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

In the long run, we're all Dad

astralcodexten.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 169 posts

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#131

Post by reducesuffering »

travisgriggs wrote: post #91

I’m impressed this guy has time to write. My wife and I raised four children. My wife was blessed to be able to be a “stay at home” mom during the early period. It was a lot of work. I often joke that after the first two weeks of our oldest, I had no recollection of what the first two years of marriage had been like. The child rearing experience is just so all consuming. Four years ago, that oldest child got pregnant…

He's told us how in a previous post.

"On the other hand, I know people who want to get good at writing, and make a mighty resolution to write two hundred words a day every day, and then after the first week they find it’s too annoying and give up. These people think I’m amazing, and why shouldn’t they? I’ve written a few hundred to a few thousand words pretty much every day for the past ten years.

But as I’ve said before, this has taken exactly zero willpower. It’s more that I can’t stop even if I want to. Part of that is probably that when I write, I feel really good about having expressed exactly what it was I meant to say. Lots of people read it, they comment, they praise me, I feel good, I’m encouraged to keep writing, and it’s exactly the same virtuous cycle as my brother got from his piano practice."

https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/31/the-parable-of-the-tal...

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#132

Post by pizzafeelsright »

footy wrote: post #68
pizzafeelsright wrote: post #8

I read of an inconsistent mindset. God this. God that. "Natural selection didn't design" which is contradictory. Evolved murder monkeys. Happy to have babies. Women are indeed saved by childbirth. Men too.

> Women are indeed saved by childbirth. Men too. saved from what?

Selfishness mostly.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#133

Post by pizzafeelsright »

huijzer wrote: post #12
pizzafeelsright wrote: post #8

I read of an inconsistent mindset. God this. God that. "Natural selection didn't design" which is contradictory. Evolved murder monkeys. Happy to have babies. Women are indeed saved by childbirth. Men too.

> I read of an inconsistent mindset. Isn't everybody full of contradictions?

Yes. Rarely within the and sentence

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#134

Post by koliber »

the_mitsuhiko wrote: post #29
mgaunard wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Myself I closed the tab at the second sentence, so I can't attest to that.

And yet that first sentence was reason enough for you to leave a reply. In a way it did evoke something in you that probably most texts don’t do.

In this case, the hook effect was so strong that I immediately thought about that writing advice. It's one of the best examples of that working on me that I can remember.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#135

Post by cjameskeller »

asylteltine wrote: post #128
zabzonk wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

can you understand why people consciously decide not to have them?

Yes that part is very easy. I can’t understand why someone would choose to give up their prime years for a child. The entire idea of retirement is a direct consequence of this. You don’t need to retire if you can you know, just continuously enjoy your life the entire time.

I think there's a direct comparison to be made with the choice to devote one's "prime years" to building a startup. It's a meaningful project that materially impacts the world in a way that one has a decent degree of control over. And it can be fun, even in the same moments it is deeply difficult!

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#136

Post by koliber »

theSuda wrote: post #118
koliber wrote: post #6

Good writing advice says that each sentence has a single goal. The goal is to draw the reader in, and convince them to read the next sentence. This article does it masterfully. The title drew me in. The opening sentence finished the job. Well done.

I saw the scrollbar and hit CTRL+W. Sleep deprived by an autistic 3 year old who can't speak but only cry all night. I have no energy to do anything. I am surprised I typed this long a response. I also just wrote a subquery as a column instead of inner join or something. Dunno it might be right. It worked though.

I hope you find some time to rest soon.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#137

Post by koliber »

mgaunard wrote: post #106
_gabe_ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the second sentence mentions the Bible? Or some other reason? If it’s the former, I’m a Christian but I don’t just close out articles if they’re written by Richard Dawkins or quickly proclaim that they’re an atheist. There’s still a very real chance that they have some wisdom to share. Just because people share a different religious view than me doesn’t mean I can’t learn from them.

I'm an atheist; I've read and studied the Bible as part of my catholic education 25 years ago. Not that I'm strongly against it, but my attention is challenged by many things, and a man who starts an article about becoming a father with a clear sex-is-for-procreation Bible quote makes it sound like his experience of life is not relevant to mine.

In the paragraphs that follow he goes on to explain how people twisted their god's intent while writing the bible, at least on this particular topic.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#138

Post by mgaunard »

galdosdi wrote: post #127
mgaunard wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an atheist; I've read and studied the Bible as part of my catholic education 25 years ago. Not that I'm strongly against it, but my attention is challenged by many things, and a man who starts an article about becoming a father with a clear sex-is-for-procreation Bible quote makes it sound like his experience of life is not relevant to mine.

You're behaving foolishly. If you spend just a moment looking at it you'd see the author isn't even taking the religious text he's quoting seriously! So your great fear of accidentally interacting with a religious individual is overblown. Well, since you chose not to read it, and continue to choose thusly in similar situations, you'll never really be able to confirm or deny whether or not"his experience of life is re…

I'm not "refusing" to read it. I just reacted on a comment.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#139

Post by mgaunard »

oooyay wrote: post #110
mgaunard wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more hacker news that I'm interested in, and how the article was representative of the crowd that gathers here. Start-up founders are often of the age to start having children I guess. Even if having a child and a start-up at the same time is most definitely not a good idea.

The average age range of startup founders is 35-45. The average age of people having their first kid is 30. That said, there's a lot more than startup founders here. Always was.

What about the median?

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#140

Post by Vecr »

jefftk wrote: post #52
boiler_up800 wrote: post #16

Congrats to him. I’ve seen stats that somewhere between 30-50% of all twins are born through IVF. So technically not a huge surprise on that result. A little surprised on the 50% death rate for children before the age of 5 in 1800. It’s amazing how recent that is.

> I’ve seen stats that somewhere between 30-50% of all twins are born through IVF. So technically not a huge surprise on that result. It sounds like you think this was an IVF pregnancy? But Scott says it wasn't: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/in-the-long-run-were-all-da...

It's possible he's not honest about that sort of detail. He's done it in the past.
Post reply on HN