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

Quit Your Job

palladiummag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 427 posts

Re: Quit Your Job

#271

Post by bawolff »

darkengine wrote: post #41

I know it's bad form to move so quickly into meta-discussion on here, but I feel a lot of the comments in the thread right now are endemic of a certain closed-mindedness that has, to me, come to define in part the Hacker News zeitgeist, which stands in something of a contrast to the site's supposed founding principle of intellectual curiosity. There is plenty of prior art in Western (and other traditions of) philosop…

Of course, the opposite is also true - many of the pro side see this article as the road not travelled, and are lamenting not following a romantic vision of what could have been, without thinking too hard about what it might cost.

Re: Quit Your Job

#272

Post by Juliate »

JimboOmega wrote: post #185
themacguffinman wrote: post #175

"If you lose everything you own, you generally still have your network and skills" I get the general call to action that those who have excess resources should leverage that to take big risks, but this really undersells the possible consequences of losing everything you own. No, you don't always keep your network and skills. Sometimes, you lose everything. You lose friends from fallout or you belatedly realize that y…

It smells like privilege. That isn't to say that the OP was protected regardless. But the mindset that lets you do this is a mindset that comes from a background of abundance. Where you can always get another job if you want one, where you always have friends or parents who will bail you out or give you what you need. A background where things just always seem to work out.

It is privilege. That one may have or attempt.

It doesn't make it less valid a path to consider.

Re: Quit Your Job

#273

Post by cipheredStones »

sdze wrote: post #239
Jensson wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody risks it all unless they bet their life, everyone can go back making salary doing basic work. For example, if a software engineer risks their life savings on a project and they lose all of that money, they can still go back and make $300k a year just doing basic work, that is hardly "risking their all" either.

Where the hell do you earn 300k per year? In Europe most certainly it this is not possible. Also don't forget life style creep and risk of loss of social circles.

This is much easier to achieve at big tech companies in the US than you think. Look at levels.fyi and you'll see many examples of people with only a few years of experience making $300k. I personally know many people making that much three years after graduating from a coding bootcamp, and a few people who make $450k-$550k after only a couple more years than that.

Re: Quit Your Job

#274

Post by thelettere »

usrbinbash wrote: post #261
thelettere wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that only the rich are able to take risks - or even think about it - is a bias, and an ugly one at that. It doesn't match history - the only reason we have many good things is because poor people took major risks - and it's part of the tyranny of low expectations that is seeping deeper every day into the fabric of our culture. It's a remarkably effective way of keeping the pours in their place in the name of…

Of course everyone can take risks, but the consequences of these risks backfiring, are vastly different based on available monetary resources. A wealthy person may well sink years and piles of money into a dream. If it doesn't work out, meh, that's life. Back to some well paid job and preparing the next try. Person in strained financial position doing the same and it backfires: May well take years to get back on ones…

The person who I responded to said "the mindset that lets you do this is a mindset that comes from a background of abundance" - implying that pours have a mindset which doesn't "let them" take risks.

And it goes without saying that the rich have it easier. That doesn't make it their exclusive province, nor indeed should it. It's not exactly as if the risk-free pour life is exactly paradise anyways. When I fell from working class to vagabond in fact it was a significant step up.

Re: Quit Your Job

#275

Post by bawolff »

jonstewart wrote: post #209
dang wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't post this sort of snarky internet attack to HN. It's not the culture we want here, and it's against several of the site guidelines. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Serious question: Palladium’s other cofounder is a white nationalist neoreactionary. Is one degree of separation from white nationalism sufficient distance for HN culture? It is very hard for me to see such dross posted and discussed seriously, earnestly, when everything I’ve been taught about critical thinking as a hacker is to be skeptical, whether of function return codes, technical documentation, or people writin…

So your argument is, because of the author's moral failings, we should reject his arguments out of hand without considering them?

And you make this ad hominem argument in the name of critical thinking?

Re: Quit Your Job

#276

Post by bawolff »

iandanforth wrote: post #47

Such drivel. If you really want to move people to act give them a clear roadmap for a lifestyle that supports years without meaningful income. Did you have $1M in savings? Did you have rich parents? Did you just live off your SO's income? Did you have financial dependants like children or elderly parents? I hope I'm wrong but this just reeks of intense privilege being misconstrued as nonconformity.

> I hope I'm wrong but this just reeks of intense privilege being misconstrued as nonconformity.

Just because not everyone is privileged, does that mean that nobody should ever write articles targeted towards privliged people?

Re: Quit Your Job

#277

Post by mlatu »

> If your role in the universe is structured work within order found and built by someone else, those off-road investments are pointless.

nobodies role in the universe is to work for someone else.

can we stop repeating the trigger phrases from our cbt sessions colloquialy known as school?

edit: PAH! elitist muck! he basically says: if you got money, just quit your job, through amassing wealth you have been chosen by the spirits of the iluminati and blessed by the rothschilds to quit your job and become the next edison.

you dont have money? ah, tough luck, look at the time, ciao

Re: Quit Your Job

#278

Post by srcreigh »

namose wrote: post #189

I don’t get the obsession with building an “empire”. Why is that even something people find noble or the actions of a “responsible elite”? Imperialism quite literally has destroyed the lives of millions of people in the service of a privileged few. If you really wanted to be a responsible elite build public goods, not an empire.

Maybe you do get it. In my opinion, his empire is the very public good itself.

What is building an empire? To gather the resources, make plans, complete projects, gain collaborators, provide services, pass the torch. Defeat problems for public good, defeat temptations to extort exploit and abuse...

Re: Quit Your Job

#279

Post by valleyer »

nobody9999 wrote: post #136
hattmall wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you only make $40k a year you aren't going to be paying very much in taxes at all. You also want be paying very much for healthcare as it will be subsidized by the ACA.

>If you only make $40k a year you aren't going to be paying very much in taxes at all. You also want be paying very much for healthcare as it will be subsidized by the ACA. ACA subsidies (at least in NY) are in the form of tax credits. If you don't have any (or not enough to pay taxes on) income, those tax credits are useless. If you have no (or very low) income, the state will instead put you on Medicaid. Which has…

In fact, the ACA tax credit is refundable; that is, if you owe no taxes, the government pays you.

Re: Quit Your Job

#280

Post by baxuz »

I have to say that the guy raised a huge red flag for me already in the first paragraph:

"I hit the gym, pursued the most interesting and important ideas I could find, and started looking for a wife."

Ho boy, I'm getting some Christian fundamentalist vibes with that sentence formulation. Like, a mix of a holy mission, an objectifying checkbox and a "time to get a wife to generate progeny".

So I continued reading:

"The squirrel has no way of knowing or checking that his instinct to bury the nuts will lead him to new life in the spring; he can only trust that God has given him what he needs."

"When we must we defer to a master who teaches us what to value, let us do that consciously and explicitly and personally. Let us aim to be uplifted thereby as we take responsibility for more and more of the task we are given, until the student surpasses the master to receive their visions directly from God."

"How does that project fit into creating a more glorious future? How is that future pleasing to God, the proper order of things, and your own felt value instincts? "

"God’s Trust Fund

The reason taking responsibility for the question of ends involves a leap of faith is that you actually have no sure-fire way to ensure that your visions are sound and good."

"Even fearsome Nemesis, born from chaos via night and darkness, is ultimately the hand of God and the minister of justice. Even the supposed exceptions to justice prove its rule."

"If your vision is beautiful and sound, it will flourish. Resources will unexpectedly come out of the woodwork to support it. If your vision doesn’t have that virtue, you will be struck down for its lack. That’s life. It is also justice. Where this justice conflicts with our own human desires, perhaps it is we who are wrong, not God."

"So take the leap, and have faith that God’s trust fund will come through with what you need."

Having read the whole article, the ongoing theme is "God" and "faith" and the whole article oozes with the unflinching conviction of a religious fanatic.

The man glorifies struggle and sacrifice for a "higher purpose" and then attributes good outcomes to the will of a divine being. I can't really stand behind that kind of reasoning, and I can't really understand how the HN audience resonates with this article. Maybe it's the hustle success story of an entrepreneur that is appealing to the audience, but the guy is actually sending a very dangerous and misleading message.

Post reply on HN