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

Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

joincolossus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 89 posts

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#71

Post by hiAndrewQuinn »

01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote: post #41
yeeetz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many successful American tech founders and entrepreneurs have strong religious or spiritual beliefs — I believe it's part of the unique competitive advantage and edge in this industry

I wonder what the correlation / causation is on that versus having a supportive family and community. That is, if you took someone who's an atheist, would making them religious (left as an exercise to the reader) make them measurably more successful? Or is it that people who already have supportive families tend to come from religious families, and tend to inherit their parents' religion?

An atheist's principles usually have to be deduced at the source, by e.g. talking to the atheist. This isn't hard, but it does take time. It usually doesn't scale to other atheists.

A moderately devout Christian's principles are likely ones you already know in some low resolution through cultural osmosis. This is reason enough to suspect that, ceteris paribus, people will prefer to engage in voluntary trade with the Christian over the atheist. It is less because of the Christianity itself, than because trying to follow a known standard for good conduct reduces transaction costs.

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#72

Post by raddan »

alexslobodnik wrote: post #49
Aurornis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a young person in the United States, the main concern is that if you aren't one of the greatest at what you do, you'll be doomed to a life of increasing poverty In psychology there’s a concept called splitting, or dichotomous thinking, where a person only thinks of things in concepts of their extremes. Either the most extreme good outcome, or the most extreme bad outcome. They might see people or public figures…

The binary perspective gives an excuse to give up. The reasonable perspective does not. It demonstrates that though agency is limited it does exist. Our life outcomes are connected to our actions. For many their circumstances make this an unpleasant thought, thus binary thinking protect their self-image. For some that's all they have left.

I too am baffled by the prevailing sense of doom that many young people have. They certainly get a lot of messages about how hard things are, and of course, one’s circumstances have a big effect on one’s future. I am often asked in my job as a professor: “if I fail this test am I doomed forever?” which strikes me as so miscalibrated with reality that I struggle to respond.

Humanity’s initial circumstances, by modern standards, was pretty poor! What is lacking from the modern day doom and gloom is any notion of agency. You can change an awful lot in your life if you identify a goal and then ask yourself “what do I need to do to get there?” The common objection to this line of argument is “well there are people who cannot change their circumstances” and maybe that’s true. But I doubt that’s true for most people, and it certainly was not true for me. My life is dramatically more interesting and comfortable than the one I started life in. My main advantage over others is that I had loving and supportive parents who encouraged me to dream, and maybe that is a big advantage, but what we did not have was much money.

The recurring thought I have is that, where I live in the Eastern US, most of the houses, which were built in the late 1800’s to early 1900’s, were built with what we would now think of as primitive (and affordable) tools. That did not stop people from building beautiful things. I have learned to use those tools, and while they are slower than modern ones, they work fine. It’s hard not to get the sense that, for all of the complaining about “I will never be able to afford a house,” etc, there is also not much effort invested in seriously considering how one might acquire one with limited means. I bought what used to be called a “fixer-upper,” a house that sat on the market for years because of its problems, and turned it into a comfortable and pleasant home. I had to sacrifice nights and weekends. For years. But I made it happen, and eight years after I bought it, my mortgage (which was small) is nearly paid off.

Was I lucky? Maybe. But I also coupled that luck with the motivation to actively change things. I would love it if I could somehow convince people that they really can have fulfilling and even happy lives if they are willing to work toward that goal.

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#73

Post by raddan »

chr15m wrote: post #35
kaiwenwang wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like very good isn't enough as employers want the best candidates but not the average candidates, and if you're sort of in the middle then the so-so companies don't want you either because they think you'll leave. Something about the increased social stratification of our times, which also has to do with increased transportation and communication. Might also depend on your locale. Plumber in Germany might be b…

Hiring is not a zero sum game (growth of the company/economy through good hiring means more positions are created). I've hired software developers before and what I was looking for was somebody who commits code that works and is good quality. I don't care about their ranking on some imaginary programmer hierarchy. You probably don't want to work at a company where they do.

Not to mention that motivated humans are amazing learning machines. The supposed trend of replacing entry-level programmers with AI is pure insanity. Sure, code of indeterminate quality (let’s assume for a moment that it is good) will get written. But a company is its people, and you are shutting the door to new ideas. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen the neophyte, who was maybe considered a bit of a dope after they were hired, in their second or third year stumble on a great idea that energizes everybody. People can change. A good organization recognizes this and nurtures them so that both change for the better.

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#74

Post by riehwvfbk »

robertritz wrote: post #51
jebarker wrote: post #36

I too would like to hear more from people with similar approaches to work, career and technology to KK. However, it seems like there’s a large amount of survivorship bias at play when people talk about just following their interests and it leading to financial security and work freedom.

Meh I took a serious left turn after college and my first few jobs. Much happier now. Work on Capitol Hill for less than a year then tech outsourcing then consulting. Realized it was boring, useless, and mind numbing and moved across the world. Now have multiple businesses, more than 30 employees across those business, and I get to have fun. It's stressful sometimes but I think we've kicked the stress finally (at 37)…

Humblebrag much?

Do you think your employees are where they are in life because they aren't willing to do uncomfortable things? Or because they follow their interests too much?

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#75

Post by asdf6969 »

raddan wrote: post #72
alexslobodnik wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The binary perspective gives an excuse to give up. The reasonable perspective does not. It demonstrates that though agency is limited it does exist. Our life outcomes are connected to our actions. For many their circumstances make this an unpleasant thought, thus binary thinking protect their self-image. For some that's all they have left.

I too am baffled by the prevailing sense of doom that many young people have. They certainly get a lot of messages about how hard things are, and of course, one’s circumstances have a big effect on one’s future. I am often asked in my job as a professor: “if I fail this test am I doomed forever?” which strikes me as so miscalibrated with reality that I struggle to respond. Humanity’s initial circumstances, by modern…

Inequality is increasing and we’re anxious about being on the wrong side. It’s just standard (and justified) economic anxiety. We’re correct to see that the standard path through life is increasingly precarious and there’s no safety net. On the other hand, successful people are more successful than ever.

Your students who can’t graduate will have to reevaluate their entire lives. If I didn’t become a software engineer I would have to move across the continent and choose a new career. I already had to leave all my friends and family behind and I’m one of the success stories. Sometimes there is a solution but it’s not worth the trade offs and that’s typically when pessimistic thinking is helpful.

If you live in a low cost of living area then I have no idea though. Those people really are just whining.

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#76

Post by asdf6969 »

pragmatic wrote: post #29
kaiwenwang wrote: post #21

As a young person in the United States, the main concern is that if you aren't one of the greatest at what you do, you'll be doomed to a life of increasing poverty: food derived from vegetable oils and chemically bleached wheat, apartments of grey laminate flooring and concrete, crime, people who derive their actions from social media, a 60 minute commute---as the real world: nature, people who are present, quality f…

Woah that’s bleak. You don’t have to be faster than the bear, just faster than the other people the bear is chasing. The bar is so low in corporate America you could trip on it. Just try to be halfway competent, do something useful at work, read a book or two about your industry. You’re already way ahead. Don’t fall for the hacker news bs. Lots of millionaires out here that never had a successful startup.

> The bar is so low in corporate America you could trip on it.

I talk to incompetent people all day every day but I don’t know anyone competent who could get the opportunity to work here without at least a few weeks of studying and a lot of luck. Thousands of applicants for every position and you still think meritocracy matters? The only winners in this market are people with no self respect and the well connected

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#77

Post by asdf6969 »

danparsonson wrote: post #69
kaiwenwang wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried to be as accurate as I perceive it, and the descriptions of the environment are accurate to the locale of most of the United States. If the bar is that low, then the environment is sure to be like the first place I described.

"Most of the United States"? You're covering an awfully big area there - how much of it have you actually seen for yourself vs learned about second hand through news and social media? As for the skills bar, if you're intent on being hired by the likes of OpenAI then sure, you'll need to aim high, but for the majority of jobs, being reasonably good, friendly, and reliable will definitely be sufficient; the challenge i…

Sufficient is irrelevant when the interviews are 10x harder than the actual job. Employment is a competition. How else can you explain the credentials arms race for low skilled labour?

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#78

Post by financltravsty »

riehwvfbk wrote: post #74
robertritz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh I took a serious left turn after college and my first few jobs. Much happier now. Work on Capitol Hill for less than a year then tech outsourcing then consulting. Realized it was boring, useless, and mind numbing and moved across the world. Now have multiple businesses, more than 30 employees across those business, and I get to have fun. It's stressful sometimes but I think we've kicked the stress finally (at 37)…

Humblebrag much? Do you think your employees are where they are in life because they aren't willing to do uncomfortable things? Or because they follow their interests too much?

Yes.

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#79

Post by kaiwenwang »

Aurornis wrote: post #40
kaiwenwang wrote: post #21

As a young person in the United States, the main concern is that if you aren't one of the greatest at what you do, you'll be doomed to a life of increasing poverty: food derived from vegetable oils and chemically bleached wheat, apartments of grey laminate flooring and concrete, crime, people who derive their actions from social media, a 60 minute commute---as the real world: nature, people who are present, quality f…

> As a young person in the United States, the main concern is that if you aren't one of the greatest at what you do, you'll be doomed to a life of increasing poverty In psychology there’s a concept called splitting, or dichotomous thinking, where a person only thinks of things in concepts of their extremes. Either the most extreme good outcome, or the most extreme bad outcome. They might see people or public figures…

Sorry in advance if this seems rude. Going to context dump a lot of stuff below:

My opinion is based on the real world as I've lived it. I cook for myself. I highly recommend https://www.centurylife.org/ for anyone else learning to cook.

Have also deeply thought about types of cookware: from glass to ceramic to clay, have experimented with clay pots such as RÖMERTOPF (not worth it), dutch oven is fine to pressure cookers, or German cookware such as Fissler that has spot welded and presents a neat design compared to riveted cookware common in the US.

If you go to almost any supermarket (Costco, Publix, Kroger, Whole Foods, HMart), the majority of foods people eat are derivatives of what I said.

Whereas recipes in the past were limited by the locale, we are now limited to the cities we have transportation options to.

If you're in a suburb of one of the major metropolitan areas, this doesn't apply. In small cities of the United States, people might only have Walmart, Amazon, Dollar Generals. So people have to cram into cities as the availability of goods is limited.

There are only a few suppliers for things---there is not unlimited choice from free market competition, a wall of supermarket cereals look different but the ingredients are fundamentally the same. I can't get good cuts of meat such as bone-in shoulder easily. Nor can I get it cut at a butcher because USDA guideline has limits on outside meat.

Food is only 3 categories: fats, carbs, or proteins.

Let's consider proteins: The major meat I buy from Costco is the Australian grass-fed lamb import. The Sprouts has lamb, but it's been sitting on the shelf for a long time. The factory farmed pork, chicken, fish, and feedlot beef give me symptoms of malaise.

Almost all processed foods are using canola oil, vegetable oil, sunflower oil, etc.--the polyunsaturated fats are shown to highly depress metabolism, despite what the USDA guidelines say.

For carbs, most of the wheat is chemically bleached with "Oxides of nitrogen, Chlorine, Nitrosyl chloride, Chlorine dioxide."

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B...

The wheat and the corn give me symptoms because I am fairly aware of my body's reactions. Some person might be extremely unhealthy and live in a slum (from my perspective) and say that they're fine, and we would both we right because each perspective is relative to an individual.

Many are increasingly unable to afford to even transport oneself in the United States without a car or gasoline because of the suburbanization of infrastructure yet cities are increasing in price.

The internet affects the real world because federal laws, which be written in places far away from where you live, affects people's behaviors and how they can do things.

You categorize me as a surface-level thinker prone to the emotional dramatics derived from the internet not having deeply thought about the reality and nature of things, but I would hope that the above comment dispels such preassumptions.

Seemingly widening inequality and inability to land meaningful jobs as a lived experience for people I know makes my concerns reasonable and truthful based on lived experience (young 20s).

Re: Flounder Mode – Kevin Kelly on a different way to do great work

#80

Post by kaiwenwang »

alexslobodnik wrote: post #49
Aurornis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a young person in the United States, the main concern is that if you aren't one of the greatest at what you do, you'll be doomed to a life of increasing poverty In psychology there’s a concept called splitting, or dichotomous thinking, where a person only thinks of things in concepts of their extremes. Either the most extreme good outcome, or the most extreme bad outcome. They might see people or public figures…

The binary perspective gives an excuse to give up. The reasonable perspective does not. It demonstrates that though agency is limited it does exist. Our life outcomes are connected to our actions. For many their circumstances make this an unpleasant thought, thus binary thinking protect their self-image. For some that's all they have left.

Feel like binary perspective is a motivation to not fall into hell. If I lived in certain places in Western Europe or my family was in a developed part of the United States I would be fine being a tradesman or simple office job.
Post reply on HN