agota
I do get that vibe from the vast majority of popular content creators in the "hustle" niche, though.
I also wanted to comment on this.
What I have observed about FIRE folks is that they start optimizing everything for FIRE.
This isn't a healthy way to live, certainly not in the long run, and it's not like this goes away once they reach FIRE.
Here's an article where Mrs. Money Mustache shared how uncomfortable she was about her parents taking her and their son to the movies, then to an ice cream place.
She was already retired, literally a millionaire.
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/07/27/youll-never-be-no...
This means that they are optimizing for the short term, which is counterproductive to success in any area of life.
Back in the 2010s we saw this with niche sites, ebooks, info products, etc.
It worked for some but it's probably safe to say that learning to code and getting a tech job would have had better ROI for most people who went down that route.
At the moment we are seeing this in the crypto space, where you have all these guys in their 20s who are "investing in crypto" (gambling) because they want a Lamborghini ASAP.
They would likely be better off learning to code and getting a tech job, but they can’t see it at the moment because they don’t have the perspective that comes with time.
More like "This ONE Tip Will Change Your Life!"
IIRC, Jocko Willink believes that his ability to function on little sleep is genetic, he just doesn't need much of it.
He has mentioned that this was a running joke in the Seal teams, which presumably consist of people already selected for their ability to function on little sleep, not your average "7 - 8 hours of sleep" folks.
But then normal people who need an average amount of sleep start "getting after it" by waking up at 4.30 AM because that's what Jocko does.
You can wake up at 4.30 AM as a normal person, but you'd need to go to sleep at 8.30 PM - 9.30 PM for that to be sustainable.
You can't "discipline equals freedom" yourself into optimal performance under perpetual sleep deprivation.
I see that as an argument for choosing traditional gender roles because it seems to me that one of the main causes of conflict in 50/50 relationships are these arguments about chores, tidiness, etc.
Splitting chores 50/50 seems like asking for trouble given that men and women have evolved differently in this regard - he ends up feeling that she's endlessly nagging him, she ends up feeling that she has to manage him like a child.
Seems like the traditional breadwinner/homemaker setup would be a solution to this problem.
Did this guy's ex-wife agree to be a subject of a blog, articles in major publications, and a book??
According to the article:
"Hundreds, maybe thousands, of times, my wife tried to communicate that something was wrong. That something hurt. But that doesn’t make sense, I thought. I’m not trying to hurt her; therefore, she shouldn’t feel hurt"
At what point it's okay to stop "trying to communicate" and just leave?
Those who claim that they "can't control themselves" yet somehow manage to be functional adults are lying - they can control themselves, they just can't be bothered.
John Gray addressed this in "Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus" - I believe he argued that this is the #1 mistake men make in relationships.
IIRC, he also argued that the #1 mistake women make in relationships was trying to help men by giving unsolicited advice.
If you need to repeat yourself half a dozen times to get any reaction beyond dismissal, it's reasonable to conclude that the other person is indeed not listening.
In fact, it's reasonable to conclude that they just don't care, and that it's time to move on.
Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia?
I'm one of the "normal people". I absolutely hate Windows 10 . I used it for a few years because switching to Linux seemed overwhelming. I have finally ditched Windows 10 for Elementary OS, it's just so much better.
This doesn't mean that:
1. Any activity that requires focus has the same effect on the prefrontal cortex of meditation.
2. Video games have the same effect on the prefrontal cortex as meditation.
Also, using this article to support your position is an interesting choice, given that you have previously said that "There are no proven benefits to meditation" and this article discusses proven benefits of meditation.
Actually, the very quote you provided mentions "range of physical as well as mental health benefits", presumably referring to meditation (or "mindfulness practice").
1. It discusses video games that were created with a specific purpose of improving ability to focus.
2. It mentions that researchers have a hypothesis that these games will improve ability to focus.
3. It mentions that there is an ongoing research into what's happening in the brain when people play these games.
I don't see how you can take this and draw a conclusion that video games have the same effect on the prefrontal cortex as meditation.
And your initial claim was broader than that, you said that "prefrontal cortex activity touted by Kelly McGonigal is achieved through any other focused activity", which appears to be completely baseless.
Seems extremely unlikely, but I'm curious, so I would appreciate a link.
Can native English speakers tell me if the word "learnings" is an actual word that exists outside startup blogs?
Genuine question, not saying that it isn't, just curious what exactly makes it great for you.
I remember reading about this couple of I believe software engineers who achieved financial independence at I think age 30.
If I recall correctly, she didn't have any natural aptitude for software engineering, she struggled to keep up with her classmates, she didn't enjoy her work, etc.
Still, she got her degree, got a job, made six figure salary, and retired at 30.
From what I understand, for her it was worth it.
The curriculum is tailored towards people of average intelligence, so if you are one, two, or three standard deviations above that, you won't be under pressure to develop a work ethic because you can get good grades without it.
Of course, if your intelligence is above average, then you probably are interested in a career that attracts other intelligent people.
And then you are in a serious trouble, because now you are in an environment where everyone is of similar intelligence, so you don't have your competitive advantage anymore, plus some people have a work ethic that you lack.
And even if you are still a standard deviation above most people, there are likely other people who are at the same level as you, and they might have a work ethic.
I think this is something that people who have intelligent children need to pay attention to.
I think that's a good example of "Good at A + hates B", say "Good at software engineering + hates marketing".
But what are the other "Good at A + hates B" skill combinations?
At the top, you have genetic freaks with insane work ethic that are obsessed with that particular skill. Can you compete with that? No.
I'd guess that if you have average talent, you can probably get to the top 10%, mainly through outworking everyone else. But you will never be the best in the world.
Because generally, no competition means no demand, so while it might be satisfying to be best in the world at something, an obscure skill might not translate into financial success.
One exception I can think of where you legitimately need to be decent at three skills is bootstrapping as a solopreneur.
You need to be able to code, design, and market your product.
Other than that, it does seem like "X + marketing" is what you need, though I guess "marketing" is an umbrella term (content marketing requires writing ability, public speaking requires public speaking ability, etc.).