Advice
patrickcollison.com
patrickcollison.com
That's the right time to learn what you should and shouldn't put in your body, and how to be constantly active. There's a million different ways to accomplish that but it's important to find one.
People at that age often don't really understand how closely linked physical fitness and mental health are. But if you ignore it there will be consequences.
Going into a full blown mega health nut phase is not very helpful either because the end result is not going to be pretty anyways.
Now if/when we start making serious life extension progress beyond 120 years with high quality of life then we can start talking.
>Ikaria, Greece, three times more likely to reach 90 than Americans, almost no dementia
>residents stay active through walking, farming and fishing, but they also make sure to take time out to nap and socialize. In addition to their Mediterranean diet, they eat a lot of wild greens and drink an herbal tea that’s full of nutrients. Their community lifestyle also encourages good health habits and regular social engagement.
Yes, that's the greatest component of my regret. I cannot even make the excuse of "it was so hard, and I was focusing on other things".
I started weightlifting at age 40. I never seriously exercised or did sports regularly before. After one year of exercising 30 minutes a day, I am in a better physical shape than ever before. Those 30 minutes a day are totally worth it. And I regret not doing it twenty-five years ago, when I had much more free time than today.
Why did I even think it would be hard?
Seems to me that most people are bad at giving "80/20" advice -- an advice that is not literally best in the world, but is close enough to the best, and it easy to understand and remember. People often make things sound much more complicated than they are; for example there are dozen of exercise methods, and everyone says their own method is the best, and doing any other method is just a stupid way to hurt yourself. It all you have is contradictory advice of this type, it doesn't sound encouraging. Then some people say "well, it's a science, you have to study it", but I don't have extra 5 years of life to research exercise, then 5 more years to research nutrition, 5 more years to research finance, etc. for each important aspect of life.
(Then there is another line of useless advice, which is "just do what feels natural". Well, what feels natural for me is using internet all day long, and not exercise. Because that's what I have been doing most of my life. And of course, my natural shape is fat. But this is all because "feels natural" simply means "your habits". If you have good habits, following them is a good advice. But if you have bad habits, it is a harmful advice.)
If I tried to give advice to younger people, I would probably just give them one book per topic to read. "Convict conditioning" for exercise. "How not to die" for nutrition. "Early retirement extreme" for financial planning. I would have to think longer for books on other topics; perhaps some topics do not have the right kind of book. (The right kind = one you can read without much previous knowledge in the area; and which will give you advice that is maybe not perfect, but pretty good and not actively harmful.) I believe that sending these three books by a time machine to a 15 years old me would have dramatically improved my life.
Observing my family, I have realized how much exercise impacts your quality of life as you age. I've seen family blame "just getting old" for many symptoms of poor health choices, such as problems walking up stairs or type II diabetes. If they focused on health, they might be able to improve their quality of life significantly!
As a specific example - various studies have correlated the ability to stand up (or, doing a squat) not only with how long your life is - but also how long you will live independently. Extrapolating this - not only does exercise have the potential to extend your life, but it also extends how long you can continue to do what you want in life - such as traveling, walking, living alone, etc. Being specific - I know one 60-year-old who ran a half marathon last year, and another who can barely walk up the stairs to his bedroom.
I wish I had learned better health and exercise routines as a teenager!
I would say that I regret not doing these things earlier, but a large part of the issue is that it's somewhat expensive (both in terms of time and $$) to exercise and eat well, so it would have been hard for me to afford living like this (both in terms of time and money) when I was younger.
(Yes, you can eat well and exercise well without much money, but it's super challenging if you can't afford quality prepared foods and a decent gym membership: I don't see many 24 year olds that have a full time job, are in top physical health, but also still have time available for other interests...)
I winced a little bit at this one, though it's worded strangely so I may be misinterpreting it. The way I took it is poor advice -- when there is a mismatch between yourself and another in terms of "what's important" or what should be kept in "high regard", do not immediately assume the other person is a moral failure. This is the kind of thinking that leads to division and mistrust between people. The proper way to react to this is to make a good faith effort to understand why the person doesn't care about the issue you do, and be conscious that you may also change your mind one day. "Strong opinions, weakly held."
As the Bob Dylan song goes, “I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now.”
Why would anyone want to listen to your advice?
(/s Be careful about listening to people who are obviously statistical outliers, who are young and apparently have succeeded at everything they've touched.)
I see this all the time and just wanted to point it out.
The Stripe founders I'm sure have incredible expertise in the payment and startup space and are clearly brilliant. Yet from reading this piece I can sense in a way that he himself probably can't, a sort of ignorance that comes from a lack of life experience. I wouldn't really be too interested in their ideas on most other subjects whereas I would be very interested in reading someone who (gasp!) hadn't created a 10-figure net worth before 30 if they had experience in that area. What a concept. I can't recall how many times I've looked back on a time I dismissed someone else's opinion only later to realize I was completely wrong. The realization that your opinions very often will prove incorrect and the associated behavioral change is what makes you wise, not the refusal to admit you are wrong and the dismissal of everyone who disagrees with you.
I also find this to be a useful heuristic. Particularly "How seriously does this person take my ideas? When I'm wrong, do they make an effort to explain why? Are the open to me being right?"
This works best when you're a student or otherwise new to something Obviously, it won't work when you have status over the person; they'll listen to you anyway.
My point was that a heuristic that urges one to have confidence that they have "correct" value judgements simply due to their age is a bad rule to have in your mental model of how to navigate differences with others, even if it's not a hard one.
> My point was that a heuristic that urges one to have confidence that they have "correct" value judgements simply due to their age is a bad rule to have in your mental model of how to navigate differences with others, even if it's not a hard one.
The entire world nudges young people in the opposite direction from the very moment they're born. That nudging is frequently incorrect when it comes to technology, so some nudging in the direction of young people believing in themselves is appropriate.
In 2006, there were a bunch of college students who thought Facebook was a pretty big deal. Most 50 year olds in 2006 probably would have disagreed and didn't see why it would be important to post pictures of your friends drinking online. The older people were wrong. It's not a value judgement. They weren't bad people because they were wrong about a technology trend. But they were still wrong.
When any new thing comes along there's always a few older, well respected people who dismiss it and say it isn't important. They end up being wrong. It you want to be the one bringing those new things about, you need to learn to ignore those people, even though they're older than you.
This example falls apart for lots of reasons. First, the assertion that someone wouldn't find value in Facebook simply because of their age is demonstrably false. There are millions of 50 year olds who use Facebook today and because Facebook is 14 years old, that adoption happened very quickly. 50 year olds in 2006 wouldn't have found Facebook useful at that time and for a very good reason- it wasn't a community for them, it was a community specifically for college students. I doubt Mark Zuckerberg envisioned Facebook/Whatsapp/Instagram when he first created the site in his dorm room. The use case (and usefulness) expanded over time.
> It's not a value judgement. They weren't bad people because they were wrong about a technology trend. But they were still wrong.
Wrong about what? This seems like a straw man to me. Nobody other than college students at very elite colleges were able to use Facebook in its early days. Did that mean that students at community colleges didn't understand the value of sharing photos with their friends or was it just old people? I think it's a mistake to try and explain the complicated in such simple terms.
This assumption would be false, but it's not the one I was making. The first people to recognize the potential of a new technology are usually young. Yes, Facebook is popular with older people now. It wasn't in the beginning, even when it opened up to everyone and not just college students.
The shoe shine had been reading a manga take on the bible. Just a regular guy that in another life could be a computer programmer if the circumstances were different.
He asked me what I do: mobile apps. And he went on and on about how his favourite iPhone app downloaded all of Wikipedia but it didn't work on the latest version of iOS anymore.
That app was Patrick Collison's Encyclopedia app:
http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/07/oscon-preview-how-patrick-c...
It seems like a strange decision take take a month off after founding your startup to build a side project in Japan.
> Then in November of 2007, I went to visit my friend in Japan for a month. And in Japan they have all of this incredibly advanced cellular technology and all of the rest. And so because of that, they had very few wireless networks, and my phone didn’t work. As a result, I actually had very little access to the Internet. I sort of realized without Wikipedia how little I really knew. And I had just got an iPhone, so I decided to try basically putting a copy of Wikipedia on the phone, so that I’d have it as I was walking around in Japan.
Also, there is nothing wrong with living a pedestrian life. Millions (billions?) of people do so, happily. And there are many small changes you can make in the world even while walking a typical path. The world changes over time, as many people make those small changes. Feel free to pursue large changes, but don't reject the power of incremental improvements.
I think Hunter S. Thompson's advice for young people is much better, because in it he makes the point that anyone seeking to give you advice can't possibly know enough about your situation to give good advice.
https://fs.blog/2014/05/hunter-s-thompson-to-hume-logan/
If who you are is pedestrian, don't hesitate to be the most pedestrian you can be.
Be and do what must be done, not get advice from Collison or Musk et al. This is something I have learned along the way. Sure, respect achievements.
Please for God's sake do not try to become like someone or be something or change the world. It is not worth it. Others can label you. It doesn't count.
[0]: http://blog.samaltman.com/the-days-are-long-but-the-decades-...
Typo - "Shot" should be "short"
Although I have to admit, that word might fit in some cases...
Definitely a 20-30 thing, never even crossed my mind before I was 25.
Oh, and you guys were great on Bloomberg Studio 1.0!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2018-05-31/john-patric...
Study abroad was my favorite part of college. Spending just a few weeks each in Taiwan and Costa Rica was pretty enlightening.
This could describe Seattle, Portland, Austin, Denver (from my experience) in the US, and a myriad of other places worldwide.
The type of folks you want to meet, if you're interested in doing something that will be seen as important in a generation, are generally fairly apolitical. Politics (at least the hyper-partisan variety pursued in the U.S. today) consumes a lot of energy for the purpose of opposing other people who are expending a lot of energy. It makes sense that neither one of them makes much progress, though they generate much heat and noise in the process. Real change comes from people working on stuff so weird that nobody bothers to oppose them.
We're politically liberal (sometimes to a fault), not any more optimistic than average (and quite possibly less), and definitely not what I'd call "energetic". It'd be more accurate to say the PNW has positioned itself as the laid-back alternative to SF. I've known a couple companies who have left the area because they couldn't find enough people here in their particular field who wanted to really work hard.
On these particular axes (which may or may not be important to you), Seattle/Portland simply aren't in the same league as San Francisco or New York City. People in those cities are mercilessly open, optimistic, and energetic.
The problem is that the Bay Area might be full of more creative, interesting people, but the quality and cost of life down there is terrible (and nobody's fixing it), and the problems associated with that more than mitigates the benefits.
You meet smart people, but in order to pay their exorbitant rent they need to work long hours for companies that can pay them an enormous salary, and that's usually the big ones you know about already. That financial burdon, combined with chronic transportation issues, prevents the congealing of people and free time required to form the really creative new ideas and companies, and you just end up with whatever the VCs want to throw a pile of money onto.
So naturally, the thing I do find the area useful for is companies that could be considered VC/10x plays. But I feel like most companies, even very successful ones, don't fall under that criteria. And it only works for companies VCs are willing to fund, limiting your ability to get creative and outside the box.
My advice would be to go there for 1-2 years after college, then decide if all the problems with the area are worth it. Anecdotally, most people I've known eventually get sick of it and leave. And infact the problems are so bad now that the area has started losing population.
I think in order for the Bay Area (and California in general) to really become good for creatives, they need to take a deep existential look at themselves and really decide that they're willing to solve the problems. That means making radical, Marshall Plan levels of reform to zoning and property tax laws, establishment of strong regional metropolitan governments, and significant investments in better transportation. I have zero confidence in the idea that the region will continue to be successful unless they aggressively tackle these problems.
And this will never, ever happen. California is going to continue it's slide into something resembling the third world, where the ultra-rich elite 10% live in their exurban gated communities with armed guards, and a permanent underclass of service workers provides for their every need while barely scraping out an existence. The incentives pushing things in this direction are simply too great for any kind of change to happen. I've been here for 4 years now and have seen it visibly getting worse in that time. The place is completely unlivable. I'm now just biding my time to save for a down payment in Seattle or Portland, because the thought of buying a house here has literally become a punchline for even high income earners.
Good general rule of thumb is your cost of housing shouldn't exceed 30% of your income.
The 40x rule in New York (annual income must be at least 40x monthly rent) conveniently works out to be 30% too.
https://www.nakedapartments.com/guides/nyc/beginning-your-se...
Hitting 40 this year my advice to any young person is do what will make you feel happy and fulfilled. Whatever that is. It's hard to figure that out, but we only live once and the old adage "You'll regret the things you didn't do more than the things you did." is generally true.
The one sentence version is; say "Yes!" to more things.
My advice for any young person is to learn to think for themselves and figure out things for themselves. There is no magical advice out there that will work for everyone. The same thing that will transform someone's life in an amazing way will ruin someone else life.
I lol'd.
Most of my interests formed, solidified and shaped me in this range. 20-30 is more so improving aptitude. I am not saying people do not find new lifelong interests past this range.
in general i like that he scoped his advice to his own years though. very humble thing to do despite having done more than most of us will in our lifetimes.
When you feel old and curmudgeonly, that's the perfect time to take a deep breath and become a beginner in something new.
It's never ever too late to do anything, the important thing is whether someone's willing to admit they didn't know as much as they thought.
Personally, I got tired of hearing famous people tell me I should read more, work on things I love, be an expert (or don't be an expert), "make things", blah, blah, blah many years ago.
A good tan! Get some sun, bro!
Most powerful statement in there. It's one thing to 'know' about Internet's power and another thing to utilize it to your personal best.
Internet can be an incredible personal force multiplier -- if used in a good way -- leading to never-before-imagined opportunities. This truly is an amazing time to be alive. [0]
[0] http://www.upworthy.com/4-awesome-how-we-met-friendship-stor...
I feel like I'm missing the point of this one. For basically 100% of the things I thought were important between 10-20 years old, as I got older I realized I was wrong and older folks were right.
Conversely, if someone older than you thinks something is important and you do not, you should probably reserve judgement until you're older...
Someone 20-30 disagreeing with the previous generation is much more likely to be right imo.
It's very common for successful people to over-analyze their specific behavior rather than acknowledge the harsh reality of what actually separates them from others. A description of reality is both less flattering and seemingly less useful. But it does have the virtue of at least being real.
IMHO there are three major factors in changing the world:
#1 High general intelligence and ambition (genetics)
#2 Highly educated well-off parents (environment)
#3 Support of powerful people (opportunity)
You probably can't do much without at least one of these factors. Most people that do big things have all three.
A lot of this would still apply but there’s a huge percentage of the population that has to deal with major difficulties in life before they can heed the kind of advice Patrick offers.
Do you or is this just some lefty privileged angst?
Do you feel like you productively added to the conversation?
It’s absolute bullshit that you assume you know so much about me from browsing my web presence
I didn’t ask for an apology and what I said about my life is true. You seem to have some kind of complex about class where you feel you need to make a point but without actually expressing anything of significance. I am not at all trying to prove any kind of point about what your class background means or doesn’t mean. I made a very clear comment and you replied snarkily with assumptions about what my background might be. And I replied that you are wrong, which is true.
What are you trying to get at? What is your point? It looks like you want to be an asshole unless I can somehow prove I am the poorest kid from the roughest situation still posting on hacker news. But all you’re posting is pithy bullshit.
Who do you want me to be to fit your world view?
You'll end up more closely identifying with first gen immigrants which puts you in a pretty good place out in SF.
You'll get used a lot in your 20s, people will make a major buck off your skillsets, but if you keep growing them you'll skyrocket a few years after most everyone else plateaus, the joy of working and fear of poverty never leave, but they are rocket fuel later.
You get used to deprivation, develop a non-fragile sense of self, and learn to let most things go too, you'll get used to sweating in secret and it'll give you a great pokerface, it's great training for doing the hard things once life gets easier financially in your 30s and temptation to coast lays most other people low.
He grew up in a city with 50% unemployment. After he realized he has no future there, he left. Just bought a ticket to a larger city, and then applied to companies there until he found one that took him. (His friends from the original city keep meeting in local pubs and dreaming about how one day they will somehow get lucky. They haven't.)
At his first job they abused his inexperience, paid him about half the market price, and as he kept learning new things, they gave him more difficult work, without increasing his salary. But the work still paid bill for living in the city, he learned a lot of stuff, and then one day he left for another job that paid several times more.
If it is possible, you should find ways to talk to people you adore. Many people will spend the time to talk back to you. They will be the fuel in your life when you need advice, help, inspirations.
If you're a person in STEM, you should listen carefully to/date people studying arts, literature, social studies, education, politics... Never ever look them down as not as smart as you are. Think of people who don't think the way you do as being different rather than inferior to you. This is easier said then done, if you have a good job and in general, probably have a higher position in the food chain compared to them.
This. I was often surprised to find out that a famous person whom I admire is actually a very nice person, replies to my e-mails, and sometimes even agrees to meet and talk in person. Sometimes you may even be able to help them with something, and that feels really awesome.
> you should listen carefully to/date people studying arts, literature, social studies, education, politics...
But you should always listen to more than one person in each category, and compare what they said.
That's a really overlooked point, and perhaps the most contrarian nugget of wisdom in this damn good piece of advice. Point is, whatever successful thing you do, it'll always end up gaining you a certain degree of prestige (which is ultimately a form of bullshit, but that's another topic).
That being said, I can see how -if you identify as a non-conformist in some way or the other- it makes sense to move to a place with a higher-than-normal ratio of other non-confirmists.
After all, even if they are not of the same bent as you, at least they are familiar with the feeling of not fitting in and, hopefully, as a result are more tolerant of other people who deviate from the norm - whatever that norm may be.
Granted, I am an introvert and don’t strike up conversations as much as I should, but it seems like saying visit SF is useless. Is there a club or some secret society or library or bar that everyone hangs out in? I’ll come back and visit if I have an address to go to. SF is way too broad.
Best way to meet CEOs is to become one yourself.
I’ll keep trying to search, but could someone post a note on what’s it’s about?
And the name is a throwback to the 2600Hz tone that was used to gain operator rights on pre-digital trunking phone lines.
For example, in 2007, I loitered outside Facebook HQ on university ave until I had a chance encounter with someone who also attended my alma mater (!) and was starting his first day of work, so he took me inside with him[1]. I tried to meet with Zuck but they sicced Dave Morin on me. I ended up getting incredible access to the FB engineering team and my app was ultimately acquired, and I partially attribute that to unfair advantage.
[1] I think he's now successfully retired.
Also it seems like you might be good at talking to people (based on the story above). The OP says they are an introvert and might find that more difficult.
If evolution keeps going in this direction then there will be a point where capitalism won't be able to support it anymore. Capitalism was designed for a certain kind of species and we are no longer it.
Second, just because it worked for you doesn't mean it works in general. I'm sure if 1,000 people did it, a couple of them would be successful. But that's definitely not the best way to get peoples attention. Some YC partner says in one of their Investor Startup School lecture that they hate it when people stalk investors at their favorite coffee shop or whatever and that it leads to an adverse effect.
- You can meet people by emailing them and asking for coffee. A cool thing about SV culture is that people are pretty open for that. - The favorite way I like meeting new people is through friends (friends of friends) at non-work related parties - You can meet people at networking events, but I find that there's a self-selection bias (i.e. interesting people usually don't go there, at least in my experience) - You can just meet people randomly at bars, etc. but that takes some time :-)
Note the advice about making friends over the internet. Do that and then ask to say hi.
Reply to the person on this thread who suggested places to go and ask to buy them a coffee.
Don’t go to places, go to people.
nl's advice seems to be broadly on the money. Get in touch with people online first, and also spend more time there so you don't have to pack the schedule too hard.
What's nice is it's somewhat less insular than other status-oriented hierarchies in that you can break into these circles by being reasonably good at generating value (particularly as an engineer/technologist) and even vaguely charismatic.
That said, in my opinion the primary focus should always be on figuring out how to create value. These days the upper echelons of the Bay Area are alarmingly saturated with talkers and bloviators, as opposed to doers.
Well, then, I'll get right on that! Sounds simple... I'm surprised I'm not already on Marc Andreessen's dinner list.
Besides that it helps to be around other similar people, but I wouldn't necessarily spend my day in Philz / Ritual / Sightglass / Four Barrel / a co-working space if the trip was for vacation. I came to SF for a pre-accelerator once that brought a similar crowd.
Staying in the HI hostel helps too.
I'd love to hang out with chill tech folks à la Homebrew Computer Club, but I get the feeling that kind of thing doesn't really exist anymore. Everyone is too busy peddling their wares.
And then less good specific but decently good networking at interesting side projects meetups.
I think the general purpose tech meetups can be hit/miss. It takes some work to find the best big one in a city. The best one in my city asks that only startup employees attend and not third party recruiters unless they're sponsoring.
It also helps if the meetup is hosted at an incubator or accelerator type space — one signal of quality vs a random place.
I might replace that advice with "be in the city", where "the city" is anywhere that isn't suburbs/rural.
The fact that you didn't step in it makes that a good day in SF
lol
>Austin
Texas.
>Salt Lake City
Mormons.
>Probably Portland.
Bingo.
Honestly I doubt it will be a city on the tier of Austin/Portland/Seattle, when San Francisco was still the obvious place to go for people who wanted to do weird things it was much cheaper relatively. The same goes for NYC back when it was a musical/artistic hotspot - living space was much much more affordable than any of these cities.
It definitely does, but to a lesser extent. Oregon is a reliably blue state because the population is extremely sparse outside of Portland, whereas Austin is just a bubble amid a sea of red. Oregon is also a lot less of the "southern redneck confederate" type, and more of the "libertarian don't tread on me" conservative, which is far more tolerable.
It's actually hard to be fully aware of the high levels of conformity one finds elsewhere until you have spent 6+ months in SF.
That's not to say that there aren't widespread prejudices held in SF.. the biggest one I have encountered is the belief that people living in "flyover" states are idiots and are less enlightened than those living in SF.
Saying SF is open to nonconformity is not another way of saying SF is "enlightened". It's just an aspect of enlightenment that SF culture does particularly well compared to other parts of the world.
This isn't even necessarily all kinds of nonconformity... it's just some that are rare elsewhere.
If you pick a person at random from anywhere in the US you'll find roughly equivalent levels of enlightenment and judgmental views. What's unique about SF is that being different is way more acceptable than it is elsewhere.
When you live in SF for a while and then go to other major cities and see how people dress it looks like they are all wearing a conformist costume, trying to look acceptable. But acceptable to whom? It's this instinct toward conformity that is so repellent about many areas of the country. The example I used about fashion is just an example, the same exists when it comes to life choices, values, etc.
I haven't found this to be the case at all, at least compared to LA/NY/Seattle.
< 30 Follow somebody. It's not which company you go, it's which boss you follow.
< 40 Work for yourself, if you realy want to be a entrepeneur.
< 50 Focus on things you are good at.
< 60 Work for the young people.
> 60 Spend time for yourself.
~Jack Ma's Advice to The Young People
I fall under the target audience for this piece and by now I've dabbled with at least half a dozen of programming languages and their celebrated frameworks/libraries- from Front to the Back. I tried my best to go deep on all of them just for the sake of learning. But, now I feel lost and can't figure out which path am I supposed to pursue in this vast CS space. Where did I mess up ?
Edit: spelling errors
There's saying.. if u fall on your face, dont forget to take something as a souvenir...
have fun
For maximum flexibility, aim to be a jack of all trades, and learn to fluently translate between tech-speak and business-speak.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-schmich-su...
I'm actually old enough to write a 20-30 column. My only advice is to know the different between wanting something and how you want something to happen. In my 20s, I despised the idea of luck, but I've learned so much of what happens in life is outside your control. The only thing reliably in your control is your attitude.
I've always aimed to read a lot...but rarely manage to actually do it.
Also, doing it this way, it was an easy ritual -> brush teeth, shower, lie in bed and read, feel tired and can't focus anymore, set book aside, turn off bedside lamp and close your eyes and fall asleep quickly. This adds up to a lot of reading over the months and years.
I'll read waiting in line. During unproductive meetings. Riding in any sort of public transport/lyft/etc. In airports. On the toilet.
One of the things I like about getting old is I can let go of all those things I should be doing, in my case writing but in your case perhaps that's reading.
The average 10 year old will most likely not go out of their way to "aim to read a lot" if it is hard to get books. Fortunately, I had a set of parents that highly valued education, and they really worked towards opening access to books for me and my siblings (we could go to the library whenever we wanted, and they prioritized driving us there). Obviously there will be the occasional 10 year old that will do anything to get more books but I don't think that is average, as are most things on this article.
This follows for most things on this list. Curiosity, taking hobbies you enjoy way way way too far (read that as "becoming an expert"), and "making things" are all things that I think happen better or exclusively under parental guidance. In addition to that, something I think I noticed (and I'd be curious if Patrick experienced this too) but doing most of these activities with my siblings significantly encouraged my habits. I built my first computer with the help of my siblings, and have read dozens of books I never would have without the suggestions of my siblings.
All these slightly random thoughts combine into the fact that my "resume education" did very little to get me to the point that I am today. I didn't learn how to program at school. I didn't write my first program at school. I didn't develop my love of reading at school. I didn't build my first quad-copter there, etc. So, rounding this out, I'd ask the question; what portion of these activities (listed here, or on Patrick's blog) should I have done at school vs at home? Should education move to a more Montessori[0] style to encourage this exploration? Should teachers merge more into parents as is the case in a lot of public schools? How can a company (non-profit?) garner enough of a child's time to encourage these behaviors?
On a more tangential note, have you done anything in the education/parenting space Patrick?
It's scale that seems to kill education, in fact I sometimes wonder if there might just be too much of it.
You can create complex things while young, but also you can pick up skateboarding at 40.
My assumption that it's rarer for those who are older is probably due to the fact that they have to worry about making a living and there aren't as many resources where you can engage with your peers outside of university, and also the fact that as a kid, making mistakes is not frowned upon but merely a process of discovery, whereas when you're older there is a lot of negative emotions associated with failure.
EDIT: for life-changing choices
I would be careful with this point. Young people who don't have great social skills already tend to feel that they are somehow missing out on something important. But those who have good social skills in our culture will have a hard time forming new and unique ideas, and will often get talked into believing big, fundamental ideas that are wrong or crazy. I'd compare it to being a smoker in the 1960s. In exchange for being cooler, you suffer irreducible risk, that is made more dangerous by the fact that few people realize it's there. Until our culture changes, it's probably better to encourage people to learn about human nature than about "social skills".
I can assure you that having good social skills is absolutely nothing like being a smoker in the 1960s. And, there is no absolute relationship between having good social skills and getting talked into believing crazy ideas.
I have absolutely no idea where you get those ideas, but they are completely and demonstrably wrong.
For many people, this is not true. Look at how common a second-act career has become.
E: Just to point out what I actually believe so I’m not just doing a drive-by insult - let capitalism and self interest be just that, like how a pizza delivery guy or payday loan provider probably isn’t deluding themselves about making an impact. Leave talk of societal impact to actual politics.
Related to this is the talk the founder of Asana gave at Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders. If you can make the people that are on the front lines of doing good a bit more efficient then you are doing good yourself.
Having worked at a YC-backed alternative to payday lender (https://www.//lendup.com) and having spent a lot of the time in the call center listening to our customers, I'd suggest that a lender to folks without access to credit can have much more impact than you could possibly imagine. Being able to instantly inject $500 into the bank account of someone that needed it for a car repair or they'd lose their job when they couldn't get it elsewhere was only one of the many, many examples. Now multiply that by hundreds of thousands of customers, and the impact is not trivial by any measure.
Taking something that is incredibly painful and making it a delight at scale is a beautiful thing, almost no matter how trivial that thing is. I'm reminded of when Steve Jobs forced the Apple team to shave 30 seconds off of the startup time, because multiplied by the number of people who use Apple devices it's the equivalent of years in aggregate.
I love that there are thousands of companies trying to change the world by making the one thing they work on absolutely perfect. It's a great thing.
This is exactly the mindless "head-in-ass" crap the OP was talking about. You're not helping that person by lending them $500 at 400%+ APR [0]. You are trapping them into a debt cycle they will most likely never recover from until default. Subprime lending is a predatory practice which has been around forever, no matter how you flip it. It is legal under our system though, so you're more than welcome to do it and profit from people's financial ignorance. Just don't try to pretend like you're helping anybody.
A few takeaways from their most recent CFPB fine of $6 million :
>"Misled consumers about graduating to lower-priced loans"
>"Hid the true cost of credit"
>"Reversed pricing without consumer knowledge"
>"Understated the annual percentage rate"
>"Failed to report credit information"
It's honestly sad how weak the CFPB is, but at least it's something. This entire industry is a stain on humanity.
[0] https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/lendup-enf...
All of that stuff was either done on accident when the company was a small handful of people or is pretty innocuous (we got in trouble for not displaying on our advertising that the rate may differ from the imaginary icon we showed, which displayed one of the possible rates based on how much money you took out. Or getting nailed for trying to give people a discount if they promised early repayment and not giving the discount if they didn't pay in advance).
Literally any company that had that regulatory weight on it would have the same number of things the CFPB could go after if they could, but no one else is trying to play by the rules and just operate out of sovereign nations.
But the point isn’t about the immediate impact on people’s lives at the moment of funding ... rather the longer impact during the time that they will hold the debt, and the high interest cost to those who can afford it least. Multiply that into man-years per your Steve Jobs anecdote! ️(smh)
There’s a reason usury is illegal, and why payday lenders have to pair with sovereign nations and shady legal structures, and why google won’t even list you, etc.
shame.
But oh no. I’ve just bad-mouthed a YC company on HN! Here comes dang!!
You know what LendUp does if a customer doesn't pay? It just stops, and tries to get you to pay back the original loan. No more compounding.
That's a big difference. I you think charging $30 total interest for an instant $200 loan to someone with bad/no credit is evil and doesn't make a difference, you probably don't understand the realities of what people would have to do if LendUp weren't there.
LendUp is run legally as a licensed lender in California. The shady legal structures in native american nations is what they're fighting. I'm damn proud to have spent a couple of years trying to solve it.
Okay? ... every company has the same licenses. CashNetUSA, Quickloans, Captain America Loans, and hundreds of other companies. Including even most with the shady legal structures, based in Malta, etc. Google won’t list the Deleware ones either. Advertising platforms don’t like them. Cities don’t like them. Regulators watch them closely and frequently press charges.
> I’m damn proud to have spent a couple of years trying to solve it.
Look this is probably going to seem uncivil, but given the poor ethics of what you are talking about, I have no qualms shaming.
I spent a few years founding a payday business. Ultimately, despite having the same “forgiveness” policies and “innovative” loan structures, and telling myself all the same junk you are telling yourself (CFSA PR propaganda) I couldn’t bring myself to treat poor people like a crop to be harvested. You know that forgiveness or not, the majority of borrowers are repeats, and that there is a huge incentive to maximize this. Essentially, people use you instead of a bank.
There is no escaping that this means you are in the business of siphoning 10% off of an already poor person’s wages on an ongoing basis, and that’s without compounding. (Sounds like 15% by your numbers)
Do you really feel good that you did this? You drank some silicon valley koolaid, worked as someone else’s employee and harvested poor people? And then acted as the company’s mouthpiece afterward? Because you want to feel congruent with your resume?
Before you say I don’t know blah blah about LendUp ... hear this: A great many Payday companies came before LendUp, attempting the PR of being “ethical” and “innovative”, with the same practices. And by far they have not been the last. They’re all still in the business of fleecing at least 10% off of the people who can afford it least. There’s always money in stealing from the poor. The only innovative thing they did was to con YC. (hi)
Do not deceive yourself or others. It is not an honorable business. It is a called a VICE INDUSTRY for a reason, and you guys didn’t do anything to “solve” it (by your own admission of the word “trying”).
I know ... you want to stand by what you did, but if I were you, I would put that one in the rear view.
I have a serious medical condition. I was sexually abused as a child. I spent nearly 6 years homeless.
The last thing I want is someone trying to "rescue" me. I've spent enormous amounts of time trying to figure out how to solve some really hard problems without approaching it as charity and rescuing other people.
For example, I am trying to start a program to help homeless people and others with barriers to regular employment start making money online, even if it is only in dribs and drabs. I do what I can to advocate for more development of market-rate, inexpensive housing rather than "homeless programs" per se. I want to see the fabric of society change such that we have less homelessness. I absolutely don't want to see more Big Feels (TM) efforts to Help The Homeless because that almost always means giving them temporary relief that often actively helps keep them stuck and then expecting them to grovel in gratitude.
Having thought about this a whole, whole lot, I think good business models are the single best way to make the kind of civilizing impact I desire to see.
We need more Ghandis, who taught India financial self sufficiency as the antidote to being Britain's bitch, not more Jesus Christ Superstars, who at this point is a meme of "the only good man is a dead man who died a martyr." I assume that was what the world needed 2000 years ago. But I would like to see less charity and more healthy fabric of society that makes the lives of ordinary people work better without them having to prove they have some problem that merits positive intervention of some sort.
I"m fine if people feeling like their vision will "change the world" is the motivation they need to put themselves through the hell that starting a company can be. I'm extra fine if that framing has them thinking in terms of "How does this genuinely improve the lives of people and not just milk them for money to line our pockets?"
Hahahahahahaha is this for real?