Late bloomer, not a loser. (I hope)

Post by tomelgin » Thu, Jul 12, 2012, 5:02 PM UTC

chrisyeh wrote: post #165

kinleyd wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the original post by @Dave and the honesty that comes through. I also like this reply. Life can feel so frenetic and short on time sometimes, and yet very, very long - too long even - at other times. Time is really a very elastic perception. The bottom line is you need to figure out what you want in life and how you define success. Hopefully at some point we all come to realize that while wealth, power or fame…

Scientists have already done great work in this area. "Success" doesn't bring happiness: http://chrisyeh.blogspot.com/2005/12/meaning-of-life.html Here's the money quote: "In the book, Deci talks about a study which discovered that humans have six basic aspirations. The first three, the extrinsic aspirations, are to be rich, famous, and good-looking. (Actually, rich/powerful and famous/well-liked, but why ruin a euph…

Post by pckhoi » Sun, Jul 15, 2012, 2:04 AM UTC

Udo wrote: post #97

simonsarris wrote: post #7

Well he's not a late bloomer to the vast majority of people. I think no matter your lot in life, if you're competitive, you get the feeling that you missed out on a lot that you could have accomplished. Stories of kids learning programming at 6, or starting companies at 16, etc, feed into this. Even I feel like I would be much farther "ahead" if I had only started programming before high school, if I had been more gu…

I found it difficult to relate to his position. By all accounts, he is already very successful and, more importantly, financially independent so he has the freedom to do anything he likes. Labeling that kind of lifestyle as either "late blooming" or "being a loser" is a gross insult to the majority of people who are still trying very hard to achieve his level. By his standards, I'm worth less than a handful of dirt.…