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

The days are long but the decades are short

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 406 posts

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#101

Post by drzaiusapelord »

astrocat wrote: post #68

> On work: it’s difficult to do a great job on work you don’t care about. And it’s hard to be totally happy/fulfilled in life if you don’t like what you do for your work I get that this is aimed at the startup crowd, but I've always felt that this sentiment is pretty privileged. We, the elite, get to cherry pick our work and do what we like. But I bet 9/10 people will never feel they have this luxury, and 8/10 will b…

>I just can help but feel sometimes that it's irresponsible to dump the "you can be/do anything!" sentiment on our youth when the reality is nowhere near that for most of them.

This is my take as well. If prompted for advice, I tell people to find satisfation outside of work. Work is a rigged game. It simply will not make you happy outside of some truly edge cases and those cases are often temporary until things change. "New boss took away the pinball table. I miss the noisy environment and need it to work!" "New boss won't take away the pinball table! Its too noisy for me to work!"

Its also concerning to make career choices at age 18-22 that will last a lifetime. Young me loved working in tech. Current me could leave it at anytime and kinda wants to. Unfortunately, our employment system isn't set for a mid-life career change, unless you want to take on serious risk and start at the bottom of yet another career mountain to climb, which you may bore of just as fast, if not faster.

My personal wish is to migrate society to accept a very young retirement age. Maybe as early as 50. With automation going where it is, I think this is probably inevitable and am happy to think my kids won't be grueling through work until 65-70 like my parents generation did.

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#102

Post by joshrotenberg »

mikeg8 wrote: post #24
sz4kerto wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a child relativizes everything else and makes life so much easier because you don't need to figure out the meaning of your life anymore and you don't even need to be successful, neither personally nor professionally. This does not mean you won't be or you can't be, it just does not matter that much anymore. And this is friggin' liberating.

I have an amazing father and grandfathers, all of whom I am close with. I've dreamed of being a father for many years (26M) and think I'll make a great one someday based on the examples I was fortunate enough to have. But I don't like the thought that as soon as you have a child, you instantly have to be defined by that. Is reproduction really the meaning to life? (Biologists say absolutely). And saying you don't hav…

Father of two here. I don't think the point is that you can't/won't want to succeed, it's more that the result of your success is to further the success of your kids. And that doesn't just mean "provide for your family" in the old fashioned "dinner on the table" kind of way, it has more to do with being happy with yourself, and your kids pick up on that. If you are successful, in however you define it, your family is as well. And for me, more and more as my kids grow up and become themselves, seeing them succeed (and periodically fail) feels like real success to me, more so than any pat on the back I'd get from someone else.

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#103

Post by mikeg8 »

kaiwen1 wrote: post #100
mikeg8 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an amazing father and grandfathers, all of whom I am close with. I've dreamed of being a father for many years (26M) and think I'll make a great one someday based on the examples I was fortunate enough to have. But I don't like the thought that as soon as you have a child, you instantly have to be defined by that. Is reproduction really the meaning to life? (Biologists say absolutely). And saying you don't hav…

Until it happens to you, it's impossible to appreciate how sudden, profound and unexpected this change is (for must people). It's not a thing you plan or attempt. It's hard wired into your genes. Baby arrives. New behaviors, feelings, and priorities ensue. Whatever you were rushing around trying to do before is now less important. Your primary objective is to make sure that life over there in the crib is protected an…

Makes sense. thank you for your reply.

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#105

Post by lojack »

simi_ wrote: post #94
georgemcbay wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you were effective at your job, said boss needs to examine what is important to him, slavish respect-mah-authortai-style following of rather arbitrary rules, or having a "bird-in-the-hand" competent employee who gets shit done (perhaps 5 minutes later than the boss-man would like). It is kind of sad how many boss/manager types still fail miserably on this point, and then complain about not being able to hire…

I'm the counterexample - I like letting capable people as loose as possible, and more often than I'd like this backfires. I'd appreciate some effective pointers on how to deal with this issue.

Focus on results and not on some measure of what you think leads to results. If an employee is always 5 minutes late, but they always complete quality work on time, then why bother? Your time is better spent focusing on the employee that is always on time producing mediocre work.

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#106

Post by spain »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #33

I was 5 minutes late to work every morning, because of taking my son to school in the neighborhood where our new house was being built. I didn't want him to have to move schools in the middle of the year. Boss said "This won't do. You'll have to examine your priorities." I thought about it all day, that night. Next morning I got to work (5 minutes late), went in his office, said "I examined my priorities. Work is #12…

By left, I assume you mean left the job completely?

As interesting as a story this is, is it really the only reason you chose to leave? Did you enjoy the work and did you try and negotiate at all? I don't mean to criticize your prioritization but the decision seems a little impulsive given how you described it. As you mentioned you gave your priorities a lot of thought, but what about the decision itself?

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#107

Post by fuzzythinker »

guynamedloren wrote: post #70
fuzzythinker wrote: post #28

> When in doubt, kiss the boy/girl I got slapped in the face doing that in middle school.

Better than not doing it and forever wondering "what if".

I guess Sama covered that one too from the "don't regret" ;)

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#108

Post by waterlesscloud »

kungfooey wrote: post #99
runesoerensen wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't say I'm surprised to see this as the top comment, but I think it's sad that you (and apparently many other upvoters) don't think 30 year olds can offer valuable advice on life. It's also wrong as proven by history. Many writers have produced some of their best works at the same age. One example is Kirkegaard who wrote "Fear and Trembling"[1] at age 30. If you think that Sam's advice is narrowminded or bad as…

Clarification: I'm not saying that no 30 year old can offer sage advice. I don't think Altman is on the same level as Kirkegaard here. As others have pointed out, the list is not terribly revolutionary. It simply struck me as odd that this (not particularly revelatory list) could be passed off as worthy of note. What, other than his work with YC, makes Sam's musings worthy of our time?

There's nothing wrong with the list.

It's not like the earlier pg essays that literally changed the ways I think about a lot of things.

It's just a list of largely common platitudes. Nothing wrong with that in itself, though. Many of them are worth reiterating from time to time.

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#109

Post by wvenable »

simi_ wrote: post #94
georgemcbay wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you were effective at your job, said boss needs to examine what is important to him, slavish respect-mah-authortai-style following of rather arbitrary rules, or having a "bird-in-the-hand" competent employee who gets shit done (perhaps 5 minutes later than the boss-man would like). It is kind of sad how many boss/manager types still fail miserably on this point, and then complain about not being able to hire…

I'm the counterexample - I like letting capable people as loose as possible, and more often than I'd like this backfires. I'd appreciate some effective pointers on how to deal with this issue.

In what way does it backfire and can you specifically focus on that?

Re: The days are long but the decades are short

#110

Post by kcovia »

spain wrote: post #106
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #33

I was 5 minutes late to work every morning, because of taking my son to school in the neighborhood where our new house was being built. I didn't want him to have to move schools in the middle of the year. Boss said "This won't do. You'll have to examine your priorities." I thought about it all day, that night. Next morning I got to work (5 minutes late), went in his office, said "I examined my priorities. Work is #12…

By left, I assume you mean left the job completely? As interesting as a story this is, is it really the only reason you chose to leave? Did you enjoy the work and did you try and negotiate at all? I don't mean to criticize your prioritization but the decision seems a little impulsive given how you described it. As you mentioned you gave your priorities a lot of thought, but what about the decision itself?

Do you really want to work for someone who thinks getting to the office 5 minutes earlier is more important than your child?
Post reply on HN