The Art of Money Getting • Hacker News Board

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#101

Post by neilyio » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:21 PM UTC

roncesvalles wrote: post #93

Michelangelo11 wrote: post #14

> Barnum’s first rule: pick the work you’re built for, then aim to be the best at it. Edsger Dijkstra, in one of his letters, giving advice (IIRC) to a PhD student: "Do only what only you can do." Kind of funny to see one of the greatest computer scientists and one of the greatest public entertainers giving the same advice, but I guess that speaks strongly in its favor.

I've come to learn that "do only what only you can do" is not great advice at all. It's leagues better to be the 10,000th-best SWE at Meta than the world's best basketweaver. Often doing something super unique is an excuse for shying away from mainstream competition.

I couldn’t resist a quick Google search for this.

“Mary Jackson is a world-famous African-American sweetgrass basket weaver. In 2008, she was named a MacArthur Fellow for her basket weaving.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jackson_(artist)?wprov=sf...

I have to say, that sounds more fulfilling than anything I will ever do. People who become the best at anything are usually truly extraordinary.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#102

Post by Aurornis » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:31 PM UTC

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #5

> They take whatever job pays and spend decades fighting upstream. I suspect that this affects a lot of folks in tech. There's a lot of money to be made, so people get into it. They don't really like what they do, so it's always a chore. Their work often shows it, too. I'm retired. I don't have to write software, but I spend more time writing software (for free), than I did, for most of my career. I like the Integrit…

It’s everywhere in tech. Ever since tech became known as the place to be for high paying jobs without requiring too much education or working hours, compared to traditional routes like doctor or lawyer.

The better places to work have some ability to filter it out. Not perfectly, but enough to make it hard to be there if your goal is to max your paychecks while minimizing and/or hating your work.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#103

Post by cm11 » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:33 PM UTC

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #39

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #5

> They take whatever job pays and spend decades fighting upstream. I suspect that this affects a lot of folks in tech. There's a lot of money to be made, so people get into it. They don't really like what they do, so it's always a chore. Their work often shows it, too. I'm retired. I don't have to write software, but I spend more time writing software (for free), than I did, for most of my career. I like the Integrit…

> and that's pretty important to me The older I get, the more I realize what a critical component of personal and social relationships it is, and how deeply it reinforces virtually everything good in society. There's never a good reason to forgo it, and never a good reason to accept spending time with people who don't have it. It only leads to trouble. I started my career in ad tech and it was often such abject miser…

Integrity is important and missing. I think there's a contradiction in what you're writing though. Recognizing the importance of personal and social relationships is what's keeping the no integrity people around and/or getting them promoted. It's the networking for networking sake as well as the more mundane social lubricating they do in contradiction to integrity. It's disagreeing with discussions, projects, companies, leaders and going along with it and expressing agreement. It's smiling, being "enjoyable to be around", being naive or presenting as naive, and being easy to work with. And more specifically being easy for the many liars and sociopaths to work with. Caring for personal and social relationships is not inherently reinforcing of all that is good. I wouldn't know how to count, but I feel there's quite a bit of it reinforcing the bad.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#104

Post by Aurornis » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:34 PM UTC

neilyio wrote: post #101

roncesvalles wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to learn that "do only what only you can do" is not great advice at all. It's leagues better to be the 10,000th-best SWE at Meta than the world's best basketweaver. Often doing something super unique is an excuse for shying away from mainstream competition.

I couldn’t resist a quick Google search for this. “Mary Jackson is a world-famous African-American sweetgrass basket weaver. In 2008, she was named a MacArthur Fellow for her basket weaving.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jackson_(artist)?wprov=sf... I have to say, that sounds more fulfilling than anything I will ever do. People who become the best at anything are usually truly extraordinary.

Focusing on the best of anything is usually misleading.

The deep end of anything almost always has some positives attached to it. The best basketball players make a ton of money. That doesn’t make it a good career option.

For more obscure activities it takes an unreal amount of effort and sacrifice to get near the deep end of the pool. I grew up knowing a lot of people who were the best of the best at their sports and poured their life into it, but none of them ended up making it professionally or getting into the Olympics despite a lot of trying.

For a hobby or sport it’s more enjoyable if you’re not trying to turn it into something more. Leave it as a relaxing thing you do on the side.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#105

Post by pessimizer » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:37 PM UTC

kingofmen wrote: post #80

sireat wrote: post #57

I am paraphrasing but I think it was W. Buffett who said: "Work at the job that you do not hate" In other words, not all vocations that you are great at and talented and want to pursue are valued by current world. I love playing chess way more and actually am reasonably good at it, but programming and teaching are valued more and I like those too. As Jimmy O. Yang's father reportedly said: "Pursuing your dreams is ho…

What are those artists successful at ? Making art, or marketing it? The New York art scene is a curious example in this context, because it is notoriously all about who you know rather than what you do, and that's not usually considered a good thing.

> What are those artists successful at?

Making money in the profession that they enjoy, rather than having to take up one that they enjoy less.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#106

Post by xg15 » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:40 PM UTC

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #5

> They take whatever job pays and spend decades fighting upstream. I suspect that this affects a lot of folks in tech. There's a lot of money to be made, so people get into it. They don't really like what they do, so it's always a chore. Their work often shows it, too. I'm retired. I don't have to write software, but I spend more time writing software (for free), than I did, for most of my career. I like the Integrit…

I think this even affects people who do see their vocation in tech. The field has become so vast with many subfields that you can easily find yourself in a different subfield than the one you were originally interested in - probably even more so when everyone and everything is pulled towards AI.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#107

Post by arwhatever » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:42 PM UTC

didgetmaster wrote: post #69

Even if you find a vocation that you generally enjoy, it doesn't mean that you will enjoy every part of it. I love to program, but there have been a number of jobs and tasks during my career that I definitely did not like. I think this probably applies to every career. You have to navigate within your available options to balance things that pay well with the ones you enjoy doing. I have a side project that I truly e…

Knew a guy who owned an I.T. consultancy who was fond of (privately) saying, "This job wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the customers and the employees!"

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#108

Post by squidbeak » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

roncesvalles wrote: post #93

Michelangelo11 wrote: post #14

> Barnum’s first rule: pick the work you’re built for, then aim to be the best at it. Edsger Dijkstra, in one of his letters, giving advice (IIRC) to a PhD student: "Do only what only you can do." Kind of funny to see one of the greatest computer scientists and one of the greatest public entertainers giving the same advice, but I guess that speaks strongly in its favor.

I've come to learn that "do only what only you can do" is not great advice at all. It's leagues better to be the 10,000th-best SWE at Meta than the world's best basketweaver. Often doing something super unique is an excuse for shying away from mainstream competition.

I think you underestimate just how competitive obscure fields and crafts can be. The world's second-best basketweaver is likely to be painfully aware of their superior rival, and push themselves hard to catch up and surpass them.

What you're really arguing is that SWEs are superior to basketweavers. But I wouldn't be so sure. That basket might well be around and admired long after the software's obsolete and gone.

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#109

Post by cindyllm » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:51 PM UTC

squidbeak wrote: post #108

roncesvalles wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to learn that "do only what only you can do" is not great advice at all. It's leagues better to be the 10,000th-best SWE at Meta than the world's best basketweaver. Often doing something super unique is an excuse for shying away from mainstream competition.

I think you underestimate just how competitive obscure fields and crafts can be. The world's second-best basketweaver is likely to be painfully aware of their superior rival, and push themselves hard to catch up and surpass them. What you're really arguing is that SWEs are superior to basketweavers. But I wouldn't be so sure. That basket might well be around and admired long after the software's obsolete and gone.

[dead]

Re: The Art of Money Getting

#110

Post by xg15 » Sat, May 23, 2026, 9:52 PM UTC

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #46

an0malous wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is conflated by the fact that most people start to enjoy things that give them a lot of money and prestige. Otherwise everyone would be in playing sports and making art, the things kids do before they care about money and prestige

I think they enjoy the money and prestige; not the work, itself. I get a real joy out of developing software. I have, for all my adult life. The fact that it paid well, was gravy. I do feel that I was incredibly fortunate to have landed into a field that I already loved. I guess that my loving it, made me much better at it. Of course, there were lots of "friction points," along the way. Working for myself, in retirem…

Yeah, maybe a test could be: How much do you enjoy the time actually working on something vs the time going home and enjoying the things your wage enables you to have.

Or as the sibling comment said, do you enjoy the vocation or the vacation more?

(Everything in moderation of course: Even the most interesting and meaningful project will turn into drudgery to some degree, simply due to the amounts of time involved. Also we're in the attention economy, so there are lots of things specifically designed to feel more rewarding in the short term than to work on a long-term project. Maybe the difference is how much meaning and reward there still stays besides the day-to-day drudgery)