“No one is going to talk me into…” is shorthand for “I’m not open to any other ideas that don’t align with my preconceived notions.” It’s not terribly productive on a site whose guidelines try to foster an open and curious conversation.
By all means, people can say what makes them happy!
My point is that we have no grounds for criticizing another person's subjective experience or personal life choices, nor is that desirable as a goal for this website.
How would you say the OP adds to the discussion if what they say, almost by definition, is meant to shut down discussion? Or is your issue with pointing out HN guidelines? It feels like you're reading way more into my point than was actually there if you think I was criticizing anything related to their life decisions.
It's fine with me if someone has that point of view. But I don't think a forum like HN, which is supposed to be about fostering dialogue, is the best place to share it, or at least share it in that manner.
I've already explained this: "It's supposed to be about intellectual curiosity. Not questioning other people's life choices and giving unsolicited advice."
You've actually warped the direct quote "No one is going to talk me into BEING [emphasis mine] otherwise" into "Nothing you say can CHANGE MY MIND". The OP is talking about how they feel, what kind of person they are, what kind of life they intend to life. Not talking about some kind of belief about a subject X.
This conversation with you is becoming very tedious, and I'm repeating myself, so I doubt that I'll be continuing.
I didn't misquote; I said "amounts to" in order to indicate I was paraphrasing because it seemed like it would benefit from rephrasing since it appeared we were talking past each other. Although what you've pointed out comes across as a difference without a distinction to me. Saying "No one is going to talk to me into BEING..." is just as apt to shut down healthy conversation.
Fair enough when it's just a vague, general sentiment like "making the most of your life." What is probably worth being open minded about is how you define the objective function that maximizes that potential. It might be a little odd if I defined "making the most out of my life" in the same way I did when I was six (or even 16) years old.
If you have worked in most tech jobs, at large or medium sized companies, you have not met people like me. I took risks. Major ones. I left comfort.
I'm happy for your success. I assume it was earned with hard work. I hope it works out. A lot of startups with high valuations are feeling the crunch right now. Many of those will peter out and the founders will join the rest of those depressed by their life choices and/or feeling like victims of circumstance. There's far more to success than forgoing comfort and there's far more to happiness than success.
For my part, I co-founded and built two companies for ~4.5 years each: one in hardware and one in SaaS. The SaaS one was in the second batch of TechStars Boston. I had some success and I'm happy I did it. I learned a lot and it was generally fun. But, I trashed my health and wouldn't recommend others do it under the guise of happiness.
Nowadays I do industrial research on language VMs. I get paid very well. The work is gratifying. I have time for my kids, I'm learning things on the job. And I work with great people. I'll probably start another company some day because I like the variety of work and the thrill of the chase. My startup experience gave me a broad network and introduced new opportunities, but I'm only marginally better off compensation-wise than peers that worked a more conventional career. I'm almost certainly behind in terms of lifetime earnings. Many of them are impressed that I struck out and built multiple companies, but that has no real bearing on my happiness.
I'm not sure what being in the top 0.5% means without knowing the metric. If you love starting companies, have at it, but I can think of more challenging paths if you're looking to reach your full potential. Some of the smartest people I've ever met built the foundational technologies that allow SaaS to even exist while working for decades at the same company. I don't know how happy they are, but I know how impactful they've been.
Is your point that in order to take risks to be happy you need to be so cock-sure as to be closed minded? I tend to disagree and would probably characterize that as reckless as opposed to taking informed risks.