Do not remain nameless to yourself (1966) • Hacker News Board

Re: Do not remain nameless to yourself (1966)

#121

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

essayist wrote: post #120

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah. Thanks for the correction. I will note that. Yeah, that's why I said "I think." LOTS of misattributed quotes out there. My fave is "Don't believe everything you read on the Internet." -Abraham Lincoln. UPDATED TO ADD: I preface my Medium posts[0] with quotes, and those, I tend to research a bit more exhaustively. One of my entries[1] is prefaced by the quote "A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships a…

My mother's favorite actor, singing a song whose German lyrics include "a ship isn't designed just to lie in the harbor; it needs to sail out to the open sea", and other more scandalous metaphors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqzX-uZUtI4

Boy, he had great teeth!

Re: Do not remain nameless to yourself (1966)

#122

Post by dorkwood » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:58 AM UTC

munchbunny wrote: post #118

dorkwood wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your playing small doesn't serve the world. There's nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. Is this really true? I've always felt that people are more likely to open up and be themselves if I demonstrate that I'm a bit unsure of myself, too. Don't get me wrong, I _hate_ when someone presents their work by saying "here's my poor attempt at X, it isn't very good" (whic…

Is this really true? I've always felt that people are more likely to open up and be themselves if I demonstrate that I'm a bit unsure of myself, too. I think the key is that you shouldn't need to shrink. You can be competent and still have weaknesses that you openly acknowledge. And you can play with how you present those weaknesses, but that shouldn't require you to think less of yourself or to present yourself as l…

I think my interpretation was a little bit different on the first read. But looking back at the original quote, it does say "playing small" -- as in, pretending to be smaller than you are. I agree with you that that shouldn't be necessary.

Re: Do not remain nameless to yourself (1966)

#123

Post by mam2 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 4:12 PM UTC

mysterypie wrote: post #75

I’d like to know what the modern substitute is for long personal letters like Feynman’s? It’s not just Feynman; look at this list from the featured website: > written correspondence includes letters from: Jane Austen, Richard Burton, Helen Keller, Alan Turing, Albus Dumbledore, Eleanor Roosevelt, Henry James, Sylvia Plath, John Lennon, Gerald Durrell, Janis Joplin, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Hunter S. Thompson, C. G. J…

Long letters have no value. You can find depth in long back and forth discussions because there is an actual exchange. Long letter were conveying / creating little value compared to the amount of words they are using.

As said president macron about a philosopher "he was light because he was profound" (ligth in the french sense of not being "heavy" / painfully laborious and annoying).

Learn the value of saying less.

Re: Do not remain nameless to yourself (1966)

#124

Post by dhruvparamhans » Thu, Jul 16, 2020, 10:22 AM UTC

eldavido wrote: post #112

a1369209993 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> used to solve hundreds and hundreds of classical mechanics problems for fun , in his spare time. [emphasis added] You kind of missed your own (or possibly your professor's) point there: being great at something is a matter (in part) not just of putting in the work, but of having the inclination and motivation to put in so much work. If you think of it as "all the toil that gets you to that level", you're not the ki…

A lesson I learned too late. You have to be willing to do the work, yes, but also figure out what you really, really like doing, and then do it -- a lot. Over, and over, and over, for years or even decades.

A lot of times its simply difficult to find what one really likes doing. But I agree that ones who do end up "succeeding" really follow the template you propose here.

That being said, running after high remuneration in and of itself isn't bad. Sometimes its just what you have to do because a lot of other people depend on it.

Re: Do not remain nameless to yourself (1966)

#125

Post by LordHumungous » Sun, Jul 19, 2020, 5:25 AM UTC

a1369209993 wrote: post #110

LordHumungous wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a physics professor who liked to point out that Feynman (who we all idolized as college students studying physics) used to solve hundreds and hundreds of classical mechanics problems for fun, in his spare time. These were the same homework problems that we hated doing and always complained about. The professor's point was, being great at something isn't just a matter of having a big powerful brain, it's also a…

> used to solve hundreds and hundreds of classical mechanics problems for fun , in his spare time. [emphasis added] You kind of missed your own (or possibly your professor's) point there: being great at something is a matter (in part) not just of putting in the work, but of having the inclination and motivation to put in so much work. If you think of it as "all the toil that gets you to that level", you're not the ki…

Sure, I guess that's one way to look at it.