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

Life Is Short (2016)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 310 posts

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#101

Post by lwhi »

twblalock wrote: post #64
kubb wrote: post #38

This makes you think that Paul would be interested in fighting for a world where people don't waste most of their short lives in bullshit corporate jobs because the market demands it, and instead can focus on important things like their families.

If everyone behaved like that, our society wouldn't have the wealth needed to make anyone's lives comfortable and secure, except for the lives of the rich. A job that provides an income to a worker, and generates wealth for society, is not bullshit -- even if all it involves is making crappy consumer products, or working on an assembly line, or doing paperwork all day. In fact, such jobs are the reason the majority o…

Your comment only stands if we continue with the system we have.

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#102

Post by breck »

holoduke wrote: post #98
breck wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first years are brutally hard (the sleep deprivation in particular) and in my experience work is much easier than raising children, so there's definitely truth to that. The best is when you can do both at the same time. During COVID, for instance, I wrote code in one room while my 1yo played in the next (since everything was locked down). As she got older, she started asking questions and would even provide me ad…

A personal take on this. I found myself allowing too much screen time for the kids while working at home and having the kids around me. I couldnt give enough attention to either work and kids. Its good for everyone that everything is back to (normal)

Oh I would agree. Luckily we had dual income and hired a nanny 5 days a week from 8-4. Otherwise would have been impossible (at the time we lived far from family).

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#103

Post by [deleted] »

breck wrote: post #92
ablatt89 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny enough, I know some engineers who go to work, non-remote, to escape from their wife and kids for a bit and work becomes an avenue to relax! And having to take care of an aging parent who lives with me, I can understand.

The first years are brutally hard (the sleep deprivation in particular) and in my experience work is much easier than raising children, so there's definitely truth to that. The best is when you can do both at the same time. During COVID, for instance, I wrote code in one room while my 1yo played in the next (since everything was locked down). As she got older, she started asking questions and would even provide me ad…

[deleted]

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#104

Post by rrgok »

sinlar-multiple wrote: post #81
yarrowy wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universal Basic income would solve those problems. Eventually AI and automation should perform all the mundane jobs which is a good thing but we need to provide basic sustenance for everyone.

lmao @ UBI I can't understand how educated people can still gobble ubi propaganda up when it's proven that such model is completely unsustainable economically and socially

I'm not 100% pro UBI. But do you feel the current model/system is sustainable?

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#105

Post by weatherlite »

ablatt89 wrote: post #63
kubb wrote: post #38

This makes you think that Paul would be interested in fighting for a world where people don't waste most of their short lives in bullshit corporate jobs because the market demands it, and instead can focus on important things like their families.

Funny enough, I know some engineers who go to work, non-remote, to escape from their wife and kids for a bit and work becomes an avenue to relax! And having to take care of an aging parent who lives with me, I can understand.

That definitely exists. But I think there's more people who'd prefer to work less hours (and keep their current salary) than people who simply want to stay in the office more.

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#106

Post by nickpp »

lwhi wrote: post #101
twblalock wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If everyone behaved like that, our society wouldn't have the wealth needed to make anyone's lives comfortable and secure, except for the lives of the rich. A job that provides an income to a worker, and generates wealth for society, is not bullshit -- even if all it involves is making crappy consumer products, or working on an assembly line, or doing paperwork all day. In fact, such jobs are the reason the majority o…

Your comment only stands if we continue with the system we have.

Do you have another system in mind? Go ahead and propose it.

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#107

Post by watwut »

ablatt89 wrote: post #63
kubb wrote: post #38

This makes you think that Paul would be interested in fighting for a world where people don't waste most of their short lives in bullshit corporate jobs because the market demands it, and instead can focus on important things like their families.

Funny enough, I know some engineers who go to work, non-remote, to escape from their wife and kids for a bit and work becomes an avenue to relax! And having to take care of an aging parent who lives with me, I can understand.

I have colleagues like that. When we had kids, I started to feel sorry for their wifes and realized how egoistical those guys are.

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#108

Post by jbaber »

I'm able to shorten life by doing mindless "have to" tasks and consuming distracting media (music, books, movies, games, etc.)

I'm able to lengthen it by deliberately, reflectively doing anything (thinking, programming, breathing, etc.).

I spent almost three decades in school -- grading and getting graded. I made that time race by as much as I could so I could get to the part where I have kids and a job that I can actually enjoy.

Now I'm savoring every minute. I feel the natural compression of time that comes with age, of course, but I'm more than able to counter it by consciously enjoying life.

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#109

Post by nickpp »

kubb wrote: post #38

This makes you think that Paul would be interested in fighting for a world where people don't waste most of their short lives in bullshit corporate jobs because the market demands it, and instead can focus on important things like their families.

Do you know what families need? Food, clothes, heating and cooling, medicine, technology, mobility, various forms of entertainment and so on.

Do you know how you make those? Mostly with those "bullshit" corporate jobs.

Re: Life Is Short (2016)

#110

Post by AussieWog93 »

Lionga wrote: post #97
AussieWog93 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't make comments like this on HN. Nobody was making the argument that extremely specific religious quirks like this are encode knowledge important to the wise use of modern technology.

It is valueable as the comments shows so easily how wrong religions get it, when many take religions as truths

That's a valid comment to make - religions do get things wrong, but GP is plain old "look how smart I am" strawmanning.

It doesn't make the discourse more interesting or enlightening, and frankly doesn't belong on this site.

Post reply on HN