Sergey Brin's Unretirement • Hacker News Board

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#431

Post by heyjamesknight » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 6:42 PM UTC

WJW wrote: post #381

heyjamesknight wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mentally healthy person wants to be helpful. They want to be seen as helpful and they expect others around them to be helpful as well. This is the foundation of "pro-social" behavior: I benefit the group as much or more than the group benefits me. Tying your identity to the place where you're helpful and where that help is appreciated and acknowledged isn't mental illness.

But this person was laid off. His help was (apparently) not appreciated, and he's not helping anyone by sitting alone in his car on the parking lot. Do you think it is healthy behavior to go to a parking lot at 0900 every day and do nothing because you mentally cannot face the idea of not going to an office?

Coping mechanisms are complex and diverse. The individual in question lost a major source of meaning-making in their life and was struggling to cope with that loss. I don't believe this is any less healthy than other common responses, which range from societal withdrawal to substance abuse.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#432

Post by aatd86 » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 6:50 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #343

aatd86 wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think you have no agency why do anything at all? You could choose to stop doing anything. Or you could decide that your partial knowledge(unrealised futures) gives you agency. It's a matter of metacognition. Being able to compute possible futures gives you artificial agency at some level. At a meta level even if that compute can be deterministic at a higher level, but you should not care. It's a nested univers…

> If you think you have no agency why do anything at all? I addressed that in my comment, but let me address it again since it's the most frequent objection to this: > You could choose to stop doing anything. In the mechanical sense that an "IF ... THEN ... ELSE" statement makes the program "choose" which branch to take, you're right, yes I could. But then I'd also suffer the consequences. As I pointed out, if I were…

I think we agree. The subtelty is that, it is about closed and open systems. Your partial knowledge makes things a locally open system. You are processing new data and then acting accordingly. That's dynamic agency. The better you can get knowledge, the better you can influence the next step.

That realization happens at the meta level and gives you agency in your actual universe. Even though at the meta-meta level, that realization itself can be deterministic.

Not to be confused with someone who would be external to the system and could watch your life as if it was a video tape, being omniscient. They would not have agency in your system as they can't interact with you and for them everything is predetermined, and they could compute the next state of the system from the past state. You can't but the system is impredicative enough that by recognizing this, by self-consciousness, the system effects itself toward its own favored state. And in fact, the more knowledge you have, the less agency. Because the fewer choices.

The meta level person doesn't just observe how the video. It observes the fact that people realize they are characters in a video and how that realization affects the choices they make. Given the initial conditions.

Should you have regrets in life? You had the choice of knowing more and be more able so it makes sense. Could things have happened differently given that they did and obviously you wanted back then for them to be different and wish they had been? Or did it happen because the conditions were set to happen?

Basically the question is whether we control our odds? Doing anything is controlling some odds so I'd say yes. Requires increased self consciousness. Being able to imagine what is not there. Animals seem to have that capacity. Especially humans. We can make sure that certain things don't happen by virtue of our own existence. This is our agency. Are we biased by construction toward the best odds of we can recognize them? Yes. Are their really things with the exact same odds in the system? Wouldn't that block us? Probably. But the system is already made in a way that it wouldn't happen by virtue of having (at least local) asymmetries. In practice we wouldn't be blocked. Someone perfectly symmetrical in a system that also is, would perhaps. But there might not be any two same most desired odds then so no. Unlikely.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#433

Post by fragmede » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:00 PM UTC

Xiol wrote: post #421

melling wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I’d take directing big things at Google over riding a dirt bike… I’m not actually sure what you don’t get. I’m all for not living a lower level grind and riding a dirt bike. Most jobs simply aren’t interesting.

Regretting not being able to create more shareholder value on your deathbed. So very sad.

Depends on the shareholder. At Sergey Brin's level, that shareholder value shapes the future of humanity, a legacy affecting many more people and will last far longer than spending time with single, or even double digit number of children.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#434

Post by fragmede » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:03 PM UTC

jart wrote: post #224

amelius wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get this. Just find a coworking space and work on a FOSS project.

I left Google to build an open source project a long time ago. A big part of the appeal was being able to have something to work on that's truly mine. Sergey already has something that's his and it's called Google. So I think he belongs there.

The world thanks you for your work. Which one of yours is your favorite?

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#435

Post by fragmede » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:07 PM UTC

WJW wrote: post #381

heyjamesknight wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mentally healthy person wants to be helpful. They want to be seen as helpful and they expect others around them to be helpful as well. This is the foundation of "pro-social" behavior: I benefit the group as much or more than the group benefits me. Tying your identity to the place where you're helpful and where that help is appreciated and acknowledged isn't mental illness.

But this person was laid off. His help was (apparently) not appreciated, and he's not helping anyone by sitting alone in his car on the parking lot. Do you think it is healthy behavior to go to a parking lot at 0900 every day and do nothing because you mentally cannot face the idea of not going to an office?

> His help was (apparently) not appreciated

That's just your take. We don't know where he sat in the team, so we can assume the idea that he wasn't appreciated by his teammates as incorrect. He didn't make the cut based on unknown metrics from upper management, but they have their own reasons for doing things.

Getting in to the parking lot of the old office sounds way healthier than not making it out of bed at all.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#436

Post by palmotea » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:08 PM UTC

geodel wrote: post #397

ericmay wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One big difference was social life. In India, I was constantly meeting people—connections were easy and organic. In the US, maintaining a daytime social life felt much harder. Everyone is on a treadmill—insurance, income, careers—often not by choice. I know there are ways to build community here, but in India it just happened naturally. The primary reason for this is the built environment we live in here in the Uni…

I don't know if it is build environment or cultural thing. In US showing up at friends, or neighbors unannounced and spend hour or two would be very odd if not downright impolite. But in India it is something everyone would do or at least used to do a 15-20 yrs back when I was there. One simple reason I think is overall US is very rich so people just can have anything they need on their own and sharing small things w…

> One simple reason I think is overall US is very rich so people just can have anything they need on their own and sharing small things which lead to more interaction is simply not needed.

That's a very interesting observation!

I have a theory that reducing "friction" is actually a net negative after a certain point, and US society is way past that point. But everybody keeps doing it, because they're myopically focused on little problems and don't see the big picture or down have a full understanding of all the alternatives.

People need external constraints, because those are the things that keep certain internal drives under control.

It's like when food was scarce it made sense to gorge yourself on calorie rich things and avoid physical effort unless absolutely necessary. Now that food is abundant and it's actually possible to nearly completely eliminate physical activity, we have an obesity epidemic, because those drives no longer hit external limits and are now out of control.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#437

Post by bombcar » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:09 PM UTC

massysett wrote: post #422

ericmay wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little of both but the built environment is the primary issue. We have neighbors - sometimes we need someone to grab a package, or we make too much food and we share, &c. or we run into each other walking to a restaurant or through the park. But this isn't the norm. We live in a neighborhood built before the introduction of cars, so homes are built a little bit closer together, but not too close, and we have m…

I don’t think the built environment is that determinative. I live in a car-dependent suburb. Walk Score 2. My neighbor knows the whole street. She knows the garbage men. It’s because she wants to. When I run into her outside, she chats. She walks her dog and chats with dog owners and anyone else she sees. Easy relationships are available at the grocery store, post office, etc. I’ve been seeing some of the same people…

This is an incredibly important point - you could remove the car entirely, even make you dependent on others (as you're dependent - or were before self checkout - on the Costco clerk) - and you still would have the disconnect.

Hardship can force it more often, perhaps, but that is accidental and secondary.

In all the times I've traveled on forms of "mass transit" (airplanes, subways, trains) the only time I've ever really talked to someone was at the seat-together dining on a long-distance train. Otherwise you can sit next to someone for 20+ hours and never say much more than "excuse me" if you need to use the restroom.

(Another counter to this is kids, if you have kids and there are kids anywhere within screaming distance, they will find each other and immediately be best friends. Parents get dragged along - https://www.bluey.tv/watch/season-2/cafe/ )

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#438

Post by alexjplant » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:09 PM UTC

zippyman55 wrote: post #330

alexjplant wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I found that outside of CA, this is asked a lot less often. I moved to California a few years ago from the Least Coast (insert shaka, surfer, wave emojis here) and had multiple other out-of-towners in the same situation as me say the exact opposite at a party. They all were adamant that they had yet to hear "what do you do [for a living]?" since they'd moved as they did ad nauseum when they lived on the other side…

Never hear that question either. I don’t ask it either. I’ve actually been pretty successful but asking that question seems to rank someone on a scale that does not reflect their amazing contributions to society.

I ask because a) I'm interested in the same way that a child is in what people's jobs are and b) it gives me a frame of reference for interacting with them conversationally vis a vis common ground.

Wealth signaling still seems to me to be done primarily by conspicuous consumption and expensive hobbies.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#439

Post by scottyah » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:15 PM UTC

pastorhudson wrote: post #289

mckn1ght wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve found asking “what do you like to do” vs “what do you do” to produce much more interesting conversation.

I always ask “What do you do for fun?”

Same! I love the pregnant pause after "What do you do..." as they start to mentally draw up their usual work spiel before adding the "...for fun" to flip the conversation around and actually get their brain thinking and exploring beyond the standard conversation flows.

Re: Sergey Brin's Unretirement

#440

Post by scottyah » Wed, Jan 07, 2026, 7:18 PM UTC

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #189

marcus_holmes wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took a career break and was weirded out by the question of "how do I introduce myself?". So used to saying "Hi, I'm Marcus, I'm IT Director of " that suddenly having nothing to say there was strange. When people asked "what do you do?" I had no good answer, and that felt like I had no good identity. I guess for Sergey Brin it's a little different, he will always be "Founder of Google" even if he leaves Google. But…

Who were you before you got a job? No one? Nothing? I identify more with myself as a child than I ever did with my work. Why would I identify with someone else’s goals that I’m being paid to help achieve?

If you ever get to talk to people who are more than laborers trading time for dollars, it is great fun. When dollars are just one of the many rewards from their career (where a person spends like 80% of their life energy), you get to hear a lot of passion, learning and growth. It really is a whole different way to live.