Live data from Hacker News

The most precious resource is agency

simonsarris.substack.com

211–220 of 340 posts

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just applied for a regular job. Because to be honest, it’s gonna be pretty sweet having a fat bank account, even if it’ll take till I’m 50 to have FU money. You will never have FU money working a regular job.

15 years ago a young engineer i worked with overheard me say "getting rich is a pretty easy formula if you are patient." he came to me later and asked me to expound. i told him "the formula is: spend less than you make and invest the left over. you do that long enough and you'll become wealthy." i also told him "from what i can tell, it will happen so gradually that you'll barely notice a difference in your lifestyle…

What is the point of this story? This will objectively never happen for anyone with a ”regular” job, I.e. anywhere within 1 standard deviation or less of the median income.

Also, counting a home’s net worth in assets does not make sense to me unless you can afford to greatly downsize at anytime and the market is liquid.

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#212
post #206
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just cut out avocado toast and now I'm well on my way to 150k!

How much is an avocado in the US?

About $0.60 for a small one, up to $1.20 for a large one.

Parent is referencing this joke: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/avocado-toast

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just applied for a regular job. Because to be honest, it’s gonna be pretty sweet having a fat bank account, even if it’ll take till I’m 50 to have FU money. You will never have FU money working a regular job.

15 years ago a young engineer i worked with overheard me say "getting rich is a pretty easy formula if you are patient." he came to me later and asked me to expound. i told him "the formula is: spend less than you make and invest the left over. you do that long enough and you'll become wealthy." i also told him "from what i can tell, it will happen so gradually that you'll barely notice a difference in your lifestyle…

Brian! Long time no see my man. HN is a small world ;-)

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#214

One of the biggest tragedies isn't just that the childhood is wasted, but that many people never learn to have agency once it is available. I'm not saying you need to start your own business or anything like that, but it seems like most people live their lives never questioning the scripts that are given to them. The basic life script we all seem to have in western society seems pretty awful when you think critically…

> The basic life script we all seem to have in western society seems pretty awful when you think critically about it. Not if you've studied much history. Modern western society is awesome compared to what nearly all of our ancestors lived through. Wanting more is good, but denigrating things that nearly anyone from history would kill for doesn't sound right.

Depends. There is a lot of the bad mixed with the good.

Rich societies (not just Western ones) seem unable to reproduce themselves - the TFR has gone south of 2 pretty much everywhere, with interesting exceptions (Iceland, Israel). That means that our lifestyle is incompatible with long term survival.

We also have a huge, huge health problem that might directly be caused by abundance of food. Metabolic diseases. Just count all the fat people you meet during a 10 minute walk downtown. Many of them are young and already on their way over the 300 pound mark.

I am not even starting a rant about how algorithms hijack our emotions and manipulate our behavior online.

Humans aren't necessarily built for the world we created. Yes, many things are obviously good: not dying of cholera at the age of 2, for example. But there definitely are things to denigrate in our daily life script. And we must acknowledge these downsides if we ever want to get rid of them.

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#215
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The basic life script we all seem to have in western society seems pretty awful when you think critically about it. On the flip side, if you step outside the bubble of comfort that Western society generally affords people, you'll find that life is "nasty, brutish & short" as Hobbes put it. We've come a very very long way in a short time towards raising our standard of living and our expectations for what our lives…

I live in a non-western low income country. Life is not "nasty, brutish and short". Honestly, it makes me pretty angry when I hear people from the west espouse this sentiment. Have you ever lived in a non-western country, to state that with such assurance? Life here is beautiful, the sense of community is so much stronger than it is in the west and overall I'd say that people are less stressed. On the flip side, many…

I have no clue where you live, but I live in an eastern european country and I fail to see how can life be better anywhere outside western democracies.

Even living in the poor part of the EU is still a lot worse then living in the good part.

>Life here is beautiful

snort

> the sense of community is so much stronger than it is in the west

the community is precisely why I dislike my country. I can't imagine worse torture then being force to live your life with close-minded ignorant people stuck in the past.

Go and be gay or atheist or just strange in your country then tell me how beautiful your life is.

>overall I'd say that people are less stressed. On the flip side, many things are harder for sure - wages are low and working hours are long, good healthcare is hard come by for many people.

As long as you don't care if you starve or die of illness it's all great. So literally the basics of security.

>life is not "nasty, brutish, and short"

sure, it's just relatively nastier, more brutish and objectively shorter in years of life.

>Perhaps, in future, before making such statements about the lives of people from cultures other than your own, you could take a few moments to try and empathize with them instead?

I don't need empathy when I feel it on my own skin.

Pretty weak all in all.

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#216
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen. I’m a sober alcoholic, and if I died tomorrow I’d be content knowing that I did at least one worthwhile thing with the time I had: I helped another alcoholic, a 23 year old man who tried to kill himself shortly before I met him, get sober and start working and move out of his mom’s basement and stand up straight and look other people in the eyes and then go and help a few other people stop drinking. Not a singl…

The whole society seems designed top down to keep us fighting and arguing, live at the expense of others is the mantra. It seems it took a lot of engineering to get us this far from our natural state of caring. The Chinese seem to indoctrinate with a slightly different model where you are to believe society comes before the individual. The sensible model seems rather obvious: One has to organize their own show before…

Elevating society above the individual stifles innovation and leads to stagnation.

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#217
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Free market economics didn't tell people to spend less time with their families and more time consuming entertainment media. It literally did. I've probably seen tens of thousands of advertisements for games consoles, films and Netflix-style streaming services. >from the perspective of a white male Many women would disagree with you on the "male" part.

Advertisement can only sell something that people want. If we swapped all video game advertising with Math Olympiad advertising, we both still know which one is going to be much more popular. Games with zero marketing budgets have no problem selling millions of copies. >Many women would disagree with you on the "male" part. And any woman with a professional job would disagree.

> And any woman with a professional job would disagree.

My mother is going to be 70 in a few weeks, she is a highly regarded teacher of English, and in her opinion, a lot of things have gone downhill since the 1970s, and especially since the 1990s, though obviously not all of them. So there is your counterexample.

People are complicated and stereotyping them (any woman with X) is bound to fail.

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#218
post #176
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But even Ramessess II is not really "remembered" by more than a tiny handful of people. Most people who recognize the name know nothing about him, and most would never come up with the name unprompted. Most knowledge about him is lost. We know him in the very abstract, not all much different to how we know the Ozymandias of the poems. Does that level of being remembered matter?

To the extent that being remembered after your death matters at all, then absolutely, yes. To go back to the original point of comparison, many more people know Ramesses II now than have ever heard of Paul Graham, and this is when pg is still alive and probably near the all-time peak of his fame. There's a relatively small, but not that small, number of people who can name some of Ramesses II's monuments or other ach…

I mean, who knows what random selection of events will cause someone to slip through the crevasse of history into the future. Imagine being the fossil that is found and paraded as the missing link between our species and the one that roams the earth 100,000 years from now, and Ramesses II nowhere to be found...

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#219
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in the 1970s would have killed for smartphones (or any phone not physically tethered to a landline,) the advent of personal computers and the web making global information, communication, data and commerce available for practically nothing, and the convenience of Uber, or just e-commerce in general. Streaming media with access to an entire library of movies and television shows is qualitatively better than thr…

>People in the 1970s would have killed for smartphones... Would they? Boomers are famous for being luddites, and a growing minority of millennials now would be more than happy to toss their smartphones if it didn't mean being pushed to the outer of all their social groups. >Streaming media with access to an entire library of movies and television shows is qualitatively better than three analog tv channels and whateve…

Millennials don't apply to an argument about who would have done what in the 70s - every generation has people who don't appreciate the value of what they have, and I don't think everyone in the 70s was an Archie Bunker stereotype. Yes, I'm quite certain there would have been plenty of people who would have seen the value of cellphones and the internet at the time.

>The more interesting question, though, is whether or not frictionless access to near-infinite vaults of that tailored entertainment actually makes your quality of life better.

That's the thing - "quality of life" is an entirely subjective measure, one which both of us are tailoring to fit a predetermined outcome.

But even if one dismisses the value of access to media to quality of life, the degree to which online services (any service, including streaming media) democratize that access compared to the limitations of physical media and gatekept broadcasts (VCRs didn't even come around until the late 1970s) improved quality of life substantially. That some or much of that media is pure entertainment is less relevant to my argument than the paradigm shift it represents.

I mean, to invoke the trope, you have a device you can fit in your pocket which allows you access to almost the entirety of humanity's cultural and intellectual output, a GPS system, a camera, a radio, a compass, a calculator, it can answer questions, it can order food, it can allow you to communicate with people around the world without long-distance fees. From the point of view of the 1970s, that's literally something out of Star Trek. That seems like an objective improvement to quality of life in the same way that the printing press, internal combustion engine and indoor toilets were.

> But kids in that era would play together in the streets, and families had closer bonds.

Kids don't play in the streets anymore but they still play - my niece and nephew have a huge backyard they play in, and my nephew also makes games for his friends on Roblox. To me, kids today have richer and more fulfilling lives than I did, stuck in my living room watching TV and reading old library books.

Also, I would argue that due to the advancement of progressive ideals allowing certain demographics to exist more openly than society would have allowed in the 1970s, some familial bonds are stronger now than then. Maybe if you're a white Christian conservative male things seem to have gone downhill, but things seem to be looking up for everyone else.

Re: The most precious resource is agency

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Modern western society is awesome compared to what nearly all of our ancestors lived through. Any sane person would agree with you in the sense that it's definitely better to be alive in 2021 than 1621. If you you shorten the timespan and only look at cultural changes since, say, the 1970s, though, it seems we've sacrificed a lot of what makes us human (community, interconnectedness, a sense of wonder about the futu…

It's clear to me that it's too easy to be Panglossian about our material conditions. Just thinking about the time frame I grew up within(1980's-2000's US) there were a lot of things that I now see as definitely bad and that have, in fact, all started to change in my adult life: * The omnipresent nature of sweetened food and drink * Car-dependent culture * Mass media culture * Simpsons-style dysfunctional nuclear fami…

Is it fair to say you're citing identity politics and the presence of ideology as a cause of problems in society?

Re identity politics, I'm trans and it helps me a lot. It feels like an intermediate between misogyny and the abolition of the categorization of gender. Focusing on the rights of one group (trans rights, trans liberation now) feels essential.

Re the presence of ideology, there is no way to not have an ideology. Liberalism and neoliberalism consistently say that they are neutral, but they are also a story about the world and a way to interpret facts, on the exact same scale as Marxism. It's just that because (neo)liberalism places weight on the individual and discounts systemic factors, it can feel neutral if you don't need to think about systemic factors (this is what privelage is).

Not really relevant to your overall critique, but it's just something that stood out to me reading your comment.

Post reply on HN