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

Poor in Tech

megelison.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 817 posts

Re: Poor in Tech

#691

Post by curi0sity »

proxyon wrote: post #504
SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But when you put kids from poor parents into rich households they will continue to do poorly. Have you considered it’s because being a poor child is itself a traumatic experience that isn’t magically cured by being ripped away from family and put into an environment of material abundance?

> Have you considered it’s because being a poor child is itself a traumatic experience that isn’t magically cured by being ripped away from family and put into an environment of material abundance? What you've said is unfalsifiable voodoo mumbo-jumbo. Even if someone proved you wrong here and started the experiment with the poor child at newborn level, which is what people do when these bad faith criticisms are lobbe…

> inherited generational trauma

https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/epigenetics.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

Re: Poor in Tech

#692

Post by golergka »

Grustaf wrote: post #466
SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, she’s point out that no one treated her like a thief. Previous workplaces treated her like a thief because she was poor.

OK, if it was me my reaction to that would just be relief and gratitude. "Oh how nice middle class life is, I will do my best to remain here. I probably shouldn't steal."

That's what I thought this post was about...

Re: Poor in Tech

#693

Post by dang »

kingsuper20 wrote: post #493
lovegoblin wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should be a better person than you are being here.

In the interest of harvesting downvotes, I'd have to say that I'm bored with people like Ms. Elison. Looking at this essay, and at the summaries of her books, she's obviously in the grievance porn business. 'Poor in tech' is a real thing but needs a better champion. Shout out to the few still-sane folks out there.

Can you please stop posting personal attacks to HN? It's not what this site is for, and you've done it more than once recently.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.

Re: Poor in Tech

#694

Post by umeshunni »

avancemos wrote: post #7

Instead of seeing the bright side of life, in which this person clearly vastly improved their situation in life, all they can see is what they don’t have. “I knew I was the only poor person at my tech startup because I had the only fat body in the building.” I’m sorry, but no, being poor doesn’t make you fat. Your eating choices make you fat. Poor people have agency too. Agency is not something you buy. This is comin…

Am I the only one who realizes that this is a work of fiction. This is the author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meg_Elison

Re: Poor in Tech

#695

Post by umeshunni »

GuB-42 wrote: post #681

I started to sympathize and even being admirative at times, then it got darker. One word: theft. Taking advantage of free snacks, fine, it is what they are for. Taking stuff back home is borderline but ok. Not handing back the $350 headphones because no one is looking, definitely not ok. The way she described the situation as "everyone is rich so no need to lock thing up and check everything" instead of "people trust…

This is a work of fiction (The author is a novelist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meg_Elison )

Re: Poor in Tech

#696

Post by proxyon »

curi0sity wrote: post #691
proxyon wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you considered it’s because being a poor child is itself a traumatic experience that isn’t magically cured by being ripped away from family and put into an environment of material abundance? What you've said is unfalsifiable voodoo mumbo-jumbo. Even if someone proved you wrong here and started the experiment with the poor child at newborn level, which is what people do when these bad faith criticisms are lobbe…

> inherited generational trauma https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/epigenetics.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

I don't see how this points at evidence of inter-generational trauma which to my knowledge is recognized as bullshit voodoo. Can you explain where it does so?

Re: Poor in Tech

#697

Post by proxyon »

MattRix wrote: post #684
proxyon wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did you grow up poor, as she did? If not, then you are missing the important context of what it’s like to grow up in a food scarce environment. Yes I did and I'm still not obese.

Statistically it’s much more likely that you are.

Because statistically poor people who remain poor have poor impulse control, prioritize short term pleasure and make bad decisions. Like many people who escaped poverty, I am not poor because lacking these traits elevated me out of poverty.

Re: Poor in Tech

#698

Post by buescher »

sokoloff wrote: post #663
buescher wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not compare it to a car you scrounged for free? I mean, I'm not just arguing with you to win points. I was you. By the way. there are other problems with your math: you're double-booking the cost of the payment and the depreciation of the car. Really, play around with a total cost of ownership calculator like Edmunds'. It will be enlightening. Let's look at the F-150, the most popular vehicle in America. For the…

One problem with that calculator is that it "rings up" the depreciation after 5 years, in effect assuming you'd sell the car at that point. Much of the savings here are driven by keeping the functional car for 10+ years, not having to carry collision insurance on a car that's too expensive to write off, paying less in transaction costs and taxes, etc. It's not the calculator is "wrong" in answering the question it as…

Yeah, if you want to take it out past 5 years, you can make your own estimates. You just won't have the benefit of Edmunds' data. You are right that you will save on transaction costs if you do not buy a newer car every five years. You're also a bit of a special case in that it seems you only put about 5,000 miles per year on a car. I'd estimate your TCO on that car to be about $2K/year, which is pretty frugal. It wouldn't make sense for you to buy a new car, because you'd be losing depreciation to age faster than you'd be wearing the car out. At 20 years, you'd have only 100,000 miles on a car that would be essentially fully depreciated.

It is pretty tough, though, to get the cost of ownership on a car driven 15,000 miles/year below about $3,500/year. By comparison a new compact will be $5k to $6K per year in total cost of ownership. So if you are wondering why gold doubloons are not accumulating in the chests in your basement that much faster than they are for the guy who drives a new Honda Civic, that's why!

Re: Poor in Tech

#699

Post by artem247 »

bluecalm wrote: post #674
jschwartzi wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of at least one society that formed in the 1930's for which this was an absolute mandate! But I don't recall reading much about them past about 1945, so perhaps you should do some further research.

Yeah and welfare programs and heavy redistribution programs were tried by a society that caused several times more deaths and suffering than the one you mentioned over way longer period which we don't hear from anymore either. What kind of argument is that, seriously.

Oh shit! Several times more? Maybe you should actually read some actual data about Soviet Union. Saying that Soviet Union caused more suffering over longer period of time than Nazi Germany is way off.

And by the way - free healthcare and free higher education are actually very good things that worked like a charm.

I hope you will not have children, also.

Re: Poor in Tech

#700

Post by 2cb »

908B64B197 wrote: post #670
isomorph wrote: post #116

Many of the comments on this article are so cold. I can’t believe it. When I read the original article I was imagining all the constructive ways HN readers would interpret it and hold a mirror up to their own behaviour. Some commenters are doing this. But it surprises and depresses me how many people are commenting saying “no, this list isn’t what it says it is, it’s a list showing the author has a negative mindset /…

> you can't buy your way out of the mindset, or snap your fingers / empty the cache / cycle the power the way the average HN commenter seems to think you can. Reading the list, most of them are pretty harmless if not annoying. But one struck me as something completely different: > I knew I was the only poor person at my tech startup because I was afraid to seek mentorship from anyone above me, convinced that even ask…

But I don’t see what insecurity around asking for help or mentoring has to do with wealth or lack thereof?

This to me sounds more like an issue of shyness or low self-esteem than anything to do with money or class.

I think the same of a fair few other items on that list as well.

Post reply on HN