231–240 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FIRE = Financial Independence, Retire Early for those who don't know.
I like the concept. There are even young people experimenting with retirement but for typically one year, also known as a 'gap year' where they don't work/study - they just explore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn’t say “paradise” of freedom. Definitely more flexibility without kids, but kids bring so much joy and meaning to life. For most people it’s a very worthwhile trade.
Yeah I fuggin hate the "just you wait" attitude about kids. I'm excited to have kids, even in spite of the tradeoff involved in my spare time. I don't need endless reminders of the tradeoff. That's just piling on.
Let's not lie to ourselves: kids are demanding. There are moments when I hate my life (usually when I'm falling behind on work, errands and sleep, simultaneously). But then, one minute I'm feeling sorry for myself, and the next minute my daughter does something silly or touching, and I suddenly feel like the happiest, luckiest man on the planet.
Looking back, I'd say the perfect time for a kid is the earliest moment when you feel you have control over your life and yourself. I.e. if you know you're struggling with personality/emotional/mental problems, try to sort this out first. Other than that, it's better to have them early, when you're still full of energy: it'll make confronting the challenges easier, and leave you more energy to enjoy the rewards :).
But it's still true: all time management problems look serious until you have your first kid. This will teach you about prioritizing real quick - but also will shift your priorities, so it doesn't hurt as much as it sounds. For example, before becoming a parent, I was worrying I'd be depressed over not having time for my side projects. And indeed, I have almost no time for them[0]. But I also feel much less need for them. The desire for independent creative expression is still there, but the daily challenges of parenthood often tickle similar areas of the brain - the kind of how artificial sweetener can substitute for sugar without being the real thing (and also makes you feel better).
--
[0] - I'm hoping that when my daughter is old enough to communicate verbally and reliably keep attention on a single thing for more than 30 seconds, I can get her involved in helping me with tinkering in stuff. But that's still years away.
Western economies, particularly that of the United States, have been built in a very calculated manner on gratification, addiction, and unnecessary spending. Calculated, like in planned-economy, directive-from-the-top? I disagree. A lot of the "fluff," as the author describes it, is excess capital finding its way to things people find pleasurable, whether it be dope, travel, beauty, or rock and roll. Purveyors of suc…
That quote is right out of Herbert Marcuse's One-Dimensional Man ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Dimensional_Man ). Marcuse argues that we only think we're choosing to pursue certain things (pop music, sex, cars, food, etc). Actually, society has been transformed by certain parties to push these "false desires" on us. I think there's something creepy about telling people their desires are false. This is an exampl…
Maybe they dont determine what we want but they certainly define the options available.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The reality is, the clothing industry decides what to produce at least 6-12 months in advance. It's more the mainstream you're referring to, late adopters basically. of course they can produce in advance as the styles are already validated on urban streets and within subcultures who really set the trends. There are inventors, early adopters and late adopters, quite similar to SaaS.
That's the party line, but it's just some sub-cultures, teens and troubled personalities that "express themselves" through fashion (the most shallow thing you can do, a juvenile thing in any case), the "early adopters", and then a huge industry copying them at various levels and with various delays. On top of that, there are also top-level mandates "this year let's push yellow strayjackets" or whatever. This results…
Like, really?
My dad mostly wears tough leather boots, flannel shirts and aged jeans. It's all old, proven, and tough. He's a heavy outdoors enthusiast, into kayaking motorbiking and camping, and his clothing style fits this perfectly.
My brother is a big rugby player. He prefers a much more casual look, with rugby shirts, trainers, shorts if the weather allows, and a baseball cap (not often seen in rural England!).
We all express ourselves through clothing, whether you do so consciously or not. Even picking clothes that say "I don't care about fashion" is expressing yourself. We're social creates, and there's no getting away from that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fashion is basically part of a real world interface for the social groups you interact with, a way to tweak the first impression. It's only junk for you as an outsider not understanding the social groups of insiders dressing a certain way. It's valuable and sells because social ladders are everywhere, we're all apes to a degree. It's not a suprise that the epic centers are urban melting pots with a higher population…
>> Fashion is basically part of a real world interface for the social groups you interact with, a way to tweak the first impression. It's only junk for you as an outsider not understanding the social groups of insiders dressing a certain way. I've seen former peers and fellow students borrow and become indebted to become part of the group this way. Great if the subject can afford it, not so much if the subject is now…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Fashion is basically part of a real world interface for the social groups you interact with, a way to tweak the first impression. It's only junk for you as an outsider not understanding the social groups of insiders dressing a certain way. I've seen former peers and fellow students borrow and become indebted to become part of the group this way. Great if the subject can afford it, not so much if the subject is now…
Any culture group that expresses itself through expensive clothes will find another expensive way to show group membership if clothes aren't an option. Other subcultures (think grunge, or tech people) either use cheap mismatched charity-shop styles or use other signals (e.g. running Linux at home).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the ideal conception of it, but practically, power also plays a very large role. Firms don't get to "try things" without lots of resources already, any novel startups may simply be acquired and assimilated or even shut down, large existing organizations are capable of sustaining failures despite market conditions, extra-market rules may be implemented by firms with political access, and if enough of the supply…
I agree with you, but in evolution there are also power differentials due to organism size/features or population leading to some organisms/species having an advantage at a certain point in time. I think this could be considered analagous (not exact mapping) to corporation power at a given time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the party line, but it's just some sub-cultures, teens and troubled personalities that "express themselves" through fashion (the most shallow thing you can do, a juvenile thing in any case), the "early adopters", and then a huge industry copying them at various levels and with various delays. On top of that, there are also top-level mandates "this year let's push yellow strayjackets" or whatever. This results…
This is such a weird cynical take on fashion I don't even know where to begin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fashion is basically part of a real world interface for the social groups you interact with, a way to tweak the first impression. It's only junk for you as an outsider not understanding the social groups of insiders dressing a certain way. It's valuable and sells because social ladders are everywhere, we're all apes to a degree. It's not a suprise that the epic centers are urban melting pots with a higher population…
> Fashion is basically part of a real world interface for the social groups you interact with, a way to tweak the first impression. Yes. But it's a shallow real world interface, for shallow groups and facile identities, mostly used to associate with teenagers and juvenile group forming. I dont say it's not a thing, or don't have a use. I say the use is bad.
The "travel mentality" that has been circulating in the last ten years portraits travel as the ultimate goal for many tech workers. It sells the ultimate concept of freedom and zero responsibility. Social media extended this with the van life blogs, pictures and clips. This of course a big fallacy. When you're traveling you have zero planning ahead. You don't need to think about major decisions in your life, you usua…
Like you can still workout without a gym.