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

Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

bittersoutherner.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 311 posts

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#291

Post by urlwolf »

throwaway7h65 wrote: post #255
dzink wrote: post #9

He is not wrong. “If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster And treat those two impostors just the same” - R. Kipling Media riles up those who have been limited or deprived by circumstances. It waves flags and triggers emotions and creates envy and conjures social ladders to political influence, or financial gains, or popularity and public attention, or peaks of history. The reality though is that those apply to the…

The counterpoint to this is that having “internet status” begets a number of benefits. For example, when you email support at $bigco you’re more likely to be taken seriously. When you contact a random founder for a meeting, they’re more likely to meet you. You forget to take out the trash from your Airbnb and nobody complains, etc. Basically everything in your life gets a bit easier, because people are more scared to…

> Basically everything in your life gets a bit easier, because people are more scared to piss off someone with a lot of twitter followers

This is terrifying. Status online shouldn't bleed on all those other domains. Using your influence online to get things (or else I will tweet about you and the sky will fall on your head) is petty, and one more bad thing that social media has brought to our lives. Now we have to aim to please those who have amassed followers?

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#292

Post by p1esk »

swiftcoder wrote: post #272
p1esk wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that achieving what these two men have achieved is not desirable? Becoming the most powerful or the richest person in the world? I’d say that’s very much desirable, to most people.

Maybe in abstract. I doubt the majority of people have considered those positions in more detail than "wouldn't it be nice if no one could tell me what to do?", or "wouldn't it be nice to never worry about money ever again?". Close proximity to a bunch of tech executives very quickly cured me of any illusion that I wanted to belong to that in-group. Most already with more money than they knew how to spend, and still…

Well, you write code for a living, right? I’m guessing the vast majority of humans would shudder at the thought of doing that 40 hours a week. It would be a similar attitude to what you expressed towards executives. Executives are sexier than coders, at least for general population. And it’s not clear which one would become more attractive to an average Joe after personally experiencing both professions.

I’ve read the piece. It’s well written. But, no, that’s not how I would like to live my life, and that’s not the life I want for my kids. Too simple, too boring, not for me. But, to each its own, right?

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#293

Post by vouwfietsman »

all2 wrote: post #169
vouwfietsman wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoting a religious/ideologist book is inherently different to quoting an individual author or a non-religious/spiritual text, because the act of quoting itself is part of a tradition of (in this case evangelical) propagation of the religion/ideology. We can pretend to see contemporary bible-quoting as a secular thing, but in these cases history matters. For instance, in the above quote in the part "It is through thi…

I'm confused at what you are trying to say. As far as I can tell, it appears you are saying something like "don't quote religious texts in a way that makes them look like they have any claim on moral authority". And it appears to me that you are saying "moral authority", in this case, is a-religious and should not be related to any particular religion. Am I getting this right?

Well, fundamentally moral authority is a misguided idea, morals don't flow from an authority, morals are constructed and transformed over time by society. Taking your morals from an authority directly is itself immoral, as they don't have a foundation of human rights or empathy but rather are based on arbitrary ancient writing of arbitrary ancient writers.

I'm saying quoting religious texts without religious context (like you say, morals are not inherently religious) is not a secular act and can not be separated from the religion because of the history around quoting religious texts. Quoting religion in a moral discussion introduces religion into a discussion where religion is not necessary, and could even be harmful.

That's not to say you should never do it, but doing it is not the same as quoting any other text or other author. Again I'm not sure why this is controversial, regardless of the other comments quoting Hitler or Mao's red book in a moral discussion would very much be very weird if there is no reason to introduce any of his writing.

Somehow religion gets a pass, it shouldn't.

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#294

Post by swiftcoder »

p1esk wrote: post #292
swiftcoder wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe in abstract. I doubt the majority of people have considered those positions in more detail than "wouldn't it be nice if no one could tell me what to do?", or "wouldn't it be nice to never worry about money ever again?". Close proximity to a bunch of tech executives very quickly cured me of any illusion that I wanted to belong to that in-group. Most already with more money than they knew how to spend, and still…

Well, you write code for a living, right? I’m guessing the vast majority of humans would shudder at the thought of doing that 40 hours a week. It would be a similar attitude to what you expressed towards executives. Executives are sexier than coders, at least for general population. And it’s not clear which one would become more attractive to an average Joe after personally experiencing both professions. I’ve read th…

I go home at the end of my 40 hours (at least now I'm the far side of 30), which I think makes my deal qualatatively better than the exec who barely sees his wife and kids in the first place, and then calls into every SEV from family vacation.

Like... I don't know how evident it is to folks who haven't been on the receiving end of the round-the-clock exec communiques, but those people just don't have an off switch. It's like working with a coked-up energizer bunny

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#295

Post by mikhailfranco »

rubicon33 wrote: post #166

Appreciate you posting this. For what it's worth, I'm in the same boat. I basically achieved my goals in life and am now very comfortable. I could just continue to work and keep up-to-date and find myself old and tired in short time. I'm poignantly aware of this window of opportunity which is closing. I'm still young(ish), and still have some physical and mental energy... The question is what will I use it for? What…

Just work on a side project, artistic longing, hobby, craft skill, church, new language, charity, ... And if those are ill-formed for you, or lacking a pull, just go travelling...

Give yourself a deadline. Not a deadline to achieve, but a deadline to decide.

Stay in your country, explore the east and the west, the loud and the quiet, the beautiful and the ugly. And pay complete attention to every person in front of you, at all times, in attentive and generous detail.

Travel a continent, or the world. Start somewhere you have curiosity to be satisfied: proximity, historical knowledge, smattering of the language, distant family history, old friend, current networked contact... Then just go.

Don't be instagram-deluded and selfie-stick blind. Commit to not taking any photos, it's a liberation. Let loved-ones know you are safe, but no reporting back to a once-before and never-again esteemed group of fake friends. Yet always look at everything with a photographer's eye - still and moving. Look. See. Be still. Be moved.

Focus on something concrete, but unimportant, where the journey will be the objective. A pilgrimage, the museums of Europe, a long distance trail, the temples of Asia, a minimal beach, a bustling third world city. Become a short-time expert in the music scene, enjoy a local festival, work on a local farm or fishing boat. Understand tea or tea tree oil, spinning or spinakkers, avocadoes or cocoa, crab fishing or craps tables.

Put quiet aquisition of wisdom above loud narrow achievement.

Stay, linger, go.

Watch, wait, listen, decide.

I promise you will soon have some important personal decisions to make.

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#296

Post by all2 »

vouwfietsman wrote: post #293
all2 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused at what you are trying to say. As far as I can tell, it appears you are saying something like "don't quote religious texts in a way that makes them look like they have any claim on moral authority". And it appears to me that you are saying "moral authority", in this case, is a-religious and should not be related to any particular religion. Am I getting this right?

Well, fundamentally moral authority is a misguided idea, morals don't flow from an authority, morals are constructed and transformed over time by society. Taking your morals from an authority directly is itself immoral, as they don't have a foundation of human rights or empathy but rather are based on arbitrary ancient writing of arbitrary ancient writers. I'm saying quoting religious texts without religious context…

> Taking your morals from an authority directly is itself immoral, as they don't have a foundation of human rights or empathy but rather are based on arbitrary ancient writing of arbitrary ancient writers.

Where do you think should morals come from? A more precise question would be "where does human morality arise from?" Or even more fundamental, "why is it wrong to do one thing and not another?".

Given what you've said about religion and moral authority, I am genuinely curious to know your answers to these questions.

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#297

Post by vouwfietsman »

all2 wrote: post #296
vouwfietsman wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, fundamentally moral authority is a misguided idea, morals don't flow from an authority, morals are constructed and transformed over time by society. Taking your morals from an authority directly is itself immoral, as they don't have a foundation of human rights or empathy but rather are based on arbitrary ancient writing of arbitrary ancient writers. I'm saying quoting religious texts without religious context…

> Taking your morals from an authority directly is itself immoral, as they don't have a foundation of human rights or empathy but rather are based on arbitrary ancient writing of arbitrary ancient writers. Where do you think should morals come from? A more precise question would be "where does human morality arise from?" Or even more fundamental, "why is it wrong to do one thing and not another?". Given what you've s…

As already mentioned, empathy.

You are referencing the age old argument of moral origins, you can simply google to find out many sides of the argument (example: https://www.quora.com/If-not-for-religion-where-do-morals-an...).

However, its quite simple to resolve. The gist of it is: if you need a deity holding judgement over you to distinguish right from wrong, you are probably a psychopath.

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#298

Post by kadushka »

swiftcoder wrote: post #294
p1esk wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you write code for a living, right? I’m guessing the vast majority of humans would shudder at the thought of doing that 40 hours a week. It would be a similar attitude to what you expressed towards executives. Executives are sexier than coders, at least for general population. And it’s not clear which one would become more attractive to an average Joe after personally experiencing both professions. I’ve read th…

I go home at the end of my 40 hours (at least now I'm the far side of 30), which I think makes my deal qualatatively better than the exec who barely sees his wife and kids in the first place, and then calls into every SEV from family vacation. Like... I don't know how evident it is to folks who haven't been on the receiving end of the round-the-clock exec communiques, but those people just don't have an off switch. I…

It's not evident. I've had a fairly long career in tech (both as an IC and as a manager) and many execs I worked with didn't do much of really impactful work. Sure, they attended a lot of meetings, created spreadsheets and slides (while they were attending the meetings). They left work at 6pm, with the rest of us, and came back to office at 9am the following morning with the rest of us. I don't remember ever feeling the pressure to respond to an email or Slack message sent after 6pm, and the overall number of times I received those was not large. Typically founders worked more than the rest, but that's not surprising. I'm talking about execs below C level.

Execs probably have a higher ratio of BS artists, and SWEs have a higher ratio of slackers, but overall the fraction of workaholics is about the same.

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#299

Post by hellojesus »

gen220 wrote: post #233
hellojesus wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you're saying, but as someone completely unfamiliar with the Bible but familiar with the common phrase, "Money is the root of all evil", I agree that the GP's original statement is much clearer. > For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. This reads not that money itself is the root of evils, or even that a desire for money ensures you live a sinful life. To me this reads that money, as a moti…

> But someone who uses their desire of money as a catalyst for bringing world change via a new product, service, knowledge, is well found in their desires and implementation, as they are making the world better while achieving their goals. For what it's worth – and I think it is a worthwhile thing to note – I do not believe that Jesus would condone this. To Christ, the root of "well-founded" behavior is the golden ru…

Thank you for the response and the links. It's an interesting perspective on life, but I'm not sure I'm totally sold.

> 17And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. 19You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’” 20And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have kept from my youth.” 21And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” 22Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

Here we do see the commandment for this rich man to rid himself of his possessions, but the command instructs him to take the proceeds and give it to the poor.

In selling his goods, does the man not capture value from his customers? He does so, and then is able to transfer the value freely to those who have none.

IMO, capturing value through voluntary transactions isn't robbing the counterparty. In fact, you may be treating them exactly as they wish to be treated. For example, I am quite happy to buy a phone for $700. It would take me far more than $700 to make my own phone, so the trade is really quite good for me. And I don't mind that some of the $700 goes to paying the people that did create the phone. Both parties are left better off.

Assumingly my employer feels the same about me, and we trade time for money. With the money, I can support myself and use the surplus to give freely to others.

I don't see any of this as a bad thing. But if I did rent out a house that was mold infested, knowingly, and refused willfully that fix it, that would be a violation of the golden rule.

Re: Obituary for a quiet life (2023)

#300

Post by gen220 »

hellojesus wrote: post #299
gen220 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But someone who uses their desire of money as a catalyst for bringing world change via a new product, service, knowledge, is well found in their desires and implementation, as they are making the world better while achieving their goals. For what it's worth – and I think it is a worthwhile thing to note – I do not believe that Jesus would condone this. To Christ, the root of "well-founded" behavior is the golden ru…

Thank you for the response and the links. It's an interesting perspective on life, but I'm not sure I'm totally sold. > 17And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. 19You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery…

> In selling his goods, does the man not capture value from his customers?

No, because selling goods is not the same thing as capturing value. Jesus is not asking for the man to first accrue wealth and then distribute it, he's asking the man to liquidate his wealth and distribute them. The implication is that the man developed his wealth through value capture.

> I don't mind that some of the $700 goes to paying the people that did create the phone. Both parties are left better off.

This unfortunately omits the many other parties involved in the supply chain, who are exploited and whose exploitation is carefully elided or hand-waved away by the phone vendor.

You're not exploiting them, though. Even the vendor has plausible deniability – because local governments have "different norms" around worker safety. And hey, they have money now that they didn't have before! So don't look too closely, OK?

You're a point of negative pressure (demand) in the system, that collectively keeps the whole system in balance. It's difficult to wrap our brains around and difficult to accept, which (IMO) makes its informed maintainers worse than a petty criminal.

Of course, capturing value through voluntary transactions does not necessarily rob the counterparty. But in today's complicated global economy, it's unfortunately insufficient to look at your transactions in isolation to know that you're not robbing somebody by proxy, or becoming an accessory to a robbery.

To put it in relief: is money laundering a violation of the golden rule, even if you capture no value from said laundering?

Post reply on HN