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

Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

joanwestenberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 81 posts

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#41

Post by natebc »

moralestapia wrote: post #39
reactordev wrote: post #18

40 is the new 30s and life really starts after 50. Until then you’re spinning your wheels trying to pay back loans, raise kids, work, save, and not fall victim to vices. Colonel Sanders started KFC in his 40s and didn’t come up with the signature recipe until he was 50. KFC as we know it didn’t exist until he was 65. Truth is, most successful business owners start in their mid 40s or around 40.

>40 is the new 30s and life really starts after 50. If you're poor, yes. I don't mean this in a derogaroty way.

What?

What's the secret that you know which makes poor people have a better life after 50? I'd love to hear it and quit working so damn hard. Hell these days the middle class is getting their ass kicked at the grocery store. I can't even imagine how hard it would be if you cut my income by what it would take to get me to the poverty line. That amount won't even cover my rent.

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#42

Post by freetime2 »

smeeger wrote: post #30
reactordev wrote: post #18

40 is the new 30s and life really starts after 50. Until then you’re spinning your wheels trying to pay back loans, raise kids, work, save, and not fall victim to vices. Colonel Sanders started KFC in his 40s and didn’t come up with the signature recipe until he was 50. KFC as we know it didn’t exist until he was 65. Truth is, most successful business owners start in their mid 40s or around 40.

i was asking myself what is the point of succeeding if its so late in life. then i wondered what is the point of succeeding young? having a ten year period of not working when you otherwise would be? but business owners and other rich people work harder than most… so the only way to succeed is to not only succeed but make enough to stop working? i just dont understand what im chasing anymore. the only two clear objec…

> the only two clear objectives that i can identify are to avoid discomfort unless its deliberate discomfort and to become rich just to prove to myself that i can

IMO any fulfilling goal needs to be about more than just yourself. Not just avoiding discomfort for yourself, but also providing stability for a family (note: not saying this needs to be a "traditional" family). And in business the goal should be to contribute positively to your community, which can include seemingly mundane things like producing things of value, establishing trust-based relationships, mentoring others, providing employment opportunities, etc.

I also don't think the goal of early retirement should just be to quit and do nothing - I think that's actually quite unhealthy. But rather to free up time to focus on the things that are most important to you. Self improvement, health, family, charitable causes and other causes that are important to you, and of course some leisure time as well.

I think by those measures, Kurt Vonnegut was a very successful person. I don't know that always translated into happiness, though. Although I think he was about as happy as he could be - which is the most we can ask for.

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#43

Post by badc0ffee »

selectodude wrote: post #38
isleyaardvark wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think child prodigies as commonly known exist in computer programming. A child can learn concertos or even write concertos, but not the comparable version of a concerto in code.

Geohot sim unlocked the iPhone at 17.

Pff, I unlock my iPhone all the time

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#45

Post by hodgehog11 »

Unfortunately, this doesn't fully transfer over for math. The Fields Medal has an age limit on it for example, based on an ancient premise that old mathematicians can't make new incredible discoveries.

It's ridiculous though, I've seen some older mathematicians do some incredible work by themselves. Rare in my experience, but it happens.

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#46

Post by reactordev »

moralestapia wrote: post #39
reactordev wrote: post #18

40 is the new 30s and life really starts after 50. Until then you’re spinning your wheels trying to pay back loans, raise kids, work, save, and not fall victim to vices. Colonel Sanders started KFC in his 40s and didn’t come up with the signature recipe until he was 50. KFC as we know it didn’t exist until he was 65. Truth is, most successful business owners start in their mid 40s or around 40.

>40 is the new 30s and life really starts after 50. If you're poor, yes. I don't mean this in a derogaroty way.

Even the rich, get richer… this comment definitely misses the point.

The point isn’t about money, it’s about spending time doing the things you enjoy doing. Without commitment to doing so because it’s your job. Some people find their ikigai early. Some decide to work to provide for others and put their own ambitions aside. Selflessly. So sure, the kid genius who struck it rich at 22 that now lives in a mansion is “living his best life”. By what standards? We have different measuring sticks.

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#47

Post by marbro »

jongjong wrote: post #33

I feel like there is powerful social conditioning in our society which prevents people who didn't succeed early from succeeding later. It's not about their work. At the end of the day, nobody can succeed in society without the stamp of approval from a bunch of elites. Like a big publisher, or a big social media influencer or a big media platform editor. Nowadays, it seems more than ever, that the elites all have to a…

Charlie Sheen was successful at age 20 in Platoon and has been a drug addict since.

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#48

Post by gowld »

hodgehog11 wrote: post #45

Unfortunately, this doesn't fully transfer over for math. The Fields Medal has an age limit on it for example, based on an ancient premise that old mathematicians can't make new incredible discoveries. It's ridiculous though, I've seen some older mathematicians do some incredible work by themselves. Rare in my experience, but it happens.

The Fields Medal isn't the only achievement in math.

> based on an ancient premise that old mathematicians can't make new incredible discoveries.

Not true. The Fields Medal is an encouragement to do more work, not a reward for completion.

https://www.ams.org/notices/201501/rnoti-p15.pdf In fact, the strict age limit of forty was only codified at the 1966 Congress, although an informal criterion of youth preceded it. Fields’s remark that is often interpreted as favoring young medalists, that the prize should be “in recognition of work already done” but was “at the same time intended to be an encouragement for further achievement,” is associated with no claim about the age or career status of the recipient. Rather, the stipulation that the award should be given “not alone because of the outstanding character of the achievement but also with a view to encouraging further development along these lines,” was Fields’s suggestion for how “to avoid invidious comparisons” from partisans dissecting candidates’ existing work [18, pp. 173– 174]. What started with a worry about rivalrous national factions became an excuse to narrow the pool of candidates and eventually turned into a restrictive cutoff. It is yet another myth that Fields intended the medal only for the young.

https://www.ams.org/journals/notices/201504/rnoti-p327.pdf

Re: Remember: Kurt Vonnegut Was 47

#49

Post by bananaflag »

hodgehog11 wrote: post #45

Unfortunately, this doesn't fully transfer over for math. The Fields Medal has an age limit on it for example, based on an ancient premise that old mathematicians can't make new incredible discoveries. It's ridiculous though, I've seen some older mathematicians do some incredible work by themselves. Rare in my experience, but it happens.

> The Fields Medal has an age limit on it for example, based on an ancient premise that old mathematicians can't make new incredible discoveries.

No, it's like that because it was established to encourage young promising researchers. It should not have become the "supreme award" of mathematics. Fortunately, now we also have the Abel Prize.

Post reply on HN