Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 269 posts

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#111

Post by carlzlhu »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #89

- Shiny things are nowhere as much fun after you get them as before, even if they have some value. So yes, that Kindle or iPad or whatever will have a real use, and you will be marginally happier with it than without, but not as much as you think - You can talk yourself into (or out of) anything. The only difference between smart people and other people is that smart people do this with bigger words and more complex…

From this 36 year old, thank you for this wonderful note reinforcing my own thoughts and hard-earned lessons this last 16 years. I am in complete agreement with all of your points.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#112

Post by thecircusb0y »

lionhearted wrote: post #65
leelin wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird, isn't your comment a bit self-contradicting? Above the fold: "Stop the loser talk. You can learn from others' mistakes. Your fate is not sealed." Below the fold: "Track record is king. It's all DNA. People don't change. Your fate is sealed." FWIW, I tend to agree more with your below-the-fold views based on most people I've met.

> Below the fold: "Track record is king. It's all DNA. People don't change. Your fate is sealed." You read it wrong - it's not about DNA or fate. It's about what a person has done recently. It's a good predictor of what they're going to do next. As soon as someone changes for real, they build a new and healthy track record. In general, you should weight a person's actions - track record - over what they say. It's a p…

Isn't it possible that a person will act the same based on track record because their environment is always the same and therefore there isn't an incentive to change their habits, especially if they are unaware of this? People can change enough to make a big difference when their eyes are opened and they realize what really matters in life. I've seen it happen.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#113

Post by dhimes »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #89

- Shiny things are nowhere as much fun after you get them as before, even if they have some value. So yes, that Kindle or iPad or whatever will have a real use, and you will be marginally happier with it than without, but not as much as you think - You can talk yourself into (or out of) anything. The only difference between smart people and other people is that smart people do this with bigger words and more complex…

Excellent reply (as usual) by DBM, but I disagree with this:

Concentrate on your weaknesses. Make them stronger. When you get to your 30s you can work from your strengths, but there has to be some time in your life to work on shit you suck at, and for me it was when I had the most motivation, my 20s.

Concentrate on your strengths, even at this age. Peter Drucker's argument sold me: If you work on your weaknesses, the best you can be is, if you're lucky, acceptable. If you on your strengths, however, you have your best shot at being outstanding. You'll also have more mental energy for the fight.

I wish that, in my twenties, (1) I knew this, and (2) I had the balls to be brutally honest with myself about what my strengths and weaknesses were.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#114

Post by portman »

duopixel wrote: post #7

Being too cocky about the experience and depth of knowledge I had at the time. I was a big fish in a small pond, and I outperformed my peers, but on once you go up the professional ladder you realize how little you know.

I 100% agree, and would summarize as "You are not as good as you think you are".

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1209119

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#115

Post by cookiecaper »

chegra wrote: post #109
cookiecaper wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sports stars are something of an unusual situation. Things like instability generate publicity for the given player and his team. Rodman was good for the Bulls because: a. the Bulls is show business; people pay to see characters like Rodman b. celebrity tabloids/news pick up on "unstable" behavior and make a show out of it, which is good publicity and marketing for the subjects c. a long-term steady relationship is n…

[I didn't downvote you, I think you are making some valid points] What I'm trying to point out is not paint with broad strokes. But evaluate everything and everyone independently of rules. Flaws of people admired: 1) Gandhi - Racist 2) Martin Luther King - Copy someone's work for his phd. Also an adulterer. 3) Edgar Allan Poe - So disrespectful that he was disowned by his guardians. 4) Tesla - Hated fat people. 5) St…

Thanks for not downvoting me.

Again, it's not about finding "flawless" or "perfect" people. We all know these people don't exist. It's just about paying attention to a few basic moral imperatives, namely integrity; if a person has a history of adultery, that person is not likely to be a trustworthy resource. That person is willing to destroy the lives and hearts of his family for fleeting personal sexual gain. Why do you think such a person wouldn't be willing to trade the well-being of your company or other employees if the right personal incentives materialized? An adulterer is pretty much the most selfish kind of person you can find.

Of course adulterers and other people can still do good things. Everyone is capable of doing good. I am merely saying that I wouldn't invest the resources into hiring an adulterer because adulterers prove that they are suspicious and untrustworthy by committing adultery. There are plenty of non-adulterers out there that are safer investments, even if it costs me a bit of CPU time.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#116

Post by scotty79 »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #89

- Shiny things are nowhere as much fun after you get them as before, even if they have some value. So yes, that Kindle or iPad or whatever will have a real use, and you will be marginally happier with it than without, but not as much as you think - You can talk yourself into (or out of) anything. The only difference between smart people and other people is that smart people do this with bigger words and more complex…

I think experiences are highly overrated. What I've seen, done or felt quickly gets pale and fades into the background.

For me nothing can replace learning new interesting things and understanding new interesting concepts.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#117

Post by portman »

ido wrote: post #106
torpor wrote: post #34

A couple things from this forty-year old: 1. If you want to have kids, do it sooner rather than later. The sooner you have them, the better: they grow up so fast, you'll still have time in your 40's to enjoy life with them as teenagers, if you're lucky. If you leave it too late, you'll be pretty disconnected from their teen lives, and hell .. what 40-year old doesn't enjoy the odd jaunt with their teenage kids, eh? I…

1. If you want to have kids, do it sooner rather than later. My issue is that kids cost a lot of money, which means you lose quite a lot of flexibility. I want to start my own business within the foreseeable future (probably 1-2 years, currently saving money, gathering contacts and getting more on-the-job experience in the field I want to operate in). Right now I know that if I save 20k Euros that could easily last m…

I have a 3 year old, a 2 year old, an 8 week old, and a startup.

Having kids has no impact on having your own business. They're completely orthogonal. Using that as an excuse for not having kids makes as much sense as saying "I don't want to eat tacos for dinner because I want to have my own business."

Note: I'm not responding directly to your comment; I'm responding to the somewhat pervasive idea on HN that kids are a substitute for startups.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#119

Post by jpdbaugh »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #89

- Shiny things are nowhere as much fun after you get them as before, even if they have some value. So yes, that Kindle or iPad or whatever will have a real use, and you will be marginally happier with it than without, but not as much as you think - You can talk yourself into (or out of) anything. The only difference between smart people and other people is that smart people do this with bigger words and more complex…

"If you are changing and getting better, that means you are changing friends too. This was very difficult for me, but you can't hang out with the same folks and expect to become a better person. There are exceptions, of course, but to a large degree your life is controlled by whom you choose to be friends and hang out with. Be aware that you don't want to be the same person at 30 as you were at 20. I'm not saying be an asshole -- keep being friendly by all means -- but be very careful who you hold yourself up against as "normal""

As a guy in my early 20s from a small rural town that I lived in my whole life I can really relate to this. My best friends from home aren't planning on leaving and there just isn't really a place there for me. I think I sort of ruined college for myself because I didn't go far away despite going to a good school and I never really branched out because I could just go hang out with my "home" friends. It really crippled my four years. For this summer of my junior year I decided to move a few hours away to where it isn't convenient to drive home. The problem is I am trying to meet new people but that is definitely a problem in itself.

Re: Ask HN: What were your naivetés in your twenties?

#120

Post by eagleal »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #95
edanm wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"In a way I find it very disturbing, that we need to learn how to parent our children." Really? Why? I've never understood why people look at parenting differently than any other skill you have to learn.

>I've never understood why people look at parenting differently than any other skill you have to learn. Parenting should be assimilated (learnt if you like) gradually over time from those around you. Humans IMO function best as family groups within a [close-knit] tribal system: under such a regime one learns from one's own parents, parents of peers, parents of younger children, older intra-generation peers and peers…

From experience I've seen that this "learn by your parents" is truly starting to be weak in the Western "thinking" countries. Poor countries on the other hand use this a lot.

I was raised in a post-communist Albania, and people weren't influenced by consumerism. It was a more warm-environment for the child to grow. My sister was raised in Italy (during 00'). Between me and my sister, assuming the same age, I would learn better from my parents then her.

Post reply on HN