> It does, usually, mean that someone wanted to give you money for some reason Isn't that the definition of participation in the economy? You created goods, or provided services, or arranged for goods to be created or services provided, and in exchange people give you money? Cases where people are given money without in some way earning it are far in the minority.
> You created goods, or provided services, or arranged for goods to be created or services provided, or drank with someone on a regular basis, or married one of their relatives,
It's almost like building social connections and establishing trust with other people is important to later being trusted in other contexts!
TIL: Didn’t know I was stupid for having different goals than starting a family. In non mockery voice: I think there is nothing wrong in being smart and perusing academic titles, wealth or recognition. Can’t I be happy travelling the world because I have so much passive income that I don’t care how much I spend? Can’t I be happy running megacorporation without a child?
If that makes you happy then fine, but it's wrong to assume that it's the ultimate goal for everyone to be mega rich. Honestly it's a very common mistake for people to be totally sure that everyone in the world desires to be rich and famous
I think it was Naval Ravikant who said recently that the ideal is to be rich or financially independent enough to not worry too much, + anonymous. Rich AND famous is a never-ending nightmare and poor + famous is pretty much the worst outcome because you have such reduced freedom and privacy and don't know who your real friends are.
I don't care about being kicked out of the 9-zero club or whatever, I just want to lay about all day or if I want to take a week trip to Kenya or Moscow... and NO BOSS
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment, but of all the dreams to pin your critique on, I’d recommend not using travel or public service. While there is definitely consumerist travel of the Instagram variety and plenty of misguided philanthropy, there’s a beautiful baby in that bathwater.
There is, for sure. But we certainly have a tendency to dream of taking that great leap and saving all the children in Africa etc. I do see people from richer countries and families actually doing it, and posing with the African kids in Kenya on Facebook pretending it's something other than a vacation. (There are some articles on how this help is often useless or even positively counterproductive, only offset by the…
to add to your interesting points:
"If you reject the food ignore the customs fear the religion and avoid the people you might better stay at home." - James Michener?
I think this is sadly very true - trying to actually be a kind person really limits how well you can play "the game". There's no good solution to this either - if there was more kindness in the world, then that would just create even more opportunities for the people playing the game to get ahead, because they would have more victims to exploit.
There is an old joke about the game: Capitalism believes you can win the game. Communism believes you can tie the game. Religion believes that you can quit the game. But they are all wrong, because you can't win, you can't break even, and you can't even quit the game.
Aha! but the way to win is not to play the game! Sorry, couldn't resist the dad joke.
It's perfectly fine not to be informed (or interested!) in most topics. It only becomes dangerous when you're uninformed but trust your own opinion more than the experts. Popular examples are climate change, or the COVID-19 response.
SO we are to be ruled by experts? Show me the model produced by he experts that has been right? Show me the science behind the idea of quarantining the entire population in order to slow the spread of Covid-19. There is science behind quarantining sick people - but not healthy people. Show me the science behind the social distancing - 6 foot rule? I mean really - where IS the science to those things? These experts ar…
Hi! I am not sure about your background--which matters for explanation. I cannot speak to 6 feet in particular, but the basic idea starts with the assumption that the primary vector is large respiratory droplets. If that's the case, imagine you are a droplet. You are acted upon by gravity and by air/temperature. As you move along, you will fall. At some distance, most droplets above a certain size will have settled. That's the basic reasoning. You can argue about the particular cutoff, but the bigger question is how relevant aerosols are. But, the problem is that in the early spread of a virus, the growth in infections is very fast. Someone has to guess. If you wait for perfect knowledge, a lot of people will die because you are taking a linear approach to an exponentiatial problem.
Whenever you see someone who you believe to be an idiot succeeding, it usually means they're really good at the game and you don't even understand what the game is .
So Trump is really good at the political game, for instance?
Absolutely. But the game we use to choose a president does not seem to be at all related to the actual job of president.
Piracy in 2020 is more polished than first party streaming platforms.
I think content acquisition still has several hurdles as well as the pipelines of your favorite metadata scraper isn't exactly trivial to setup. The actual software, once installed is really nice (I have a Plex Server + Infuse on an Apple TV), but in my case I still pay for content (via usenet).
There is software that has already done this for you, no need to configure anything, just open the app, search the title, and start watching.
Idiot usually means someone who doesn't know basic facts or has trouble anticipating consequences for their actions. But I think part of GPs comment was to note that the concept of idiot needs to be readdressed. For example, if your hypothetical person has a family network (just another tool; but a v. good one!) that helps them, then they choose to either stick with their family or try to strike out on their own. We'…
I have never, ever, once in my life ever heard anyone say "Isn't that person smart, they managed to get their dad to give them a job"
And maybe one could respect people who go their own way to get out of their family's shadow so they can be seen as making it on their own. But if that's not the game then both people are 'idiots' (in this thought experiment).
I agree, but luckily everyone is born with the ability to define what success means to them.
No idea why this would be downvoted, this is absolutely true - there is not just one version of what a successful life looks like. Deciding how you define success is a principle part of forming yourself as a person.
While this sounds great, it's a bit like when people say you can "choose what to believe". You cannot, in fact, choose what to believe. You either believe something or you don't. Similarly, with feeling successful, you either do feel that or you don't. It's not really under your control.
But what you can do is realise that things aren't always under your control so not to worry about them. Instead just concentrate on things you do have and things you can do. You have the power to be useful to society so do that. You have the power to do good things so do it. How you feel doesn't really matter.