Working for someone vs. doing your own thing
tik.dev
tik.dev
My friends who have been successful (and who had blue-collar upbringings like me, and all in mid-40's now) all worked full time jobs until their side projects were self-sustaining. None of them hit unicorn status, but I think all of them have lived healthy, fruitful lives.
Also note by "sustainable" I mean they had contracts worth substantially more than their salaried job. Because to transition to that completely, you've got to set aside time and money for so many things: insurance, legal, hardware, whatever corp infra, recruiting, etc, as well as offset the risk. So I'd not jump ship too soon, until you have a real plan on how to get your company from A to B. Especially these days when tech salaries are so high, it'd be a mistake to opt out of it too soon.
The problem I think with NOT eating together is that it sews disharmony in the machinery of the household.
If everyone DOES eat together all the work related to it happens together as somewhat of a team. You do the thing once. Everyone is in a shared state of being. Specifically being satisfied in appetite and social interaction and ready to do there own thing after.
Otherwise Billy is hungry at a different time than Sandy and Sara wasn't hungry until it was time for bed. Dishes have to be re done for each person. Billy made a better dinner for himself and left none for his sister. Someone ate in the bedroom and left a glass of milk out over night and mom was angry in the morning...
I am rambling and maybe it's obvious but ultimately I don't think it's just the act of eating together I think it's the reduced friction and increased cohesion of the household that shared dinner causes.
To answer your question, Maybe family dinner forces you to be "doing it right" just by the act of having the family dinner.
That's not to say you can't screw it up. If family dinners are spent in silence with the kids praying they get through the dinner without setting dad off again and watching him beat their mom to a pulp, or hoping that they don't get sexually abused later that night by one of their family members, etc. Then yes, maybe there are some quality issues, but I'd argue even in that extreme case, it might still be a positive indicator against the base cases of abuse without that element.
I was a paramedic. There is a massive fraction of society with upbringings like you wouldn't imagine. That's what you're up against. When people say they have a dysfunctional family, it's often pretty mundane. Especially compared to people in that class that didn't realize until they were an adult that things like getting raped by all of their mom's boyfriend's isn't a normal thing everyone deals with as soon as they start puberty.
IMO, having regular family dinners is just one of many characteristics of stable and healthy families.
I've done it all my life, as a child and a parent, I have no idea why people would not want to enforce this.
As you have more meals together, you are (they bond to you) and feel (you bond to them) more loved by the other people at the table.
The gratitude towards my parents alone has driven me to push myself harder in my career.
Absolutely love how that was phrased. I couldn't agree more.
It’s more of an internal preservation thing than a fear of externalities.
I've learned that there are people who don't have this response, they simply keep it on an emotional level. These people also never experienced or saw any physical fight during childhood and were never really bullied.
I saw fights pretty much daily as a kid and experienced them at least once per month, winning about 50% of them. So I've experienced both sides quite a bit.
I've noticed that kids who fought daily have this much more in their physiology than I do.
I was thinking more about people who grow up with very little, i.e. aren't sure if their parents are going to put food on the table that day. If you start out like that but manage to get a steady job etc..., I think it can be much harder to take risks like changing career or being assertive in certain situations.
It is a factor often missed in outcomes and sometimes wrongly attributed to persistence.
It is always easy to be persistent without any economic pressure or financial liabilities, even more so when your family ensures that for you.
Speaking from personal experience, I have to disagree. I was raised in Baghdad by a single parent, my mother. We lived through three major wars, almost never had a steady income till after 2004 when I was 19 and started working for the US military as an interpreter. I believe growing up under great pressure (and violence) has made me more resilient and increased my appetite for risk.
Also, if your relationship with your mother was strong, that counts for a lot. I'm glad you survived and are thriving!
eg they get their life on track, but it seems to be "too boring" (or similar) for them, so they start creating chaos with the people around them to get things "back to normal"
Someone with little privileged who puts in a huge amount of effort can overtake someone with a high privilege who puts in a normal amount of effort.
Imagine not having to deal with that during entrepreneurship, without the issue wealth of contacts and money, what an advantage it is.
Sure, you can have more grit if you come from a more constrained background, but I would not know what I would choose between the two.
My conclusion is: when privilege is applied well, there is no competing it. And the stable and secure environment that you're talking about plays a role in that. As I've noticed that I'm lacking it a bit (just a bit) and I am seeing its effect. The issue is that this type of stuff is mostly automatic behavior, so it's hard to flush out.
Is this a thing? I thought the common wisdom was that you gain resilience once you get past hardships, not lose it.
I don't think there's a hard rule on this, and it depends on the mentality of the individual. It's possible for people from rich and poor backgrounds alike to be resilient.
But I do think emotional security helps you deal with challenges in life. It's not the only thing and it's possible there's other ways of dealing with it. But growing up in a secure environment makes a difference (note, this doesn't necessarily mean rich. It means stable. If you're rich, but a close family member dies when you're young or some other hardship occurs, you can still be emotionally hurt despite having an otherwise secure environment -- that's why it's a bad idea to judge people on their backgrounds, you never know the full picture)
I think when I was younger I tended to see financial success and stability as a downstream effect of other factors, but I can't help but now see that viewpoint as naive. Economic pressure alone is sufficient to create severe emotional stress and instability (which probably creates a feedback loop that makes it even harder to recover from).
If you come from a “the pie is fixed size; gotta fight for your share” mentality, you might have different propensity to succeed as an entrepreneur. Likewise if you never saw the real good, bad, and ugly under the covers.
Could also be genetic. You'd have to design an experiment (or, more likely, find a natural experiment) that controls for genetics to know.
They're also at a big advantage because they used to work in Silicon Valley and have a lot of connections in the industry.
I'm not disagreeing, but is there any research to support this that you can share, or is it based on your personal experience?
https://qz.com/455109/entrepreneurs-dont-have-a-special-gene...
But given that the secret to successfully launching a business is to have enough resources to fail many times, it stands to reason that successful startups are highly dependent on founder funding (and thus, parental wealth).
The “smart” kids, myself included mostly had middle class backgrounds and all became professionals, there’s only one that I know of who is a business owner.
Supporting a few sibling commenters here. I believe it is more nuanced than a safety net provided by parental wealth.
I definitely come from a background of privilege. My grandfathers were both high status professionals. My parents were a combination of high-performing professional and Ph.D. I have pursued several ventures. I have no major success to report from a startup perspective, but plenty of professional success. I have certainly taken risks in my career.
I have never consciously planned risks around the thought that my parents could provide a safety net. I have always had backup plans several layers deep and my parents have never factored into those plans. I cannot rule subconsciously banking on their support. Luckily I've never had to fall through all my backup plans.
Like I said, I certainly come from privilege. I'm not trying to say I did it all on my own. I am not trying to say my parents had nothing to do with it. Just that my safety net has not been planned around any parental largesse. I built it on a foundation provided by them.
I like to put it this way: I am a self made man. I made myself and achieved what I have on my own. I have achieved it with skills and a mindset that I learned from my parents. That I learned from the high quality education that they directly gave me and that they made sure I got in my schooling. I have achieved it with a confidence borne of an upbringing that tells me I deserve success and should expect it if I work well. I have achieved it in an economy that is supportive of professional development. I have achieved it by working hard - and being lucky enough that my work got to start at 0 instead of in a socioeconomic hole. I have achieved it by being lucky enough to live in a society where I am not discriminated against. I have achieved it by being lucky enough to be born in a time and place, and to parents, that were conducive to my hard work and to my success. I am a self-made man, but I don't think that's too much to brag about given the privilege I was born to.
So, there was never any direct safety net from my parents, but the safety net was there d/t the circumstances of my birth and life and luck. These things enabled hard work to pay off. Unfortunately hard work is not enough on its own. Luckily for me, I did hard work in the right time and place.
In hindsight, I'm honestly not even sure that the nuance matters. The effect is largely the same whether there is truly a "safety net" of any sort, or whether the circumstances of birth and raising eliminate the need for a safety net.
What’s weird to me is that I don’t see more successful founders mentioning that having economically well-off parents being a factor in their success. I’ve long since accepted that any success I’ve had or will have will be, at least partially, a result of my privileged upbringing. I used to be a bit bothered by that, but now I’m happy to give tons of credit for any of my own successes to my parents. And anytime I hear about startup founders achieving success despite coming from poorer families or even hostile environments, I’m super impressed.
Might also be a cultural thing, in many societies there are myths of equality and everybody having a chance.
It's not just people with rich parents. I've noticed people tend to dismiss parental help they get even when it's just a few hundred every once in a while. They don't connect that vacation they just took, was paid for by that Christmas present they got, or that they're able to save because they're living rent free with parents.
It's like people see money from their parents as non-existent and don't count it in as 'extra' money they've received. Meanwhile, they've never actually had absolutely no money, because their parents never let them reach that state.
"A day job gives you money, a connection to the world, and a routine. Freedom from financial stress also means freedom in your art. As photographer Bill Cunningham says, 'If you don’t take money, they cant tell you what to do.' Because the real truth is, once you start making money doing what you love, it BECOMES A JOB. And with it comes all the hassle of a job."
It's why I've personally decided to work for someone else full time and then use any time I can get outside my day job to do the things I really enjoy (which are very profitable). The full time job enables me to be more "creatively reckless" in my side projects, which in turn allows me to learn a lot and stretch creative muscles I might not otherwise get "working for the man."
But the TL;DR for the chapter on motivation and energy comes down to: work on things that improve your own life, set clear objectives, and work in small chunks. The book itself is being written in 30 minute chunks throughout my week because that’s all the time I can spare.
Of course, that's not really sustainable. But 30 minutes does not seem feasible for me.
It's not like you're going for a 30 minute jog where you just run without thinking. Don't you need to take time to "warm up" until the project you're doing starts being fun? And how does stopping just when you start enjoying yourself not kill your motivation? And don't you think about the project throughout your day job (instead of whatever problem you're supposed to be working on)?
Then a spare weekend will finally come around and I’ll have made enough progress that I want to spend an hour, or three, on the project.
The purpose is to make progress however you can. This is also why my other points are so important: work on something that will directly benefit you (scratch your own itch) and have a clear objective outlined.
You will probably have to decide what is most important to you. You cannot chase and strive for promotions, extra responsibility etc. on your day job while still wanting to do your own thing in your spare time. Perhaps you need to look for a job that has less pressure and perhaps less pay, but which does not drain you.
I have just had to go through the same realization myself that I cannot chase on both fronts. And my priority is my own projects, so I will have to course correct.
Interestingly, for myself the more intense the day at work is, the more energized I feel when I get home to work on my own passion projects and businesses. Since my role has been relatively autonomous, I'm the one setting the intensity level and if it's a high pressure day it means I bit off more than I bargained for.
To avoid the after-hours productivity slump, I try not to let work get "slow" by taking on new projects, asking other teams what problems they're encountering, and finding new tools to add to my arsenal. That being said, there are still days that seem to crawl by and very little is left to be done. Those are the days that drain me mentally and physically. Some of the people I've worked with have talked about how they spend their workdays pretending to work while actually playing mobile games or whatever and how it makes the day go by faster. I'm genuinely fascinated by what I perceive to be their complacency and lack of ambition.
As background, this is my first role at an organization I'm not a founder of and I started there three years ago at the age of 27. Starting at age 14 I had my website network which was racking up $500+ a month in server bills, so the entrepreneurial lifestyle (rollercoaster ride) is my definition of normal. As a first-time employee, I've had some embarrassing moments while learning the rules and etiquette which is probably common sense to everyone else.
40 hours per week is more than half of most people's waking hours. That's a terrifying amount of my life to have to spend on something I don't _absolutely love_ doing, and I sincerely hope I can find a way out of it sooner rather than later.
So my point was just to not bet full-on on two horses at one. If your priority really is your side-gig or starting your own business, then do not run too fast in the hamster wheel also. Put yourself in a position where it might not be the most fulfilling work, but it serves the purpose of giving you economic room for pursuing your own business.
> I’ve been working remotely for four years now, and I know that working alone can make you lonely..
I also work full-time remotely. I built a community around myself, made new friends and regularly hang out with people I met at coffee shops, at startup meetups, old classmates, ex-coworkers (that may also be fully remote), etc. I hear it a lot, but this argument honestly falls flat on its face as long as you're not a weird hermit that only works from your house. In fact, that main reason I wanted to work remotely is because I get to meet people (particularly women, as I'm getting to an age where marriage is starting to become a priority) that I'm more interested in than in the myopic circles that are commonplace at large tech companies.
> I like the idea that you can earn money while you sleep, but are those businesses fun?
Yes. Because it gives you the freedom to do whatever you want. And freedom is fun. I mean, passive income is basically free money -- I'm not sure I'm getting what author is saying here.
> I imagine working on your own thing full time and on the side are definitely not the same; it’s scary, to be frank. If my side-project became my full-time work, might my passion for my project dwindle and become yet another job? How would it differ from my current job?
I don't see how working for your own business could ever become "just another job" -- you're acutely invested in the venture, your strategic decisions guide it's success (or failure). Working for a corporation is the definition of "autopilot" for most above-average employees (engineers or otherwise). This could not be more different when doing your own thing.
The post opens with:
>This is more of a brain dump or an internal monologue. I don’t intend to prove any point or convince you to start your own thing. Neither do I want to reassure you that working for someone else is the best option for most people. My goal here is simply to get my thoughts out so I can think clearly again and rationalize this thing that’s been nagging me.
Having worked remotely for close to five years now those who worked in coffee shops and not from the comfort of their own homes were usually the weirdos.
For some reason those whom I worked with who were choosing to work in such places usually were also not overly sociable. I have, of course, at least one example of a person who works at home and is self-admittedly antisocial, but the correlation is still there.
I have this one friend who only really uses his tiny apartment for sleep and other basic stuff. He works at coffee shops and doesn't cook even though he's good at it. Getting to know this guy was a lengthy and laborious process.
I am an extreme introvert though and could go just fine for weeks without interacting with anyone, so if that’s what you mean by “weird”, then yeah, I guess so.
And that just confused me - I do sports so I hang out with people, I take language classes outside of work, and on top of that I am married and we have a pretty active social life.
If you only see people at work - I think that's a red flag. Get a hobby where you see people, it's good for you. :P
> I also work full-time remotely. I built a community around myself, made new friends and regularly hang out with people I met at coffee shops, at startup meetups, old classmates, ex-coworkers (that may also be fully remote), etc. I hear it a lot, but this argument honestly falls flat on its face as long as you're not a weird hermit that only works from your house. In fact, that main reason I wanted to work remotely is because I get to meet people (particularly women, as I'm getting to an age where marriage is starting to become a priority) that I'm more interested in than in the myopic circles that are commonplace at large tech companies.
It shouldn't be controversial that if you decide upon a path in life where 8 hours of it you spend by yourself, you're going to meet less people than if you were working in a team at a company. Also, some people do not live in the same place they went to school and/or university for example (unlike you).
> Yes. Because it gives you the freedom to do whatever you want. And freedom is fun. I mean, passive income is basically free money -- I'm not sure I'm getting what author is saying here.
If you want to make money, you cannot do whatever you want, you have to do what earns you money. And sometimes what makes money is not what is fun.
> I don't see how working for your own business could ever become "just another job" -- you're acutely invested in the venture, your strategic decisions guide it's success (or failure). Working for a corporation is the definition of "autopilot" for most above-average employees (engineers or otherwise). This could not be more different when doing your own thing.
Passion can dissipate. Doubts will set in as you question yourself whether it's all really worth it. If you want to make money you will inevitably have to start doing things which you would rather not do (because you would rather do something else), and that's when you start to question the whole project, because if success is in doubt then why spend your time doing stuff you don't enjoy if you have the freedom to do something else [which is fun]?
That all sounds quite negative, so let me balance it out by saying I really enjoyed working autonomously, but if trying to create a business with a product I would definitely aim to do it with a cofounder or two. Consulting by oneself is fine though.
This reads like “I have a social life.” I’m sure the author has a social life as well, but it’s way harder to casually chat to people throughout the day when you’re working on your own. (Source: also self-employed/solo for four years.)
I've bought a gold plan off the exchange in California for Kaiser and it's $530/mo with no deductible. That's lower than I expected.
Wow. Just wow. As an Australian, I cannot fathom having to include $530 into my monthly budget just to ensure I don't end up homeless (or heavily in debt) if I get really sick. I'm not a socialist (I'm quite a centrist when it comes to economic policies), but something about the US system absolutely must change.
The thing about health coverage is that you either pay via your premium or via deductible/oop max, but there is no escape. The health insurance is there to protect you from losing your assets from costs over the out of pocket maximum.
Since you’re in mid 50s, even the astronomical amount you pay is actually being subsidized by younger people, since your premium is capped as a multiple of someone in their young 20s.
Otherwise, you’re real health insurance premium would be even higher. That’s just how expensive healthcare is in the US, and how guaranteed you are to needing it as you get older.
(Not that this is enough! I am absolutely on the side of everyone having access to good public health care.)
https://ca.db101.org/ca/programs/health_coverage/medi_cal/pr...
and like others said you would qualify for either free or subsidized insurance if you were low income
So not only are you being taxed more in the US, you also have to pay for healthcare on top of it. Insane.
if you're self employed then your health care premium is 100% tax deductible
https://www.kff.org/health-reform/press-release/coverage-at-...
Children are getting covered just like adults are. Just because they aren't/can't earn an income to cover it doesn't mean it doesn't cost just as much to the insurance provider. In fact, children tend to go to the doctor more, so...
Pension is 20% from the total. (used to pay the current pensions)
Healthchare is 13% from the total.
This comes out at around 990€/month for "health insurance". There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems, but I'm pretty sure you're paying something as a tax for you health insurance and it's probably similar to what they're paying.
To be fair, i'm well paid and a person with an average salary would pay around 250€ monthly. It's just the way our system is setup with a fixed % which automatically creates tax brackets.
Really curious what his job and location is, maybe I move there :)
Another interesting fact is that in Romania the tax system is simple enough to always negotiate in net salary. Your employer takes care of paying taxes and social contributions etc.
Because if that's the case I'm coming over to join you. :)
But the rest of the country doesn't, so we have the lower COL.
Give me a private contact and I can give you some concrete answers and tips regarding the area.
I can't complain :)
For example, a routine doctor's office visit can cost hundreds in addition to the monthly fee you pay.
Last year I paid $300/month for my medicine, in addition to other costs.
Someone making 100,000
On average you pay 2% of annual salary to health levy which gives you medicare 2000.00
If you are over 90k you pay 1.5 unless you have private insurance On average $2000. Plus on average $800 in extra like someone driving you to the hospital
$4800 aus to usd = $3312.41
It looks like you are paying half.
But the government is spending 7800 a year per person. So the additional cost comes from general tax revenue which you pay.
On average you are paying an extra 10000-15000 in taxes on that 100,000
I think it suggests that the healthcare barrier to entrepreneurship is much higher in the US than in Australia.
(Ref: why were medieval cities so dense despite their low populations and plentiful surrounding acreage? Everything had to be walking distance, so a big manor in the middle of the city would place a major burden on everyone's commute whose destination was not that manor).
So the tax is what you pay for the burden that your exclusive hold on the land imposes on others.
Or, you could think of it as what you pay to maintain the right for it not to be paved over as a superhighway, plus what you pay for the government to agree to keep other people from trespassing.
Not the fee for living there -- the fee for not letting others live there.
There is no minimum tax payable before accessing healthcare services: if you have no income, or are unlucky, you won’t die or be debt ridden for the rest of your life.
That said, healthcare in Australia in fact is cheaper than in the US, but not as much cheaper as you think it is.
I also pay substantially more in other general taxes (compared to the US), which ends up funding healthcare as well.
I've heard we've been paying more and more for certain types of medicine as far as subsidies go and although i haven't looked into it enough i can't help but look with distrust at recent governments over it.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&u=https%3...
Note that private health insurance isn’t a necessity, public healthcare is generally ok here, but I choose to go private for comfort and additional peace of mind.
Went with the health ministry route because we align with their principals already, plus we can visit family out of the country and be "covered".
When you search for health insurance, you’re only asked for age and location and smoking. Basically, nowadays in the US, your health insurance premium is simply a function of age, and the premium for oldest person at 65 is limited to be a multiple of youngest (healthiest).
The price is similar to what you get from an employer, except the employer pays most or all of the premium.
I can tell you the points that stick out the most for me:
- i've learned a HELL of a lot. I've learned so much running through the hustle life that comes with making these projects work & handling life around it etc there couldn't really be a price tag on that. At first I was more or less a hacker w some sales skills. Now I feel like I could handle ceo-coo-cmo-cto type things all because I had too. These are lessons & knowledge for the rest of your life. Even a generalist will be thrown constant challenges, I guarantee it.
- I had to make big adjustments to my social life. It's good you have some remote experience because this one was a challenge. Deciding what to go to and trying to spend time w/ community is difficult when you are trying to get it all done. Spend energy and time in places you enjoy & appreciate. When I worked at big co I would go to things all the time on weeknights and throw it on the weekend but you cant really afford all those peaks as much when youre on call as the boss. It's too taxing.
- Self Care: Could really go a long way with this one but damn.. This is the most valuable lesson I have learned. You have to watch over yourself. Like Marshawn Lynch put it this past weekend.. "watch over your mentals, your emotions, your chicken (i think he was talking about the body." Take some time off to relax when needed, keep tabs on your body and mental well being & keep close community who can help and support you when needed. It will go a long way to have someone who can help you when you just need to vent or maybe have a glass of wine ~ ~
- I'm happier - I do a little bit of work just about every day but I'm also spending a bit more time in creative areas that really make me feel good that I coulnd't seem to get time for at a big co. I make less money but I can't really seem to put a price on that "hey i'm gonna go surf cos waves are crushing right now.. will do this when I get back" option. The ability to control my time in life is one of the most valuable assets I have.
There is something about humans and how we think about what it is like on the other side. Is the grass greener? Only one way to know ~ ~ good luck xX
Having a project that already has ARR is a massive headstart over most people too. Especially if you are close to ramen-profitable, then quitting to run it full time only requires sacrificing relatively assured opportunity cost.
I don’t know how it works when you’re on a visa but since I’m not, I know I would probably just quit as soon as I had enough liquidity. You don’t have to be married to your first business for life. It’s an amazing opportunity, not only necessarily financially, but also in terms of learning potential.
This is actually the primary focus of a book I just read [1]. The author's primary thesis in this book is that that there are some very interesting reasons why we completely suck at imagining what a future life will be like.
This isn't really a book recommendation - the author took a single idea and chewed it in 20 different ways to make a larger book. However, if this is something you are struggling with right now, you might benefit from it a little.
[1] Stumbling on happiness - https://www.amazon.com/Stumbling-Happiness-Daniel-Gilbert/dp...
In 1999ish I was approached by two chaps that I worked with and one of whom I worked for (he was my boss.) Would I fancy being the Managing Director of a new company thing they'd dreamed up? Nothing too grand, first customer was where we worked already etc etc. Times have changed a bit now and we have some customers that most people in the UK have heard of.
Our triumvirate has worked out really well over the years. We will never set the world on fire but our little business keeps us and our 20 odd staff pretty comfortable. Three directors has worked out very well for us. Two stops one being a twat for example!
My advice is that you might consider finding and attracting a few allies but you must position them carefully. Fill in the bits that you are shit at. For example, if you can't be arsed with accounts then get someone in who will and pay them properly with shares if they are an early appointment and you can't give them readies now.
There's another, more subtle issue. If you aren't sitting on a million-dollar seed round, there's a _huge_ energy gap between working alone and hiring someone, even for a consultancy, never mind some kind of product effort on which you work for a year before you get any revenue.
This is in part because of the additional taxes you have to pay if you're no longer flying solo, and in part because of demands on your own time. Say you're doing something solo and you're super strong technically and can do what you do very efficiently. It's pretty easy to generate a ton of revenue working in this way. It's also much easier to tolerate gaps or reductions in revenue - you could just work on your own stuff and continue to pay yourself from past revenues. Say, now, you want to grow, and hire people. But you can't just hire people. Now you have to pay for their benefits, pay unemployment insurance, etc etc. Moreover you have to manage them, which will reduce your own "technical" throughput to basically zero. I've done a back of the envelope, and for me it doesn't make sense to have fewer than 10 people in my employ, since I can't skim enough off the top to justify my own loss of productivity. And 1 person solo LLC vs a 10 person company are vastly different companies in terms of business operations (especially bizdev and sales), taxation, and regulation.
I'd theoretically like to grow at some point. But I don't know how to do it in a sustainable fashion as a consultancy.
Being (overly) fiscally conservative, I would not feel comfortable hiring for a more product-oriented business either unless it demonstrates traction and upward trajectory. $1k/mo is not what I'd call "traction".
Working on greenfield projects is so much less mentally draining than working on some old thing with only 10% of its functionality encoded in tribal knowledge that interacts with like a 100 different services that you need to constantly be learning about.
So yeah, I am skeptical that this is the "future of work".
> Looking back to the twenty-year-old me and the person I’ve now become, I see almost no similarities, interests, or passion.
Comparing the me of now with the me who graduated college almost seven years ago and I... am essentially still the same guy, only with a lot more money to spend.
> Do I have to choose it now, or can I do what I’m doing now and decide later?
If you're thinking about it now, then you should start figuring it out, or you're postponing the inevitable and these questions will be on your mind every day.
> If so, why are these questions disturbing me now and not in the future?
Possibly because you are dissatisfied in some way with what you're doing now. A good chance that you're finding it comfortable but not stimulating.
> How do most people work out what’s the right path for them to take?
Most people don't, and don't believe the ones that say they knew in advance what the right decisions were. None of us can see clearly into our possible futures; we can't see in advance the successes we'll have or the mistakes we'll make. The best we can do is to understand our motivations when we do make a decision, and then at least be at peace with that decision no matter how it turns out.
> Does it have to be either or can you do both things together—have a full-time job and do your own thing?
If you want to live a balanced life -- i.e., without all of your waking hours behind computer screens -- you should choose either/or. Working full-time and trying to put real energy into a side project doesn't leave much time for anything else, and it will cause both your full-time work and your side project to suffer.
This isn't to say that people never manage to pull this off. Some people make it work out. They are the exceptions that prove the rule.
> Looking back to the twenty-year-old me and the person I’ve now become, I see almost no similarities, interests, or passion. I was a completely different person back then and the only thing that has stuck with me after all these years is my love of soccer. How do people predict the future? Clearly, I’m no good at it.
Congratulations, you're a normal, healthy person that's still growing and maturing. Keep doing that.
> I wonder whether, as we grow older, the rate of change in our interests slows down too?
It hasn't, for me, and I think I'm at least 10 years ahead of you. Nor has it for any of my more interesting older friends.
What does change is the gradual realization that you won't have time for all of your interests. Being a dilletante is a lot of fun while in your 20s and 30s. Some manage to have fun continuing to dabble in a bit of everything for many more years, even into very old age. Other folks start to feel like they might be missing out on something by just grazing the surface of their interests, and start to consider whether their time might be better spent focusing more intently on just a few.
> I imagine working on your own thing full time and on the side are definitely not the same; it’s scary, to be frank. If my side-project became my full-time work, might my passion for my project dwindle and become yet another job? How would it differ from my current job?
Your project should become your full time job. You should maintain the discipline you have in your current job and resist the urge to fritter time away here and there.
But it will be different, because you'll be investing in your interest, and despite it becoming your job, you'll still feel an ongoing sense of satisfaction at being solely responsible for your success or your failure. If you wake up one morning and have a great idea for your project, you won't have to convince middle or upper management, or enlist a sales team, or wait until the next company all-hands. You'll just do it.
And that can be really rewarding, and it can also be a great big trap you fall into, without anybody else holding you accountable or challenging whether your next idea is a good one or not.