Tortured by regrets? A new study details how best to overcome them
latimes.com
latimes.com
Was it? I ran a mining program for weeks with no results and finally deleted it because a) it was trashing my CPU the whole time and b) I was worried that Ihad been fooled and it was using my machine as a node for distributing CSAM or something.
Even later in life, large amounts of money can cause people to do stupid things (see many famous people), but maturity has a chance then.
When I was new to driving I tended to drive around the ex-highways in the outer burbs and end up in little drag races at each light in the beater I could afford.. One time I looked over at the guy with the aggressively gunning the engine in his VW rabbit(?) and realized how utterly sad that was.
Plenty of Ferrari drivers, when they get negative feedback, probably get feedback that seems cool to rebel against instead of people exhibiting utter shame of association.
But I will agree, it really depends on the person. When you're young and have a lot of energy, drinking 2-3 beers throughout the day might seem like a good idea. I never did; but the fact that many people are blissfully unaware of how 2-3 beers throughout the day impacts them still shocks me.
Very North American/European kind of problem with the way I seen people go hard and the sort of things being used here, primarily the appetite for stimulants and opiates that I'm glad I never stuck around to develop in the culture I was from. I have a few other friends who have managed to spend most or enough time away from the continent who feel the same.
I think there's a lack of family cohesion as a huge factor of difference here. Ties into shit like higher suicide rates jn the developed world and other sad shit
In this story, people use a device called a *Prism*, which allows them to communicate with alternate versions of themselves in different quantum realities. The Prisms create a split in reality when activated, connecting two timelines that diverge from the moment the device is used. People can talk to their alternate selves in these parallel universes, and this communication brings up complex philosophical questions about free will, decision-making, and identity.
Chiang explores the emotional and ethical implications of interacting with alternate versions of one's life, focusing on how people cope with the knowledge of the different paths their lives might have taken.
-> thanx Chat.
It's like Peter F Hamilton, his stories are insane in length but you almost feel like you experienced the book, and what it is like to live in that world.
William B. Irvine starts chapter six with:
> “ONE WAY TO PRESERVE our tranquility, the Stoics thought, is to take a fatalistic attitude toward the things that happen to us. According to Seneca, we should offer ourselves to fate, inasmuch as “it is a great consolation that it is together with the universe we are swept along.”
We both understood sunk costs from the beginning. We know governments love to take things. Of course we could have saved more. But the people I grew up with are dead or homeless addicts. Many of the people she grew up with were destroyed or disappeared by the government. If catastrophe strikes, and we have to move to a shoebox outside of Cleveland, that’s what we’ll do.
Fatalism has worked out well for us. We are exceptionally fortunate to think congruently on those matters.
Why didn't she stay in China ? Why did you leave that unsafe and disordered environment ?
> I disagree. The best thing to do to avoid regrets is to act, to take the step forward. Not to resign ourselves and diminish ourselves hoping to soften the nastiness the world is sending us.
> Stoicism is good when you are being tortured (hello John McCain), when you are in the final stage of incurable illness, when you are a slave (hello Epictetus edit: oops, I meant Epictus) and have no agency.
But upon re-reading the advice is about the past, not the future and it's not an endorsement of the whole of stoicism and I think I could agree with it. I just don't follow through with the whole Stoic ethos.
Especially in these days and age where it's being promoted by ex-marketing executives feeding off of people who are lost. It's Tony Robbins's exploitation of people in bad places all over again. It's mindfulness meditation training for employees instead of raising wages and getting rid of monthly quotas.
It seemed to serve Marcus Aurelius (hello Emperor) quite well. Stoicism is strongly tied to duty, to ones self, to ones family, and to ones nation.
I like the advice of the article better - approach every decision knowing not all of them will work out. It's what I ended up in the last couple years and it has worked ot out for me. Fear of failure can paralyze you and this will cause even more regrets. The advice doesn't help with old regrets though - for this it boils down to, for me: dwell and die slowly or forgive yourself for making a mistake and move on with your life. Can't change the past, but you can change the future.
There is no way to change the past, so it makes sense to be fatalistic about the past but not the future.
In the future, I will make another mistake, and I will be regretting that instead of this. So I should focus on the present and the future, and try to identify and avoid that mistake (pick a different future!), rather than obsessing over the past.
It's incredibly obvious, of course, but going through the exercise of thinking it out explicitly really helps.
Why not regret all of them? I'm yet to see my capacity for regrets get saturated
The movie Challengers this year portrayed the most relatable depiction of regret ive ever seen. Made me feel like the intrusive memories of mistakes i live with daily, and keep to myself, are a universal experience. Knowing that living with regret is part of life helped me embrace it. Now i can think of it as, "my brain doing that thing that all brains do" then move on without a mental breakdown.
Thanks, I didn't want to watch that movie because even though I was interested by the setting I was not interested in the drama (and headlines I read in my feeds made it clear it was about drama). But your comment makes me reconsider.
Yeah, regrets like not telling "I love you" or telling it or "let's wait a bit before becoming parents" or "let's go for this career" or "don't call that friend back", etc. Those regrets.
Try not to make up too many regrets, people.
Similarly if I regret a 10 year relationship that ends in divorce, something like finding a great new restaurant isn't going to even that out.
As a hacker trying to win the internet lottery since.. 1992-ish, I put all of my eggs in one basket most of the time, and I've been part of at least a dozen ventures that all failed. It's like flipping a coin and getting tails 30 times in a row, which feels like 1 in a billion odds of losing to this extent. My best years were invested in techs like C++ that nobody even uses anymore, and I wouldn't use because they don't provide enough leverage. I only have the smallest bandwidth now to get anything at all done, and 90% of that is a waste of time due to conceptual flaws in languages, frameworks, operating systems, hardware, etc. In a very real sense, my most impactful choices were in the beginning, but I chose poorly or lost, so now it's too expensive to get back the sunk cost that I've invested. Making it ever-harder to keep going. Sometimes it feels like regret is all I have.
Unfortunately the winners usually don't have this experience. They don't have the gumption to lose for a lifetime. So they don't go through the same healing and growth process. Vanishingly few wealthy people can step back and use their money for social wellness altruistically.
Meanwhile some of us stumble onto concepts like duality and see through the matrix. We grok that there's no way to opt out of reincarnation. Then we look around and wonder why everyone is acting so strangely, having strong attachments to materialism in the 3D. The more we have, the more we cling to our ego and accomplishments, eventually living in fear of losing it all. While the people with nothing are more likely to lose their risk aversion and live in service to others.
Which means that the wealthy and powerful often live in a fear-based reality, while the poor often live in a love-based reality. Which works out well for the rich, while the poor suffer under systems of control they have little say in.
Zen Buddhism and Taoism touch on the idea that life is suffering, and suffering comes from attachments. So something that helps me is to go into situations knowing that I'll likely fail, but trying anyway, without expectation of outcome or regret.
So that one day if/when the win comes, I don't waste it like so many others. And maybe, just maybe, we can change the world.
> In a very real sense, my most impactful choices were in the beginning, but I chose poorly or lost
Specifically in relation to picking up technologies. Unless you are working on something highly specialized, I am not sure your situation calls for such desperation. Learning new languages is not hard (as you are aware, as far as I can tell), and switching to a more agile stack like e.g. React/JavaScript could unlock new opportunities, considering how in demand it is across the industry.
> We grok that there's no way to opt out of reincarnation.
Hm. That's a personal belief, right? It seems like you are convinced in it as a fact of life, and that might not be the most change encouraging strategy. Similar to fatalism in a sense.
> Which means that the wealthy and powerful often live in a fear-based reality, while the poor often live in a love-based reality.
You are romanticizing the poor. Certain societies have more family and community oriented lifestyles. Not because they are poor but because they have a cultural predisposition and a tradition. Poverty is not full of love, financial abundance is not full of fear.
I'm actually most fascinated now with simple spreadsheets and getting back to #nocode with stuff like Firebase and Airtable, although I don't believe that anyone has fully solved offline and distributed conflict resolution well enough to give us MS Access and FileMaker for the web. Although CRDTs can do a lot if we're willing to let ACID go, kind of like the eventual consistency fad around 2010. Dunno if I can do that though!
So really what's going on is that I'm not an artisan, I'm not a craftsman or even an engineer anymore (if I ever was, I never got my professional engineering license). I'm more of an architect or researcher. I want to write the building blocks for engines that are used to build other things.
But that ship has sailed. Open source isn't modeled right, since nobody solved funding. So nobody pays for the pure research that I'd like to do, so society misses out on proceeds from that investment in innovation. Banks only loan to match a multiple of collateral which doesn't kick in until someone has on the order of $100,000 saved. And there never was funding for ventures. VC firms vacuumed up all available capital so those trillions of dollars are now concentrated in the hands of a few billionaires and multinational corporations who pick winners and losers in the same role that democratic governments used to perform, except now through gatekeeping. The central challenge is how to get money for runway to get real work done, and that hasn't changed in the 30 years I've been doing this. If anything it's far worse today, with competition increasing an order of magnitude each decade, along with wealth inequality as winners hoard their gains and dodge their taxes.
On top of that, AI has already surpassed my knowledge and experience. It can whip up working code for mainstream frameworks like Laravel and React in seconds, whereas it would take me days just to formulate a plan of action. So the only thing going for me is that I know what not to do, from attending the school of hard knocks. But AI will solve that too within 5-10 years, removing even the minefield so that all programming has guard rails. Every innovation there just withers me, since I started down this course in life with the goal of creating AGI back when that was a joke. It's an all but certainty now, arriving by 2040 but maybe even 2030.
That's a good insight about reincarnation being akin to fatalism, I hadn't considered that. I feel that philosophies have merits that can be ranked under somewhat formal metaphysical conventions, even though they amount to sniff tests. So I find written religious accounts somewhat less believable than personal insights from experience. The most universal truths seem to come from epiphanies that can then be verified against other accounts.
So basically that means that a child's question of "how does my soul control my body?" is every bit as valid as "why don't dogs go to heaven?", except that the child's question is ranked higher because it's universal, whereas heaven is a construct and rules about who gets to go there are dogma.
We live in a mostly western capitalist economic model, with ethics rooted in Abrahamic religions. In other words, we live under dogma. So seeking universal truths is mostly discouraged, as they threaten the status quo and entrenched power structures controlled by dynastic wealth. It also threatens the psyche. The more I learn, the more my mental health suffers with knowledge that can't be shared, either because there are soul-crushing aspects to life that can't be changed (yet), or because I don't want to co-opt someone else's journey. Then people confident in their worldview mock me for trying, the way that hard-right politics mock any attempt to make things better. Because they are optimizing gain within a zero-sum game to find the best Nash equilibrium, while I and others are thinking outside the box at a meta level to change the rules, which again threatens their power. Leftist politics can also succumb to tribalism, so I'm not saying that hard-left or hard-right is best, but that strong attachments block insight and solutions. And unfortunately the people with the strongest attachments control the world right now.
So I guess my belief that we're all one in the consciousness field, destined to live out every perspective so as not to be trapped alone within a singularity as God, is not so different from believing that this is all there is and we're worm food when we die, or that we spend eternity in heaven or hell after this life. Except that I might say the worm food philosophy doesn't pass my personal sniff test, since being here again doesn't seem that much less likely than being here now.
And you're right, fear and love have no direct correlation with wealth or the lack thereof. I might say that the feeling of having enough can be personal or societal though. Someone may feel loving and not see the burden their lifestyle places on those supporting it. And conversely, someone may feel loving and not realize that it's a trauma response from exploitation.
I feel that my soul contract, the dream of my inner child, is to liberate future generations from unnecessary suffering so that they (we in the next life) can more easily self-actualize. Which IMHO is closer to a progressive planned economy with UBI like Star Trek than a libertarian wild west economy like Star Wars. Maybe our attention shifts though, the way that children in developing nations seem happier than children raised with a silver spoon. Maybe my personal journey through suffering has felt rewarding in some way. Like maybe I'd go crazy with anhedonia if all my needs were met.
All that said, what I really seek is peace, since I'm not sure that I've ever really felt at ease in my entire adult life.
It is why a windfall when young can be problematic. It won't be enough tomorrow and there just isn't enough non-chemical experiences to get that feeling back again.
It is also why people romanticize poverty because it is so much easier to go from nothing to something than abundance to even more abundance that would subjectively give the same "kick".
The biggest risk with not winning isn't poverty, but debt. My early losses set me up for a lifetime of exploitation making interest payments, which I didn't get out of until I paid my student loans off at 40. Millennials/Gen Y/Gen Z/Gen Alpha will have an even harder time, and I believe that we passed the point where debts could no longer be paid when the Housing Bubble popped in 2008. Which coincided with stuff like Peak Oil and the rise of post-Cold War authoritarianism. What we see today is theater, as the government makes no attempt to pay down the national debt, and moneyed interests stop efforts like student loan forgiveness by packing the Supreme Court. The wealthy and powerful are becoming parasites living on the working class's back. Which is incredibly tragic IMHO, as they had been stopped between WWII and 1980 before Reaganomics and the rollback of New Deal social safety nets under Clinton and GW Bush.
I had to let breaking even go as a concept. So I went through wage slavery, career death, mourning and rebirth of my own life as I stoically continued showing up with no proof that better days were coming during my healing and growth journey. But I did experience divine intervention during my destitution, as well as surrender and redemption, which I am eternally grateful for. My regrets are vastly outnumbered by the serendipitous blessings my soul received as my ego withered and died.
You're right that it's easier to live richly in poverty than it is to acquire any wealth at all or grow wealth. In fact, I think in these times it's a valid option. #vanlife and off-grid living can present more opportunities than competing with the Joneses.
A specific example of that is that I moved furniture between 2001-2003 and my income was $10/hr, about $1600/mo or $20,000/yr. My apartment's rent was $500/mo and my half was $250, so I could work about 3 days and cover rent. Which gave me time to leave work early with only 4-6 hours some days and take the winter off, but still have time to work on my startup. Dish Network and DSL were $30/mo each. Gas was $1-2. Used cars were $2000.
Contrast that with today's $1500 rent and stagnant wages. Now it takes 10 days (2 weeks!) to cover even half of rent. Food prices have tripled, Dish Network is $100-150/mo, DSL is $60-100. Car prices are in the stratosphere.
This outcome is a result of phantom tech. Stuff like innovation in entertainment and finance. Which drives costs up to maximize profit. So instead of offering the same internet speed at a lower price, we can only get faster internet at a higher price. Times everything.
Real tech is automation, economies of scale, etc. If we had real tech, the minimum wage would be perhaps $30 today. Rents and other fixed costs would decrease with inflation, not increase. So my furniture moving job would pay about $40-50/hr and I'd be able to make more than my $250 half of the rent in just 1 day.
Other countries like Finland experience this work-life balance and scratch their heads at US rugged individualism. The raw deal we receive is visceral now, it's lived. It takes a massive propaganda effort to hoodwink half the country into voting against its own self-interest to keep moneyed interests in charge.
No amount of discipline skipping Starbucks and avocado toast can counteract late-stage capitalism societal collapse.
Even though I think how bad things are is becoming apparent to most people, and I have tremendous empathy for young people entering adulthood today, it's not enough. We need a plan of action, positive outcomes that can be replicated at scale so that people have viable alternatives, and organizing for coordinated execution. The revolution is coming whether we like it or not, but it's up to us to manifest the reality where we live in a tech utopia instead of the tech dystopia that's coming if we merely survive.
Your example -- Finland -- is a very homogenous society with a population that grew from 4.5 to 5.5 million since 1960. The US, on the other hand, is vastly more diverse, both economically and culturally. US population grew from 180 to 345 million since 1960.
When advocating for UBI we can't also advocate for open borders. We have to pick one. Do you want a more open society that is also more economically inequitable, or do you want a more closed and homogenous society that is also more economically healthy? We can't do both unless we transform into some form of the World Government and an extremely globalized economy.
All economic systems (all systems in general) have to adapt to scale. What works for a village is unlikely to work for a country. European economic systems that seem more fair to you have not been yet tested by what we can expect the future world to look like. And when they have, they cracked and showed their flaws (e.g. the recent influx of immigrants from poor economies).
Also, a natural side-effect of more complex systems is that they become harder to manage. That's what we see in the US today. Disfunction at so many levels. China and a few other cultures are attempting to solve that by embracing a varying degree of authoritarianism - a more centralized control of, and distribution of, resources. This system has been proven to be fairly effective at scale (and the scale we can expect in the future). American society lately seems to be moving in a similar direction (both major parties). I don't have high confidence that our economic issues can be solved by anything other than a higher degree of authoritarianism than we currently have.
Lastly, we have experienced major automation breakthroughs throughout the 20th century. E.g. fields that took whole villages to plough now can be handled by a single operator of large machinery... I don't believe in automation as a singular solution for the reason described by inquisitorG above, i.e. human biology and human nature.
What you're really talking about is corruption. Specifically, that comes from wealth inequality due to financialization and letting the wealthy dodge their taxes.
To use your farm analogy as an example, it takes about 2 acres of land to support 1 family growing gardens and livestock with subsistence farming. So a modern farmer with 40 acres should be able to support 20 families and earn about 20 times original income. In other words, if we pay $1 for a tomato at a store, that tomato would cost about $20 to grow ourselves if we divide 1 year's labor and materials over the year. At least that would be the equivalent cost in terms of time and labor if remove money from the equation.
But we don't really do that. Farmers struggle regardless of how large their farm is. So who gets all of that extra money? Banks, middlemen, equipment manufacturers, shippers, stores, the government, etc. That's where financialization converts the real labor of earned income into the profits and leverage of unearned income.
There are major dates when this happened in the US. Modern agriculture had progressed to the point where we could feed the whole world by about 1965. Also technology had advanced enough that everyone could have access to information and automate workflows by about 1985.
But around those dates, we elected Nixon and Reagan to shift incomes from the working poor (us) to financial elites (the capitalist class). Backlash to progress in civil rights in the 1990s resulted in the Bush v Gore decision electing GW Bush. Obama produced the former president. We see this cycle throughout history - for every two steps forward there is almost always one step back.
Wealthy financiers now hoard most of the wealth produced by the working poor. Studies have shown that millennials are working harder for a smaller piece of the pie than workers did during the Great Depression:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/27/millennia...
https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/poor-millenn...
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/millennial...
(there are nearly an infinite number of these articles and studies)
That's hard to believe when we look around at all of the marvelous technology when everyone has a smartphone. What changed is tax policy. Between the New Deal in the 1930s and trickle down economics in the 1980s, the top tax rate was between 60 and 90%:
https://www.statista.com/chart/16782/historic-marginal-incom...
How that translates into real economic terms is, when business owners collect their profits at the end of the year, they can decide to keep it or invest it back into their business. If the tax rate is 35% like today, they'll often keep it. But if it's 90%, they put it back into their business to avoid it being taken as taxes. This is the key reason why US industrial capacity increased like it did for 50 years between about 1940 and 1990, and the Baby Boomers enjoyed the fruits of labor from previous generations. And why today, whole communities have their wealth sucked out as franchise fees to corporate chains rather than fed back into infrastructure and government services. AKA the Walmartization of small town America.
So now that money's all gone, sunk into McMansions and luxury cars and a Wall Street that booms the more that Main Street busts.
This election between Harris and the former president is about whether we want to pass the torch to Gen X and start addressing the rampant corruption that has saddled anyone younger than 50 with cynicism that the economy will improve in the future, or just let it slide and ignore corruption with stuff like Project 2025 cancelling the National Weather Service so that we no longer see the effects of global climate change.
Now, we can be skeptical that the candidates are more than figureheads. It's rational to see that democrats abandoned the needs of labor since Clinton rolled back social safety nets in the 90s. And that republicans put money in people's pockets through deregulation, basically removing liability from polluters and others who profit from externalities, so that those associated costs get paid by future generations.
But what we can't endorse is the othering of races and genders. Anyone younger than 50 knows it's off-color to comment on someone's race or gender in polite conversation. Yet we see it on the news, as politicians do it openly and set a poor example for their supporters to follow.
If you're saying that it's hard to integrate a multicultural melting pot like the US, well, that argument can't really be allowed to stand. Because we shouldn't decide economic policy based on racism or sexism.
Sure, democratic candidates generally support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). But that's a far cry from dividing the population along ethnic lines to garner political support, as we're seeing from republican candidates. There's a difference between working to overcome the lingering effects of generational racism and actively stoking it.
So I would say, yes, it's hard to get the US to agree on anything when half the population actively votes against its own self-interest. But that's not some law of nature, it's a result of the wealthy and powerful spreading propaganda and using regulatory capture to keep workers divided so they don't rise up and overthrow their rulers.
TL;DR: the main lever that controls how much the economy benefits the middle class or the wealthy is tax policy. It currently benefits the wealthy to an extreme degree while the middle class has largely been replaced by the working poor. Because the top tax rate was higher when the middle class prospered (this is the academic view).
Take a show like Yellowstone: highly politically charged, and the plot is around the realities of making it in the world today. I would argue that the ranch should be public land and the ranchers should pay grazing fees instead of taxes. But they are homesteaded, so the land is theirs. Which creates tension in who profits from the land. One advantage of private ownership is that it's arguably less susceptible to development, in that a selfish person can't build a cabin at the top of the mountain for all to have to see. But it can also go the other way - the Wilks brothers (billionaires) bought large tracts of land in Idaho and immediately built fences to keep hunters out of what used to be shared. People previously all for private ownership are now suffering under cognitive dissonance at the loss of what they felt was their heritage.
I take the academic road and imagine ways to satisfy these constraints outside of the current context. But most people are trapped in a Nash equilibrium where not everyone is happy, in fact a lot of people are unhappy. I think that's what you're getting at in your comment, that these things are hard. My idealistic dreams have little effect on the situation on the ground.
Sorry if I was too confrontational in my response.
Strange -- I'm actively considering learning C++ to help with CUDA programming for ML.
If you grasp CUDA, you'll be ahead of me as far as programming GPUs goes. I was never able to quite let my love of desktop CPU programming go to transition to shader and cloud programming. I'm more into higher-order methods like map/reduce/filter. But languages like Julia are working to unite the two paradigms under a common runtime.
There are many tools available to help you get started. I would highly recommend also learning Docker and git (if you haven't yet), so that you can rapidly iterate with full undo ability to remove fear of failure. There are many operations in git that I find easier than the built-in SCM in Unity, for example. And I know they can be used together to give you a local scratch sandbox, then commit your final changes when you're ready. I still want to do this, so you'd be ahead of me again.
And if you could go ahead and build J.A.R.V.I.S. for the rest of us, that'd be great!
But it's not. It's more like playing the lottery over and over. The chance of succeeding even once is pretty low.
> My best years were invested in techs like C++ that nobody even uses anymore, and I wouldn't use because they don't provide enough leverage.
Bit of an odd choice. Not only is C++ still being used, as far as I know, but even if it weren't: If you know C++, you know C, and that is definitely very relevant. If you know C, you have vastly more low-level knowledge than the average programmer nowadays. C is not my favorite language by far (I like rust, or Haskell, depending), but just being proficient in it means I can program a lot of different things.
Anyway, to the rest of your point: I never wanted to get rich or anything like that, I always just did what interested me on a technical level. I fared very well with that.
I can feel how much more fulfilled I'd be if I got to make the personal contributions in my heart. I wanted to write languages and frameworks, even design hardware like multicore CPUs, that would have made tech work easier so I could accomplish more and maybe win the internet lottery in the process.
But instead, I just endlessly ran the treadmill to make rent, in the end only standing in place as if I had done nothing. That's what the very essence of the suffering of life is: we insert a coin from the astral plane to incarnate in this life and run the rat race, eventually losing it all to end up right back where we started. Do it enough and we might ascend to the next level, but even then, we eventually volunteer to start over as the fool.
So nothing against C++. In many ways, it's still the most capable bare-metal language. The catch is that the developer has to do everything by hand. It's like comparing a protected memory process to one that can take out the whole OS at any time. I know from personal experience, having programmed my first computer (a Mac Plus) with C++ in the early 90s and having to reboot up to 30 times per day.
Today my time is stretched so thin that in an 8 hour day, I usually get less than 1 hour of actual work done, and probably more like 20 minutes if I'm being honest. It's all logistics now. Travel, orchestrating containers, meeting with team members, researching workarounds for unfortunate snafus in whatever framework, navigating large codebases, maintaining the body and living area, etc.
If I was using C# or C++ instead of PHP and the shell, I simply wouldn't be able to get any real work done in any reasonable amount of time. And PHP is a lackluster language, a far cry from what I would design, but it's the only imperative language with copy-on-write arrays like functional languages, so runs circles around them and avoids countless conceptual pitfalls. It's like MS Excel, simultaneously the best and worst software that I've ever used.
I really want to learn Haskell and Scala to extend my functional programming knowledge, but so far have only made it to Lisp and Clojure. I think I need a course to overcome some of my misunderstandings around decomposition, currying, functors, monads, impurity, etc. The utility of MATLAB jumped out to me immediately (operations happen on arrays, not primitives, similarly to shaders), but I haven't found a use for lambdas as much.
I'm happy that you've fared well and are able to do what interests you. I'm struggling with discipline, motivation and giving myself the space to play as a people-pleaser. I've had a scarcity mindset and been in survival mode for so many decades that I don't know how to put myself first. I just procrastinate and project my frustrations onto the web..
Like others have said, just some random on the internet, but at a minimum seriously find a wordsmith to update that resume and some recruiter will be contacting you. Also, more is not better no need to list the Test Tech or Mac Repair since other jobs overlap with those years and makes it seem like you were only part time. Everyone fibs a little bit no one is going to ask if you were part time or full time on a job from 20 years ago. Also, if you have self-employed listed make sure you have the tax# and LLC cert from the state as they are going to want to see that as proof to count as relevant experience.
I know you did not ask for my advice, but after reading your reply got me curious about why so gloom. As programmers we need to market ourselves and fake it till, we make it.
The gloom comes from knowing that had I just worked company jobs with 6 figure salaries, I'd be retired by now instead of still at square one. And I never bought Bitcoin when it was $10. And I never had money at the time to invest in Google when it opened at $85 and everyone knew it would go to $100, and it did, opening day if I recall correctly. Same with Apple, when it was $12 but I had no money to buy shares.
That's how capitalism works. As you get wins, they let you invest in further wins to eventually create a stream of unearned income large enough to more than cover living expenses.
But if you never have a single win - not in the beginning and not ongoing - then you watch on the sidelines as countless people with less experience and expertise, who haven't tried as hard, who don't even know what they're doing half the time, fly past you into financial security.
And why did I never have a win? Because the rules of the game that I started under changed. In high school, I didn't know anyone with a computer besides a handful of my friends. There was no internet or cell phones, just the BBS. Geeks weren't cool. We didn't know girls. We barely had cars, passed down to us from parents, if we were lucky. The only real jobs in my small hometown were flipping burgers and moving irrigation pipe.
The reasons I went into tech are largely irrelevant today. And if I knew then that our combined efforts were driving us towards a service economy, wealth inequality and tech dystopia, I might never have gone into it. I originally wanted to be a genetic engineer and cure all genetic disorders, eventually helping to cure senescence.
Which I'm not sure I even truly care about anymore, because at midlife there is a certain allure to starting over in the next life to lose one's memories. I understand Joker and Loki sentiments that I never expected or wanted. Or at least, I'm able to forgive those that scream "let me out!" like David Bowie and Freddie Mercury sang about. And have survivor guilt, that I'm still here after losing loved ones so close to me.
So the central challenge is how to get over myself, to forget the horrors I've seen, to somehow reintegrate with the 3D and reenter the matrix. I basically have startup PTSD from so many tries without a win. Basically a veteran like Rambo, I've seen too much, am highly capable, but can barely take care of myself and would be homeless if not for the help of family and friends.
I really appreciate your advice though. It's good to get honest feedback from someone able to see the situation impartially. Writing this out helps me see that the barriers before me are not so much societal, but self-imposed perhaps.
https://medium.com/@dualisticunity/ai-religion-and-the-uncom...
It says that it was written 3 days ago and that my post was 4, and I definitely read it after mine. But I've noticed that these similar attention/expression synchronicities are happening more and more often lately.
In the alt universe where I aced the interview and gotten my dream job, I might have died in a car crash.
In the alt universe where I didn't say something stupid and alienate a friend, my husband might have been stricken by cancer.
We just don't know and can't know. Every night, whatever happened, I try to feel a moment of gratitude. My family is here and secure and happy and that is not true of everyone and not to be taken for granted.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02699931.2024.2...
I think this was a huge super power for me early in my career. I embarrassed myself over and over again and didn't care or even think about it. Right back at it the next day.
But they didn't "lose real money". They lost theoretical money that they didn't actually have. This is a trap people fall into with gambling, the stock market, and other up-and-down financial systems. What matters is the money you're holding in your hand, not the money you could have been holding in your hand. If I go to Vegas and put $20 on roulette and watch it multiply over rounds to $20,000, do I have $20,000? Not until I cash out I don't. So if the next round wipes all of that out, how much did I lose? $20. Not $20,000 — $20.
I realize this is sort of tangential to the point, but it's also a valid strategy for avoiding regret.
I got this idea from reading Nietzsche’s Thus Spake Zarathustra, although it is my own personal spin on some of his ideas.
That WAS what you intended, right?
Yes, people turn to faith and religion. But this often amounts to a complete bypass of actually processing/reframing difficult feelings (like regret) and instead of learning to use those feelings to learn/grow and make your future less regretful, they’re offloaded onto some entity who is supposed to carry the load for you.
It works for some people for a period of time because they feel like they have permission to let go. Until it stops working because letting go isn’t enough. Actually processing these feelings is necessary but gets ignored, and eventually this build up and leads to burnout/breakdown.
(I was steeped in the church from a young age, and have watched countless people find the limits of this approach).
Better to confront things head-on.
I failed for a much more mundane reason - I didn't work hard enough, or I didn't have the right tactics/strategy or the dice roll simply didn't go my way. In the first two cases I know what I need to fix and I can fix that. In the third case, I simply must shrug my shoulders and move on.
But I was no longer sitting there unhappy about some extra terrestrial being not giving me the help I asked for. The religious mindset was making me unhappy because it made me think I had no control over my life, someone else did.
Once I accepted that I had control of my life I was much happier and also more successful.
Modern-day spiritualism is dominated by shallow inspiration masquerading as profound psychological and medical insight. Courses on "raising vibrational frequency", literal belief in astrology, crystal healing, etc.
> they’re offloaded onto some entity who is supposed to carry the load for you
This isn't supposed to happen, and in fact can be considered sinful. Christians are supposed to pick up their cross and carry it.
> This isn't supposed to happen, and in fact can be considered sinful
And this highlights the problem with turning to religion as a primary solution for dealing with life's major emotional challenges. If you don't happen to find the "true" Christians, you're out of luck. There's a wide variety of opinions and interpretations.
Unfortunately not a single one of the dozen or so churches my family bounced around while I was growing up had an enlightened view of this.
And I still have fundamental problems with "bearing one's cross" (the "correct" way) in terms of the actual psychological benefit. It personalizes things that happen in life that need not be personalized. Instead of establishing a rational reason for acceptance that can actually bring psychological freedom, it attaches the idea that it's your lot in life to suffer these specific things, which is a deeply harmful idea psychologically in the long run.
e.g. if I do something that I later regret deeply, the church says "you fucked up, and now you must feel bad about it". A more reasonable mindset is to use the regret as a signal that change is needed. To choose how to live differently in the future based on that regret. And then to leave that regret behind since the past can't be undone.
Different denominations and even different churches within a denomination will have different views on this[1]. That being said it's obvious your opinion is based on that experience but please know that this isn't the only viewpoint.
So much of church is based in communal relationships. In Acts, Paul makes it very clear that members and even church leaders should live "life together". To not may not necessarily be considered sinful, but it certainly leaves a gap in one's soul - Paul saw this early and gave the warning.
> "bearing one's cross"...it attaches the idea that it's your lot in life to suffer these specific things
> if I do something that I later regret deeply, the church says "you fucked up, and now you must feel bad about it"
> A more reasonable mindset is to use the regret as a signal that change is needed.
Again, I think these are distinctions in opinion based on individual denominations and churches. In the SBC it's often taught the way you desire - acknowledge the mistake by admitting it to yourself and God, and fix it. Even mistakes for which there may be no real victim (other than you) - wipe the slate clean and try again (which is the whole point of Baptism).
[1] Christianity is often seen as one thing but few understand the wide range in opinions, doctrine, canonical interpretations that exists. There are churches that openly support gay marriage and even abortion while others consider it a sin, to pick two hot topics. Scoping things just to Christianity should come with the understanding that even that may not be crystal clear, so I do apologize for not being clear earlier.
It's a kind of narcissistic wound to accept that we make bad decisions.
To learn to let go such regret is a big achievement for our further life.
Or ... having children!
Reframe the loss as a learning experience that will save you much more in the long term.
Example: You can read and listen to all the advice in the world, say, about being careful who you lend money to, but when you get stung for $100 by a "friend" that is going to register very, very much more strongly and will possibly save you $1000s in the future as your antenna will be much more effective.
It isn't something that can always be used but being able to see seemingly painful hits as cheap lessons can be quite empowering.
Now I wish I knew Uncle Vanya better.
The ones that are harder are where you regret something that occurred as a result of not applying logic. There, you need to learn how to cut yourself slack, understand the context you existed in at the time, and acknowledge that you’re a better person who has learned from it.
Regret, by definition, comes too late;
Say what you mean. Bear witness. Iterate.
Each has a strategy to deal with specifically. Typical ways are gratitude, acceptance, understanding and more. You just need to change your perspective on the event and it should minimize its impact. Extreme events excluded.
“Boy that sucked, I’m sure gunna remember not to do that again” Read the SRE book on blameless postmortems for more blindingly obvious and wildly underused psychological and institutional hacks.