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

291–300 of 427 posts

Re: Quit Your Job

#291

Post by kzrdude »

mlatu wrote: post #281
vmception wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another way to look at it (especially for those allergic to the idea that privilege may apply to their own outcome) is that ambition, risk taking, and entrepreneurship are evenly distributed across all socioeconomic classes, or close to it. It's just that some distinct socioeconomic classes have the capability of failing and retrying very quickly, due to moneyed resources. Contrast that to the person without assets o…

i liked your comment until the last sentence. > outnumbering the poorer people that want to play tech entreprenuer. PLAY? why the belittlement?

> So, if you're willing to play your cards, you play them. Enough people are willing to and their successes wind up outnumbering the poorer people that want to play tech entreprenuer.

Writing, literature. The word play is used in reference to the use of play in a previous sentence. I think it's a common colorful writing technique.

Re: Quit Your Job

#292

Post by mlatu »

jonstewart wrote: post #204

The author is Wolf Tivy, a cofounder of Palladium Magazine. Palladium Magazine is funded by Peter Thiel. The other cofounder of Palladium is Jonah Bennett; he now works at a stealth web3 startup and he says on his website he’s a political moderate. However, he also used to work at Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller and pal around with white nationalists and neoreactionaries. He resigned from Palladium after those ties and…

> Thiel

ah, that really explains everything.

i have no more questions, thank you

Re: Quit Your Job

#293

Post by LAC-Tech »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #250
deepakkarki wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this relevant to the article?

I started to think that the article _might_ have a certain political slant after coming across these phrases: "problems of governance from beyond the established liberal democratic paradigm" ... " the lone overman" ... "Growth Through Struggle" .. "your cosmic duty and win glory only in the bold attempt" ... "our society has been so stagnant and uncreative ... We chose the path of comfort... In our cowardice, we turn…

Why don't you just come out and say what you want to say?

Re: Quit Your Job

#294

Post by mlatu »

bawolff wrote: post #208

I was nodding along until i reached: >Yes, even the bane of Darwin’s faith—the humble ichneumon wasp that lays its maggots inside the living bodies of caterpillars to eat them from the inside and burst out on maturity like some alien xenomorph—is a beautiful creature with a sacred task. Like many parasites, its role in the great chain of being is to test the health and defenses of its caterpillar host population. Its…

> Which sounds like a self-indulgent justification to hurt others for your own gain while still being able to sleep at night.

more like an excuse for the rampant exploitation of humans in precarious situations for gig or click work

Re: Quit Your Job

#295

Post by osullivj »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #250
deepakkarki wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this relevant to the article?

I started to think that the article _might_ have a certain political slant after coming across these phrases: "problems of governance from beyond the established liberal democratic paradigm" ... " the lone overman" ... "Growth Through Struggle" .. "your cosmic duty and win glory only in the bold attempt" ... "our society has been so stagnant and uncreative ... We chose the path of comfort... In our cowardice, we turn…

Not to mention the name "Wolf". Evidently, he is a "man of destiny". Oddly his linkedin profile pic has a toddler on his shoulders. I assumed the child was his own - the article does have a passing mention of finding a wife. No doubt he considers it his duty to transmit his elevated genetic legacy to future generation.

Re: Quit Your Job

#296

Post by mlatu »

srcreigh wrote: post #260
someguydave wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he is offering an idea to square a good and loving God with the horrors we see in life. This is known as a theodicy.

Yep. We could see the exploding callerpillars as being each one of our own unworthy pursuits. They blow up and we do better stuff instead.

more like failed enterprise attempts from people for whom that attempt was the only really viable way at getting out of wage-slavedom.

or, just the exploited wage slaves at their EOL.

Re: Quit Your Job

#297

Post by coldtea »

bunnythefifth wrote: post #89
coldtea wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is the lifestyle of someone with 100% confidence in their social safety net Sorry, but millions of working and middle class people without any "net" have done it in history, I'm sure millions have done it in the US, and millions will continue to do the same thing in the future. As for "whitest"? Tons of blacks have quit their jobs and safety nets and tried their luck in what was termed "the great migration", while…

> I know at least a few people in their 30s and 40s with harldy anything in their name, that quit a shitty (but steady) job and travelled the world on a whim, with almost nothing in their pocket (and no safety nets). Did they preach about it on the internet in the form of an ostentatious, almost comical prose too?

Some did. Does it matter for the argument?

What was in question in the thread (and what my answer about) was whether one needs to be born to riches or with some cushy safety net to do it, not the quality of the prose.

Re: Quit Your Job

#298

Post by mlatu »

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…

To me this piece talks to people who have at least a years income in their bank account and thus don't have to worry about failing. even dont have to fret much about getting a new job.

worse, they are basically saying that, if you are not one of them (who has a nice thick buffer of money in their account or other assets generating income), shut up, sit down, you dont get to have ideas, get back to work your tickets are late... what? no, sorry, i dont make the rules and i dont have the money to get a ladder long enough to change them.

Re: Quit Your Job

#299

Post by thelettere »

sangnoir wrote: post #286
thelettere wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did I say science? Many modern scientific disciplines are by their nature exclusionary because they require access to specialized equipment and space, so of course that's somewhat of an exception to my generality. And I say somewhat because historically a surprising number of breakthroughs did not happen in a lab, nor were discovered by professional scientists. I took a course in the history of science and tech…

You didn't - I said science since it's a specific subset of "many good things" in history that has a clear written record I'm familiar with. Do you think science should be excluded? If so, which fields did you have in mind? Philosophy? Political theory? Economics?

I would hope it is obvious I am not talking about the period prior to the modern age in which the only people who could read were rich.

Because that says nothing about mindset, which is the claim I was replying to.

To test his mindset theory, we have to go to a period in which raw non-monetary resources - the most basic of which is the ability to read - is distributed among both rich and poor. And then you see - do the pours do anything?

And they do, across the vast majority of fields - including even science, which I edited my reply above to include. I'm shocked indeed that this is even being questioned. I'm coming from a humanities and social science background and so that's my primary frame of reference, but my understanding is that while it is not the rule of course they are widely a not insignificant minority among those who have made significant contributions. And obviously an even larger group if we include not only the poor but also the "non-privileged" which is who the OP to this particular thread was throwing into relief.

Re: Quit Your Job

#300

Post by srcreigh »

40four wrote: post #235

I don’t know if the OP is the author of this article or not, but all I have to say I want to buy into the overall concept/ thesis. But the writing is so erratic and turbulent, it is really hard to follow the author’s train of thought. It feels like they are trying SO hard to come across as deep and intellectual, that they lost sight of how it comes across to the reader. It’s like they are trying to force as many ‘big…

The author is well read in philosophy, and the article (what I read in the first 1/4 or so) is a work of philosophy. I have a minor degree in philosophy. To me it is interesting and at a good pace.

For example the author doesn't descend into shallow made up lingo, they aren't too formal or abstract, the ideas are organized into sections, there's a development of the ideas, there's poetic illustrations interleaved with stories, etc.

I liked some of the themes of taking responsibility and venturing into the unknown.

EDIT: I read the rest. The spiritualizing and financial stuff is a bit clumsy. Mainly from lack of context. Based on this writing alone, the author could be anywhere on the spectrum from absolutely insane to level-headed trying to focus on spirituality qua creative pursuits.

I also spot another lack of context in the audience being considered responsible elite, meanwhile belief in bountiful surplus and the audience needing more materials. I guess he may have a different article regarding "non elites" and the bountiful surplus, or maybe he believes the bountiful surplus is only for the elites.

All in all interesting and kinda lukewarm, if only because possible craziness hides behind ambiguity.

Post reply on HN