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

What If You Could Do It All Over?

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 460 posts

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#371

Post by honkdaddy »

rklaehn wrote: post #276

I wasted a lot of time in my life. I was into C++ programming many years before the first dotcom boom. But I did not really profit from it. Instead I studied for many years, then slacked off for a few years, and only started working full time as a software engineer at the age of 30, working on satellite operations and the ground system of the international space station. I could have been a millionaire many times ove…

> On the other hand, only due to my weird, suboptimal path through life did I meet my wife, which is for me a global optimum. I literally can not think of anybody I would rather spend the rest of my life with.

This got me choked up. You're a richer man than just about anyone else in this thread, my friend.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#372

Post by lotsofpulp »

inglor_cz wrote: post #312
ternaryoperator wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my parents' generation, there was a lot of pressure to have children before 30. There was a widespread belief that giving birth after 30 risked the health of the mother and the child. As medicine advanced and neonatal care greatly improved, that deadline was pushed back and women started to seriously entertain the idea of careers before having children. There are other cultural and societal factors at play, but th…

From a 42 y.o. with 34 y.o. spouse who are undergoing IVF: the drop-off of fertility after 35 is still very real. There may be future interventions that correct for that, but generally, quality of ova starts declining after 30 and much more so after 35.

It’s also not just about giving birth, but a woman’s body is probably far better at recovery after birth in their 20s than 30s.

Not to mention the energy to keep up with little ones, and if you ever want the option of more than 2 kids. And of course if you’re 30+ when you have kids, and your kids are 30+ when they have kids, you are pushing 65 to 70+ which makes playing with the grandkids not as much fun and you’re soon to be less of an asset in terms of help and possibly a liability for your kids due to declining health.

On the other hand, you may have increased your chances at having a higher paying career, but I suspect, for many, the extra savings don’t quite make up for the trade offs.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#373

Post by nullc »

nullc wrote: post #370

I don't often experience anxiety. One day I came across a silly writing prompt thread on Reddit along the lines "What would your mind was transported back to you as a 14-year old?"... Presumably anticipating lots of comments about buying Apple shares and Bitcoin. I was struck by the sheer impossibility of retracing my footsteps to get back all the things I've liked about my life, the loss of loved ones who only exist…

I feel less anxious about the form of this idea expressed by the artsy film Mr. Nobody.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#374

Post by croissants »

CaptArmchair wrote: post #318
teekert wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't like about this quote is that it pretends you just have to choose between all these attractive and worthwhile goals and that the choosing is the difficult part. In reality though you may opt for a career, leave the family but fail. Or you may put your career on a lower pitch only to have your wife and you decide it won't really work out. In reality, it's more like you start to climb for a fat purple fig…

The quote makes more sense if you take a look at the life of its author, Sylvia Plath. [1] She struggled with mental health issues and depression most of her life. She excelled academically and she was driven to write, but at the same time, she struggled with her own self. Her life is marked by several suicide attempts. She married the poet Ted Hughes and moved around frequently during their short marriage. While she…

> She married the poet Ted Hughes and moved around frequently during their short marriage.

My understanding is that Ted Hughes' contribution to Plath's mental health went beyond "mov[ing] around frequently during their short marriage" [1].

> In 2017, previously unpublished letters written by Plath between 18 February 1960 and 4 February 1963 accuse Hughes of physically abusing her months before she miscarried their second child in 1961.

Hughes also began an affair with another woman, Assia Wevill, in 1962 and (apparently) had a kid with her in 1965. Plath knew about the former and committed suicide in 1963. Wevill also killed herself as well as her child with Hughes in 1969 after, you guessed it, "Hughes began affairs with Brenda Hedden, a married acquaintance who frequented their home, and Carol Orchard, a nurse 20 years his junior, whom he would later marry in 1970" [2].

It might be too reductive to say Hughes just drove two women to suicide, but it seems like we can be confident that he had, uh, extensive personal failings?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Hughes#Death_of_Sylvia_Pla...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assia_Wevill#Ted_Hughes

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#375

Post by tomrod »

imposter wrote: post #247
seppin wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Also the same guy who bashes established disorders like ADHD publicly and the whole field of psychiatry(calling them engineers) saying the disorder has deep psychological roots, while himself taking anti-depressants to treat his depression isn't someone worth listening to for anything substantial. This dude thinks a disorder like ADHD is just bad conscientiousness that can be fixed by reading his 12 step book.

Perhaps for some the placebo effect is enough, and Peterson becomes their savior with devotees.

I don't know, I've listened to some of his stuff and what doesn't come across as simplistic platitudes has baked in assumptions that seem unnecessary, like defining truth to be an evolutionarily useful principle.

That he inspires people doesn't surprise me, the religion of my youth did the same and was more hokum than Peterson's mythological substrate mappings.

But it's still a good idea to clean your room.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#376

Post by gfxgirl »

teekert wrote: post #284
acwan93 wrote: post #8

This reminds me of “The Bell Jar” by Sylvia Plath, which has a quote Aziz Ansari used in his series “Master of None”: > "I saw my life branching out before me like the green fig tree in the story. From the tip of every branch, like a fat purple fig, a wonderful future beckoned and winked. One fig was a husband and a happy home and children, and another fig was a famous poet and another fig was a brilliant professor,…

What I don't like about this quote is that it pretends you just have to choose between all these attractive and worthwhile goals and that the choosing is the difficult part. In reality though you may opt for a career, leave the family but fail. Or you may put your career on a lower pitch only to have your wife and you decide it won't really work out. In reality, it's more like you start to climb for a fat purple fig…

No, you can't. I'm in my mid 50s. I can't go back and change my decision (non-decision decision) to not have a family. I wanted one. The choices I made or the chances that came by depending on how you look at it got me where I am today. Mid 50s. I'm not going to birth kids. I'm also not likely to be able to change my career to anything that requires 10-15 years of study before I can get a good position in that career. Going forward I also need to choose things that payout so that I can afford to pay for my life once people won't keep giving me work.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#377

Post by matthewdgreen »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #372
inglor_cz wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a 42 y.o. with 34 y.o. spouse who are undergoing IVF: the drop-off of fertility after 35 is still very real. There may be future interventions that correct for that, but generally, quality of ova starts declining after 30 and much more so after 35.

It’s also not just about giving birth, but a woman’s body is probably far better at recovery after birth in their 20s than 30s. Not to mention the energy to keep up with little ones, and if you ever want the option of more than 2 kids. And of course if you’re 30+ when you have kids, and your kids are 30+ when they have kids, you are pushing 65 to 70+ which makes playing with the grandkids not as much fun and you’re s…

I can tell you that you’re way more prepared to be a parent a decade later. Bodies be damned.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#378

Post by lotsofpulp »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #377
lotsofpulp wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also not just about giving birth, but a woman’s body is probably far better at recovery after birth in their 20s than 30s. Not to mention the energy to keep up with little ones, and if you ever want the option of more than 2 kids. And of course if you’re 30+ when you have kids, and your kids are 30+ when they have kids, you are pushing 65 to 70+ which makes playing with the grandkids not as much fun and you’re s…

I can tell you that you’re way more prepared to be a parent a decade later. Bodies be damned.

Also a good point, trade offs all around to consider!

I had mine in 30 to 35 range, but if I could go back in time and had found my spouse, I think I would have opted to have them in 25 to 30 range. However, no one in my social circles has kids in their 20s and barely anyone is married by 30 so we also may have been socially isolated if we had chosen to do that.

But I try to think back to what I did in my 25 to 30 range that I thought was worth delaying starting a family and I can’t come up with anything, other than being a little bit further ahead in the rat race. But all the other rats are thinking the same thing, so who is really benefiting?

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#379

Post by gfxgirl »

kodah wrote: post #84

Much of my life hasn't played out how I expected. I had dreams like many people in high school and none of them came true. Instead of finishing college I joined the military after the stock market collapse in 2008/9. Impressions were left on me throughout my early life that I only came to know as an adult. My family got sick, I ruined the relationship that I'd worked for, and at times I alienated people close to me o…

Obviously if you think digital nomad live is for you then go for it. For me I want friends and companionship. My experience is that's not what nomads get. Friends requires you to be near by and spend time when them else they drift way. Sure you can keep in touch online but you won't really be a part of their life nor them a part of yours if you're not there to share your life with them. The same goes for a long term companion unless by some luck of the draw you manage to find someone that can join your open ride lifestyle. Some people don't need that. I do which I learned the hard way.

Re: What If You Could Do It All Over?

#380

Post by gfxgirl »

indigochill wrote: post #65
quickthrower2 wrote: post #17

It’s worth thinking about how we measure how “good” a life is and if that is superficial and too much influenced by fashion. For example the cliche is go travelling or get rich starting a business. “I raised kids” doesn’t have the same boastworthyness in a lot of circles, but arguably it’s more interesting. Or maybe not. What’s the life well lived metric?

> What’s the life well lived metric? I grew up Christian, and among Christian young people a common question was "What's God's plan for my life?" In that context, I came across Micah 6:8 which spells it out about as plainly as you'll find anywhere: "He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?" That seems like a…

I'm going to say I find this a very poor POV.

The Christian POV is basically, "it doesn't matter how bad your life is because it will be great in the after life". In other words the good parts are ahead, period.

But if you don't believe then there is no guaranteed good parts ahead and the line above has no meaning.

Post reply on HN