Here's what I don't understand: Vinay, if what you loved so much was the journey, why would you sell the company?
Loom was your life, clearly. It meant a huge amount to you. You cared about it and the work you did there, so you... sold it to a giant multibillion dollar corporation and let them absorb everything special about it so they could make another buck.
Was there just no way to continue on without being acquired? If there wasn't, then what was the value in what you were building? Did you just luck into a fortune?
I am one of those people who thinks capitalism is largely worthless as a personal ideology (though not as an economic system). I think that because, as the author of this post has discovered, money is inherently worthless. Success means something, but money doesn't. Loom could have been a going concern. So many companies could have been. They didn't need infinite growth. They needed to do a good job to help their customers and make the world better by doing so.
Nobody seems to understand or care about that anymore.
If I were in your position, Vinay, I would quit my own retirement. I would give away as much of my money as I could, leaving only just enough to act as a safety net if I failed or had a true emergency. I'd put that money into some form of trust where it was difficult enough for me to access that I had to live within some limited means. Then I'd start another company, and, if it succeeded, keep it. No more acquisitions.
There's no point in money except what it buys you, but you already had what you wanted. You made a mistake and lost it. You'll have to start over to get it back.
(I also personally don't love AI and don't want more companies doing AI, but I am trying to focus on the point of this post, not an ex post facto discussion of Loom itself.)