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

A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 254 posts

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#211

Post by MichaelZuo »

lostlogin wrote: post #53
losteric wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The older folks typically also benefited from getting into housing when it was less scarce, riding one or more waves of progress, at a time where healthcare ROI was much higher. My generation faces a different economic situation. I know people in academia that love what they do and dreamed of living a life like Rudy's. In practice, they're stuck - huge debts, dismally low post-grad wages, stuck renting, just hoping f…

Your housing comment is key - the grind of paying for rent or a mortgage with two incomes really stifles and ability people have to try something.

This is almost always due to a couple trying to settle in a neighbourhood or school district or home beyond their means, at least in the US.

Even a tenured professor at Columbia, who won the Nobel prize and loves their work and has a wife earning a matching compensation, would have a pretty miserable life if they insisted on mortgaging a large Upper East Side townhouse.

It's the same in Palo Alto from what I've heard.

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#212

Post by eropple »

nine_k wrote: post #153
paulryanrogers wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because arguably it reduces demand for the next generation to do their thing. And if too many do it then it also becomes a necessity for more in the same age cohort to afford housing and transportation.

"Stepping aside" makes sense if you are in a singular position, like the CEO of a company. Most positions are not like that. Even though tenured positions in a university is a finite resource, having a highly productive professor on such a position is beneficial, no matter the age. The problem here is in they way science is financed, not in the glut of Nobel laureates refusing to leave.

It does, however, create a pipelining problem: there's very little reason for someone who wants to become a professor to stick through literal decades of adjunct hell to maybe get a tenure-track position when somebody decides they're finally ready to let go of theirs (and the paycheck that comes with it, which is not large but certainly incentivizes staying a long time).

Tenure is a great and necessary phenomenon, but it is one of the best examples of the folks who get it needing to be more broad-minded than themselves.

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#213

Post by rkhacker »

jacquesm wrote: post #76
zw123456 wrote: post #57

Hi there, old person here. Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. I had vowed to myself that I would completely and totally retire, Finally, at 65. But then, this "thing" cropped up and the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I wonder, am I crazy. But I feel passion for this project. So, I am throwing myself into the fray again, there is no logical reason to do so. So, Rudy, I understand.

> Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. Congrats! > the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I'm still pretty active (58) but there is no way I'm going to do another run, I'm happy tinkering with stuff, spending time with kids and working on average 3 to 4 months per year. I always saw money as a means to an end, just another tool in the toolbox. I don't need more of it so that part of the drive is…

I sincerely think that the present corporate culture can suck the air out of anyone's life and force to seek contentment elsewhere very soon. Doing a research work and solve problems, where one does not have to seek approval (easier when you NL next to your name), on a daily basis can keep one engaged and energized.

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#214

Post by rkhacker »

zw123456 wrote: post #57

Hi there, old person here. Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. I had vowed to myself that I would completely and totally retire, Finally, at 65. But then, this "thing" cropped up and the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I wonder, am I crazy. But I feel passion for this project. So, I am throwing myself into the fray again, there is no logical reason to do so. So, Rudy, I understand.

My question to self is - retire to do what?

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#215

Post by adventured »

rkhacker wrote: post #214
zw123456 wrote: post #57

Hi there, old person here. Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. I had vowed to myself that I would completely and totally retire, Finally, at 65. But then, this "thing" cropped up and the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I wonder, am I crazy. But I feel passion for this project. So, I am throwing myself into the fray again, there is no logical reason to do so. So, Rudy, I understand.

My question to self is - retire to do what?

Depending on the context of course - retire from a career to pursue one's passions.

Retire as a software engineer, pursue business ideas. Tinker. Maybe build wood cabinets and chairs.

Picture someone that just spent the last 30 years writing C, C++, Java (whatever) code, and maybe doing various lower level management roles. The age of AI has broken into an open gallup; said person is 55-65 years old, maybe now is a good time to have fun with their capabilities instead. So now they're learning Python instead of punching a 9-5 time clock, messing with LLMs or Stable Diffusion extensions. You get the idea.

We have hit an inflection point the scale of the World Wide Web circa the mid 1990s. There's a lot to do. Vast new territory to explore and it's moving fast. It feels a lot like the mid 1990s did in terms of speed. It feels like "internet time" has returned. It's damn exciting again.

For younger people here that are completely unfamiliar with the phrase "internet time." Vaguely the idea or sense of experience that development online circa the 1990s was moving abnormally fast compared to everything else (this is from 2001, when people still understood the original context of the phrase):

https://www.technologyreview.com/2001/04/01/275725/the-myth-...

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#216

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #98
vl wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are happier because their work is finite. They do athletic sessions, they are done, their time then is their own. As software dev/lead/manager/pm you are never done, there is always next thing to do. This why some devs become SREs - your shift is over, you are done.

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#217

Post by theptip »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #105
theptip wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty offensive to suggest that someone should “step aside for the next generation”. Personally I’d rather work for someone with more experience (all else being equal), but ultimately the best ideas and execution will win.

Not suggesting people go off and die, or be thrown off a cliff. Rather that they consider there are some downsides to society at large if they unnecessarily work late in life. FWIW, I was responding to the question "why not? [keep working]".

I think your world model is a bit off here. Each tech job creates multiple non-tech jobs on average (1.5-2 in the bay area, last I checked). It's true we're coming out of a mini-recession in tech, but in general over the past 10 years there have been way more job openings than workers.

Someone experienced continuing to work in tech is a net benefit to society; they contribute way above median taxes and their economic activity generates jobs. It's not zero-sum; the more people working in tech as senior engineers, the richer society gets.

The only case I think you could actually point to net downsides is that within tech, it's possibly easier for a more junior to get a job replacing a more senior when the latter retires, from reduction of competition. So from a selfish perspective of "I want your job" sure it makes your life easier if a senior engineer retires.

I'll put a [citation needed] on your claims around downsides to society and leave it at that. Judging by the downvotes it seems others don't agree with you either; if you want to persuade people I think you need to provide some concrete evidence.

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#218

Post by theptip »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #119
pedrosorio wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a counterintuitive idea. Older people helping to make more products/services is a downside to society at large? I would understand if “working” was a competition for limited resources. But if it is, in fact, a value generating activity, how does it harm society at large? e.g. Having more doctors work until later, if they are capable, is not a net positive for our society’s ability to provide healthcar…

Some demand for workers scales well, virtually unlimited. Yet many are not. And as tech quickly takes more and more jobs, older workers contribute to the competition for shrinking demand for human labor. Now advances in tech may continue to increase demand for workers elsewhere, once training and workers catch up. Or maybe not as much as roles are lost.

> older workers contribute to the competition for shrinking demand for human labor.

Posted a similar request elsewhere, but I think you need to substantiate this claim.

Furthermore, if you're claiming that tech destroys jobs in the general economy, then the consistent position would be that young or old should stop working in tech, not just older people. But the research I've seen shows that tech jobs generate non-tech jobs on net.

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#219

Post by aljadooa »

WeylandYutani wrote: post #183

My mother recently retired. She was working since 16. Nobody does that anymore most enter the workforce at 25 now. Anyway she spent 40 years working as a psychiatric nurse and later as a therapist and got tired of the sex abuse stories and all the other horrors our lovely society produces to make people go insane so I don't blame her for retiring. Some people have real jobs.

[dead]

Re: A Caltech Nobel laureate celebrates his 100th birthday, then gets back to work

#220

Post by ChuckMcM »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #156
ChuckMcM wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This situation/attitude is exactly the thing that great people end up in. As I've mentioned previously I have known a lot of people that developed enough wealth over time to "retire."[1] And by retire I mean choose to work on what they wanted to work on, and not work if they didn't want to. I once explained as "being a consultant with infinite days of paid vacation." Some folks like Jacques and the GP author are "old…

Are: your member-benefit idea - we live in an extreme mono-culture of company structures and I think any innovation there might help. Tell us more :-)

Basically the concept is to create a company that does the "house keeping" (in the USA a company health plan for example, managing tax requirements) and a record keeping system of "points" related to work product of members, and an annual distribution of profits proportioned strictly on a point basis.

Because this was originally conceived for people who "could retire" but chose not to, employee pay would be $1/month plus medical coverage for the member and a spouse that is all paid for[1], office space, "lab" space if the space in the office is insufficient, and shared high-expense infrastructure.

Revenue sharing based on points and other work products (such as consulting and training classes).

There is also an "investor" option where for every $1M you put in you get $3M back. The trick though is that in the early stages it is unclear how quickly you would get your $3M. Later when rates of return are better understood that ratio could be reduced.

[1] Given the tax laws, there is also a requirement to include money to cover this "income" (US considers anything you give an employee income) so there is also a cash amount to cover those taxes. From the members perspective, they get $12/year "take home" pay, and if they did nothing else could file a tax return with $0 tax required. (caveat existing government tax shenanigans)

Post reply on HN