Hacker News Reader

Comment by imsteve | Hacker News Reader

Thanks for the fantastically rare anecdotal example.

My point is more about the implications of such exceptions. Don't make decisions in the abstract. You aren't some random variable. You know a great deal about yourself, and conditional probabilities affect the aggregate statistics that caused your stereotypes and perceptions.

So you're saying that one should never heed general warnings but instead discover all potential risks through first-hand, irreversible, unprepared-for personal disaster?

The critical aspect here is that you do not entirely control the temperament of your partner. That is up to her and your luck. Best to not throw away this advice and make use of this knowledge while you can.

Of course, congratulations on your awesome luck.

No, take general warnings as a guide, and add the context of your specific situation.

For example, wingsuit diving is essentially suicidal. http://youtube.com/watch?v=JHlOvhlKPvs

But if you happen to be an extremely talented wingsuit diver, such broad declarations don't mean as much.

Certainly heed advice if you are in no way exception with respect to the matters that influence the issue.

Also, about temperament... I've probably thought about the long term implications of temperament and interaction about starting the business far more than average. So if you shouldn't have gotten married, you sure as hell shouldn't start a company together. If you made a good decision (which sadly isn't too common), you can probably work together really well. Goes back to the main point: context matters over generalizations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com