Comment by alextheparrot | Hacker News Reader

Comment by alextheparrot | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Can you expand on the boringness? That conflicts with what I think because I believe that engaging hobbies are that vitality which manifests as “playful” and “fun”. Are you willing to try something new, and if you do, are you willing to learn to do it well enough to enjoy it.

Engaging with a hobby tends to involve making it part of me - the hobbies I haven’t committed to actually liking and just performed have always been the ones that get lost in the shuffle of things. Even more so, being so committed to a hobby pushes me to do more heavy lifting when it comes to doing it socially.

(Edit) After a bit more thought I decided an example would be good:

I love Jorge Luis Borges, so when my book club finally decided to read him I took the time to rate many of the stories, trying to collect an essence of his magical, gaucho, and mystical stories to help focus our discussion. That is what I mean —- to love something so much that effort becomes effortless because you’re bursting at the seems hoping to share. In this way we didn’t just read “Library of Babel”, but some of the little mysteries that show a different touch of his craft.

It seems to me that the perception of boringness can come as a result of earnestness being very niche/focused. Your example is a great one! But if anybody who is not a fan or doesn't know Borges, they would probably find a person earnestly passionately about his writing quite boring -- as one can only have the time and mental energy to be truly earnest about so many things.

In contrast, GP's example of popular people are likely those who are good at faking that kind of deep interest in many things, tailored to their present company, so that they attract a few people from many different crowds. Of course, this is based on my own experience only; in certain circles I can feel quite loquacious and come off as extroverted -- usually because of an earnestly shared interest -- but in most cases I think I come across as boring or even introverted!

The founders I have worked with (who became billionaires) are quite boring.

In pretty much every social gathering with them, they were silent (brooding) and didn't have interesting things to say about things and didn't seem interested to hold a conversation on their own. They seemed to be content listening to others talk.

But in work related meetings, when it came to making crazy bets they were extremely passionate about their belief and commitment and made those decisions like a boss. (They had personality flaws (they could be perceived as rude, unpolished etc in those situations) and they made mistakes when they became insecure while making high-stakes decisions as stakes became bigger.)

In most other cases (in not so crazy decisions that needed to be made everyday), they showed great amount of trust in others. They also showed genuine humility - they didn't assume expertise they didn't have and didn't try to assert that they are the boss.

I have come to believe that the founders mindset and behavior is crucial in attracting and retaining the right kind of talented next 10 employees. After that crucial bit, it is those 10 employees who determine the success probability of the company to a great extent. That founding/forming team is a bigger determinant of success rather than just the founders or just those initial employees by themselves.

We might be getting at different parts of "earnest", which an internet search defines as "resulting from or showing intense and sincere conviction". Your post is about intensity, and I guess mine is about sincerity.

I think jtanderson’s comment clarified the difference for me. Mustering intensity for me means being sincerely interested, so I actually wasn’t seeing the difference.

Thank you for the comment, learned something.

Re your example, Borges is one of my fav authors too. Would love to see that list.

The idea was to try to cover some of his range, which isn't trivial given how many styles he can write in.

My favorite is the Secret Miracle, though. The idea of finishing your masterpiece in abstract of the fame, recognition, even impact is beautiful.

Here’s the ones we read and discussed:

Man on Pink Corner

The Secret Miracle

The lottery of Babylon

Three Versions of Judas

Deutsches Requiem

On Exactitude in Science

In Memoriam, JFK

The Zahir

What did you end up reading, if I may?

From his collected fictions, the sampling was:

- The Secret Miracle

Personal favorite, I actually think it links well to this discussion of earnestness.

- Man on Pink Corner

A bar story, the characters are a bit rough on the edges. Action packed.

- The Lottery of Babylon

Mystical world where a lottery runs everything.

- Three Versions of Judas

This is a good example of Borges combining non-fictional and fictional elements, he is doing a critical analysis on a fictional author be made up regarding the “real” role of Judas.

- Deutsches Requiem

Part of his explorations on fascism and nazism, written contemporarily (1946) so it has a bit more rawness.

- On Exactitude in Science

The title well describes this short piece.

- In Memoriam, JFK

Also short and incredibly well-written.

- The Zahir

The Zahir creates obsession, to the point of driving the obsessed insane.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com