Being ambitious and being a dad

Post by somenameforme » Wed, Aug 19, 2026, 5:06 AM UTC

voidmain0001 wrote: post #129

reillyse wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it funny that I spent my 20s and 30s doing everything in my power to avoid having kids and at this stage in my life I’m doing everything to have kids. I do feel that 30 year old me would definitely be in better shape to chase kids around.

This. I’m an old dad. I realized two years ago that to keep up with my pre-teens I had to change my lifestyle. For me that meant cutting out alcohol, not eating processed foods, avoiding sugar, reduced caffeine, way more protein and doing calisthenics. I sleep well and I have energy. I just have to keep this up for 10 more years when my youngest will be 21, then I can die. ;-)

Post by somenameforme » Wed, Aug 19, 2026, 5:14 AM UTC

Quothling wrote: post #86

marssaxman wrote: post #32

The passionate hunger to do something significant and meaningful with my life was a major reason I took care never to have any children. Having grown up in a large family within a religious subculture full of other large families, the amount of time and attention children consume was crystal clear from a young age, and I knew that I was going to need every scrap of energy I could spare for the work I wanted to do. Ye…

I got sort of lucky early in my career because I had a talent that was discovered in a national network. Which meant I found myself writing national strategies for IT in our public sector (Denmark) at my late 20ies. It felt great for a year, or maybe two. When it stopped being fun though, it sort of hit me hard. I did enjoy writing and working on the strategies with other people. All the "glamour" around it, advicing…

Post by marttt » Wed, Aug 19, 2026, 5:24 AM UTC

alanwreath wrote: post #232

enos_feedler wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain this please.

I mean: siblings. Not to discount that it’s great when you play with your kids, but it’s different when your kids play together, and in particular when you can’t play that they have someone to interact with.

   1. Kid A plays with Kid B
   2. Kid A plays alone and Kid B plays alone

   1. Kids A, B and C play together
   2. Kid A plays with Kid B, Kid C plays alone
   3. Kid A plays with Kid C, Kid B plays alone
   4. Kid B plays with Kid C, Kid A plays alone
   5. Kid A, Kid B and Kid C all play alone

Post by Calazon » Wed, Aug 19, 2026, 5:40 AM UTC

dalyons wrote: post #80

Calazon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately any two ambitions will compete with each other for finite time and energy. (Assuming each ambition benefits from more time and energy being spent on it, which is usually the case.) You can be reasonably successful in multiple areas, but you can't max them all, you have to compromise somehow.

i agree. But i read the blog post as the author trying to escape having to compromise. Which, as we seemingly both think, is not possible.

Post by ElProlactin » Wed, Aug 19, 2026, 5:42 AM UTC

avinoth wrote: post #242

ElProlactin wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can have the best ship but if you're sailing in the wrong direction, you're still sailing in the wrong direction.

Which is good if sailing is what you wanted and like to do, which is what the author and the OP is implying. You don't necessarily have to "succeed" or "reach" somewhere.