By all means, people can say what makes them happy!
My point is that we have no grounds for criticizing another person's subjective experience or personal life choices, nor is that desirable as a goal for this website.
How would you say the OP adds to the discussion if what they say, almost by definition, is meant to shut down discussion? Or is your issue with pointing out HN guidelines? It feels like you're reading way more into my point than was actually there if you think I was criticizing anything related to their life decisions.
It's fine with me if someone has that point of view. But I don't think a forum like HN, which is supposed to be about fostering dialogue, is the best place to share it, or at least share it in that manner.
I've already explained this: "It's supposed to be about intellectual curiosity. Not questioning other people's life choices and giving unsolicited advice."
You've actually warped the direct quote "No one is going to talk me into BEING [emphasis mine] otherwise" into "Nothing you say can CHANGE MY MIND". The OP is talking about how they feel, what kind of person they are, what kind of life they intend to life. Not talking about some kind of belief about a subject X.
This conversation with you is becoming very tedious, and I'm repeating myself, so I doubt that I'll be continuing.
I didn't misquote; I said "amounts to" in order to indicate I was paraphrasing because it seemed like it would benefit from rephrasing since it appeared we were talking past each other. Although what you've pointed out comes across as a difference without a distinction to me. Saying "No one is going to talk to me into BEING..." is just as apt to shut down healthy conversation.
Fair enough when it's just a vague, general sentiment like "making the most of your life." What is probably worth being open minded about is how you define the objective function that maximizes that potential. It might be a little odd if I defined "making the most out of my life" in the same way I did when I was six (or even 16) years old.
If you have worked in most tech jobs, at large or medium sized companies, you have not met people like me. I took risks. Major ones. I left comfort.
I'm happy for your success. I assume it was earned with hard work. I hope it works out. A lot of startups with high valuations are feeling the crunch right now. Many of those will peter out and the founders can join the rest of those depressed by their life choices or feeling like victims of circumstance. There's far more to success than forgoing comfort and there's far more to happiness than success.
For my part, I co-founded and built two companies for ~4.5 years each: one in hardware and one in SaaS. The SaaS one was in the second batch of TechStars Boston. I had some success and I'm happy I did it. I learned a lot and it was generally fun. But, I trashed my health and wouldn't recommend others do it under the guise of happiness.
Nowadays I do industrial research on language VMs. I get paid very well, the work is gratifying, I have time for my kids, I'm learning things on the job, and I work with great people. I'll probably start another company some day because I like the variety of work and the thrill of the chase. My startup experience gave me a broad network and introduced new opportunities, but I'm only marginally better off compensation-wise than peers that worked a more conventional career. I'm almost certainly behind in terms of lifetime earnings. Many of them are impressed that I struck out and built multiple companies, but that has no real bearing on my happiness.
I'm not sure what being in the top 0.5% means without knowing the metric. If you love starting companies, have at it, but I can think of more challenging paths if you're looking to reach your full potential. Some of the smartest people I've ever met built the foundational technologies that allow SaaS to even exist while working for decades at the same company. I don't know how happy they are, but I know how impactful they've been.
Is your point that in order to take risks you need to be so cock-sure as to be closed minded? I tend to disagree and would probably characterize that as reckless as opposed to taking informed risks.
Do you want to call me to task for not being as open about that as you'd like, or shall we acknowledge that if it's important enough not being open about is a completely valid stance?
However, germane to the discussion in this thread, I don't think the definition of "happiness" is one of those immutable principles.
> A lot of those on here, I don’t listen to their input on what successs is.
> I will never be happy until I am climbing to the highest potential I can get to. No one is going to talk me into being otherwise.
What's being discussed is the definition of _success_, not happiness. And in fact, what the poster said is, this is what makes me happy and I'm not interested in anyone convincing me that shouldn't be what makes me happy.
Further, some of the issue is with the imprecise definition of “happy”. The modern use of the term can be used interchangeably. What causes someone to be hedonically happy may make them eudaimonically unhappy. So IMO it’s completely warranted to have further discussion to either define the definition or bring into question if someone is chasing the right goal for them. Saying what is tantamount to “I’m not willing to discuss this” facilitates none of that.
Furthermore,
on a purely mechanical level, what you're doing here is trying to escalate scope specifically so you don't have to give the point. Just give the point.
What I'm not saying: The OP is wrong about how they go about defining happiness or what they do to achieve that goal.
What I am saying: They are misusing HN if they are so close-minded as to be unwilling to be swayed by discussion.
Obviously, a subjective measure like happiness is up to the individual to define. I'm not disagreeing with that and I don't think any of my posts give that impression unless someone is already using a hard-focused lens to read too much into them. My point was pretty clearly stated multiple times but it seems people are primed to argue. The HN guidelines clearly state one of the intents of the forum is to foster curious conversation. If somebody makes a post that "they can't be convinced" they are no longer interested in a discussion and they are therefore misusing HN. It would be akin to someone saying "This classroom was built for learning" and I show up with my arms crossed and say I refuse to learn. Well, ok, nobody is saying you can't take that stance. But they can say you're misusing the forum provided.
People talk about having a feeling of uncanny valley when reading some of the things ChatGPT says and I must say, this must be what it feels like.
And if you're not open to the possibility that I'm speaking with ChatGPT it's because you're misusing HN.
I guess the follow up question is: what guideline do you think I'm violating?
That you rely so heavily on the guidelines is telling, it's what often happens when persons don't understand the underlying principles.
Your initial post came from a place of not understanding. As we've interacted that's become more and more clear to me. I see no need to belabor this any longer.
... proves to warn
That he not busy being born is busy dying
From a more scientific perspective, there have been plenty of studies done on happiness, and it's virtually undeniable that our external environment has at least /some/ effect on our happiness.[1] I'd argue that one has to ignore or dismiss a massive wealth of studies in psychology to insist that happiness only comes from within.
[1] Since I'm talking broadly, this might act as a good summary - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill
(Jet skiing with super models BTW is one of the most ephemeral ways of gratification one can seek, probably induced into you by media -have a look at Girard's theory of mimetics to understand why you even want this- and as such something that will only impress the most superficial of people, if you tell them "I super-model jet skiing" when asked what you did with your life - all of which make me believe this must be a young person writing.)
I quit and then asked: “what if I stayed and do I regret leaving” on my last 4 companies.
Universally the answer is no I don’t regret it. One imploded and laid off like 60% of people after turning into a nasty political hell hole. Another laid off massively and is now world renowned as a failed story. Another gave me zero opportunities and everyone was yelling at each other all the time.
Believe me, I tried to enter my internal universe and be happy not learning and not growing.
Being bored to death and underutilized if you feel highly talented and creative is a form of death.
Op needs to answer: What has he done in his life? Built a unicorn and IPOd it? Jet skiing with super models? Inventing cures for diseases? Or did he sort of sit in a cubicle typing and reading Reddit for the last five years.
A lot of those on here, I don’t listen to their input on what successs is.
I will never be happy until I am climbing to the highest potential I can get to. No one is going to talk me into being otherwise.