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

Risk Everything (2007)

web.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 142 posts

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#101

Post by koheripbal »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #96
buro9 wrote: post #66

I had to do this when young... I was homeless, rough sleeping. Honestly... it's a terrible piece of advice. Those risking everything have no other choice. If you're reading this person's blog post, if you're on HN... you probably have a choice, and you probably aren't "risking everything". I cannot imagine anyone on here actually choosing to potentially have nothing at all, no network, no funds, no assets, no nothing…

>> Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it. Speaking for myself, I'm kinda priviledged in working in the carnival, it's a good and steady income and I'm accumulating wealth, meaning I'm in a more economically privileged position than my parents and their parents were (housing crisis / cost of living aside, of course, sigh). That can, down the line, if I feel like it, be used as a springboa…

Plenty of poor kids visit the carnival. Having worked there, lots of kids walking around are poor.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#102

Post by manholio »

ajvs wrote: post #76
pavlov wrote: post #69

A reminder that this story plays out dozens of times every day in the Mediterranean right now. 42,549 irregular border crossings were reported in July 2022 on the Central Mediterranean route [1]. The number of those who drowned will never be known. Many of these Africans who dare to cross the sea have already travelled for weeks or months and survived the Sahara. They are not celebrated as risktakers, though. Unlike…

> Unlike this article, nobody sings odes to the boldness, inventiveness, motivation, honor and leadership qualities of the African migrant. Maybe they should. It's a bit odd that choice of traits to ascribe to economic migrants, which could be better describe the African entrepreneurs who chose to stay and improve their home community.

It's only odd because we project our own biases and values onto them: one is a criminal as far as the western law systems are concerned, another is an entrepreneurial foreigner.

But in reality, both are bold, inventive and motivated. The difference is just the capital - financial, social and educational - each one holds, those who have nothing are simply willing to accept riskier propositions.

Don't for a moment think you you can bootstrap a business in a corrupt African state using nothing but your hands and back, with no education, no connections and no money. Even if you are insanely productive and entrepreneurial, without greasing the right hands you will be picked clean by criminal rings, protection rackets, unscrupulous competitors etc. It's hard for a westerner to relate to a life where rule of law is spotty and tends to cover only major crimes.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#103

Post by jyriand »

adastra22 wrote: post #90
_zamorano_ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Daniel Kahneman, in his book thinking fast and slow, has a really good insight on why people in bad situations keep taking bad choices. Google "The fourfold pattern". Basically, he states that there's a cognitive bias where people in situations where a poor outcome is likely to happen, tend to risk too much, and not settle for a bad (but better) outcome that what they already have. If they kept compounding these "bad…

Just FYI, pretty much all of Thinking Fast and Slow has been caught up in the replication crisis and repudiated. I don't know about the fourfold pattern in particular.

Can you share your source, please.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#104

Post by pid-1 »

dskloet wrote: post #95
WJW wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever that comment comes up I feel the urge to just post the wiki entry for the Kelly criterion. If you don't have as many resources as your competitors in the market, reduce your bet size!!! Yes, that may mean you cannot challenge Mark Zuckerberg for yacht size just yet, but it will also mean that you can try again if you fail. Match your ambition to your means. Super risky plans with no room for errors make for…

> I feel the urge to just post the wiki entry for the Kelly criterion. Apparently not that strong of an urge ;-). For those (like me) who didn't know it yet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion

> It is valid when the expected returns are known

Sounds like a great way to lose money.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#105

Post by mkl »

jyriand wrote: post #103
adastra22 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just FYI, pretty much all of Thinking Fast and Slow has been caught up in the replication crisis and repudiated. I don't know about the fourfold pattern in particular.

Can you share your source, please.

(Not OP)

Here's one: https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/30/a-meta-scientific-pe..., discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28917017

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#106

Post by Victerius »

NiloCK wrote: post #88
_zamorano_ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Daniel Kahneman, in his book thinking fast and slow, has a really good insight on why people in bad situations keep taking bad choices. Google "The fourfold pattern". Basically, he states that there's a cognitive bias where people in situations where a poor outcome is likely to happen, tend to risk too much, and not settle for a bad (but better) outcome that what they already have. If they kept compounding these "bad…

This is detailed pretty will in the book Scarcity, which highlights similar psychological effects among people who have not enough money, not enought time, not enough prestige, not enough room for caloric intake (dieters), etc. I wish this book were more popular.

> not enough prestige

If someone had enough money, time, etc. but not enough prestige, how would it manifest itself?

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#107

Post by randyrand »

buro9 wrote: post #66

I had to do this when young... I was homeless, rough sleeping. Honestly... it's a terrible piece of advice. Those risking everything have no other choice. If you're reading this person's blog post, if you're on HN... you probably have a choice, and you probably aren't "risking everything". I cannot imagine anyone on here actually choosing to potentially have nothing at all, no network, no funds, no assets, no nothing…

> Middle class kids can afford one throw.

*self funded

Once you have decent funding, the wealth of your parents shouldn’t impact you very much.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#108

Post by psychstudio »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #96
buro9 wrote: post #66

I had to do this when young... I was homeless, rough sleeping. Honestly... it's a terrible piece of advice. Those risking everything have no other choice. If you're reading this person's blog post, if you're on HN... you probably have a choice, and you probably aren't "risking everything". I cannot imagine anyone on here actually choosing to potentially have nothing at all, no network, no funds, no assets, no nothing…

>> Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it. Speaking for myself, I'm kinda priviledged in working in the carnival, it's a good and steady income and I'm accumulating wealth, meaning I'm in a more economically privileged position than my parents and their parents were (housing crisis / cost of living aside, of course, sigh). That can, down the line, if I feel like it, be used as a springboa…

And then you miss. You're 50 and broke. Back to square 1.

Re: Risk Everything (2007)

#109

Post by jrochkind1 »

buro9 wrote: post #66

I had to do this when young... I was homeless, rough sleeping. Honestly... it's a terrible piece of advice. Those risking everything have no other choice. If you're reading this person's blog post, if you're on HN... you probably have a choice, and you probably aren't "risking everything". I cannot imagine anyone on here actually choosing to potentially have nothing at all, no network, no funds, no assets, no nothing…

I guess one lesson is that for a lot people what seems like "risking everything" isn't really risking everything at all, you will in fact probably still be fine (and not homeless rough sleeping) even if you "lose".

This isn't the way the advice was framed, and I think you are right that it should be -- but the reframed advice can still be good -- I don't know about for startups, I think most startups are BS, and the comparison of someone "risking everything" to survive (a refugee) to an entrepeneur is frankly kind of offensive....

But for life anyway. Take a sober look at what you will really be losing if you lose. Is it in fact mostly about your self-image, and not about your material safety? Is it more inconvenience (even supreme inconvenience) than existential threat? Then take the risk for something you really want, for sure.

Those who actually risk everything, like, their lives (say, refugees in boats) do so because the alternative is existentially intolerable. The comparison to entrepeneurs is just... not actually ok. The better advice for those not facing existential threats to their humanity is probably more like... you aren't actually risking everything, you are nothing like these people, you'll be ok either way, so go for it. Which is actually pretty different than OP, yeah...

Post reply on HN