aftermath personally of one of those attempts to enact it,
| I'm inclined to think that his system of thinking is semi-
| articulate garbage), it's obvious that we can't do what he
| prescribed and get the results he claimed we would.
|
| Frankly, the part where all of the power temporarily
| concentrates before redistribution is the problem area: no
| one can withstand the temptation to just keep it.
|
| Or possibly they never intended to let it go in the first
| place.
| desumeku wrote:
| There are far more than 17 capitalist countries which
| meet every criteria you've listed as an evil of
| Communism.
| feedforward wrote:
| > There have been 17 attempts that I'm aware of to create
| a government based off of the ideals that Marx preached.
|
| What does Marx say in the Communist Manifesto?
|
| "The Communists turn their attention chiefly to Germany,
| because that country is on the eve of a bourgeois
| revolution that is bound to be carried out under more
| advanced conditions of European civilisation and with a
| much more developed proletariat than that of England was
| in the seventeenth, and France in the eighteenth century,
| and because the bourgeois revolution in Germany will be
| but the prelude to an immediately following proletarian
| revolution."
|
| This is what Marx said, what his ideals were. A political
| fight in a country with the developed proletariat of the
| Ruhr Valley - Germany. What he can be judged by is what
| he said.
|
| Marx said a precondition for his ideals would be the
| conditions the Ruhr Valley and Germany had. So if
| attempts made without the ingredients he stated failed,
| then Marx's ideals are shown to be correct. Your examples
| prove Marx was right.
| hamandcheese wrote:
| I just want capitalism where the capitalists pay the same tax
| rate as labor.
| samatman wrote:
| That sounds fairly awful. The top 1% of earners pay 45% of
| income tax (US figure). Why would you want laborers to pay
| so much more tax?
| hamandcheese wrote:
| I clearly wrote tax rate, not total taxes.
|
| And the top 1% gets a lot of wealth that isn't classified
| as income.
| gtirloni wrote:
| In what country is that?
|
| Average tax rate paid by billionaires in the US is close
| to 8%
|
| https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-
| room/2021/09/23/new-...
| samatman wrote:
| The US of course, I specifically said that.
|
| https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-
| federal-in...
|
| > _The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a 25.9 percent
| average rate, nearly eight times higher than the 3.3
| percent average rate paid by the bottom half of
| taxpayers_
|
| > _The top 1 percent's income share rose from 22.2
| percent in 2020 to 26.3 percent in 2021 and its share of
| federal income taxes paid rose from 42.3 percent to 45.8
| percent._
|
| The post I was replying to suggested that everyone pay
| the same tax rate. I'm opposed to this. Progressive taxes
| are more fair, due to the marginal value of money.
| tightbookkeeper wrote:
| Capital gains tax is lower to offset the risk of taking a
| capital risk, which labor does not do in receiving a wage.
|
| Much of "labor" participates in capital risk through
| retirement accounts and homes, blurring this 19th century
| distinction.
|
| The "capitalists" are likely to sidestep taxation through
| politicians, lawyers and accountants (See the often quoted
| 1960s era "tax rate") which is a phenomenon of power, that
| exists pre-capitalism.
| gtirloni wrote:
| > How do you reset capitalism so that we refresh to healthy
| markets (a prerequisite for capitalism to act as a force for
| societal welfare)?
|
| Do you know about Sisyphus?
| desumeku wrote:
| It's far too late in the history of discourse to try and
| change this perception, but 'Marxism' is not really so much
| of a system in-of-itself more than it is a grouping of
| influential ideas that were propagated by Marx and
| disseminated throughout history. Marx at no point ever
| attempts to describe an ideal economic system - Communism as
| an idea is far more intagible to him, and many 'modern
| Marxists' have long since re-oriented their ideological
| critique away from 'the establishment of Communism' and
| towards 'survival under Capitalism' as modern society is
| inexorably more alien than Marx could have ever known.
| uhddfe wrote:
| I think your bulleted list is a bit wonky.
|
| The one that jumps out at me is implying "socialism is a form
| of Marxism" when it's the opposite that is true.
|
| There are thriving socialist governments right now. What
| benefit does your argument get from ignoring those?
|
| Why do you have "capitalism" and "despotism, feudalism, and
| other ruler based economies" separate? Are you unable to see
| the oligarchy of the US?
|
| > Drowning the individual is not it.
|
| Spreading ownership across those necessary for a thing to
| exist is drowning them? Or is it drowning the Csuites?
|
| If your online bookstore turned imitation product megastore
| requires the people boxing the goods and driving the trucks
| then they should own a piece of what their work creates; that
| means ownership in the company and a share in the wealth it
| creates.
|
| Is it because a CEO is golfing with war criminals that they
| deserve to capture the economic production from the labor of
| so many?
|
| The fact that a company can create one of the three riches
| men on the planet and have its employees who are the ones
| making that person's wealth be on government assistance is
| absolute bullshit.
|
| > What else is there?
|
| What indeed.
| desumeku wrote:
| > The fact that a company can create one of the three
| riches men on the planet and have its employees who are the
| ones making that person's wealth be on government
| assistance is absolute bullshit.
|
| I agree here. Even during the feudal era, if you happened
| to be employed in the envoy of one of the world's richest
| trading fleets, you would be treated with far greater
| respect than an Amazon worker.
| comfysocks wrote:
| In my opinion, a good first step is to stop looking at
| socialism and capitalism in absolute terms. I think its a
| mistake to idealistically cling to one archetype as the best
| of all possible archetypes. When you go the idealistic route,
| you are doomed to repeat the failings of the past.
|
| I would argue that the most successful economies are blended
| economies that have achieved success by blending elements of
| both systems and perhaps other systems as well.
|
| For example, the USA once had working conditions as described
| by Upton Sinclair in "The Jungle ." Those working conditions
| are no longer legal thanks to regulations. But regulations
| are an element of command-economy, not of free markets.
|
| An example from the other side is the rise of China's
| economy. I don't believe China could have become "the world's
| factory" without introducing elements of free market
| capitalism.
|
| During the cold war, propaganda made socialism the bogeyman
| to the west, and capitalism the bogeyman to the east. I don't
| think this fear is rational. To me they are just two economic
| archetypes of many. Each has its own merits and faults. The
| key is to apply them where they make sense.
|
| To me the real enemies are: authoritarianism and corruption.
|
| I see regulatory capture as a form of corruption. The
| regulators are corrupted by those who would like to
| externalize their costs onto society. How do we fight
| corruption? It's a tough battle, but remember it has been
| done before. Tammany hall, etc.
| throwaway98797 wrote:
| it's dangerous to take advice from those with superlative ability
| if you are only slightly above average
|
| often times it's not for you
|
| be honest of your place in this world
|
| enjoy the luck you have it's better than most
| jacknews wrote:
| More self-serving feel-good from pg
|
| The way to make billions, or even millions, is OWNERSHIP.
|
| Own the profits or some of the profits of other people's hard
| work and creativity in some way, either directly or indirectly
| (eg property), or the promise of such profits (stocks), and trade
| that.
|
| That's not to say you shouldn't work hard or create, yourself.
| Just that hard work, creativity, etc, in and of itself, doesn't
| pay. It pays off when you work harder (or smarter, or just
| luckier) than other people, in order to win or create ownership,
| that other people will then contribute to. Just like pg did.
| tightbookkeeper wrote:
| If you make studio pottery you likely own everything, and still
| dont make money.
|
| Many FAANG employees are clearly in it for the money or status
| and have no real ownership. (Inb4 RSUs. They are treated as
| cash.)
|
| The Marxist analysis makes most sense in the context it came
| from - the Industrial Revolution where most economic value was
| concentrated in expensive machinery.
| ponector wrote:
| Their comment said to own other people's profit. And that is
| true: the only way to get really rich is to own results of
| work of millions other people. Like Musk, Zuckerberg or
| Mohammed bin Salman.
| tightbookkeeper wrote:
| And my comment argues why that's not true:
|
| - many people prioritizing money are workers
|
| - many (most?) owners are not making money
|
| So in the context of this essay "choosing ownership" is not
| the key career choice facing young people.
| breck wrote:
| I didn't find any new terms here, but it was a great synthesis of
| a lot of his work. I also really enjoy the shorter length of the
| recent essays.
|
| Here's my user test:
| https://news.pub/?try=https://www.loom.com/embed/9ac3f3b85fd...
| BohdanPetryshyn wrote:
| I'm young and at a pivotal point in my life, where I need to
| decide whether to remain in my well-paying job in software
| engineering or pursue my dream of becoming an entrepreneur. This
| article has deeply inspired me, hitting at just the right moment
| to encourage me to aim higher and take the leap.
| dv35z wrote:
| Two things to check out: (1) find out the best university in
| your area, and see if they have a business incubator. Check out
| their events page - there's usually something interesting
| happening in the next couple of weeks - go to it with an open
| mind! Creators, investors, students, entrepreneurs all in one
| spot. Meet the organizer, and find out what kind of workshops
| would be valuable, and consider running one! They will help
| promote you! Usually, they'll have a busy group chat (WhatsApp)
| - get in there and see what services people need / offer...
|
| (2) Find out if there is a community maker-space in your area,
| and take a tour. You'll meet some of the most creative,
| entrepreneurial people there, and you'll see up-close, what's
| possible with product prototyping these days - 3D printed
| ceramics, robotics, CNC wood carving bots, metal carving, etc -
| and computer/code labs!
|
| I ran a "Get your product on Shopify" workshop in a maker-
| space. It was tons of fun and high value - got people booted up
| with a custom domain name, photo of their product online, Buy
| it Now button, make a business card with a QR code. For
| software experts this kind of thing is easy (a couple of hours
| etc), but for most people - it can feel like an extremely
| complicated mission (managing DNS records, or adjusting a
| theme's CSS - super tricky!). Not that you need to go be a
| Shopify installer! But the point is that you can help turn
| someones dream into reality, and its satisfying for all
| involved.
|
| Best of luck in the next chapter of your journey!
| underdeserver wrote:
| Be an entrepreneur. If it's not for you, you'll know within a
| few years.
| shafyy wrote:
| Don't go all in. Try starting your business on the side and see
| how it goes for a while.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Note that Paul Graham has a vested interest in you doing that
| and he writes with that in mind.
| com2kid wrote:
| Work at a job that contributes highly to a retirement fund
| (401k o If in the USA) and after you have maxed our your
| retirement savings for at least 5, if not 10 years, then go
| ahead and do something else.
|
| If I had waited 3 more years before I tried to go the startup
| route I'd have another 200-300k in the bank right now and I
| would have the financial independence to do whatever I want for
| however long I want right now.
|
| Compound growth is amazing, take advantage of it while you are
| as young as possible.
| nuancebydefault wrote:
| Probably the culture of where I live is very different from the
| other side of the ocean, but... why is money such a big point in
| this article? I love my work and I'm decently paid and... I don't
| really want to be rich. With the given title, I would advocate
| for/stress on contentment rather than monetary richness.
| hnthr_w_y wrote:
| honestly, I want to be rich. I do make a decent living, but not
| enough to quit my job. At this rate I'll have to work until I'm
| 50 or 60, which is same as everyone else, so cry me a river,
| but even so, it would be nice to dedicate more time to hobby
| which at this rate I can at most dedicate a weekend to, but in
| practice it's a bit less because I have to go out with the wife
| and I have visit my family, etc. Most weeks I have a full day
| at most to pursue anything.
| nuancebydefault wrote:
| From what i understand my life is very similar as yours. One
| out of 7 seems not too shabby though.
|
| Maybe a cliche but... my advice would be to try to get most
| out of each simple experience. Today my spouse and kid went
| for a long walk together with me... while I could have been
| doing woodworking. I _tried_ to teach the kid the joy of
| walking without having too much on his mind. I also started
| conversations with strangers while waiting in the ice cream
| queue. There's always something to learn from that. I guess
| you by now understand my advocating for contentment.
| kragen wrote:
| this afternoon i couldn't have been doing woodworking
| because i don't have woodworking tools. that's not just
| because i can't afford them; my apartment is not really big
| enough for a woodworking shop, and i worry that the wiring
| might catch fire if i tried to plug in a high-powered saw.
| i'm having a hard time being content, despite going on a
| walk with my wife this morning and having lots of lovely
| conversations with strangers over the last three days,
| because the rent is due in two weeks and i'm nervous about
| whether i'll have enough. ever since i got covid for the
| third time in april, at which point i couldn't get
| paxlovid, i don't remember things like i used to. (i
| suspect that with enough money i could have gotten
| paxlovid.) also, my aunt is going to die soon, and i don't
| have the money to visit her before that
|
| i really wish i'd spent more effort on making, _and saving_
| , money 20 years ago. i wouldn't want to spend my life on
| it, and no amount of money will keep me from dying, but
| right now i'm spending a lot of my life coping with the
| consequences of not having it
| erik_seaberg wrote:
| Besides removing distractions, having more money raises the
| limits on what you can build before it needs to become self-
| sustaining. Retirement should be a consolation prize but not
| the entire goal.
| com2kid wrote:
| Because America has such a poor social safety net that it is
| very easy to go from well paid to homeless in just a few years.
|
| Accordingly, everyone is fighting to make enough money to not
| get fucked over during each of our cyclical "economic
| recessions". During each recession more and more people
| permanently fall into poverty and everyone who is left fights
| even harder to not be a victim the next time the economy goes
| south.
| tightbookkeeper wrote:
| In place of money, you can equally substitute status, prestige,
| or power.
|
| When it comes to young people choosing careers in the US the
| money choice is more prominent.
| dxbydt wrote:
| I don't want to lead with the mean retort that people who say
| they don't care about money often don't have any, so let me
| give you the kinder version - I think you come from a place of
| immense privilege. Either born in a first world country, or
| born to well off parents or in a rich society.
|
| otoh, Where I come from , we have a proverb that's hard to
| translate but describes our misery quite accurately - "we don't
| even have enough water to wipe our anus after we poop".
|
| So that's why I seek wealth. Not because I'm not content, or
| stressed out or whatever. Because the people I was born with,
| my cousins, brothers, relatives - they are still digging
| ditches. I am no smarter than them perhaps, but because I chose
| to pay a little extra attention at academics, atleast I have
| some money to buy some water so I can wash my butt after I
| poop.
|
| Don't hate on people who want money. The world outside your
| tiny bubble is very, very poor.
| thayne wrote:
| Consider who the author is: a wealthy investor for whom money
| is obviously very important.
| asdf6969 wrote:
| > why is money such a big point in this article?
|
| There's no such thing as a reasonable quality of life on an
| average income anymore. People who don't prioritize money will
| live like poor students for the rest of their lives renting
| with roommates. They will never have a family, healthcare,
| hobbies, or respect from their community.
|
| Stop pretending that not prioritizing money is an option. It's
| incredibly condescending. In most parts of most developed
| countries you need at least a top 20% income just to live with
| dignity.
| rr808 wrote:
| Same. I think PG and the bay area has been such a goldmine the
| last few decades most people in tech and VC driven by the
| rewards. Most people in American are somewhat more money driven
| than Europeans, but most are relatively content than the Bay
| Area population.
| euvin wrote:
| Can someone help me understand the first footnote?
|
| >[1] These examples show why it's a mistake to assume that
| economic inequality must be evidence of some kind of brokenness
| or unfairness. It's obvious that different people have different
| interests, and that some interests yield far more money than
| others, so how can it not be obvious that some people will end up
| much richer than others? In a world where some people like to
| write enterprise software and others like to make studio pottery,
| economic inequality is the natural outcome.
|
| Yes, clearly different passions lead to different industries
| which mean different economic outcomes.
|
| But when people talk about "fairness", it usually means quality
| of life right? The ability to afford good healthcare, high
| quality food, housing, security, providing for a family, social
| opportunities. How are we defining fairness?
|
| I have no idea of how to solve this or create the perfect utopia,
| btw. I'm just confused on the point of the footnote.
| Mahsaaden wrote:
| i think it's pretty clear what pg means. more useful products =
| more money = better outcomes in life. no one wants more pins
| and posters of some artist's OCs, they want software that helps
| the world and actually changes lives for the better. studio
| pottery won't do that.
| euvin wrote:
| To be clear, I like the idea of making something really
| useful and being rewarded from bettering other people's
| lives. I don't doubt that if you make something really useful
| for the world, you can gain a lot from it.
|
| But when people talk about fairness, (I assume) they're
| usually thinking about the successful scammers, predatory
| practices, people not contributing to the world yet profiting
| a lot from it. They may also think about "essential workers"
| who, in contrast, may live paycheck to paycheck.
|
| It becomes blurrier to me when I think about who "deserves"
| what.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I've written software that has had a _big_ impact, on a lot
| of lives. I 'm still doing it.
|
| I haven't been paid a dime for it, and I'm quite happy with
| that.
|
| I don't think PG, or any VCs would be at all interested in my
| work. They might like the work, itself, but it's not gonna
| make anyone rich.
| ensignavenger wrote:
| I hear a lot of focus on money and not just quality of life.
| One issue with quality of life is that as you improve it for
| the bottom, the expecations of what a minimal quality should be
| tend to go up. So you may never really "solve" it, but that
| doesn't mean we shouldn't be continually trying to improve.
| kpw94 wrote:
| > But when people talk about "fairness", it usually means
| quality of life right?
|
| Seems you're focusing on the Floor whereas pg refers to a
| Ceilings?
|
| It's normal that enterprise sales lovers ends up as taller
| poppies than pottery lovers. You could take it a step further
| and say: it's normal than Tom Brady and Ronaldo ends up rich
| but mediocre football players make $0 from football, even
| though both have interest in football.
|
| That's the typical Ikigai diagram stuff: if someone's "what you
| love" naturally aligns with "what you can be paid for", pg
| point is that this person will be richer. (On top of this, if
| someone's "what you're good at" also aligns naturally with
| "what you can be paid for", they'll also be richer).
|
| But you're approaching a different question: do pottery lovers
| have a good enough quality of life? Do they deserve one if
| nobody needs any of their pottery stuff?
|
| Does everyone's deserve a good quality of life regardless of
| what their passion is? What about people with antisocial
| passions (crime, exploiting others etc)?
| euvin wrote:
| I think you make a really good point at the end, that those
| with antisocial and pathological passions shouldn't be
| encouraged for the sake of societal health. They can really
| make a huge profit if done in a certain way, right?
| Exploiting others like using dark patterns or scams
| definitely can reap huge rewards.
|
| As a layman, I'm curious to know what you and others think
| about what standards should be held to meet the floor, what
| standards should be held to reach the ceiling.
| wnc3141 wrote:
| It's good to know people crawling themselves out of poverty
| just lack the right hobbies
| WorkerBee28474 wrote:
| I know you're being sarcastic, but there is truth to that.
| Without judgement, it is well-documented that those in
| poverty will spend, as a proportion of their income, 20 or 30
| times as much on lottery tickets as someone who is rich. Now
| they have their reasons, I think a lottery ticket lets one
| dream what life could be like, at least until the draw
| happens, but the truth is their financial situation could be
| much better if they chose a different hobby.
| tshaddox wrote:
| Also I bet there is extreme income inequality among studio
| potters. Could even be more unequal than the overall
| population.
| f3dora wrote:
| new twist on capitalist pitch: "There are even some people who
| have a genuine intellectual interest in making money. This is
| distinct from mere greed. They just can't help noticing when
| something is mispriced, and can't help doing something about it.
| It's like a puzzle for them."
|
| the older Paul gets, he sounds just like rest of his club mates!
| shafyy wrote:
| The mask is coming off
| ponector wrote:
| Better that way than usual startup bullshit about changing the
| world to a better place.
| WorkerBee28474 wrote:
| I'm someone who is not rich but is interested in capital
| markets. My net worth is less than USD 100,000 and I spend
| hours each week downloading market data, looking for trade
| ideas, writing scripts, running statistical tests, implementing
| trading strategies, and analyzing the results.
|
| I expect to be quite well off someday as a result of this
| hobby, but for now it's just an interest.
| smokel wrote:
| From an investors perspective looking at a group of people with
| randomly distributed interests, it seems like great advice to
| motivate each and every one of them to pursue their interest with
| all their energy and waste their lives on it. Some might get
| lucky and make the world a better place.
|
| From the perspective of an individual who only gets assigned one
| or a few subjects to be interested in, not knowing whether these
| will bring fortune or not, not so useful advice. Chances are that
| you will fail, lose money and friends, and forget to spend time
| with your loved ones.
| shafyy wrote:
| I gladens me to see that the sentiment here on HN is getting
| increasingly critical of PG and other VCs and Silicon Valley
| figures. Let's just hope that PG doesn't decide to pull the plug
| on HN some day.
| smokel wrote:
| Aren't we the court jesters who entertain them with our wit, or
| the court scientists who provide them with early insights into
| which technologies will be worth investing in?
| tightbookkeeper wrote:
| > you don't know what makes you happy, what the various kinds of
| work are really like, or how well you could do them
|
| A very succinct explanation of complex emotional challenge.
| ergonaught wrote:
| If you aren't young, you aren't worth Paul taking a moment to
| write a sentence about you, though, so go to hell.
|
| Apparently.
| yayitswei wrote:
| He's targeting a particular audience in this essay. Doesn't
| mean he hates everyone else. In fact, in other essays he says
| that being an older founder can actually be an advantage in
| some ways.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| When friends say they are "going to start a business", I ask them
| "Why? Do you know why, do you know what your goal is?".
|
| In most cases people can't really explain exactly why, and that's
| fine and normal. Only after years of being in business did
| certain things come clear to me. Are you there to make money, to
| follow your passion, to succeed with something, anything, to own
| your own time and life? The naive might say "all of the above",
| but they are not compatible.
|
| You may find that you care more about owning your own time than
| working on stuff you are passionate about.
|
| I've seen quite a few people start a business to work on
| something they are passionate about and then go out of business,
| when they COULD have stayed in business if they had been prepared
| to make money doing stuff they didn't love. What is more
| important in this case, being in business or doing stuff you
| love?
| cushychicken wrote:
| _Don 't wait. Don't wait till the end of college to figure out
| what to work on. Don't even wait for internships during college.
| You don't necessarily need a job doing x in order to work on x;
| often you can just start doing it in some form yourself._
|
| What silly advice. I didn't even know my "what to work on"
| existed until I was near the end of my junior year of college. XD
| euvin wrote:
| I took that phrase to mean "don't be blocked by any
| institution, person, or societal expectation to pursue what's
| interesting to you". Could be casual research, a cursory
| glance, or a deep internal investigation of yourself.
|
| Which is always good to start as soon as you're aware of it.
| It's fine if you figure it out near the end of your junior
| year, your first job, or a midlife crisis. "Best time to start
| was yesterday, 2nd best is now" type of thing.
| abhaynayar wrote:
| > One useful trick for judging different kinds of work is to look
| at who your colleagues will be. You'll become like whoever you
| work with. Do you want to become like these people?
|
| Reminded me of this gem: https://moxie.org/2013/01/07/career-
| advice.html
| hypertexthero wrote:
| Also of this interview at Slashdot:
|
| > Please, don't spend your late teens or early twenties in
| front of your computer at a startup. If you're a young person,
| I think the very best thing you could do is get together with a
| group of friends and commit to a one year experiment in which
| the substantial part of your life will be focused on discovery
| and not be dedicated to wage work - however that looks for you.
| Get an instrument, learn three chords, and go on tour; find a
| derelict boat and cross an ocean; hitchhike to Alaska; build a
| fleet of dirigibles; construct a UAV that will engage with the
| emerging local police UAVs; whatever - but make it count.
|
| -- Moxie Marlinspike
| https://interviews.slashdot.org/story/11/12/19/179256/moxie-...
| _dark_matter_ wrote:
| We don't deserve Moxie. What an inspiration
| Alacart wrote:
| While I agree that would be great for many people, how are
| 99% of young people supposed to survive during this time? How
| do they pay their rent, buy groceries, and pay for these
| explorations without wage work?
| alexashka wrote:
| Work is what you do to keep society and your place in it going.
|
| Hence it's an intersection of what society needs and what you are
| capable of.
|
| The issue with modern degenerate society is that nobody'll tell
| you what society needs - you're supposed to figure it out through
| gossip.
|
| This is extremely stupid.
|
| People who write articles attempting to solve collective problems
| at an individual level are blaming the victim _and_ giving
| terrible advice without realizing it. So it goes.
| theGnuMe wrote:
| Well the reason is that nobody knows what society needs... or
| stated differently, what ends up being useful is non-obvious.
| So you can't plan it outside of some general parameters.
| asdf6969 wrote:
| Extremely out of touch and not useful at all. He needs to learn
| how to tell when he has something important to say and when he's
| just yapping. How can he think making just a little bit of money
| is even an option? I have a very high income and I still can't
| afford a home. I can't even imagine how terrible my life would be
| if I took risks.
| msvan wrote:
| This is because you chose to live an expensive life. Most of
| the world gets by on less.
| asdf6969 wrote:
| I spend around 25% of my income
| Sebb767 wrote:
| > I have a very high income and I still can't afford a home
|
| This is only true if you limit your choices of homes to popular
| areas. Homes out in the country are usually easy to come by,
| especially with the salary of someone working in tech. Now, if
| you want to live in a big city, this is obviously not true, but
| this is arguably a livestyle choice to spend money, which you
| then need to earn [0]. If you love farming more than anything,
| moving to flyover country and make your living doing that is
| entirely possible, which is the point PG is making.
|
| [0] I don't mean to say that the housing bubble is not a bad
| situation, but this does not invalidate the argument.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-29 23:00 UTC)