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

Choose your status game wisely

ofdollarsanddata.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 344 posts

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#221

Post by bsenftner »

trh0awayman wrote: post #195

I think it's interesting how different people view status, like the "Harvard Professor or Homeless guy?" quiz that used to get passed around. I grew up in one of the last WASP strongholds in the US and the more money you had, the smaller the house you lived in (up to a point). People could afford insanely expensive cars, but would buy tasteful ones instead (excepting kids). Most people wouldn't be caught dead in a Ra…

That's old money. they have had money in their family so long, it is like the air. They display their status by rejecting conspicuous consumption in all but a few instances. The families tend to be extremely protective. In social settings the conversation can appear like active college professors debating, their educations being really what the spend their time honing.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#222

Post by bsenftner »

xenocratus wrote: post #186

> Choose money and you’ll end up working all the time. Choose beauty and you’ll always want to look better. Choose fame and you’ll constantly be seeking attention. This is straight-up paraphrasing David Foster Wallace in This Is Water, just that DFW was talking about these things as de-facto personal religions that we're usually unconscious of. So the "choose" part isn't nearly that explicit in his view. The bit in T…

So don't be an idiot and "worship", be a rational balanced human and as the OP says diversify your interests. DFW tends to exaggerate to make his points, and this is an example. Nice prose, be it describes idiots and implies to the reader that everyone are such idiots.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#223

Post by bsenftner »

kromem wrote: post #177
angarg12 wrote: post #59

Not sure how this will sit with the HN crowd, but a couple of years back I got into menswear, and I derive some pleasure from being the "best dressed guy" at the office. Beyond personal opinions on that particular hobby, I can confirm first hand that living at the intersection of two or more personas (e.g. a programmer that dresses well) brings a peculiar sense of joy. I might no have much status in either of those c…

My career advice to nearly everyone starting out these days is to bring different professional interests together if they have more than one. There's thousands of specialists in most fields, but not nearly as many generalists or people who can walk in two interconnected worlds. Finding a niche can be very valuable to oneself and others. One way to carve that out is by going deeper than one's peers in a specialization…

Please readers following this advice: make one of those multiple professional interests you cultivate be better communication skills and public speaking. The number of developers that can only explain weakly, or one way, or get confrontational when questioned is far far too many. Learn how to communicate and doors open, as far too many developers simply cannot explain to others such that they can then duplicate or follow or want to.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#224

Post by bsenftner »

fartcannon wrote: post #79
angarg12 wrote: post #59

Not sure how this will sit with the HN crowd, but a couple of years back I got into menswear, and I derive some pleasure from being the "best dressed guy" at the office. Beyond personal opinions on that particular hobby, I can confirm first hand that living at the intersection of two or more personas (e.g. a programmer that dresses well) brings a peculiar sense of joy. I might no have much status in either of those c…

What do you do when you bump into an equally well dressed person who just happens to be more physically attractive than you?

Smile that dominate smile while indicating the anaconda in my pants.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#225

Post by bsenftner »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #114
skmurphy wrote: post #56

this reminded me of the "This is Water" commencement speech given by David Foster Wallace to the 2005 graduating class at Kenyon College. Key graf: "In the day-to-day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshiping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship. And an outstanding reason for choosing some sort of God or spiritual-type thing…

That's making the broad assumption that religion won't "eat you alive". My personal experience deeply contradicts that. My perspective is that atheism is not a lack of worship, but a lack of faith. Faith requires you suspend critical thinking on a predetermined set of claims. Atheism, to me, is the rejection of faith; to direct critical thought to all claims. Taking that to its conclusion, I worship critical thinking…

The devils greatest achievement is taking God's one true gift, our rational mind, and convincing people they need to use faith, a direct rejection of our rational capabilities, do be close to God. So beautiful in its sublime deception. So powerful, it insidiously destroys the most intelligent minds.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#226

Post by mark_l_watson »

throw0101a wrote: post #100
epgui wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually feel pressure to dress down in my role as a SWE: hoodies and jeans seem like the norm, and forget about wearing a suit (lol!) or even a dress shirt. I've found black/grey turtlenecks to be a nice middle ground, and apart from the occasional "one more thing" (Steve Jobs) or Elizabeth Holmes comment, those tend to work well.

> I actually feel pressure to dress down in my role as a SWE: hoodies and jeans seem like the norm, and forget about wearing a suit (lol!) or even a dress shirt. If Vint Cerf can wear a three-piece suit, so can you! :)

You are correct! He does dress well and formally. Combined with his friendliness and general cheerfulness, he makes a great impression.

At two consecutive remote jobs with a lot of zoom time, I had the habit of wearing Tommy Bahama shirts - these are Hawaiian style shirts (or some of them are) that are expensive and perfectly made (e.g., the pattern matches perfectly on both sides of the buttons). My wife made sure I had a diverse collection.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#227

Post by retrac »

Flankk wrote: post #94
alar44 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feeling fulfilled doesn't pay the bills, unfortunately.

False dichotomy, it usually does. One day you will die. You won't be thinking about bills.

"Who will look after my dependents or children? Will they be safe and comfortable?" is one of the main worries for people when they die, I figure.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#228

Post by sidewndr46 »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #220
trh0awayman wrote: post #195

I think it's interesting how different people view status, like the "Harvard Professor or Homeless guy?" quiz that used to get passed around. I grew up in one of the last WASP strongholds in the US and the more money you had, the smaller the house you lived in (up to a point). People could afford insanely expensive cars, but would buy tasteful ones instead (excepting kids). Most people wouldn't be caught dead in a Ra…

>where even the wealthiest people are not allowed to move to because they don't have the right last name How is this carried out in practice?

I'm reasonably sure the author is just making this up. As a US citizen you have wide discretion on where you live, even extending to several other small nations that have signed agreements with the US.

If you're renting or selling property, most of the discretion that used to be afforded to buyer's is now outlawed. But it would require someone willing to pursue a case if they felt they were not sold a home because of their race or whatever.

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#229

Post by vgeek »

gota wrote: post #96
gretch wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arnold has a really good quote about this: "A well-built physique is a status symbol. It reflects you worked hard for it; no money can buy it. You cannot borrow it, you cannot inherit it, you cannot steal it. You cannot hold onto it without constant work. It shows discipline, it shows self-respect, it shows patience, work ethic, and passion. That is why I do what I do." Really makes you think. Not a whole lot of thin…

Being cultured and well read is very similar, I think The main difference is that a physique is more immediately recognized; all you have to do to recognize Arnold is huge is look at him. But you'd have to listen some (and have enough cultural baggage yourself) to recognize that Chomsky is intelligent Also - perhaps as a consequence - being physically fit is objective. Who would argue Arnold is _not_ huge? But I'm su…

Does that one person, most obviously being Alan Dershowitz, even count given that he is nuts and/or of questionable ethics? :D

Re: Choose your status game wisely

#230

Post by throw0101a »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #130
throw0101a wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My perspective is that atheism is not a lack of worship, but a lack of faith. Can you define what you mean by "faith"? * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z4wKCsD59Q * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_4PSgFjtvI > Faith requires you suspend critical thinking on a predetermined set of claims. People like Thomas Aquinas would disagree. * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35592365-five-proofs-of-... * https://www.goo…

Faith was always described to me as a belief in something that cannot be proven. In my experience, however, especially in terms of Christianity, faith is a belief in something that cannot be proven, and - crucially - can be disproven . To put it more clearly, faith detaches a claim from reality, and puts it into a realm above criticism. As a small example, the idea that the first human male was created directly by a…

> Faith was always described to me as a belief in something that cannot be proven.

That is certainly one way to define it. Faith is the sibling/cousin of trust as the first two videos go over. If US Census Bureau says the population of the US is 331M, you are trusting them, putting your faith in their methods, that they are getting it right:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Population

> In my experience, however, especially in terms of Christianity, faith is a belief in something that cannot be proven, and - crucially - can be disproven. To put it more clearly, faith detaches a claim from reality, and puts it into a realm above criticism.

Most Christians simply have faith / trust that God does exist. Most Christians also trust, have faith, that when they wake up in the morning and reach for the light switch the room will get brighter, and when they turn the faucet water will come out. Some Christians will have understanding of how and why these things happen (and what could be the causes if things stay dark and/or dry).

To take your day-to-day knowledge of "faith", or what most people think as "God", is to a certain extent looking at a straw man. Most folks don't have time or energy (and in many cases the intellectual horsepower) to get into the steel man version of the idea. Not many folks are going to bother with analyzing, e.g., Aquinas' argument that God is "ipsum esse subsistens," translated by Bishop Robert Barron as "the shear act of 'to be' itself": the idea of God not simply as a noun but as an action (i.e., verb). Something very different than the Sky Father With a Beard image that most many probably visualize.

Further the question of whether, in the case of the Christian God, it is something that can be (dis)proven is completely separate than the definition of "faith". The two books by Edward Feser linked to give proofs—in reason/logic sense, not the proverbial sense of (physical) evidence—for the existence of God. None of which involve any religious texts or revelation.

> My disagreement with Aquinas is that the ideas of Christianity that are based in the abstract are expressed as literal fact, even though such "facts" and their origins are deeply contradicted by evidence. There is a name for the inability to criticize Christianity for contradicting with evidence: "faith".

The arguments for a {g,G}od (in the general sense) existing are different than those than the argument(s) for any particular God (Christian or otherwise). Aristotle put forward the argument (see the third link) that there must logically be an Unmoved Mover in ~350 BC for example.

Post reply on HN