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

The happiest I've ever been

ben-mini.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 402 posts

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#351

Post by foobarian »

abc123abc123 wrote: post #277
Aurornis wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but pretty common in tech/upper middle class circles. It's common in some tech and upper middle class bubbles , but outside of some startups and a few VHCOL cities most of the 40+ people in tech I encounter have families. I think the mindset is most popular in internet bubbles like Reddit. Reddit went mainstream a decade ago and many people in their 30s and 40s grew up reading a lot of Reddit. Reddit cleaned up the…

I find the polarization of the child/no-child discussion revolting. One side poo-poo:ing on the other, have a child? Breeder! The other poo-poo:ing back... no child, you f*cking egoist, I'm happy your gene line dies out. Personally I am of the opinion that everyone is entitled to their own life, and that the default assumption should be that they make conscious decisions in line with their own preferences. Have a chi…

It strikes me that both these views are selfish, in that they focus on direct impact on one's life. But what about the broad impact on society for the descendants? What if by abdicating procreation we create conditions where only communities that force childbearing survive? Ought we not figure out a system where we can have both freedom and equality, as well as a sustainable population?

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#352

Post by foobarian »

jimbokun wrote: post #197
paulryanrogers wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one chooses to be born. Once they are, they may find that procreation is impossible for them or just not something they'll do well or even want. None of these is necessarily depressing. We have no shortage of humans, so there's no need to try to shame the childless. Nor those who focus on themselves.

We are on course to have far more elderly people than young people. A global retirement community without even any grandkids to visit them strikes me as a depressing dystopian future.

The question is what happens after they are gone?

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#353

Post by dismalaf »

In a similar but slightly different vein, I found that doing things with my own child (now 3.5 years old) is far more rewarding than I ever imagined. Nothing makes me happier than seeing the joy in his eyes when he discovers something new, accomplishes something or even just gets excited when I come home from work.

I gave up on most passion work years ago, now just optimize for money/time and enjoy my life outside of that.

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#354

Post by popalchemist »

rixed wrote: post #215
popalchemist wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is always full of danger. This moment in time is exceptional only in the form of that danger, not in its substance. When those of us with noble traits -- intelligence, empathy, morality and so on -- refuse to reproduce, we do so at the cost of allowing the OTHERS who lack those traits to make up a larger and larger percentage of the population. They WILL reproduce. Food for thought.

Are we back to the beliefs into inherited nobility already?

It is literally just game theory. If you don't act, others still will. Multiply that times 8 billion and you have an evolutionary process that rewards the dumbest amongst us.

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#355

Post by popalchemist »

littlexsparkee wrote: post #244
popalchemist wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is always full of danger. This moment in time is exceptional only in the form of that danger, not in its substance. When those of us with noble traits -- intelligence, empathy, morality and so on -- refuse to reproduce, we do so at the cost of allowing the OTHERS who lack those traits to make up a larger and larger percentage of the population. They WILL reproduce. Food for thought.

So just teach those traits to other people? You don't need to have kids to help.

Yes, that is possible, and I didn't claim that having kids is the only way to influence humanity... obviously.

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#356

Post by sublinear »

graemep wrote: post #336
sublinear wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am about to hit 40 soon and have an alternative take on all that. I agree reddit was and still is a very toxic echo chamber, but the rest of us who have avoided having kids shouldn't be lumped in with those people. I came from a big family and grew up somewhat poor watching remorseful adults who didn't recognize the gravity of bringing a life into this world, let alone several, basically drink themselves to death t…

You seem to be polarising the choices. You do not have to have a big family or no kids at all. I have two kids. For the vast majority people nothing else they can do with their lives will be anywhere near as fulfilling as having children. There are exceptions, of course, but it takes something like an unusual personality, or a great commitment to something else (e.g. celibacy in religious orders etc.), or something e…

Sorry, I'm not trying to be polarizing. I'm trying to emphasize what I've learned at the extremes. That can inform a choice much more clearly.

The outcomes of the children are directly correlated with the quality of the relationship the parents have. No relationship I've ever seen, then or now, seems to be stable enough to do much better.

In my case, they made up for it with love and attention that brought plenty of comfort but few answers. I know many people pine for that sort of thing, but it's very heavy for a child to go through. People often foolishly romanticize a life where anything seems possible as long as they feel supported. They think that support is the missing piece. What they don't think about is all the times that kid is going to walk directly into a wall and have to find the courage to not be mad at the wall or lose their shit and turn radical like those people on reddit. Love is not enough for hope, and hope is not a plan.

On the other end I had some friends whose parents brought plenty of answers without much love. Those people found some early success in life, but ended up restless and unsatisfied following someone else's path.

You can again say I'm being extreme, but my own experience with relationships is to bridge this gap is almost impossible. Trust is hard and must go both ways, and the current social climate makes it harder than ever. I am still young enough to give it time I guess. I'm not saying no to a family ever. I'm saying I don't know enough to be confident I can do better.

To be clear, I'm saying I've never met someone that has the curiosity and unyielding stubbornness to truly know something (in the Richard Feynman sense) while still being strong enough to be vulnerable and really love their family over all else. What few out there exist and meet that bar must then somehow find each other and commit. It's tough.

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#357

Post by hirvi74 »

nine_k wrote: post #184
arealaccount wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> dont want to deal with kids Someone has to bring up the next generation, the no kids crowd want all the luxury of having the next generation without putting in the effort or spending the money.

I suppose that people who actively do not want to have kids should not have kids. Their hypothetical kids won't be happy and well-developed, but instead always feel that they are an undesired burden. Instead, people who like having kids should have more kids. This would proliferate a healthy culture that sees kids as a source of happiness, not a burden of misery taken out of necessity.

> I suppose that people who actively do not want to have kids should not have kids.

I would describe myself as being the converse of that statement. I do not believe my desires should truly have much of a bearing on my situation.

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#359

Post by globular-toast »

Odd. I never felt that moving rectangles around was my shot at happiness. My whole career I've spent doing things I genuinely believe are useful and help people. If moving rectangles is no longer useful then so be it, I'll do something else.

I love software engineering but I've never really been great at it, if I'm honest. I'll be sad if it goes away, but there are much more important things: nature and access to the outside away from noise and cars, for example.

What I find quite funny is I don't think we ever really got that great at software. There are bridges in my country that are 150 years old and carry 200 trains a day. Most software projects don't even last 5 years and are riddled with bugs.

It still remains to be seen whether LLMs can really do software, though. It will be interesting times ahead, for sure. Maybe we'll realise that recycling old content over and over again isn't good for us, before it's too late.

Re: The happiest I've ever been

#360

Post by watermelon59 »

dejawu wrote: post #154

This is exactly why, as someone who thought I'd be an IC with my head buried in code my whole life, I accepted a role as a tech lead last year. Humans will always need other humans to be human for them. I love working with computers, but supporting, teaching, and mentoring junior engineers has been rewarding for me in ways that writing code never could be. There is no social substitute for concrete relationships with…

Were you able to get into that role without the expectation that you’d still be functioning as an IC i.e. holding two jobs at the same time?

I had an awful experience as a lead because the massive mental context switches between leading and doing IC work were unsustainable.

Post reply on HN