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

Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

tik.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 233 posts

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#121

Post by gsbraitberg »

camhart wrote: post #69
tempsy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your definition of prohibitively expensive? I've bought a gold plan off the exchange in California for Kaiser and it's $530/mo with no deductible. That's lower than I expected.

I was looking last year in Washington. Cheapest option for my family was ~$1800 / month, and that had a 14k deductible and ~20k max out of pocket. It also couldn't be used outside of Washington state (which sucks). Went with the health ministry route because we align with their principals already, plus we can visit family out of the country and be "covered".

Careful with the health ministry: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/health/christian-health-c...

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#122

Post by daxfohl »

davidgh wrote: post #114
daxfohl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incidentally, I just got back from the annual checkup with my 7yo, and the doctor mentioned that the strongest indicator of kids staying on a good path through adolescence is whether they regularly have dinner together as a family or not. That surprisingly exceeds any other socio-economic demographic indicator.

I’ve thought about this metric, a lot. There is no doubt that having family dinner has a lot of benefits. But I can help but ask myself - is family dinner a silver bullet, or is it that families who are holistically “doing it right” also make family dinner a priority?

I also wonder about whether there is a quality criterion there or is quantity all that's needed. For example if most dinners consist primarily of yelling at kids to sit down, eat vegetables, quit playing with food, just hurry up and swallow it, small bites, not that small, no poop talk at the table, inside voice, quit dropping your spoon, feet off the table, no kicking, don't annoy your sister, STOP SHOUTING.... Does that count?

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#123

Post by cortesoft »

manigandham wrote: post #118
cortesoft wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is possible to separate out all the individual parts that go into making someone driven and successful, especially not with only anecdotal data

In that case then both perspectives are equally true and false.

They aren't equally true and false... the truth value is just unknown

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#124

Post by nemonemo »

davidgh wrote: post #114
daxfohl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incidentally, I just got back from the annual checkup with my 7yo, and the doctor mentioned that the strongest indicator of kids staying on a good path through adolescence is whether they regularly have dinner together as a family or not. That surprisingly exceeds any other socio-economic demographic indicator.

I’ve thought about this metric, a lot. There is no doubt that having family dinner has a lot of benefits. But I can help but ask myself - is family dinner a silver bullet, or is it that families who are holistically “doing it right” also make family dinner a priority?

This is a question of the causality between the family dinners and the socio-economic indicators of a kid. Just like most of similar questions, it is healthy not to assume causality until proven there is.

IMO, having regular family dinners is just one of many characteristics of stable and healthy families.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#125

Post by bogdanoff_2 »

tannerc wrote: post #105
kentrado wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to try that approach but I just don't have the energy after working all day to come home and start investing time chasing wildly creative projects.

I’m writing a book on how I do this! I’ll be sharing here on HN once it’s complete. But the TL;DR for the chapter on motivation and energy comes down to: work on things that improve your own life, set clear objectives, and work in small chunks. The book itself is being written in 30 minute chunks throughout my week because that’s all the time I can spare.

I found that back when I had lots of free time, my style when doing projects was: I start where I left off, I get engrossed and code late into the night, repeat that one or two more days, get bored and "burned out" from the project, don't touch it for a week or so (sometimes I work on some other projects), repeat.

Of course, that's not really sustainable. But 30 minutes does not seem feasible for me.

It's not like you're going for a 30 minute jog where you just run without thinking. Don't you need to take time to "warm up" until the project you're doing starts being fun? And how does stopping just when you start enjoying yourself not kill your motivation? And don't you think about the project throughout your day job (instead of whatever problem you're supposed to be working on)?

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#126

Post by mettamage »

neonate wrote: post #10
daxfohl wrote: post #4

There's a pretty high correlation between parental wealth and success as a startup founder. I assume it's because of the safety net. My friends who have been successful (and who had blue-collar upbringings like me, and all in mid-40's now) all worked full time jobs until their side projects were self-sustaining. None of them hit unicorn status, but I think all of them have lived healthy, fruitful lives. Also note by…

Given the research on adverse childhood experiences, there's likely a subtler advantage too, for founders who were raised in more stable and secure environments. Growing up under greater pressure (violence, abuse, trauma) leaves you less resilient, more risk averse, more at risk. I'm not saying wealthy families don't have this, or that poor families can't be stable and secure. But on average it probably makes a diffe…

I've seen this personally. I happen to know people from all backgrounds in The Netherlands. While I myself am middle class, I know people who almost died from hunger (in The Netherlands, yes) up until people who know the king and prime minister in a professional setting. Let's just say I have a diverse family and group of friends.

My conclusion is: when privilege is applied well, there is no competing it. And the stable and secure environment that you're talking about plays a role in that. As I've noticed that I'm lacking it a bit (just a bit) and I am seeing its effect. The issue is that this type of stuff is mostly automatic behavior, so it's hard to flush out.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#127

Post by mettamage »

n4r9 wrote: post #99
52-6F-62 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say I had a great childhood in general, but also with some major stress factors—I feel I can safely say that those stressors don’t leave you on their own so organically. And that kind of stress, even if it’s not conscious all of the time, can colour one’s perspective in an impactful way. Sometimes for better, funny enough—but also for worse in others.

Absolutely. It's impossible to bring yourself to take risks and leave your comfort zone if the outside world is a terrifying and malicious place.

What I personally experience is that whenever I'm in a verbal fight with my SO (for example), I'm physiologically ready to physically fight (though I never actually fight, I'm simply hyper aware and prepared for it, it's an automatic thing).

I've learned that there are people who don't have this response, they simply keep it on an emotional level. These people also never experienced or saw any physical fight during childhood and were never really bullied.

I saw fights pretty much daily as a kid and experienced them at least once per month, winning about 50% of them. So I've experienced both sides quite a bit.

I've noticed that kids who fought daily have this much more in their physiology than I do.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#128

Post by davidjnelson »

overcast wrote: post #5

Probably the biggest hurdle is dealing with healthcare on your own, it's just prohibitively expensive to deal with alone in the US. Multiple incomes is where it's at, at least until one of the projects takes off to cover cost of living and healthcare nonsense.

Was just looking at this out of curiosity the other day and in California the equivalent plan to what you’d get from employment to cover a family is $1,500/month from anthem. This is the platinum ppo from the exchange. $15 doctor visits, $9,000 yearly max, no deductible, $30 tier 3 drugs.

The price is similar to what you get from an employer, except the employer pays most or all of the premium.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#129

Post by yellow_lead »

bogdanoff_2 wrote: post #125
tannerc wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m writing a book on how I do this! I’ll be sharing here on HN once it’s complete. But the TL;DR for the chapter on motivation and energy comes down to: work on things that improve your own life, set clear objectives, and work in small chunks. The book itself is being written in 30 minute chunks throughout my week because that’s all the time I can spare.

I found that back when I had lots of free time, my style when doing projects was: I start where I left off, I get engrossed and code late into the night, repeat that one or two more days, get bored and "burned out" from the project, don't touch it for a week or so (sometimes I work on some other projects), repeat. Of course, that's not really sustainable. But 30 minutes does not seem feasible for me. It's not like yo…

Agreed, 30 mins is not enough time to get into "deep work" for programming. At best you could do some business-y tasks.

Re: Working for someone vs. doing your own thing

#130

Post by Enginerrrd »

daxfohl wrote: post #122
davidgh wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve thought about this metric, a lot. There is no doubt that having family dinner has a lot of benefits. But I can help but ask myself - is family dinner a silver bullet, or is it that families who are holistically “doing it right” also make family dinner a priority?

I also wonder about whether there is a quality criterion there or is quantity all that's needed. For example if most dinners consist primarily of yelling at kids to sit down, eat vegetables, quit playing with food, just hurry up and swallow it, small bites, not that small, no poop talk at the table, inside voice, quit dropping your spoon, feet off the table, no kicking, don't annoy your sister, STOP SHOUTING.... Does…

Actually, almost definitely yes! Those things you mentioned, despite being friction areas, are actually loaded with all kinds of cultural and class norms, and the fact that you have parents who care enough and are around enough to be able to set those boundaries is a major selection criterion for success in other areas.

That's not to say you can't screw it up. If family dinners are spent in silence with the kids praying they get through the dinner without setting dad off again and watching him beat their mom to a pulp, or hoping that they don't get sexually abused later that night by one of their family members, etc. Then yes, maybe there are some quality issues, but I'd argue even in that extreme case, it might still be a positive indicator against the base cases of abuse without that element.

I was a paramedic. There is a massive fraction of society with upbringings like you wouldn't imagine. That's what you're up against. When people say they have a dysfunctional family, it's often pretty mundane. Especially compared to people in that class that didn't realize until they were an adult that things like getting raped by all of their mom's boyfriend's isn't a normal thing everyone deals with as soon as they start puberty.

Post reply on HN