Working as you do for a nonprofit sounds fantastic. My setup is a bit similar - after years of devotion, a good small company basically bought my freelance time in bulk and gave me 5% ownership, and I get to build beautiful software and set my own life.

I hate buying gas and feel guilty about it, but also would like to be able to seat 6 people, so suddenly a Model Y seems "reasonable". But sitting down and doing the math shows that even if my goals are environmental, keeping the 12 year old Honda and getting a rental car now and then is much better than a brand new EV (and vastly cheaper) - but before thinking about it carefully, I was tempted.

A lot of people seem to have the idea that being a full-grown human is being rich. To me, it's being able to plug all the holes in your own roof and always bearing in mind that we're just here for a limited period of time, to gain knowledge and experience, not things to make us lazy and comfortable. But maybe that's just like some weird post-religious self denial predilection I hold onto.

I appreciate the attraction of the simplicity of older cars, but you are accepting that a crash could turn you into pink mist if you are lucky, lifetime of pain and disability if you are unlucky.

"But we must not follow those who advise us, being men, to think of human things, and, being mortal, of mortal things, but must, so far as we can, make ourselves immortal, and strain every nerve to live in accordance with the best thing in us; for even if it be small in bulk, much more does it in power and worth surpass everything."-Aristotle, Nichomachaen Ethics, Book X, 6

On the spectrum of all humanity, inheriting $40k in your twenties is on the lucky side, but it's also pretty basic. I wasn't born a Brahmin and I didn't exactly inherit Dubai. I also know a lot of people who were trust funders from birth and threw it all away, or blew their money on bad ideas. Or blew it up their noses and committed suicide - I knew several of those. Just from my own observation, most people who get money and don't know how to manage it are parted from it pretty quickly. This isn't to say I deserved to inherit something, just that, life finds a way to equalize out stupid behavior pretty quickly.

Reminding myself that that's the case is probably the only way for me not to go broke.

Not to mention that we're in a society that incentivizes people to be irresponsible. I'm not allowed to earn six-figures or I'll lose healthcare. Same with inheriting/having more than a certain amount saved. My meds cost 300k/yr, so I hit OOP max the first month of ANY health insurance plan I have EVERY year. The wrong plan can cost me over 20k/yr.

There are two things that practically every rich person I've met have in common (where rich is assets over about $100m that aren't inherited). The first is focus. They have the ability to see an idea through to the end. They believe in themselves, they believe in an idea, and they execute. By the sounds of it noduerme might have that sort of focus. To live frugally when you don't need to sounds like someone who has an idea and is sticking with it. That's awesome.

The second thing is need. Actually needing money, either just to start out, or to fund a lavish lifestyle, or to keep up status, is a powerful driving force. Setting up your life up in a way that removes the force stops most people executing on their ideas.

This is advice for anyone who wants to get rich - if you slowly grow your assets to a point where you're very comfortable, you probably won't ever level up to the point where you can buy a Lamborghini because you just won't need to. If your goal is to become rich most people don't seem to be able do it by slowly growing their wealth and then working on an idea. You have to use the need to be "%^&* you money" rich to drive your idea.

(This isn't universal of course. Some people come up with an idea later in life after they've got a house and assets and still execute brilliantly. But it's much more common to see younger founders who need success pushing an idea to a big exit.)

In my case, I have written infrastructure software that has, and will, change the world. It has already become a worldwide standard, and is used daily, by thousands of people around the world. It is not hyperbole to say that the software saves lives. That’s exactly why I wrote it.

I never made a dime on it. In fact, I spent thousands of dollars of my own money, and ten years of my life, shepherding it to the point where it could be taken over by a new team, and become ubiquitous. It was a difficult journey. The demographics of the users of my software are … challenging. I often weathered torrents of abuse, sabotage, and opposition, during the project. The new team will never have to suffer those particular slings and arrows. I’m an ornery, stubborn old coot, and could take it. I knew what I was signing up for, and many folks would consider me insane for doing it (they may have a point).

I’ll never get an award, and I have almost no recognition at all. Every day, I interact with people that use my software, and have no idea that I was the original author. I also deal with folks that know what I did, but don’t really understand what it took to get where we are. They seem to think that I sat down, and churned it out in a couple of months.

Not every achievement should be measured in money, and that’s great.

Just since we're speaking very bluntly. I found that when I'm single, I can usually meet a girl if I stick around somewhere until the end of the night. But I usually don't do that unless I'm starving. So you're exactly right, having the focus and having the need are two different things.

The only place where I personally think you're wrong is your overall pitch - "don't be this guy [noduerme]" - to young fellas that think getting rich is the end-all. Like said, if I needed it enough, I'd spend my time trying to get fuck-you money and be rich by those standards. But proving the size of my dick just isn't something I need to do, know what I'm sayin? And funny enough, that blase attitude I've developed about it really fucking pisses off the ultra-rich people in my life.

The thing about socializing is you discover that if someone has one of these hangups (women, money, intelligence) everyone around them will let them demonstrate it. It's painful to watch sometimes. "Sure I'll try your car one more time". "Wow you're really smart".

By contrast I know genuinely megarich people who can't be identified as such, because they just don't have that need for approval.

Speaking from experience, I don’t care if girls want me for my $. But I’m not looking for a wife right now. If I was, I would probably date women that I meet at higher social events instead of lingerie models.

I have a couple friends from before I got rich, but most of my friends now have similar status.

Those aren't friends. They're friendly competition. At best they're good to commiserate with. They're out to prove the same thing; they wouldn't be friends with you if you weren't rich. For proof, they think they have a lot of friends, but those people work for them.

> I don’t care if girls want me for my $

Recipe for disaster. I've seen so many people use their wealth as a tool of attracting women. You just magnetize the worst possible people to you. Tempting as it is - I'd rather front as a poor hippie and meet girls who like my personality. If they find out I have money, that's a bonus later, once I know they're solid & trustworthy people.

I think I see the reasoning for this, but empirically, I don't agree. The need may be necessary, but it's clearly not sufficient for many people.

I would even say that it's just one of the possible means to get the focus going, but not the only one.

I love this lifestyle.

It was pleasant to wake up, and see where this thread went.

I think that happiness is alignment of wants and needs, coupled with the means to satisfy them.

Some people need to be rich, as it satisfies an internal metric, of some kind, so the enormous work and sacrifice that are required to be rich are worth it. Unless you are born into wealth, getting there is a great deal of work (and some breaks, but it’s always work). I have known folks that got there, and were devastated to find that it did not make them happy.

I need to be a craftsman, to work “with my hands” (so to speak), on small-batch, artisanal creations, so my work has been focused on getting to the point where I can do that.

See the comment I responded to below. I have a hard time with that mentality, but I get it.

> I need to be craftsman

I relate to this so much. Most of my best friends are mechanics, cooks, butchers, musicians. I actually only have one friend who's a programmer, and he's a craftsman too... I know him because we drunk-coded at the same bar for a couple years. People look at programming and don't get it...(yet - they don't understand yet, in 2021, but they will in 2040) ...that it's a clock maker's job. One friend who's a mechanic builds his own engines - just glorious, gleaming machines, one piece at a time. One time I was in his shop taking a distributor apart and said my job is like this, and he looked at me like I'm nuts. No, it's like this. Taking things apart to see how they work, and figuring out how to put them together. Lines of code are just like screws and weights and this thing that flies around the middle, distributing spark, that's like a for/next loop.

My Dad was a lawyer and he said, when I was a kid, "poor people work with their hands, rich people work with their minds." Well, I told him when I was 13 I would rather make something with my hands because it's honest. Programming, done right, is honest work - no better or worse than a creative mechanic's job. And it can be very artisinal in a way that satisfies your aesthetic sense and your sense of a job done beautifully. I don't think lawyers get that type of satisfaction.

Working with a master for a few years to learn the craft, step by step, always under an experienced gaze.

Or conversely, imagine what a clock would look like if it was cobbled together by someone who has just gone through a few weeks of clock-making bootcamp. I feel this is what some of our software looks like.

I stayed at my last company for almost 27 years. When I mention that in venues like HN, it’s usually mocked, and I’m basically called a “chump,” for doing it.

I get a sense that you exist like myself, and other coders I've known, outside the furious competition for status in a FAANG, doing our own thing and crafting our own art. It's kinda calming and peaceful to watch from the grandstands while the central rat race shit show goes on.

[edit] I was also banned from here for 8 years for personally insulting the founder, who encourages and finances, uh, certain stereotypical corporate rat race bullshit.

The experience was fairly pleasant. I liked the people, but decided that the company wasn't really one that I wanted to join.

I was talking to one of the managers, there, and he boasted that he had been at Facebook longer than at any other company in his career. Since he was fairly young, I was curious.

"How long is that?" I asked.

"Twenty-seven months!" he proudly stated.

Great job!

Was a lot of fun but if we hadn’t been able to do it with airline miles I don’t think I could have stomached the cost. We could afford it, it just doesn’t feel right to spend that type of money on a few days away.

What makes you think that everyone buying stuff is doing it to show off to people. I'd much rather spend money on stuff than experiences. Experiences are ephemeral and, once completed, exist only in your memory. The stuff I buy is generally something that going to make my life better in a continuous and ongoing way. A pond in the back yard, a nicer car (I buy used, but I buy a nice used car, with the bells and whistles that I think are important), a console system to play with my child, etc. I spend most of my life in or around my house... spending my money to make that time better seems fairly optimal behavior.

That’s why I consider it financial insanity to spend your 20s traveling the world and “finding yourself” instead of working and saving. A year of 401k contributions when you are 20 probably results in subtracting 3 years from your retirement age. Make hay while the sun shines.

I think it’s important to learn about the world and take in many experiences while we are young and capable because too many people don’t make it to retirement or can’t physically do the things they wanted to when they were 20-40

I spent my 20s unemployed due to MS. I'm screwed for my whole life now. Then again I don't get to plan when I retire either so I guess it works out?

Yeah, that's what my stuff is: an addition to the fabric and experience of my life.

Spending money on pure "experiences" is, for me, wasted money. A memory of a vacation is worth less to me than some "stuff" I will use for the next 10 to 15 years[1].

For me, it depends on utility. I'm willing to spend on things I find useful, and I'm willing to spend on things I enjoy. Given the option between a vacation and replacing my 12 year old car, I'd replace the car.

I'm typing this on my main personal computer, which is a first generation i7, so at least ten years old at this point.

You need to position yourself as a consultant with a clearly defined area of expertise, your own site, blog, etc. A salaried employee these days is first and foremost a team monkey hired to please the boss, and only then a skilled professional. When you need someone with actual expertise, you hire them transactionally to solve the problem and keep them on a separate frequency from the usual chicken coup business.

I always knew those chickens would revolt one day! (think you meant chicken coop...)

I'm starting to see the pattern too. You hire for "team spirit", i.e., people that are happy to sacrifice their weekends and evenings for the mission of your company.

Old dogs, as I'm starting to become, will rather tell you that you need to work harder on your strategy, work harder on your product, avoid feature creep and sales outflanking. They might also tell you that you need management more than engineering. But enough of inconvenient truth, back to hiring juniors.

Just to make sure I don't offered anyone. A successful org needs both: fresh minds and experience.

you're proposing the same monkey dance that signal "skilled, but will ccept to be treated as a cog" which hr loves but is ultimately demeaning and dehumanizing - while the valuable jobs market moves on completely different gears

we're specialized knowledge worker, which just happen to have had our profession born after feudal ages, otherwise we'd be in the lawyer/architect/doctor brackets. we're slowly raising up there but just because of the labor market growth is getting stripped by the labor demand growth in our sector, but take not of this, unless something changes fast about how we see and market our profession, we're going to get pushed back into blu collars bracket as soon as the situation stabilizes.

The amount of discipline required to save and defer gratification is enormous, and it is a continuous effort, particularly in this country. You are one of the few. One of the brave. Congratulations!

The best coworkers I’ve learned the most from were more experienced older devs. Now I’m the most experienced dev typically, which is good for my wallet, sure, but means learning from others becomes more difficult

ageism (in our field) is not about age, ageism is about having a family with all that entails - an higher asked wage, stable working conditions, stick to the contracted hours

no amount of engineering skill gap can cover for that

These days, you have billionaires in their twenties. They don’t need anything from older folks, so there are no constraints on them.

Also, and I won’t go into the reasons, there’s now a lot of actual hatred between the generations. This time, it’s personal. I feel that.

In my job search, I was struck by the fact that the people interacting with me seemed to have a need to dominate and humiliate me. It wasn’t just a negotiation tactic. They hated me, and I had no idea why.

Similarly, people are happy to see that networking in Kubernetes "just works". Once you ask them to run it on a provider without a Kubernetes-native load-balancer, say just use some BGP anycast magic, they are lost.

One of the things about their HR policy (I’m not sure if it was written, but it may have been), is that certain levels of seniority required that you be a certain age. No matter how much of a hot shot you were, you weren’t going to get your own team until your thirty-fifth birthday.

I dont pay it in full each month dude, I pay it ... EACH TRANSACTION :D There s no reason to defer payment even by one week and each time you do delay your brain is telling a different story than if you just extracted money out of your account immediately.

Why do you think humans should permanently borrow to the next month to buy tomatoes at the super market ?

All that requires discipline and planning of course. If you don't trust yourself with being able to keep it up for years - get a debit.

Another reason is that a CC usually allows higher offline transaction limits, which might be valuable for some.

Just because your direct debit scheme makes sense to you doesn't mean it makes sense for EVERYONE.

I have a VISA debit card and a Mastercard CC. I use debit the most (commonplace in Sweden) but keep the CC around as an extra if my bank has downtime or if I'm traveling the less connected parts of the world.

Widen your views, things are different all over the world. Imagine billions of people don't have access to the internet and you'll find that your way isn't the only way, in some places they pay with sex, food, cattle, cash, CC, direct debit, crypto, futures or whatever convoluted (in my opinion) system they can come up with.

If you're in an AMUSEMENT PARK or A BATHHOUSE you might transact with a tag and pay when you leave.

That is the issue though. Why? It makes no sense. You gave this condescending lecture about understanding other cultures but didn't take a sentence to even try to explain.

Anyway it doesn’t have to be like this. In China you scan a merchant code and enter the amount you want to pay on your phone, much like a bank transfer, but it happens instantly.

I believe that self-discipline is extremely important for a life of happiness and fulfillment. Sounds like you have that. Good show.

To me a credit card always feels "dirtier" because of the connotation that it produces debt and that I have to rely on someone else extending me credit, even if momentarily. It seems much cleaner to just spend your own money directly with as little middlemen as possible.

As long as interest is avoided, rewards and protection. I end up with a 'free' plane ticket to Europe every year through my primary CC. The Apple Card gives 3% back on anything Apple (plus some others like TMO), and allows you buy almost any Apple item with 12 month, 0% payments. I could spend the 2k on that laptop or keep that money invested and just pay 166/month. The Amazon card is 5% back on anything Amazon (and Whole foods if that's your thing). I bought a 'free' TV with the rewards last year.

I've had my CCs stolen many times, and the buffer means I've never had that money leave my bank account.

I was taught early on in life that cash is king. The longer you can keep the cash in your control the better. Using CCs to provide a buffer does exactly that. And the rewards are a bonus for money I'm spending anyway.

Even if you are not earning extra points, using a credit card may be helpful for some who are trying to establish a credit history, which will be important if they wish to borrow larger sums (auto loans, home mortgages) in the future.

Ah, that explains part of it, I guess. This isn't a thing in my European country.

What I don't understand is why simply using a credit card would count more towards establishing you as a good creditor than not even having to use a credit card at all. I guess that's a weird bias in the system?

Not borrowing any money, and hence not having any history of repaying borrowed money is zero signal.

If it was true that people who never borrowed money were more likely than repaying borrowed money on time than people who regularly borrowed money, then a lender would have already noticed this in their data and would have offered a more competitive financing product in the marketplace.

Since that has not happened, it is reasonable to surmise that the tiny signal of maintaining a small revolving credit card loan with timely payments is better than the zero signal of not maintaining any loan balance.

Note that having many tiny credit card revolving loan amounts is viewed negatively.

In the US, you lose out on 2%+ cash back rewards when you do not use credit card (because the price for purchasing with a credit card is the same as not using a credit card, and the minimum cash back rewards in free credit cards is 2%).

Merchants (generally large merchants) do not offer a discount for paying with debit cards because people spend more money when using credit cards.

There are some notable exceptions that offer cheaper prices for using debit card, such as Target that offers a 5% discount for using a debit card to pay. Hence I pay at Target with a debit card.

Basically, other people’s cash flow problems and/or inability to resist temptations to spend more than what they have results in profit for merchants, banks, and people that pay their credit card balance every month.

Also, I assume that most credit companies (VISA, MC, etc.), have rules, expressly forbidding charging different rates for the use of credit cards. It makes sense, because they don't want to be avoided as a payment option.

I learned this, when I did my first shopping cart, and read the whole freakin' VISA Merchant's Manual.

There was some kind of loophole that gas stations used.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/new...

> A PCN cannot stop you from offering your customers a discount or another incentive for using a certain method of payment, as long as you offer it to all your customers and disclose the offer clearly and conspicuously. For example, you can offer your customers a discount or a coupon if they pay with cash or a debit card rather than a credit card.

In Mar 2017, Supreme Court went further and said state laws banning credit card surcharges were a violation of merchants’ first amendment rights:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expressions_Hair_Design_v._Sch...

What you may be thinking about is rules prohibiting charging different payment card network prices for various credit cards (i.e. different price for Visa vs Amex vs Mastercard vs Discover). This was deemed allowable by the Supreme Court in Jun 2018:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_v._American_Express_Co.

As an aside, this Ohio v AmEx ruling was of great benefit to tech companies that operated market places, because

> This decision was considered to have created a new type of rule that could make it difficult to seek antitrust litigation; with credit cards being a two-sided market serving two distinct sets of customers, a successful antitrust argument would have to show how both sides of the market were harmed.