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

Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–86 of 86 posts

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#81

Post by lolc »

sneak wrote: post #78
lolc wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Opting" to become addicted? I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot. And she talks about "it", that urge, in the third person. I fully "discount" her judgment in some areas and she would agree. Like I can't reason you into holding your breath for longer than a minut…

> I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot. If one can opt out (by eg not going into the city), one can also opt in.

Looks like you wanted to build an argument but lost steam after one sentence. Here, let me continue for you: "So if she chooses to go to the city, it will be her decision and consequently her responsibility when she inevitably gets hooked again."

Oh but you see, it's her friends that give her the freedom not to go to the city: If they weren't there, she wouldn't have that choice.

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#82

Post by webmaven »

sneak wrote: post #62
throwaway5752 wrote: post #59

With all due respect (and not saying these groups have overlap) there is a notable presence of people on Hacker News that minimize the danger of or encourage drug experimentation, if not regular drug use. Tony Hsieh is ultimately responsible for his choices that led to his tragic and early death. But it leaves a bad taste to see people calling out his entourage here and then other people advocating similar behavior i…

> With all due respect (and not saying these groups have overlap) there is a notable presence of people on Hacker News that minimize the danger of or encourage drug experimentation, if not regular drug use. I think a better way of describing it is a continuum of belief around drugs. Most people aren't talking about caffeine or alcohol when they say "drug use" but those are indeed psychoactive drugs as well. "All drug…

> All substances we ingest, from distilled water, to table salt, to a cup of coffee, broccoli, a beer, a cheeseburger, morphine, or methamphetamine have various effects, long term and short, on our bodies, and we should understand those effects as best we can before we ingest any of them.

Don't forget sugar:

https://www.webmd.com/diabetes/features/how-sugar-affects-yo...

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#83

Post by webmaven »

jfengel wrote: post #18
haram_masala wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a Russian saying, “Your friends are the ones who can tell you ‘no.’”

There's an American joke that "Your friend is the one who comes to bail you out of jail. Your best friend is the one next to you in the cell going, "Duuuude, that was AWESOME!!!!" It's a joke, but the humor exists because it illustrates the idea that the people really like their enablers. Not everybody would find the joke funny, though I have no idea if Americans in general find it funnier than people from other cult…

> There's an American joke that "Your friend is the one who comes to bail you out of jail. Your best friend is the one next to you in the cell going, "Duuuude, that was AWESOME!!!!"

Another stab in the same general vicinity is: "A friend will help you move. A REAL friend will help you move a body."

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#84

Post by TMWNN »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #2

US-centric views of love have evolved more towards ‘if it feels right, do it’ It feels odd to tell anyone ‘no’ because people think you are judging them, so most just stay quiet. In a different culture, Tony may have survived if people felt comfortable questioning dangerous behavior.

>US-centric views of love have evolved more towards ‘if it feels right, do it’

Wikipedia on the early history of Saturday Night Live:

>Drugs were a major problem during the show's first five years. "The value system that was around there was, as long as people showed up on time, did their job, it was nobody's business what they did in their bedroom or in their lives. That value system turned out to be wrong", [Show creator Lorne] Michaels later said. [Original cast member Dan] Aykroyd said that "The cocaine was a problem. Not for me, it was never my favorite... but it was around a lot, and it was affecting the work, the performance, the quality of the scripts... wasting time, and that was bad".

The one exception among cast and crew:

>[Jane] Curtin remained on the show through the 1979–1980 season. Guest host Eric Idle said that Curtin was "very much a 'Let's come in, let's know our lines, let's do it properly, and go' ... She was very sensible, very focused", and disliked the drug culture in which many of the cast participated. Show writer Al Franken stated that she "was so steady. Had a really strong moral center, and as such was disgusted by much of the show and the people around it".

For Curtin to have made it through the first five years of SNL without succumbing to what almost destroyed the show and those who were a part of it—during the 1970s in NYC, the era of Studio 54, no less—is remarkable.

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#85

Post by omgwtfbbq »

sneak wrote: post #60
omgwtfbbq wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision Drug/Alcohol addiction is hardly a personal decision... This is a dangerous point of view to take.

Whose decision is it, if not the person who opts to become addicted and continue that addiction? People like to personify addiction, as if there is some outside force controlling the person, but this is to discount and discard every single addict who decided to clean themselves up. I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop. Don't personify the addiction: the brain of a…

>opts to become addicted

?????

>I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.

I highly doubt you know any addicts full stop.

>Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own

I just can't even, are you a scientologist or something? I have literally never encountered arguments like yours. Truly outlandish.

"Addiction exerts a long and powerful influence on the brain that manifests in three distinct ways: craving for the object of addiction, loss of control over its use, and continuing involvement with it despite adverse consequences. While overcoming addiction is possible, the process is often long, slow, and complicated."

"...we recognize addiction as a chronic disease that changes both brain structure and function."

https://www.health.harvard.edu/%E2%80%A6/how-addiction-hijac...

Re: Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle

#86

Post by dang »

d3ntb3ev1l wrote: post #29

Billionaire dies partying. Fucks given: zero

You may not owe billionaires better, but you owe this community considerably better if you're participating in it. Please review the rules and stick to them from now on: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Post reply on HN