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

The self-made man

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: The self-made man

#81

Post by rayiner »

ancap wrote: post #77
rayiner wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean that network where the operator tried to call in an hit on people? Look at how many Bitcoin networks have been hacked (the digital equivalent of using violence). And in real world black markets, (think mafia), violence is rife (even in areas where the underlying transactions aren't illegal).

That's beside the point. You stated without government the "framework of trade [will] break down". On the contrary, even after scandals and shutdown markets, new markets pop up and, incredibly, people continue to use them. As for Bitcoin networks being hacked that is a red herring as we often hear of non-black market sites being hacked--even with the all mighty government protection.

Even with the black market, government provides a backdrop of expectations. Murderers are still prosecuted even if the murder happened in a black market trade. I'm talking about a situation where there is no disincentive to use force, e.g. a place like Somalia or rural Pakistan.

Re: The self-made man

#82

Post by briandear »

calinet6 wrote: post #63
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We would be a different kind of society were we to match our perception of success and failure with the reality of that success or failure. We don't have to give up our sense of individualism and the respect for personal growth and contribution; we just need to back it up with a recognition of the surrounding factors that are extremely real and highly influential on all our lives. I know we would be a better societ…

I agree, I too have seen signs of respect for externalities more and more. I think it's getting very difficult to ignore in light of the increasingly obvious wealth and opportunity gap in this country.

The opportunity gap is a myth. The real problem is cultural. Too many people believe themselves victims and act accordingly. There is certainly a very low probability of a poor person becoming a millionaire, but there are plenty of people who could go from poor to middle class if they made better decisions. For example, the poor too often gets caught up in the bread and circuses aspects to their own detriment. Do a survey of public housing projects and find out how many people have cable TV. It isn't about the monetary cost of that cable TV but it's a question of the opportunity cost. If someone were to spend two hours watching TV each day (actually a very low number) or if that person were to spend two hours at the public library learning something (for example learning basic coding) then in perhaps a year they might be able to find an entry level tech job. And, with the $30-60 per month they're saving from giving up TV, they could buy a cheap Linux box to start doing some coding on ODesk or eLancr, etc. in fact, most TVs cost as much as a low cost computer. Yet, time and time again you have poor people who can tell you everything about the Kardashians and nothing about HTML. I am not suggesting everyone should be a coder, but as an example it demonstrates a problem of priorities. Barely 8 years ago, I was dead broke, even living in my car for several months. My parents didn't go to college -- we weren't in poverty, however if would have been easy to just follow the path of the lower middle class. Instead, I'm now a software engineer and sometimes entrepreneur making over $200k per year. I make more in a year than my dad made in almost 6 years! I am not special -- anyone who is motivated can do it. The problem is that there is a culture of dependency among much of the poor. Effectively, our society has turned the poor into a bunch of children. Contrast that to the poor in China where entrepreneurism rather than dependency is the norm. American society enables the poor. Our War on Poverty has resulted in no change to poverty rates. Perhaps it's time to stop blaming the rich and start blaming leftist politicians who gain their power from a dependent underclass.

Re: The self-made man

#83

Post by briandear »

ancap wrote: post #53
rayiner wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may not agree with it, but its not arbitrary to say that the economy should strive to give people credit for what they choose to do, rather than what you luck into. Its a distinction based on a well-defined criterion. I'm not really interested in discussing outliers like Michael Jordan, or tiny segments of the economy like sports or entertainment. I'm talking about how we distribute the proceeds of our industrial…

> the economy should strive to give people credit for what they choose to do The economy is an inanimate abstract. It does not strive for anything. It is not interested in anyone's perception of what is fair any more than my phone is interested in vulgar language. The economy consists of billions of individuals getting together and saying "I have x to offer, I want y". To try to force some idea of justice, morality,…

If I could upvote twice, I would. The idea that the economy is a "being" is communist rot. The idea that we can (or should) control the economy is nonsense. Attempting to control the economy is like trying to control the weather. Certainly we can work harder to mitigate the effects of the weather, but a bunch of smart people thinking hard enough can't stop a hurricane, no matter how socially desirable that might be.

Re: The self-made man

#84

Post by rokhayakebe »

danielweber wrote: post #41
rokhayakebe wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do some people work 60 hours a week when others barely crack 10? That "grit" doesn't come from nowhere. Are you suggesting the people "cracking" only 10 lack the ability to work 60 hours weekly?

I'm not sure what you are asking, but I directly observe that, when presented with the choice between doing something hard that pays off a lot, or doing something easy that pays off little or not at all, that there are a bunch of people in the first camp and a bunch in the second camp. This doesn't strictly break down by SES, either, although there are certainly trends. You can come up with all sorts of reasons for t…

when presented with the choice between .... bunch of people in the first camp and a bunch in the second camp.

This is a VERY narrowed perspective.

Unless these behaviors are constant across all areas of one's life, they only tell you what one's priorities are.

Because someone may sacrifice short term for long term gain in their career, while at the same time sacrificing long term gain for short term satiation when it comes to food or health.

So truly what can be said about this marvelous developer, and about his ability to hold on for long term outcomes, when she refused a Google buyout offer and took her company public, when at the same time she pushed back starting a family, eating healthy, and working out.

My point is NO-ONE belongs to one camp and one camp only. You and I, and all others belong to both camps.

Re: The self-made man

#85

Post by calinet6 »

ghostwriter wrote: post #74
calinet6 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll repeat this again even though I posted it below, because the analogy is so applicable, and I like having thought of it so well: A wire is connected to the electricity, which powers the bulb. The bulb cannot light without the electricity, and it cannot light without the wire. Is the success of the bulb attributable to the wire, or the outlet?

The success of the bulb is the result of (and to the extend of) its internal design. Change the bulb to a cork and you'll never see the light, whatever wires and outlets you have for it.

This is flat out false.

What of a perfectly designed bulb without a fixture that holds it correctly for electrical contact?

What if no cord is attached to that fixture?

What if the cord is not plugged in?

What if the cord doesn't have a plug that fits the outlet?

What if the internal wiring of the building doesn't support the bulb's voltage?

What if the electrical grid is not attached to the building?

What if the transformer that turns the grid voltage to one the bulb can use has blown or doesn't do its job?

What if the grid is overloaded, or not correctly handling the appropriate load for the time of day and electrical demand?

What if the power plants themselves are not producing the planned and coordinated output?

What if the supply of coal or oil to power the plants is disrupted?

And on and on.

The bulb absolutely depends on the stability and function of systems surrounding it; systems that are hundreds of millions of times larger and more complex than the bulb itself. The bulb's success is due to both its intrinsic properties and quite literally hundreds of external factors that you cannot take for granted.

The pervasive ignorance of this seemingly obvious facet of our daily lives is astounding.

More astounding is that people fail to apply it to individual people—or to themselves—equally. It applies equally—without question.w

Re: The self-made man

#86

Post by calinet6 »

briandear wrote: post #82
calinet6 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I too have seen signs of respect for externalities more and more. I think it's getting very difficult to ignore in light of the increasingly obvious wealth and opportunity gap in this country.

The opportunity gap is a myth. The real problem is cultural. Too many people believe themselves victims and act accordingly. There is certainly a very low probability of a poor person becoming a millionaire, but there are plenty of people who could go from poor to middle class if they made better decisions. For example, the poor too often gets caught up in the bread and circuses aspects to their own detriment. Do a s…

This discussion always makes the libertarian cream of the crop rise to the top of the vat.

You are wrong in nearly every sentence; I don't have the time or patience to convince you, I wasted 5 years of my life arguing with a libertarian already. Please consider the wider systems surrounding each person's condition. They are not fake.

Re: The self-made man

#87

Post by radisb »

DamnYuppie wrote: post #71
radisb wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO, it has nothing to do with importance or impact of the work one does. It has to do with the supply and demand: Even if we assume the irrational that e.g. a cleaner's work is 100x more important than Zuckerberg's work, the fact that for every Zuckerberg we can find much more than 100 cleaners means that a Zuckerberg is much more important than a cleaner, not that cleaning is more important or less important that…

I don't think there is a true scarcity of Zuckerberg's as every day I walk down the street and am amazed at the overwhelming mass of self important d-bags walking around.... All trolling and snark aside your comment is the antithesis of the point that many factors outside of the individual contribute to their success. If you believe that then the number of those individuals capable of similar success rises dramatical…

> Also I am very certain that people would get by better without Facebook then they would with the lowly legions of those toiling away to keep the world merely "clean".

I totally agree with that. That's why I weight it with the scarcity. Of course you disagree with the scarcity of Zuckerberg, but in my comment I assume that what defines a "Zuckerberg" includes the outside factors that the individual doesnt control.

Re: The self-made man

#88

Post by calinet6 »

briandear wrote: post #82
calinet6 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I too have seen signs of respect for externalities more and more. I think it's getting very difficult to ignore in light of the increasingly obvious wealth and opportunity gap in this country.

The opportunity gap is a myth. The real problem is cultural. Too many people believe themselves victims and act accordingly. There is certainly a very low probability of a poor person becoming a millionaire, but there are plenty of people who could go from poor to middle class if they made better decisions. For example, the poor too often gets caught up in the bread and circuses aspects to their own detriment. Do a s…

One more thing: "Contrast that to the poor in China" -- a communist country. Then you go blaming "leftist politicians." Hm.
Post reply on HN