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

Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

seattle20.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 230 posts

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#161

Post by melling »

_delirium wrote: post #104
pg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that there is some more direct route to working on what one wants? Or that the direct route to happiness is to give up such aspirations?

Most hackerly types I can think of just go work on what they're interested in, without an explicit goal of making millions from it. Take the quintessential Jobs/Woz thing: Woz, the hacker of the pair, was interested in making Apple machines, but didn't give a damn about getting rich.

I bet he's pretty happy now that he is rich. And Steve Jobs wouldn't have bought Pixar and created NeXT if he hadn't made a fortune at Apple before he got fired.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#162

Post by jules »

seldo wrote: post #80
clistctrl wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak to myself, but I want to get rich not for a Lamborghini, but so I can start another company to truly make a difference. Personally I think the Gates foundation is going to have a longer lasting impact on the world then Microsoft has. Yes I realize how huge of an impact Microsoft has had.

Call me cynical, but I don't think 18-year-old Bill Gates had the Gates Foundation in mind when he started trampling over the competition in his rise to the top. He wanted to be rich and powerful (because frankly, with the looks and alleged personality of Bill Gates, how else was he going to get a date?). The Gates Foundation, worthy as it is, was something he only realized he wanted after he had achieved everything…

Gates is pretty good looking. Maybe not compared to TV stars, but he is compared to, say, Microsoft CEOs.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#163

Post by grinich »

melling wrote: post #161
_delirium wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most hackerly types I can think of just go work on what they're interested in, without an explicit goal of making millions from it. Take the quintessential Jobs/Woz thing: Woz, the hacker of the pair, was interested in making Apple machines, but didn't give a damn about getting rich.

I bet he's pretty happy now that he is rich. And Steve Jobs wouldn't have bought Pixar and created NeXT if he hadn't made a fortune at Apple before he got fired.

It's hard to say that for sure. Jobs seems to be a pretty driven guy.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#164

Post by ajdecon »

I would love to be rich, but I'm starting to realize that it's not what I need to be happy. What I need, personally, is a life in which I can work on things which I think are fun and interesting, and which pay me enough to live, save a little, and spend time having fun with my girlfriend.

The definition of that changes. At one point I thought the only way to do that was to get a PhD and find my way into academia; later it was found a company and make an obscene amount of money. Both of those goals were great, but the first one chewed me up and the second is one I don't know how to do yet. Right now... the goal is to find a job where the I can work on fun data-based problems. A startup would be fun, but so would a big company, or a government agency like the CDC. I don't need to be rich, but I do need to find satisfaction in my work.

And we'll see what happens next.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#165

Post by aswanson »

jquery wrote: post #156
nickpinkston wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that we all consciously have reasons like what you're saying: independence, hating bullshit etc. However, all are motivated by hardwired goals of species survival. These base needs make us want to gain advantage in mating, but also in things like independence - which give us a higher likelihood of survival (i.e. controlling how to fulfill our base needs, reproduce, not be killed by others, etc.).

Your logic is tautologous. Evolution seeks no such things. Evolution just happens and is random. It's quite likely we have many traits which are not advantageous for survival, especially in our modern world. Appealing to evolutionary psychology is an intellectual and argumentative reductionist shortcut.

Exactly. The reductionism is just too easy in these arguments with every behavior contorted to project onto a sexual / survival basis. There is no quarter given for things simply being what they are.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#166

Post by edanm »

seldo wrote: post #80
clistctrl wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak to myself, but I want to get rich not for a Lamborghini, but so I can start another company to truly make a difference. Personally I think the Gates foundation is going to have a longer lasting impact on the world then Microsoft has. Yes I realize how huge of an impact Microsoft has had.

Call me cynical, but I don't think 18-year-old Bill Gates had the Gates Foundation in mind when he started trampling over the competition in his rise to the top. He wanted to be rich and powerful (because frankly, with the looks and alleged personality of Bill Gates, how else was he going to get a date?). The Gates Foundation, worthy as it is, was something he only realized he wanted after he had achieved everything…

You make a few grand statements with no backing (e.g., who said Gates decided that Microsoft wasn't important? I'd be a pretty happy person if I'd have contributed as much to the world as MS has).

I can't say for sure what Gates had in mind, but I can extrapolate from the few cases I do know about (myself and other entreprenurial-minded friends). The reasons vary, but I for one am definitely in this to make money for the power to do more important work later.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#167

Post by ruang »

enjo wrote: post #6

Of course it's not ok. At some level getting rich is a life-or-death issue. How do I get enough money to retire? How can I possibly afford health-care? What if I or my lovely wife get cancer? The reality is, the later years of your life are going to be significantly more secure and happier if you make a lot of money.

Rich,middle,and poor is a false trichotomy.

Once you hit late 40s to 50s, people won't pay you a high salary for a typical line position.

So at that point, you either continue to work for low wages, possibly being shifted within the company to doing sales on commission, being a trainer, or moved to a low-wage country.

Or you are independently wealthy by then.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#168

Post by jmtame »

grinich wrote: post #163
melling wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet he's pretty happy now that he is rich. And Steve Jobs wouldn't have bought Pixar and created NeXT if he hadn't made a fortune at Apple before he got fired.

It's hard to say that for sure. Jobs seems to be a pretty driven guy.

woz was quoted in return to little kingdom that jobs was driven by making money. that was when they started selling blue boxes in dorm rooms.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#169

Post by jscn »

rick888 wrote: post #69
noodle wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is that what freedom means? it sounds like you're condition of freedom is to have money, and its only freedom as long as you can pay for it. not really that free.

"is that what freedom means? it sounds like you're condition of freedom is to have money, and its only freedom as long as you can pay for it. not really that free." I suppose I could live in a cardboard box on the side of the road and quit my job, but I don't think it would be a very nice existence. Having enough money to quit your job, buy a nice house, support a family, and travel is the ultimate freedom. You don't…

I think you're conflating two ideas here: negative and positive freedom.

Negative freedom, freedom from having to do things you don't want, can be had by quitting your job and living in a cardboard box. Don't want to go to work? That's cool, you can just sit in your box, or go for a walk, or whatever.

Positive freedom, on the other hand, can really only be had in this society by accumulating money. If you want to buy a house, support a family and travel, then you need to have the cash to do so.

Of course, if you get enough money, then you can have both. The converse isn't true. But that's difficult to do, and it certainly is a gamble. I think you and the OP just have a different idea of where it's desirable to be on the continuum from -ve to +ve.

Re: Hey, Guys, It's Totally Okay If You Don't Get Rich

#170

Post by einarvollset »

JesseAldridge wrote: post #147
hyperbovine wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the Mexican fisherman story. Sacrifice your freedom and happiness so that you can get rich so that you can have freedom and happiness. Why not just take the direct route?

The Mexican fisherman story, in case people haven't heard it: http://www.brefigroup.co.uk/resources/view_product.do?produc... The main flaw is that it ignores the massive amount of wealth created by scaling up the fishing operation. The fisherman could've made a much greater contribution to the world by listening to the investment banker. We are all morally obligated to make enough money to buy a yacht with a flag sa…

Please god tell me you're joking.
Post reply on HN