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

How to Be Successful

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 326 posts

Re: How to Be Successful

#121

Post by playing_colours »

apsec112 wrote: post #100
porpoisely wrote: post #92

I find these types of articles/blogs to be relatively pointless because the market/economy/country/etc has room for a select few successes. Imagine if Obama wrote "How to Be a Successful Presidential Candidate" and every 2016 candidate read it and adopted it to a tee. We'd still have dozens of failures and only 1 success. If success were really a formula, then we'd all be successful. We can't all get into harvard, we…

A presidential election is zero-sum, since there can only be one winner. There is no fixed number of millionaires; every middle-class American is very rich compared to what Romans or Persians or Carolingians expected.

It is very unrealistic that technological level and political organisation of Ancient Rome or Persia could create the conditions that could produce and sustain a significant part of population with the level of life somehow comparable with current Western countries.

Re: How to Be Successful

#123

Post by tsunamifury »

apsec112 wrote: post #100
porpoisely wrote: post #92

I find these types of articles/blogs to be relatively pointless because the market/economy/country/etc has room for a select few successes. Imagine if Obama wrote "How to Be a Successful Presidential Candidate" and every 2016 candidate read it and adopted it to a tee. We'd still have dozens of failures and only 1 success. If success were really a formula, then we'd all be successful. We can't all get into harvard, we…

A presidential election is zero-sum, since there can only be one winner. There is no fixed number of millionaires; every middle-class American is very rich compared to what Romans or Persians or Carolingians expected.

Just because the pie is growing at f(x) doesn't mean at any given moment the pie isn't limited by x. This is why I think the zero sum vs growing pie arguments are silly, both are true.

Re: How to Be Successful

#124

Post by tfehring »

rloomba wrote: post #29
aphextron wrote: post #11

1. Be born to a wealthy middle class family and go to an elite school.

Agree with this point, it really makes things so much easier. Imagine having student debt, struggling to get a job out of college, and then >Once you’ve gotten yourself to a point where you have your basic obligations covered you should try to make it easy to take risks that could easily take 10+ years?

It definitely takes years. I went back to school 6 years ago and graduated 3.5 years ago, I optimized for financial security (went to community college followed by the cheapest 4-year available, worked 40+ hours a week throughout, went into a high-paying field), and I've only recently gotten to the point where I'd consider myself financially secure enough to easily take risks. 4-5 years is probably a reasonable lower bound in those cases - you could maybe get there a bit faster if you somehow land a job at a FAANG out of school, but good luck with that.

Re: How to Be Successful

#125

Post by CPLX »

I clicked on this expecting to hate-read it and then post something snarky, but it's actually pretty reasonable, assuming you read the title as "How To Be Sucessful In Business"

With that said I think it's missing a hugely important area -- which is mental and emotional health.

One of the things I've noticed in friends who have incredible business success, and have noticed in myself during periods of greatest productivity, is that successful people are able to keep their emotional state in check.

They don't get rolled easily by criticism or praise, they don't get dragged into short term thinking or fake crisis, and they don't let an emotional state push them into saying or doing something that they'll regret, or will blow up a relationship, or give away info in a negotiation.

I think it's up in the top 3-4 attributes of those who are able to fit the description described in the article.

Re: How to Be Successful

#126

Post by oh_sigh »

porpoisely wrote: post #92

I find these types of articles/blogs to be relatively pointless because the market/economy/country/etc has room for a select few successes. Imagine if Obama wrote "How to Be a Successful Presidential Candidate" and every 2016 candidate read it and adopted it to a tee. We'd still have dozens of failures and only 1 success. If success were really a formula, then we'd all be successful. We can't all get into harvard, we…

I'd like to see this blog post written by a 2007 Sam Altman, or a 2006 Obama. Once you achieve your goal, your post-hoc analyses are not necessarily correct. From your example, you may ascribe your success to all of the hard work you put in, but not think about the initial meetings that were set up by a friend of the family.

Re: How to Be Successful

#127

Post by plainOldText »

I have no idea what it takes to be successful – whatever success even means, although a reasonable definition would run along the lines of good finances + family/friends + health + sense of purpose + luck – but I'm willing to wager you could significantly increase your chances of being successful by:

0. Being curious

1. Thinking for yourself

2. Thinking about your thinking

3. Tweaking your thinking in the light of new discoveries

4. Associating yourself, as much as you can, with people who they themselves follow 0,1,2,3

The world is very complex. No one truly knows what they're doing. Our models of the world are just local approximations

Re: How to Be Successful

#128

Post by ams6110 »

mcilai wrote: post #118
porpoisely wrote: post #92

I find these types of articles/blogs to be relatively pointless because the market/economy/country/etc has room for a select few successes. Imagine if Obama wrote "How to Be a Successful Presidential Candidate" and every 2016 candidate read it and adopted it to a tee. We'd still have dozens of failures and only 1 success. If success were really a formula, then we'd all be successful. We can't all get into harvard, we…

My view is different: the number of people who are willing to truly do evening this post recommends is just small. But those who are willing to pay the cost of success have a real chance of getting it. It's just that most people likely conclude that success is not truly worth it.

If you do nothing else, in my observation you can go a long way by just following this advice:

you need to own equity in something, instead of just selling your time

Even if it's just owning some index funds, equity in things that grow and compound over time is the easiest way to wealth I can think of.

Re: How to Be Successful

#129

Post by hammock »

sama wrote: post #34
aphextron wrote: post #11

1. Be born to a wealthy middle class family and go to an elite school.

The biggest reason I'm excited about basic income is the amount of human potential it will unleash by freeing more people to take risks. Until then, if you aren't born lucky, you have to claw your way up for awhile before you can take big swings. If you are born in extreme poverty, then this is super difficult :( It is obviously an incredible shame and waste that opportunity is so unevenly distributed. But I've witne…

I can appreciate your intention, but unless you really believe that 10,000 monkeys can type the complete works of Shakespeare, the "big swings" you envision have to be informed by some level of education, morality, and social sensibility. Basic income alone is not the solution.

Re: How to Be Successful

#130

Post by porpoisely »

apsec112 wrote: post #100
porpoisely wrote: post #92

I find these types of articles/blogs to be relatively pointless because the market/economy/country/etc has room for a select few successes. Imagine if Obama wrote "How to Be a Successful Presidential Candidate" and every 2016 candidate read it and adopted it to a tee. We'd still have dozens of failures and only 1 success. If success were really a formula, then we'd all be successful. We can't all get into harvard, we…

A presidential election is zero-sum, since there can only be one winner. There is no fixed number of millionaires; every middle-class American is very rich compared to what Romans or Persians or Carolingians expected.

There definitely is a limited number of millionaires that an economy/population can support. Also, comparing across time is rather deceptive. The north korean military is much more powerfully compared to khan or alexander's armies. The comparison is pointless considering the north korean military isn't traveling back in time to fight the mongols or the greeks. Saying middle class americans are rich compared to romans, persians or carolingians is just as meaningless. You could argue that a homeless man with a smartphone is "richer" than napoleon since the homeless man has access to more computing power, better medicine, better everything. But that's meaningless and no solace to the homeless man since he isn't traveling back to the early 1800s with current technology in his pocket. If we follow your logic, a north korean starving in a political camp is wealthier than Caesar. I guess that could be true, but meaningless and empty.

It's also a deceptive tactic people use to compare apples to oranges. We have to compare today with today and even more importantly, we have to frame money within the zero-sum context of power. Money and power are interchangeable and viewed in this context, wealth is a zero sum game.

Post reply on HN