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

Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

zamoshi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 101 posts

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#91

Post by viraptor »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #85
viraptor wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which parts do you think were the delusions?

> It reaffirmed a delusion that had previously gripped my mind and begun my psychosis; I must be dead. This place, purgatory. I prayed for a quest or that my retribution was almost over, so that I could go back to land of the living. ... > The old lady’s came marching in, and fed us pasta and bread and cake and cookies. There was Coca Cola. I ate because I had no choice, but suspicious of the sugar they forced on us.…

I see how it could be an actual psychosis, but I read it as full of rhetorical questions / observations / figurative speech. For example "is sugar the enemy?" could easily be a commentary on having to choose between unhealthy calories and having not enough when offered free meal. Paranoia and purgatory is phrasing often used by people for more fancy descriptions rather than literal.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#92

Post by nothrabannosir »

viraptor wrote: post #91
nothrabannosir wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It reaffirmed a delusion that had previously gripped my mind and begun my psychosis; I must be dead. This place, purgatory. I prayed for a quest or that my retribution was almost over, so that I could go back to land of the living. ... > The old lady’s came marching in, and fed us pasta and bread and cake and cookies. There was Coca Cola. I ate because I had no choice, but suspicious of the sugar they forced on us.…

I see how it could be an actual psychosis, but I read it as full of rhetorical questions / observations / figurative speech. For example "is sugar the enemy?" could easily be a commentary on having to choose between unhealthy calories and having not enough when offered free meal. Paranoia and purgatory is phrasing often used by people for more fancy descriptions rather than literal.

"It begun my psychosis" is a literal statement.

Maybe if you miss that sentence, the rest can fly under the radar. Assuming one also ignores the commonly reported correlation between homelessness and mental illness. But try and have those two elements front of mind, and re-read the article: it should be abundantly clear that this is in no way a healthy person down on his luck--this is a story of someone going through a mental break.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#94

Post by saagarjha »

KellyCriterion wrote: post #71
mettamage wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth: I know it could be me. I'm currently with tens of thousands of dollars in savings (in Europe, not American) but it could still be me. I'm quite afraid of it actually and I live every day so that it won't be me. I've noticed that reduces chances significantly, not to zero, but significantly.

Put your funds in some diversified dividend ETFs and you will be quite fine.

Tens of thousands of dollars seems difficult to live on

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#95

Post by Gud »

KellyCriterion wrote: post #71
mettamage wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth: I know it could be me. I'm currently with tens of thousands of dollars in savings (in Europe, not American) but it could still be me. I'm quite afraid of it actually and I live every day so that it won't be me. I've noticed that reduces chances significantly, not to zero, but significantly.

Put your funds in some diversified dividend ETFs and you will be quite fine.

Don’t be so sure. Funds can dwindle fast.

Keep your hands on the steering wheel, eyes on the road

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#96

Post by philipallstar »

relaxing wrote: post #93
philipallstar wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a freedom.

It’s a special kind of delusion that thinks being dead is more free than being alive.

You're wrong, in two ways:

- bodily autonomy; people do have the freedom to sign DNRs, which is death being more free than being alive, as it's about choice

- freedom isn't to do with people giving you things; it's about being able to choose things. It's not "freedom from"; it's "freedom to"

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#97

Post by relaxing »

philipallstar wrote: post #96
relaxing wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a special kind of delusion that thinks being dead is more free than being alive.

You're wrong, in two ways: - bodily autonomy; people do have the freedom to sign DNRs, which is death being more free than being alive, as it's about choice - freedom isn't to do with people giving you things; it's about being able to choose things. It's not "freedom from"; it's "freedom to"

Freedom to die by one’s own choice is indeed a freedom.

Stupid semantic games. “Freedom to” not die in the streets works just as well.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#98

Post by KellyCriterion »

saagarjha wrote: post #94
KellyCriterion wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Put your funds in some diversified dividend ETFs and you will be quite fine.

Tens of thousands of dollars seems difficult to live on

As I understood the current state is "saving money and getting a little return would be OK", since he is still employed? For sure, if the jo is lost in an expensive town, this money does not hold long.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#99

Post by KellyCriterion »

Gud wrote: post #95
KellyCriterion wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Put your funds in some diversified dividend ETFs and you will be quite fine.

Don’t be so sure. Funds can dwindle fast. Keep your hands on the steering wheel, eyes on the road

and the money even faster on the cash bank account? :)

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#100

Post by akramachamarei »

relaxing wrote: post #93
philipallstar wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a freedom.

It’s a special kind of delusion that thinks being dead is more free than being alive.

You seem to be implying that to fail to enforce the right to sustenance nets negative freedom. It's not clear whether you've weighed the loss in freedom required to enforce this right. Can I presume you believe this right is worth forcing people to give, forcing by threat of armed expropriation or incarceration?
Post reply on HN