What if you didn't need money or attention? - <AUTHOR> http://sivers.org/full <comment><USER2> I've been reading about stoicism lately (the ancient philosophy, not the adjective for lack of emotion) and I think that practicing stoics have some nice tools to help people out with this.

One of the primary ways that stoics find tranquility is by "wanting what you already have" instead of "wanting what you don't have." Easier said than done, so they offer some tools to help, inluding negative visualization (imagining life without things you care about), only worrying about things you have control over, and occasionally denying yourself pleasures.

I'm not doing the subject justice, but here's an easy to read book that condenses a lot of their ideas and applies them to modern life: [http://www.amazon.com/Guide-Good-Life-Ancient- Stoic/dp/01953...](http://www.amazon.com/Guide-Good-Life-Ancient- Stoic/dp/0195374614/). And of course Wikipdeia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism)

<comment><USER3> Stoicism seems like it would be relevant to a Roman. If you had no air conditioning and very little good things, being stoic would probably make you pretty happy.

We're not in ancient Rome anymore.

I don't see any reason for modern humans to be stoic. It seems like a great way to stagnate. When you can't change your environment, it makes sense to change your mind to accept your environment. When you can, self-modification is harmful. It lets you accept things you could change if you worked to to change them.

Stoicism seems to be at odds with a personal drive towards self-improvement. It doesn't seem relevant to modern environments where this improvement is possible.

<comment><USER4> Stoicism isn't anti-improvement. Epictetus was an abused slaved, then philosophical leader. Seneca was rich and was tutor and adviser to the emperor. Marcus Aurelius was the emperor.

Yes, Stoicism teaches you that you don't have (at least ultimate) control over the world. But it does emphasize that you have control over yourself. You internalize your goals: Instead of "winning the tennis championship" it's "be the best player I can possibly be despite circumstance".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I try to think this way. One thing I try to do is not work too much, so I had been freelancing trying to keep my hours to around 25 a week. It freed up time to do other things, I was learning to play guitar and working on some film scripts (I am using "was" because I decided to take on a full time programming gig until June but even this I didn't take for the money, it's way below market, I took the job because it sounded interesting).

One problem I encountered was people just not "getting it." And I don't mean random strangers, I mean potential clients. It's oddly difficult to tell people "I make enough money to support my lifestyle working 25 hours a week and I like to save the rest of my time for other projects that interest me." They expect you to be "doing more" or see you as lazy, after all why not make the most money you can possibly make at all times? When in fact I think I'm far less lazy than most people, I put a ton of effort into coding, educating myself, going the extra mile, working on projects for fun, reading technical books, going to talks. I'm also very serious about my pursuits beyond my programming "day job." And yet I've found it difficult to convey that, and that clients consider me unserious because I was intentionally working less than 40 hours a week even if they are looking for someone for a part time role.

<comment><USER6> A few years ago I decided that I wanted more free time to work on side projects, travel, whatever, and I made what I thought was a rather reasonable offer to my current employer and a couple of suitors.

I said "pay me 3/5ths of the salary you just offered me and I'll work 3 days a week". I also offered to keep this arrangement flexible so that I could work in stretches of varying lengths if needed.

This did not go over well. People were actually offended by this proposition and it went nowhere.

As a founder myself, I understand the desire to only hire people that will give you their full heart and soul. But, I'm also a practical person and if someone's skills are valuable to me, then they are very likely still valuable in part.

In fact, when it comes to a product/engineering position, I think the employer would come out on top in such a scenario. They still get access to the person's brain and all of their knowledge and ideas. For someone that's being offered high compensation, their knowledge and ideas are probably a big part of the reason why.

<comment><USER7> I've tried this several times too and it has never worked well. I've been both employee and employer and I really wish people were more rational about this.

Not only that but I think this is the key to fix the economy! Think about it: if people could accept salary cuts for less work we would have more jobs and could transition to an eventual post-scarcity economy smoothly.

Creative workers don't output more than 25 quality hours a week anyway.

<comment><USER5> I think for many people, most people even, this is not a rational decision. It's not about your time being worth a certain amount of value to the company and 4/5 or 3/5 of availability being worth proportionately less. Some people are offended by the idea of you wanting to structure your weeks differently in the first place & think of it purely as special treatment. They are obsessed with the idea of a five day work week and the traditional employer-employee relationship and accepting employment on non-standard terms would be giving away the employer's implicit power over the employee.

<comment><USER8> To the degree that they're actually offended, I think it may be more reflexive that the employee would put an upper bound on the amount of work they would do in a week.

<comment><USER5> Then why go home or take off days at all?

<comment><USER8> Because those are a couple of the things that government labor departments do tend to require.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Given money enough, and time, I definitely have things I would work on (mostly developing numerical algorithms for solving physical modeling problems, and expressing them in software). Yet, paradoxically, I worry about being given unconditional money and time to work on them.

Occasionally my wife and I talk about my quitting work, and us moving to Thailand (her native country). Her vision of my ideal life there is that I wouldn't have to work, and could sit around doing my pet projects without any time or money constraints.

That always strikes me as dangerous. Those projects I want to work on didn't jump into my head unbidden. The ideas arose from years of coming to grips with real-world problems that don't have entirely satisfactory solutions. If I untether myself from the work that led to the ideas I want to pursue, then where will the next ideas come from? And how will I know whether they are worth pursuing?

To me, having side projects that seem worth doing, especially from the point of _being useful to others_ (Sivers' way of distinguishing what he means by "not just relaxing"), requires their being grounded in real-world projects. And one measure of the worth of real-world projects, like it or not, is that people are willing to pay to get them done.

<comment><USER10> _Occasionally my wife and I talk about my quitting work, and us moving to Thailand (her native country). Her vision of my ideal life there is that I wouldn 't have to work, and could sit around doing my pet projects without any time or money constraints._

I can sympathize. My wife and I have ties to South America. Food and shelter are way way cheaper down there. The voices in my head make compelling arguments for making the move. What stops me is the kids. Don't see much of a future for them in South America vs growing up in SV.

<comment><USER11> Really? I haven't been in either place, but everything I've heard about California says it's a great place if you're a single twenty-year-old geek but a dreadful place to grow up in; intuitively I would have thought moving to South America would be ideal for the kids if they have US citizenship and therefore the right to move back to Silicon Valley later, if and when they are in the situation of being single twenty-year-old geeks?

<comment><USER10> Kids are gr8 I think: attending good public schools with favorable demographics and good influences, lots of extracurricular activities in the community, tons of outdoorsy excursions such as hiking, camping, nature. Great museums and exposure to diverse culture. Skiing in winter. Problem is cost of living. Reasonable sized housing for a family of 4 and a dog IMO is 3/2 1800 sqft with yard and garage on 5000sqft lot. Thats hitting 1.5M+ in my hood right now. So buying is out of the question. Right now I'm renting a 3/2 condo for 3650, so, as a lifetime renter, over next 10 years were are talking about 500-600K in rent alone if you factor in increases. How does one save for retirement? college for kids?

Problem with most of south america is infrastructure and security. These are things that here in the states we take for granted.

<comment><USER12> South America is a huge fucking continent. There are places in the Andes in Chile and Argentina that have standards of living comparable to 1st-world countries and a quality of outdoor activities that go beyond what you could get in the best Alpine towns of Switzerland, with free, high-quality public education and good universities nearby. They're obviously not the cheapest places to be in, but they easily cost 1/3 or less of what living in California does.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I just finished a book about a man who has been living without money for over 10 years titled "The Man Who Quit Money". It's a different perspective on not needing money. Instead of having plenty of money this book is about a man who doesn't need any money at all because he chooses not to need money, he lives outside of the money system. The title of this post seems to include men like Suelo, the subject of the book, but the content of the post seems to exclude people like this as it focuses on having more than enough money instead of not needing money.

The book does a great job describing the evolution of this man's philosophy on living outside of the money system and what it has done for him. If at all interested I highly recommend it. Instead of trying to accumulate so much money you can't imagine needing more a healthy alternative might be to focus on reducing your need for money.

<comment><USER14> I was curious, so I looked it up on Amazon. This is an excerpt of the book description:

 _The Man Who Quit Money is an account of how one man learned to live, sanely and happily, without earning, receiving, or spending a single cent. Suelo doesn 't pay taxes, or accept food stamps or welfare. He lives in caves in the Utah canyonlands, forages wild foods and gourmet discards. He no longer even carries an I.D. Yet he manages to amply fulfill not only the basic human needs-for shelter, food, and warmth-but, to an enviable degree, the universal desires for companionship, purpose, and spiritual engagement._

How did he find companionship in the Utah canyonlands? Does he have a girlfriend who shares the same lifestyle? Or is this more of a "the trees and animals are his friends" sort of thing?

<comment><USER15> It doesn't seem like this lifestyle is fundamentally sustainable for society (foraging does not scale). With something that will not work if everyone does it, is it really worth idolizing?

<comment><USER14> >>It doesn't seem like this lifestyle is fundamentally sustainable for society (foraging does not scale).

And consumerism is?

<comment><USER15> False dichotomy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > But what if you had so much money that you couldn't possibly want any more?

There's such a deeply narcissistic undercurrent here.

If you ever find yourself having too money money, what that means is you have too _few people who you are using your resources to help._

Being rich shouldn't be, "Well, I've got a yacht and a motorcycle, I guess I'm good!" It should be, "Ah I finally have enough to help X. If only I could get more and help Y as well." You aren't rich enough until the whole world is rich with you.

<comment><USER17> If only reality was this beautiful.

I _completely_ agree with your stance but we both know x % of the rich ones aren't like, say, Gates, but rather the contrary. They try to find ways to lose less (taxes and whatnot) and gain more then they already have.

<comment><USER18> I know it's not the point of your comment, but I really hate when people complain about rich people wanting to pay less taxes. They already pay far far more than everyone else, in total amount, percent of income, and even percent of income relative to total income. By wide margins.

And to use Gates as an example, I'd much rather have him spending his money than the government spending his money. He's better at it, and does more good with it.

<comment><USER17> _They already pay far far more than everyone else, in total amount, percent of income, and even percent of income relative to total income. By wide margins_

well I think the are morally obliged to pay more anyway - which is the spirit of the OP's idea. It's not like the government completely wastes every single tax penny. And even if they would, the more you have the more you can miss.

Furthermore, not only does this depend on the country you live in, I know from first hand experience tax avoidance is real, and mainly with richer people because they can pay others to do it for them. Now if they try to avoid taxes n order to give that money to the poor, I'm all good with it. But chances are they don't, in which case I'd rather let the government have it instead of it resting on the bank or being used to buy an environmental disaster like a speedboat :P

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I hate these theoretical scenarios because my practical brain kicks in and I start asking questions like:

Do I have lots of money making money not important/critical? Does everyone also not have to worry about money? Do my kids/family also have the same "money free" existence as me? Am I able to travel without incurring any cost? If I do have tons of money, am I allowed to spend it on other people/causes?

I don't need attention so that's not a concern, but the money issue is too complicated to simply take it out of the equation for me.

If I ignore my practical brain ... my priorities would be my kids, my wife, my immediate family and community in that order.

Spending time with my kids, making sure they have everything they need, most of what they want, and simply loving them (without being distracted by providing for them) would be the easiest and most gratifying part of not having to worry about money.

However being super-rich wouldn't solve any of these issues for me as I would feel a great burdon to help those in need. If my family was taken care of, the logically extends to my community, and those around the world most in need (similar to Gates) What a nightmare to know that you have more money than anyone and are in the best position (besides governments) to help people. I don't know how Bill sleeps at night.

<comment><USER20> Most of our concerns about money are definitely 1st-world. Keeping up with expectations - school, housing, car, travel. Most of the world doesn't have these concerns.

And we don't (have to) have them either. Its voluntary. There was a great book "Your money or your life" which like those others referenced here, talked about how the pursuit of money becomes a lifestyle, instead of enabling one. Lots to think about there.

<comment><USER21> > Most of our concerns about money are definitely 1st-world. Keeping up with > expectations - school, housing, car, travel. Most of the world doesn't have > these concerns.

You'd be surprised. In fact, I'd say quite the opposite: poor people in developing countries are even more concerned with appearances and expectations (for example, I have heard a lot of stories about people who can barely afford rent/food, but they drive a BMW or own a smartphone).

<comment><USER19> I think that's statistically true of poor people living in a first-world or middle to upper class environment.

Anecdotally I spent time in one of the poorest counties in Florida but never saw so many "normal" people with expensive cars, jewelry etc.

The want to appear to be rich is strong if you are surrounded by it.

I can't say the same would be true in a society where all were relatively equal or didn't wear their wealth on their sleeve.

Again anecdotally I find the differences within regions of the US intriguing. I'm from New England where there is clearly a lot of upper middle class people, but you don't see them flaunting their wealth. Other regions of the US (to remain nameless) however seem to be much more concerned with showing off their wealth. I think many factors play into this, not just the region but culture, upbringing and the media.

<comment><USER21> There's a lot of that in Europe too. There's a lot less overt flaunting of wealth in the richer countries (Denmark or Sweden, for example) than in the poorer countries.

However, I think even upper class people flaunt wealth, but in different and subtler ways. One example of this (for the super rich) are art collections (such as paintings).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I've been thinking along these lines lately. I've never much cared for or been interested in attention. I'm totally comfortable with the fact I'm going to be forgotten. I've been very lucky and I don't have to worry much about money. I'm about to finish school. What do I do next? I basically have two answers: (1) Entertain myself. Learn things because I curious. Work on things because I think they're exciting or interesting, without worrying if they're useful or valuable. (2) Try to make socially valuable contributions. How do I best put my skills to work for others? Free software is one good model here. I've been trying to learn about the non-profit model.

I'm very interested to hear other people's thoughts.

<comment><USER23> After I sold my company for enough money that it was obvious I'd never _have_ to work again, my mind went to the same place as yours.

Contributing to free/open software is a good one.

But also there are so many pseudo-business projects that are worth doing, and not commercializing. You know like when people say, "People love it, but we're trying to figure out how to monetize it." Wouldn't it be nice to not monetize it, and just leave it as a cool thing that exists? Closer to art than commerce.

<comment><USER24> Amen, I have personally experience how much better I enjoy working on something when I don't necessarily need to worry about monetizing it. In my mind, my non-profit work is immensely more successful and rewarding because everyone involved are doing it because they just really want to.

It requires a very different way of thinking and looking at things. Money is a metric often used to measure success. Even in non-profits people start to get "metric driven", but I feel that somehow belittles my efforts.

Truth be told, money is work + luck. The only metric that I like to look at is, am I doing what I can. Random dehumanizing metrics be damned, you can't measure everything!

<comment><USER22> > I feel that somehow belittles my efforts.

It does. There's lot of psychology research on this, intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation, etc. Have a look at Alfie Kohn's books, like Punished by Rewards.

<comment><USER24> Thanks. I recently read Drive, which was an eye opening book, especially when I can attest to the negative consequences of bonus based ruining of intrinsically motivated people.

<comment><USER22> I tried to read Pink's A Whole New Mind, and it turned me off to him completely.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Propose this to the homeless and the destitute and see what sort of responses one receives. This is a fun thought experiment for the privileged. As a kid this is what was beaten into the minds of the soon to graduate out of college 'study what you love' they'd say. The idea was attractive to be sure.

But when it is about survival, when you don't have a cushion, an infrastructure that will provide for you, this sort of thing isn't an option, the rhetoric is really a sophistry. What one can glean from this is what many have already considered.

Make enough money, satiate yourself so that it's no longer a need, and then you really do have the freedom to pick and choose and do what you want. It is a rare sort of situation and person that can do this from the beginning to the end of their lives.

Work comes out of a necessity, for many of us it is not something you simply change your mind on, and you're suddenly free from the burden.

EDIT: spacing, wording

</comment><comment><USER26> Just my 2¢.

I personally don't need piles of money. I could make 20% of what I'm making now, do what I love to do, and not feel strained. (Actually, I lived on much- much less.)

But I have a family to support, children to educate, etc, and _this_ requires a lot of money. So yes, I'm looking for ways to make more money, like 10x, or even 100x of what I'm making now.

Also, unlike food, money does not cease to be useful in quantities you yourself cannot consume. I bet Bill Gates does not spend a million of his riches a day. The Gates Foundation possibly spends more, though—hopefully in a way Mr. Gates finds personally satisfying.

<comment><USER27> > But I have a family to support, children to educate, etc, and this requires > a lot of money. So yes, I'm looking for ways to make more money, like 10x, > or even 100x of what I'm making now.

You must have a very large family to support/lot of college tuition to pay off.

<comment><USER26> I dislike debts, so I'd rather pay upfront, which might be a bit expensive.

Also, having 50-100 your yearly incomes invested effectively retires you and your family: you don't _have_ to work for money any more and can pursue what you love. Exactly as the original article suggests.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Check your privilege. Most people don't _have_ the opportunity to do what they love; they are just working to make ends meet. They don't _have_ the ability to fall back to something safe if they fail. If they do not have a job they will simply not survive. They aren't looking to "benefit others" through their work, they just want to continue living.

[https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/in-the-name-of- love/](https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/in-the-name-of-love/)

<comment><USER29> Most of the submitted article is spent acknowledging just how impractical the premise of the question is. Don't take it on it's own terms (I thought it was a dumb post for different reasons) but at least recognize it knows it's daydreaming.

 _Check your privilege._

Is this sentence used as anything other than a snub anymore?

Your point isn't worthless, but it reads like "wake up sheeple" posts of yesteryear. The writing is emotionally charged and confrontational as if you have something new to say. You're just reminding everyone of a world incongruity they came to grips with by adolescence. I'm not saying they are (or should be) fine with it, I'm saying your post is cliche and not helping.

You don't have to stop fighting the good fight, just consider how you're doing it. Or ignore me and post a link to a wiki page titled "tone argument" because your self-satisfaction for participating in a cause is more important to you than your efficacy at it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> _checks Maslow 's hierarchy_

Then you'd be focusing on self-actualisation. Lucky you.

<comment><USER31> Yes, but.

I am fortunate enough to be in this position. In my 50s, in good health, and I don't have to work if I don't want to. I've always dreamed of being in this situation and now I am. So what am I doing with my time?

\- Still enjoying not having to get up and go to work, and not having to work for idiot managers. Sometimes I waste whole days going nothing (thanks, 2048). I worked in startups for 25 years, and have been mulling over my "pattern": I meet a charismatic founder, get seduced, work my ass off. That's a lot less attractive now. The getting seduced part depended, in part, on the golden carrot. (But only in part.)

\- Exercising a lot more.

\- Working on my pet projects, with a degree of urgency that varies over time. I don't need these projects to pay the bills, or to be loved and used. I get my jollies out of writing the software.

\- Consulting, but being very selective about the projects I pick. They have to be interesting, and hopefully related to my pet projects. I've had some success here.

\- Learning to play piano. (Would have been so much easier if I didn't stop when I was a child.)

\- Enjoying more time with my wife.

\- Getting back to teaching (software, of course).

Here's the "problem": At my age, (and due in large part to my temperament), I'm still not thinking very far outside the box. I can afford to do lots of new things, but I'm having some trouble figuring out which ones to actually do. Why?

\- Software: I've always written software. I always will. I need to make time for other things.

\- Inertia: I tend to do what I know, and expand out from there gradually. I seem to be incapable of ravenously seeking out novelty.

\- Need ideas: After many years of working very hard, putting job and family first, those are the things I tend to think about.

\- Need to say yes more: Except for the teenager living at home, I can go someplace warm and windy and windsurf for a week, anytime I want to. Not sure why I don't. I'm starting to say yes to more impulsive things, but it definitely goes against the grain.

\- Frittering time away on small projects: I took on too many, so for a while, I had no time for anything else. I'm in a lull now, so I'm again contemplating how I want to spend my time.

<comment><USER32> I suggest that you go travelling. It's fun anyway, but you will also see new people and places that might give you the 'a-ha!' to give you a new target to work towards. Find a way to travel without your teenager, methinks, because then you'll be focusing more on seeing the things you want to see, rather than a more generic please-the-whole-family itinerary.

I spent several months crossing the US and there were only two destinations locked in - the arrival airport and the departure airport. I'd have a general idea of what I was doing the next day, but it wasn't unusual to decide in the morning to go in a different direction. It was fantastic freedom of movement, and I saw things I'd've never seen otherwise. I could travel on my whims.

Travelling with others has pros and cons - more people means more to keep happy, but also more shared experiences and memories. But however you do it, keep the ability to make spontaneous changes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This post is a bit off.

Money is a tool, a form of power. You can desire power in order to accomplish things, or simply for the love of power.

Attention is something most people crave, and while it can provide a positive feedback loop of activity, it is not an end in and of itself.

But that's not all there is to life. There is experience, exploration & discovery, the act of creation, enrichment of the mind and body (knowledge and skill), service. Power can be used in order to accomplish these feats, and attention may result, but please keep them in their place lest they take ownership of you! A life spent pursuing them will soon leave you feeling empty.

<comment><USER21> > Money is a tool, a form of power.

Money is also a simplifier of trade. I write software, my dentist fixes teeth. When I get a cavity and my dentist puts a filling, I don't pay him/her by giving them code, I give them dollars instead.

Do I have power over my dentist, since I can choose to not give them money? Sure, but then he/she will also not fix my cavities.

<comment><USER33> You have the power to get your teeth fixed by someone. If you did not have money, you'd have to use other forms of power to get it done (calling a favor, threatening, bartering, etc), or perhaps you couldn't get it done at all because you lack any source of power that's sufficient.

<comment><USER21> None of those other forms of power are as efficient or effective as money (in fact, money evolved from bartering as it was more efficient) except for violence. However, we have (or at least are trying) to move away from violence as a society.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Impossible to answer this honestly until you've reached that point. More than likely you will discover a passion for something that currently does not exist in your life. Life is never ending learning, including who you are today and how you are different than yesterday.

<comment><USER23> I _have_ reached that point, and it's _still_ impossible to answer. :-)

<comment><USER35> Then perhaps you need to do some more soul-searching? Not saying it's a bad thing that you have reached this point and haven't figured "the answer" yet, but I'm pretty sure "the answer" is probably somewhere inside of you.

I have not reached that point.. yet (I hope I will, rather sooner than later), but supposing I did reached that point, let's say, yesterday, oh boy, there are soooo many things that I would love to be doing.

For instance, after maybe going on a shopping spree for all those things that I've always wanted (truly not that many or that extravagant), for example setting up a very nice NAS + Media Center for my house, getting a swimming pool maybe, a laptop upgrade (mine is past 7 years of daily use...) and maybe stuff for my girlfriend/wife, I would then spend a few months travelling (not the whole world mind you, maybe 4-5 2-month trips or so). But aside from inane things and materialistic desires...

I would love to do a few things (besides spending time with family/friends) that would make up my "daily life", meaning I would like to do this as a form of retirement.

\- Study without worrying if I'm going to be able to maintain the scholarship for example. Just get a Physics degree and maybe a chemistry one. \- Put an animal shelter and then replicate if successful, i.e. put a LOT of shelters throughout my country. \- My most desired idea: To develop what I call an "Idea Lab", which is something I'm sure a lot of other people have thought of. What about using my bottomless bucket of money to fund really neat and cool ideas that a lot of normal folks have, and having a staff of engineers, mathematicians, and in general all types of scientists and makers, to make these ideas come to life. Ideas that should help other people like water purification tools/processes, clean energy generation, etc.

I think those are the 3 things that would very easily consume my life if I had no need for money. I would love for example to donate to my college a building or two, computers, maybe pay lecture for really cool guys to inspire students, etc.

In short, I do actually dream on becoming wealthy enough not to care about my survival so I could help others around me. First family and friends and then my immediate community. And finally, if I actually become like ultra-rich, I would just DIE to put my own space company and help, even if a tiny bit, to get humanity out of this planet and unto the stars. In that regard I think something like Carmack's Armadillo Aerospace would absolutely rock!

But of course, like someone else mentioned before, that's what I say I will do in my hypothetically perfect world. But I like to think that I won't deviate much from the general idea.... of course only time will tell.

PS: Now that I think of it, I would certainly look at putting libraries around my hometown for example. Real libraries (like with books and maybe even classrooms or something). What about putting some type of "online university", that's basically a building with the necessary tools to let people study coursers from Coursera and the like? and maybe even have "TA's" that would help you out if you got stuck. I think that could go a long way to help people bootstrap themselves out of poverty, like one other poster commented before. So no giving away free money, but the opportunity to make something for yourself. Which coming in from a third world country, let me tell you how satisfactory it is to see someone that had everything against them, succeed and be a happy person.

...and of course I would like a pony that shits rainbows... but like my dad likes to say "the cool thing about imagination is that it's free, so why dream small?"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I'm not so sure any normal human is free of the need for some kind of attention. To be kicked out of a group feels like death to us, because our mental machinery was formed to deal with a situation where it was often death. We value the regard of our peers because it's actually a life and death resource to us.

That said, humans are pretty horrific, when it comes down to it. Not that many creatures do the things to their own species that humans do as often as we do with as much enthusiasm.

</comment><comment><USER37> 1.) Nurture my family.

2.) Enable people to educate themselves. Public libraries were essential in building the mindset and providing the place and materials for me to drag myself out of poverty.

<comment><USER38> > 2.) Enable people to educate themselves. Public libraries were essential in > building the mindset and providing the place and materials for me to drag > myself out of poverty.

Completely off-topic from the OA, but do you have any plans on this front? Plans, hopeless dreams, crazy ambitions, etc.

<comment><USER39> I think what Khan Academy has managed to do is very useful. If you are looking to improve the world's education, I'd get in touch with them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I would be doing EXACTLY what I am doing now. Spaceflight software, startups and tons of volunteering.

I was at a point in my life where I seriously had to ask myself this question quite seriously. After much grief, I'm in a very happy place now. Not necessarily pleasurable, but happy. I help startups get launched, dreams turn to reality & I get to flex my geek muscles studying neuroscience and designing software that challenges me.

I realize that I am amongst the very lucky few. I recall the seriously hollow feeling. Being surrounded by stuff. I am fortunate enough to have friends (some billionaires) who surprisingly have not only dealt with this but have figured out some pretty awesome ways to live life without being an over the top Rap Star consumer. (which I unfortunately succumbed to for a while).

I have fewer cars, and other useless toys, but it's wonderful being free. Doing things because you want to and doing things to be happy (again not to be confused with pleasure). To be honest, it really doesn't take much to get there. You don't even have to be a millionaire.

Here's to doing... and realizing that the journey is the reward! Cheers to my fellow HNers looking beyond the bounds of modernism or most -isms.

</comment><comment><USER40> I can't over emphasize the importance of this message!!!!!!!!!!!!

After college, I worked for a 'prestigious' consulting firm and found immediate success in the perspective of my peers. Truthfully, I enjoyed it. That feeling faded quickly and the cubicle walls closed in and 13 months later I quit.

With no plan or direction, I moved back with my parents, who did not charge me rent and bought much of my food. In other words, I had nearly zero expenses with a stock pile of cash from my prior employer. I relaxed for 2 months before realizing that I could pretty much live this content life for like 25 years. $20k goes a long way with no expenses.

I started spending my time building websites for friends and found the work fascinating and completely rewarding. It's that curiosity and fulfillment that I seek out in everything I do. I have since created a life for myself and the $20k in savings is long gone so money still drives me.

But at least I know what motivates me. I know what I'd do if I could do anything and that is an incredible gift.

</comment><comment><USER41> _> Not just "sit around and do nothing", because that's still just relaxing. I mean after that, when you're ready to be useful to others again.

What would you do then, if you didn't need the money, and didn't need the attention?

Yes, we need money to live. We need attention to live, too. _

What's interesting to me about that bit above is that it's presented in this sort of homiletic style, as if it's the distillation of experience down to some obvious and unquestionable core, but it's pernicious in that it's pure ideology.

"[W]hen you're ready to be useful to others again," does so much work in this regard. It frames entrepreneurship as _a service that is situated within a matrix of rational choices and utilitarian moral justification_. We do these things because they're legitimately useful, they just happen to make us filthy rich. This wealth, however serendipitous and embarrassing it might be, is _also_ justified by the actual utility it provides. Zuckerberg is wealthy because Facebook is an unquestionable force for good.

The author continues, framing entrepreneurs as, at worst, misguided persons who move from being accidentally useful to being purposefully useful; Persons temporarily blinded by their _universal needs_ for attention and money. Never mind the problem of defining exactly how much attention and money one needs-- to say nothing of security and nutrition, arguably up for purchase, or love, validation, and a sense of growth, arguably not up for purchase--to...live? Survive? Get by? Flourish? Never mind all that, once that's taken care of, entrepreneurs like the author can now get back to their innately good core of, from the author's tagline, "mak[ing] useful things, and shar[ing] what [we] learn."

Look, fundamentally, entrepreneurs exist to get rich. The "problems" they "solve" are chosen for their profitability, and the rhetoric about utility is just a way to colonize the discourse and deflect attention from the obvious avarice of it all. On the level of manipulation, the level of stopping the hoi polloi from rising up and strangling you, it makes sense; Anyone too stupid to see they're, for example, making their personal lives worse with Facebook so that Zuckerberg can sell ads, isn't going to have the discretion or wisdom to run an economy after any misguided revolt, no matter how apparently justified.

As a means for understanding our own motivations and desires, our relationships to the game of Capitalism, these are the guilt-addled ramblings of emotionally crippled narcissists. Basic self-awareness demands that we do better.

<comment><USER42> _Look, fundamentally, entrepreneurs exist to get rich._

What do the rest of us do?

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> _when you 're ready to be useful to others again._

Again?

You just nailed the problem.

If everything you did was for others, then this discussion (and many like it) wouldn't even make sense.

You wouldn't "get burned out", "lose purpose", "get stressed out", "worry about competition", "procrastinate", or "lack motivation".

If your work, your art, or just your day-to-day activities were focused on delivering value to others, you'd be too busy having a ball and rejoicing in outcomes to worry about all this other stuff. And anyone who tells you otherwise (but we gotta eat first!), still doesn't get it.

Thanks, OP, for reminding us that as soon as we're not so full of ourselves, and understand our role as conduits of energy, the sooner everything else flows so nicely.

<comment><USER44> What? No. Doctors and nurses get burned out _all the time._ So do cops and EMTs. Just because you've dedicated your life to serving others doesn't mean that constantly being on the line to help others can't burn you out. In some ways it can even be _more_ stressful, because when you're only out to help yourself, you can justify easing back every now and then to reduce the pressure. When you're helping others, it's harder to do that because of the feeling that you're failing them in their moment of need.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> OP is right in that you should at least do this experiment about the money as entrepreneur. If you had all the money in the world would you still be building what you are building? I have come to believe that if the answer is no that I am doing the wrong thing. Everything must at least be building toward what I think I need to do in life and that doesn't mean only making money to do them but activily working on it as well. It makes me very happy and I think it would do that to more people if they would follow that principle.

<comment><USER46> Suppose you know exactly what you would rather spend your time doing but simply don't have the resources. The reality is that many noble and often selfless pursuits require substantially more resources than the average person has access to.

To use an example, suppose you're disgusted by homelessness and want to solve it. Realistically this is something that requires political influence and a large amount of money, not just to float yourself, as trying to solve this problem is unlikely to pay well, but also to develop solutions. So you say to yourself, I'm going to spend the next 5-10 years of my life trying to fill these gaps. Part of this plan may likely involve becoming a "successful" entrepreneur, as the typical job is unlikely to provide you with these resources either.

I think it's perfectly acceptable to admit that our pursuits are often stepping stones to achieving more later on.

<comment><USER45> Of course they are; I just said that I need it like this and I think it would be better for some others as well. Doing something unrelated as stepping stone often ends up never doing anything about your goal and ends up on the pile of 'moving to another country when I am older'. And such. Not working on the goal especially when you need a lot of money for it which you probably never reach is making people unhappy longterm.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> I would spend more time helping others understand that life is difficult and that we are impermanent. If we stop and think about why we feel unhappy, angry, insecure or afraid then we can understand and remove the cause.

We long for the past or we hope for the future and in doing so, we rush through the now. Stop. Breath. Be human. Life is more than your job. You job is impermanent. You are impermanent. Your health or the people you love may be gone tomorrow.

<comment><USER48> Sincere question from an open-minded student: My mindset is such that I try do everything for long-term happiness, but if I stop worrying about the future and live only one day at a time, where will I ever end up?

<comment><USER47> I, too, am a student. We all learn from each other.

We can't say where we will end up in life. No one knows this for certain. Being responsible and planning for the future are good things. Taking good care of yourself financially, mentally, physically and emotionally are all important now and for the future.

Life happens while we make plans. Many times, life interferes with our plans. That's OK. That doesn't mean we should stop planning. Understanding that we cannot predict or control the future will transform our suffering.

We can live now and plan for our future and have peace inside as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> California native, I would continue the explorations I've started. Given it is investigating history, potentially out of the way areas, attention can come later in recognition of or absorption of collected

Specifically, I would spend multiple weeks/months in:

1\. Death Valley (friends and I already spend a week or so a year hear for the last several years) - we always find something new; plus literature leads to additional areas to explore 2\. Highway 49, the gold country. A lot of the sierras have been built up, but there is a lot of history along Hwy 49 still to be uncovered and shared. Throw in sightseeing with tramping, appropriately timed folk songs, a lot could be learned -- for recent concerns, I would coordinate w/ those in Nevada City helping w/ the recently deceased folk hero Utah Phillips 3\. Exploring rural Big Sur/Fort Hunter Liggett. This is my current back door. Big Sur is where we go to get away, but during the high season it is over run. There are nuggets to explore, but we have missed them during the crush.

These are just three very CA oriented segments. Specifics on any of which you can send me a PM about.

</comment><comment><USER50> _You know that feeling you have after a big meal? Where you 're so full that you really actively don't want anything more?_

I've often wondered what's going on in this situation because it's not always due to literally being 'full'. If you could package up that feeling (hormones, chemicals, whatever's causing it) and sell it in pill form, you would be the richest person on the planet..

<comment><USER51> > If you could package up that feeling (hormones, chemicals, whatever's > causing it) and sell it in pill form, you would be the richest person on the > planet..

Is this not quite literally what drugs are? And I don't just mean illegal drugs but stuff like Xanax.

<comment><USER52> They are the richest people on the planet, so you are both right.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> It's interesting, because my first impression is that stoicism is more of a virtue for someone like Derek than someone who has yet to, for lack of a better phrasing, make as tangible, substantive dent or mark or whatever in the universe, i.e. myself. However, reading Sam Soffes' blog post last night where he states his deep dissatisfaction with his accomplishments to date (Cheddar, SSToolkit, Seesaw, elusive internet fame), it makes me think that I'll never be happy even after achieving larger goals.

From my current point of view, which will no doubt change, stoicism kind of seems pointless insofar as people, for at least the past couple hundred years, have had an intrinsic desire/need to feel important. It's what motivates us to do ANYTHING, not just start a universe-changing company, or achieve lofty goals in open source, or to become rich, but it motivates our everyday interactions with people we encounter for any reason. Dale Carnegie has a nice discussion of this phenomenon in 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'.

</comment><comment><USER54> "Many of my friends are entrepreneurs. A few have mentioned this deep hollow conflicted feeling. Their business ideas are not things the world wants. They're following the current tech entrepreneur stereotype, building social apps and pursuing investors. They're hating it, and having to admit they're doing it only for the jackpot. But if they stop, what's left?"

For me, that's exactly why I'm starting a company instead of going somewhere like Google. I'm not in it to hit the jackpot, I'm in it to make a lasting impact on the world and the way that we use technology. At this stage (early), it feels like I'm actually trying something useful. I feel like I have a purpose, and it's a more satisfying source of motivation than a potential jackpot.

I'd be interested to see Elon Musk weigh in on this. Hitting the financial jackpot seems very far from his mind. He said himself, his goal is to die as a resident of Mars, and the rest is just trying to pay the bills so he can fund his dream.

</comment><comment><USER55> Not sure who said it, but "our greatest reason for being is to serve others."

Even an atheist must admit that there's a certain satisfaction that comes from helping other people (even anonymously) that really has no limit.

Go out and help make the world a better place - not out of a hope for reward or recognition... just for fun. It's addictive.

<comment><USER56> Your comment on atheist shows your ignorance of what atheism is. Not sure if that's the one you're after but Rabindranath Tagore wrote this :

I slept and dreamt that life was joy.

I awoke and saw that life was service.

I acted and behold, service was joy.

<comment><USER55> My comment refers to the hope or expectation that noble acts will always be outwardly rewarded in some form (in this life or after) by a being who rewards us based on merit. That expectation is not a driving force for an atheist or naturalist.

My point is that the absence of (expected) outward recognition or reward for altruistic behavior (by a supernatural or spiritual being) does not preclude someone from experiencing the joy that comes through service. And no, I personally don't classify that joy as a selfish reward, but rather a natural consequence built in to the human brain. Whether put there by God or developed via natural forces/evolution as a mechanism to protect life (we feel satisfaction in helping other animals - not just our own species), it doesn't matter; the fact is, it's a part of our nature and can hardly be discredited in any moral debate.

<comment><USER56> When you say "Even an atheist must admit that there's a certain satisfaction that comes from helping other people (even anonymously) that really has no limit." you imply that theists have a reason to being altruistic (an probably will?) while atheists don't (and probably won't). Altruism and faith are not correlated, hence I disagree to the way you worded that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Toiling in anonymity is something I enjoy. Privacy is priceless.

</comment><comment><USER58> After reading a recommendation for the book "A Guide to the Good Life" on HN, I reviewed it on a hacker site I have. Stoics throughout history been some of the best-equipped for finding joy in life, which is one of the reasons their methods have been taken by so many others.

When you're dealing with these issues, stoicism is highly recommended.

BTW, on the target page you can read hacker reviews from most of the other major sites, my review, and a bunch of other stuff. The site was a project I completed so that I didn't have to describe the same books over and over again on HN (So apologies for not diving into a huge amount of detail here) :)

[http://hn-books.com/Books/A-Guide-to-the-Good-Life-The-Ancie...](http://hn- books.com/Books/A-Guide-to-the-Good-Life-The-Ancient-Art-of-Stoic-Joy.htm)

</comment><comment><USER21> > Many of my friends are entrepreneurs. A few have mentioned this deep hollow > conflicted feeling. Their business ideas are not things the world wants. > They're following the current tech entrepreneur stereotype, building social > apps and pursuing investors. They're hating it, and having to admit they're > doing it only for the jackpot. But if they stop, what's left?

I feel like this article is ignoring rich entrepreneurs who do use their wealth for far more interesting and/or useful things. First example that comes to mind: Elon Musk. Could he have made SpaceX or Tesla without first getting rich? Probably not. I think it's worthwhile to struggle to get rich, if you plan to use that monetary wealth to invest in more long-term plans.

</comment><comment><USER59> You are missing the peer pressure part. Even if you don't need money & don't need attention, people won't let you live being content. The greed for money+attention, in my view, are the biggest vices. Unfortunately, they also drive growth & innovation.

</comment><comment><USER60> It is funny that I have been thinking about this a lot lately too. In fact, my latest blog post deals with this question a bit.

I used to think that one should first make millions. Then retire and then work on fun projects. I used to work on side projects that can generate income like freelancing or become business like social networks. Initially, these projects would be fun. I would essentially work on my side projects during any free time. Then I would get burned and take a break from side projects. And soon I would start all over again.

Now my goals are to work on side projects that really interest me, with or without money part. So I am writing, reading non-technical books, reading up on Big Data, AI, and my new hobby, playing with Arduino.

</comment><comment><USER61> I have always said no matter whether I am rich or poor the thing I will enjoy most in life is hanging with friends and drink a glass of wine. The only thing that will vary is the price of the wine.

But there is a very big difference between this being a choice or a realization you make at one point in your life vs having to accept the situation you are in.

For people like Sivers, me and I guess most other fairly successful people this kind of insight and choice is a luxury we have.

I am always reminded that Dalai Lama is only capable of doing what he does and sound so insightful as he does because he doesn't have to worry about day to day things.

Try getting married, earn a living and have a couple of kids.

Lifes complicated and for most people a struggle.

</comment><comment><USER62> " Many of my friends are entrepreneurs. A few have mentioned this deep hollow conflicted feeling. Their business ideas are not things the world wants. They're following the current tech entrepreneur stereotype, building social apps and pursuing investors. They're hating it, and having to admit they're doing it only for the jackpot."

It seems like a lot of time and economic resources go towards creating things the world doesn't want. Some of this is just a part of competition and maybe people didn't think they wanted it until they saw it and tried it. There's some truth to it too though...short term gain is often more attractive than long term.

</comment><comment><USER63> Without a doubt: education. Specifically, my dream is to open a series of public, alternative schools where children are educated about existentialism, their role in the universe, and helping them to understand that most limits in life are artificial and made up (and ultimately to embrace creativity and harness it for good).

I haven't quite pinned it down, but I'd like the curriculum to be project- based with a handful of field trips peppered in for perspective (alternative being the keyword, with things like working at a homeless shelter for a day, spending time with an elderly "mentor", picking out something they want to see, etc.)

One day.

</comment><comment><USER64> That's when you become Elon Musk and actually change the world. But if we're talking about like $5M, enough to retire quite comfortably, I'd just experiment and not worry what others think of what I do/create.

</comment><comment><USER65> If anyone would like to explore themselves at a deeper level, to try to really understand the roots of these cravings, I highly recommend Vipassana meditation. They offer free 10-day courses, where you don't read or write or talk at all the entire time. You just meditate, and they teach you to meditate. It doesn't have any religious or political affiliation - it's like boot camp for meditation. It's truly awesome, and gives you the opportunity for true, real personal growth. You can read more about it at dhamma.org

</comment><comment><USER66> I swear, there are times when Derek puts up a post and I wonder if he's in my head seeing what I need to see at a given moment. It's eery, but damned handy too.

</comment><comment><USER67> I'd do what Tom does [http://instagram.com/myspacetom](http://instagram.com/myspacetom)

<comment><USER19> I follow Tom on Twitter (consume his feed in Flipboard) for this exact reason. Every time I look at one of his photos posted from around the world, I dream a little. Dude seems to be living the life he always wanted. The snarky side of me grumbles that he's probably still not happy .. but damn he sure looks it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> Very difficult to reconcile because, in my own experience at least, I get across the board better results if I almost "trick" myself into feeling I _need_ whatever I'm working towards.

What's weird to come to terms with is that the self-hypnosis of psyching yourself into working really hard has by definition succeeded when you no longer need it.

</comment><comment><USER69> Then I'd be in shape, out enjoying my bicycle in the local hills, have a lot more time for my kids and wife, and computer time would probably just be "fooling around with open source stuff" \- I do enjoy programming so I would not want to give it up. Sounds nice, I'd like to sign up.

</comment><comment><USER70> Last week I quit my job of 3 years to travel. The plan is to stay at a different city each month.

I've been told "Isn't it risky to give up such a well paying job". Well it seems to me the real risk is to sit in a beige box for 10 years and have little other experiences besides work and vacation.

</comment><comment><USER71> There are a lot of things in life which are better than money, and they're all _very, very_ expensive

</comment><comment><USER72> Similar to Erich Fromm quote: "If I am what I have and if I lose what I have who then am I?"

</comment><comment><USER73> To get to point when you don't need more money is not that hard. But it certainly depends how much you want. In the end you have one hamburger for lunch anyway [Bill Gates]. Attention is trickier. It brings more power, but also more social pressure.

</comment><comment><USER74> How many people really need or want attention? I somehow know that nothing I have ever done or will do would ever earn me any attention, so it must be the case that I don't need it or I'd be very unhappy right now.

Is this a Silicon Valley thing?

<comment><USER75> Depends how you define attention. From your spouse saying "that's nice" or you fellow coder saying "cool" to a billion people using your software, to hacker news karma, or acknowledgement of your comment. You can see the range of attention that I'm trying to get across.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> Amen! Agreed. I always like thinkers that challenge the unexamined life and its motivations. It gives you something to think about and just enough motivation to question why you are doing what you are doing-- and make a change.

</comment><comment><USER77> My life would be more like a star trek character beamed to an undeveloped planet.

Picard - "People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of 'things'. We have eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions."

</comment><comment><USER78> If I didn't need money or attention I would do roughly what I do now. I consider that a great blessing.

Find a job you love and keep enough distance to not grow to hate it, and that's half a recipe for happiness right there.

</comment><comment><USER79> Funny/ironic: I'm actually already doing the stuff I believe in ... and trying to figure out how to monetize it, which requires me to figure out how to get traffic (aka "attention").

</comment><comment><USER80> I think most great hackers (and hacks) are driven by curiosity. Things that have the highest expected value for returning money/attention are usually boring.

</comment><comment><USER81> Significant changes to one's life, such as deaths, sickness, and births tend to pull people's perspective on this direction (at least temporarily).

</comment><comment><USER82> Pure R&D without the need for profit. That gives you whole classes of problems you can look. Especially longer term and higher risk projects

</comment><comment><USER83> "Be content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you."

-Lao Tzu

</comment><comment><USER84> In the words of the poet Philip Larkin, we're all "stumbling up the stair/into fulfillment's desolate attic."

</comment><comment><USER85> Dunno. I inherited money and have been in roughly that position for much of my life. Try to have fun and make stuff that's cool?

</comment><comment><USER86> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7414767](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7414767)

</comment><comment><USER75> Goes against the Protestant Work Ethic. This states that to be a good person you have do be diligent and work hard.

<comment><USER87> Disagree (Protestant here). Nothing stopping you from being diligent and working hard when all your financial needs are met.

I would...exist. Off grid, as back-to-basics as possible. Minutes ago I was looking up how to obtain & grind wheat with a hand mill, lamenting not having enough land to grow my own. Bottomless supply of money? would cover the basics of buying the land (cheap though my choice would be), ensuring taxes & recurring overhead take care of themselves, buying the tools needed which I'd not yet gotten around to making from raw materials, and (insofar as I'm a geek obsessed with things I've no hope of making myself) buying leading-edge high- tech widgets which would in turn be applied to pay for themselves. Should endless funds truly tempt me, they'd be applied to (again) ultimately self- funding ventures.

My problem now is being stuck with a "market peak" mortgage. I'm painfully aware of how vital - and how near - financial independence is. "All the money I'd need" isn't really that much, as I've already earned - and spent less than wisely - it. I was actually quite close to that point, then found that love can be quite pricy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER88> Money, attention...these should be side-effects in living a good life. So simple, so true.

</comment><comment><USER89> I would browser hacker news or reddit all day. It's quite stimulating

<comment><USER52> I already do that!

</comment></comment><comment><USER90> When you realize you've enough of everything, you are truly rich.

</comment><comment><USER91> It's a cliche idea, but it was articulated really well here.

</comment><comment><USER92> i feel so fortunate that i can truly say, that for me, one of those things is software.

i really would do this for nothing.

(don't tell my boss)

</comment><comment><USER93> I feel afraid for that pigeon

</comment><comment><USER94> Likely you'd be dead!

</comment><comment><USER95> I hate compliments. I become uncomfortable when people say nice things to me because I don't know if they are sarcastic or not. Probably because I'm never satisfied with my own results always thinking about how I could have done it better.

Secondly I hate everything material, even so money. I make just enough money to pay the bills and other essentials, but if someone I know even remotely would ask me for $100 I would never ever think about getting it back.

No one else who can relate to this?

<comment><USER96> Yep. Same boat. I'm a student though, so I'm curious how things will change once I start my career.

I'm a bit minimalist, and it sounds like you are too. I hate carrying more than one bag when I travel, and the thought of having a ton of stuff I don't need makes me really, really uncomfortable. It's surreal.

Do you use this "never satisfied" outlook for personal improvement? I'm really glad I act that way. It keeps me moving forward, even if I seem a little cynical along the way.

<comment><USER97> I'm a student too, in my final year. In a month my employment is going to finish and I'll have 9 months of living on savings until it's all over.

I own a largish TV, a few consoles, a bunch of stuff I don't need. It _does_ make me feel very uncomfortable. I suspect rather than dipping in to savings too much, I'll be simply selling things off.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER98> You would probably spend your time writing blog posts criticizing other successful people [1], or invading small peninsulas like Crimea.

[1] [http://blog.pmarca.com/2014/03/18/when-carl-icahn-ran-a- comp...](http://blog.pmarca.com/2014/03/18/when-carl-icahn-ran-a-company-the- story-of-twa/)

</comment><comment><USER99> Become a race car driver but nobody is hiring/</comment>


GitHub for Mac - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/blog/878-announcing-github-for-mac <comment><USER3> I hate all the visual clutter and unjustified complexity the new stylish iOS- like interfaces bring. Those interfaces are only good for Twitter and friends (and for screenshots).

Some feedback:

* Get rid of huge spacing everywhere (for example here: [http://github-images.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/2011/mac-screensh...](http://github-images.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/2011/mac-screenshots/changes-full.png))

* Make animations go faster.

* History should have preview pane with diffs (see Mail) instead of making me click on commits.

* There are windows on Macs. You can use them instead of [edit: or in addition to] making me navigate inside a single window.

* Loading indicators are annoying. Move them to bottom (there it won't distract me, but I'll know that it's still loading).

Oh, and congrats on release.

<comment><USER4> Have you tried GitX? What you described seems a bit more like GitX than what GitHub is trying to do here.

When I first fired this up, I made a tarball of one of the repos I'm currently working in (it has uncommitted changes) and started clicking around. I'd do something in the GitHub app, then go back to my bash prompt to see what happened. I was pretty confused when I switched branches and all my changes were gone. Then I went back and read the blog post. It auto-stashes when you switch branches. I also wondered what the heck the "Synchronize" button does, so once again, I referred to the blog post. It performs what they call a "smarter version of pull --rebase && push that reduces merge commits but doesn't rewrite your merges". Oh, really?

At that point I realized that GitHub has done the hard thing. They haven't re- created the git CLI tool in a GUI, they've created something different. They've created a tool that makes Git more accessible. Little things like auto-stashing when you switch branches will confuse git veterans, but it will make Git much easier to grok for newcomers because of the assumptions it makes about your git workflow.

I see great things in this app's future. It's probably not for everyone. If you're a proficient git cli user, and you like it that way, then you're probably best off sticking with what you've got. Maybe explore some of the more traditional Git GUI clients like GitK or GitX, but keep in mind, that's not what this is.

<comment><USER3> Nothing in your reply addresses my points, so I'm not sure what to answer. Yes, I tried GitX, and I'm not looking for (or using) Git GUI tools. This doesn't make GitHub for Mac less visually cluttered.

I'm mostly discussing GUI trends (as a Mac developer who cares about this stuff), using GitHub as an example (which, as you say, gets job done great, but I say that it can be improved).

<comment><USER5> You argue that spacing produces clutter, but I completely disagree. Clutter is shoving tons of information together without spacing.

<comment><USER3> _You argue that spacing produces clutter_

"You argue"?

Clutter means (let me open the dictionary) "a collection of things lying about in an untidy mass".

I never said only spacing produces clutter. Either I'm not explaining myself clearly or you read something that was not in my comment (this is called a strawman, right?)

<comment><USER5> I never said you are completely, objectively wrong. I just disagreed with a point.. On that note, I see nothing untidy.

No hostility meant by "you argue". You provided a critique, an argument. I'd open the dictionary... ;)

<comment><USER3> You disagreed with the point which I never made ("spacing produces clutter"), putting words into my mouth ("you argue").

<comment><USER6> You mentioned visual clutter, and then your first bullet point was about too much spacing. Clutter--according to the OS X dictionary you cited earlier-- refers to a jumble or tangle of items, implying that they are close together. That's the discrepancy he was referring to.

His posts were completely non-hostile, so aren't you overreacting?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It seems clear that GitHub's goal is to make git useable. I'm super excited about everything they can do in that direction. Git's underlying model is fantastic, but it's UI is lacking. Bravo GitHub.

<comment><USER8> Sorry - I deleted my replies as I really don't want to argue about UIs. That was not my intention. I must remember for the future that text without tone often does not convey one's intention. This program is great, thank you GitHub.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> That's cool and all, but a Windows client would make a lot more business sense. There are already a couple of nice git clients for Mac. There aren't for Windows.

And I assume github is targeting SMB with its paid offerings. Unless you're a design shop or a hip startup, odds are you're not running OS X. Based on my unscientific data, most companies have the devs working on Windows (or occasionally Linux).

<comment><USER10> > Unless you're a design shop or a hip startup

They are the latter. Welcome to the San Francisco bubble, where you think everyone uses iPhones and Macs, because in your world everyone does. It's the same reason Twitter has a Mac app but not a Windows app. They build these things for themselves (and arguably they should).

<comment><USER11> You're not describing a bubble, "making something _I_ want" isn't some outlandish absurd thing for developers and designers do. Bubble is rapidly outpacing pivot for most misused word.

<comment><USER12> He meant bubble as in 'echo-chamber', and in that sense of the word it isn't overused.

It's not outlandish or absurd to design something you might want, but it is a bit silly to ignore a larger market with the same underlying need.

<comment><USER13> They're not ignoring a larger market, they're ignoring a smaller one:

> Beyond that, one-third of our traffic uses Macs. It's not a small market for > us.

<comment><USER12> I feel like I must be missing something here; how is the 2/3rds that _don't_ use Mac OS the _smaller_ market?

And as others have pointed out, the market doesn't just consist of GitHub users, or even Git users. In this case, it's developers who use an RCS and need a good desktop application to go with it.

In any case the point may be moot; judging by the rest of the comment you quoted they're not ignoring other platforms at all but rather just using Mac OS as a first step, which I can understand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What ever happened to the Kickstarter project to create a native GitHub app?

Is this it? Is this something else? Is that project now doomed?

[http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sferik/hubcap-a- github-c...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sferik/hubcap-a-github- client-for-mac-os-x)

<comment><USER15> sferik, the developer of that project, has talked a bit about his thoughts on Twitter:

<https://twitter.com/#!/sferik/status/83585135836016640>

<https://twitter.com/#!/sferik/status/83588359066353664>

<https://twitter.com/#!/sferik/status/83600376061894656>

<https://twitter.com/#!/sferik/status/83616031309967360>

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> How much of the client is GitHub specific, and how much is plain 'ol Git? Does it make sense to use it w/o using GitHub?

Couldn't find that info in either the announcement post, GitHub for Mac page, or the 118 comments so far here, and don't own a Mac so can't try it for myself (still would like to know whether to recommend to other people or not, though).

<comment><USER17> You can certainly use the client for plain ol' Git. The GitHub-specific stuff is a "Push to GitHub" button on repositories that aren't already on GitHub, and a list of your GitHub repositories.

It's more than useful without ever using GitHub the web service/site.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wonder why they've released a client for OS X and not another OS―if anything, Windows is pretty lacking in git love.

Whose is its target audience and the desired function? New users, to reel them in with a shiny UI? Or established users who don't use it much, to make the experience simpler? (And if it's established users who use it much―isn't the command-line faster for them?)

If they want more users to use GitHub, surely a GitHub for Windows makes more sense (unless this is an employee's side-project gone primetime).

<comment><USER19> Perhaps because it's easier to develop something like this for OS X?

<comment><USER19> Apparently not! <http://warpspire.com/posts/designing-github-mac/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The Github guys just never cease to impress me. They've made development so much more enjoyable. And at any given time, you can expect them to not only do the right thing, but to do better than that. Like, releasing a great Git app for free, hoping to get more people to use Git, and thereby Github, and thereby becoming paying customers. A perfectly reasonable plan, but most companies don't have that foresight and patience. My hat is off to you, you rock.

</comment><comment><USER21> This looks awesome. I really hope that their next move is to create a Windows version, as I haven't yet found a Windows Git GUI that I like.

<comment><USER22> Two days ago I gave SmartGit a try and don't really see a reason to look back: <http://www.syntevo.com/smartgit/>

<comment><USER21> Thanks for the tip. I will check it out.

<comment><USER23> Git Extensions is not bad either, although I'm not using the VS addins. The GUI is nice for visualizing histories and things like that.

<comment><USER21> Thanks for this. Git Extensions is the most promising of the GUIs I've looked at thus far.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Have you noticed this comment?

[https://github.com/blog/878-announcing-github-for- mac#commen...](https://github.com/blog/878-announcing-github-for- mac#comment-12541)

        josscrowcroft commented about 16 hours ago

        Holy crap! Cool!

        All that time i spent learning Git from the command-line, WASTED.

There is no doubt, a new generation of Hacker is emerging, where yourself the command-line-fu is a waste of time.

<comment><USER25> It's not the command line that makes git daunting, it's everything you have to know about git to use it effectively.

I don't believe a GUI can remove that without making git lot less powerful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> It's interesting to see such a killer web company start investing in native apps.

<comment><USER27> Shows a lot of versatility. I'm impressed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> This app is great. I've been waiting for something like this.

I hope they iterate on the staging/commit UI because, as is, I'm still going to use GitX to preview and selectively stage things. Some suggestions:

* Get rid of expand/collapse and checkmark pattern. Let me see two lists of files -- changed and staged. If I click on one, show the changes.

* Staging by chunk & line.

* Squashing with the previous commit.

<comment><USER29> And if staging by line never failed that would be stellar ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Mac: Tower, GitX, GitBox, GitHub, Sprout, Gitti, SourceTree ...

Windows: TortoiseGit?

<comment><USER31> Git Extensions is pretty nice for Windows. <http://code.google.com/p/gitextensions/>

<comment><USER32> "nice" is going to far but it's completely workable. Better to use that than SVN in any case.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> First time an application has been unsupported on my Core Duo (32bit) Macbook Pro. Is there a reason for it, does the application really require a 64bit OS, or did the GitHub guys just forget about us early Intel Mac owners?

<comment><USER34> It was intentional. There are differences between the 32- and 64-bit ABIs that make life easier for us to go 64-bit only.

<comment><USER33> Fair enough, I'd probably do the same if I wasn't a CoreDuo owner myself, especially since Lion's dropping support too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Does this work on Github:FI?

(Related question: does the API work on Github:FI? It doesn't seem to, but I may be dumb.)

<comment><USER36> We're prepping for a major FI release- expect full GitHub for Mac support at that time. (And yes, FI ships with the full API as well.)

<comment><USER35> Firing off support request. Looking forward to new FI. FI has been f'ing great for us.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> It works with central repos other than github too - it picked up assembla repos I had and pushes to them no problem.

Great stuff.

</comment><comment><USER38> Great news, except… it's "for Mac", not for iOS, folks. There's plenty of space on my MBP 17'' screen, so don't treat it as if it was an iPhone.

</comment><comment><USER39> What a great "out of the box" experience. Unpacked it, entered my github login data and synced my repos. No hassling with ssh keys, no setup, no other questions asked.

This is great for beginners and pros. Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER40> Will be interesting to see if they integrate issues and wiki into this. For a first release though, I'm impressed.

Edit: Also would love to see this integrated with notifications so I can get Growl popups.

<comment><USER41> Not that this contributes much to the conversation but: YES on both counts.

I use GitHub's issue tracker in volume both for some fairly large projects (getcloak.com, walkscore.com, and wherebe.us) I've found that the Issues web interface leaves a lot to be desired. It's a fine v1 [v2 technically], but somewhat painful in practice once you have more than a handful of issues. The 280 North issues app was interesting but hasn't kept up with the latest GitHub features.

As for Growl: it would be great to have it built in. In the interim, there's this: <https://github.com/miyagawa/github-growler/downloads>

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Still extremely buggy, I was only able to load one of my repos, others failed with error messages like this: <http://bit.ly/iJzNmp> and even the successful ones came up with errors after loading.

<comment> brown9-2 There is really no need to use a URL shortener when posting links here. The HN software will abbreviate the link text on it's own if it is too long. It's a little annoying to have to guess where a link is going to forward to.

<comment><USER42> GrabBox automatically shortens my screenshot links. Click if you dare. IMHO they should have used bitly pro and their own shortener for marketing the thing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Downloaded and played with the App a bit.

While it's beautiful and a great first version, I don't think it really provides anything that GitX doesn't already do better. I can see how this tool might be valuable for someone who's intimidated by git, because it's hiding a lot of what's going on. But in it's current state I wouldn't use this for more than training wheels. If / when they add pull request support and other Github specific features I might come around.

</comment><comment><USER44> How does this compare to Tower? It's not obvious from the website, but I'm guessing is less fully featured. Anyone with experience with both who can comment?

<comment><USER45> I used Tower for a while, and I didn't have the chance to test Git for Mac yet (will do later today when I'll be using my Mac).

One thing that Tower can do quite well is dealing with multiple remote repositories (e.g. github + heroku). If GitHub for Mac does that as well, I believe I'm going to switch to that.

<comment><USER46> it only works on github

<comment><USER47> Correction: It only works with a single 'origin' remote. It should work fine with any smart http git host. Someone in this thread mentioned it working just fine with Assembla.

<comment><USER48> And here are the docs for Git hosts who haven't yet implemented smart http:

<http://progit.org/2010/03/04/smart-http.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> If you're interested, here are the decent (looking, not used) alternatives - Brother's Gitx fork <http://brotherbard.com/blog/2010/03/experimental-gitx- fork/> Gitbox <http://gitboxapp.com/> and Gitx <http://gitx.frim.nl/>

</comment><comment><USER50> I don't get it.

If I made a windows desktop client for a popular website, would anyone at all even care?

Github (the website ) is great, it works well.

The thinking that a website is a poor substitute for a native app is increasingly outdated. Github is an example of this, it does a lot on the web.

What extra does this app bring to the table? What does it make possible or easier that I can't do on the website or in TortoiseGit?

<comment><USER51> It's an offline GUI for local git repositories.

<comment><USER50> So, just like Tortoisegit?

I'm still not getting the Unique Selling Point. Or is this just a case of the intersection of Github fanboys and Mac fanboys? Once both of those factors are removed, I'm not seeing the magic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> It's a good first attempt, but it's not quite there yet and won't replace gitbox in my workflow.

The big problem is that it will only work with the origin remote [1]. This means no pulling in upstream changes, then pushing it to your fork - <USER2> this on multiple branches with the command line is a pain, and something a GUI would be great for.

The interface feels a little half baked too, e.g why the multiple overlapping sidebars - one blue, one black, why not just merge them?

[1]<http://mac.github.com/help>

</comment><comment><USER53> This is a huge deal. The app looks amazing. I used Tower for a bit but didn't cut it for me. I was planning to ditch Github for Codebase tonight but I'll reconsider after this

<comment><USER54> Why is it a huge deal? It's just a desktop version of their web app. Or am I missing something?

<comment><USER55> That's kind of like saying that a BMW M5 is just a version of a Ford Fiesta. Both will get you there, but the comfort and enjoyment will be somewhat different.

<comment><USER56> Ford Fiesta? That might be selling the web app a bit short.

<comment><USER55> You're right. I'm not that good at metaphors and that one doesn't do the web app justice. My point was that while the two solutions are more or less functionally equivalent, they do differ significantly in ease-of-use and overall comfort.

I'm very, very happy that GitHub is doing this — but I also have high expectations and I do expect the app to improve significantly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Looks great! One more reason for developers to move over to Git and a great way to get more people on GitHub.

On another note, I wonder if this is another example of how native applications are gaining momentum on the desktop as a carry-over from the mobile apps industry. Perhaps, more companies will begin asking the question "if native apps beat web apps on mobile devices, why not on the desktop as well?"

</comment><comment><USER58> Looks nice. For someone who has some decent familiarity with version control but none with git specifically: does anybody have any opinion on whether this would be a good way to pick up git for use with Xcode? Version control has always struck me as lending itself well to visual tools so I'm always kind of surprised how poor they usually tend to be.

<comment><USER59> Though Xcode 4 does support git, I've stuck with using git from the command line mostly, as I'd had some issues with it in Xcode 4 (betas, mind you). My guess is it's a lot more stable now.

Having said that, I still use it from the command line just fine. And you're right, it's often the case where a version control tool like git requires something more visual (especially when dealing with out-of-sync branch merging). For that I've typically used GitX, but GitHub for Mac so far looks like a really nice alternative.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Is there something like this for GNU/Linux ?

</comment><comment><USER61> This looks awesome, but is it too soon for a feature request? I'd love a side- by-side diff view, FileMerge style.

<comment><USER62> while we're at the feature requests, multiple accounts? I've got a "business-y" type one and a personal one

<comment><USER63> Why have multiple accounts? The idea is that you have Organizations for business stuff, and you just switch "contexts" between personal and organizations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> This is not going to save anyone any time over the cli, only make it easier for people who are scared of it. When I'm writing, I hate going to the mouse when I don't have to. Give me a GUI where I can still use my keyboard and I'd pay a hundred bux for that shit.

</comment><comment><USER65> I haven't used GitHub extensively but from what I was understanding the whole control via terminal was a quite educational thing on its own.

I am planning to start using it though so I wanted to ask, should I stick to the terminal or am I making a big deal out of nothing?

</comment><comment><USER66> It stalled after I entered my credentials. It's just been sitting there for 10 minutes.

<comment><USER67> not sure if its related, but i keep getting an authentication error; can't seem to figure out what's going on

<http://cl.ly/7roP>

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> Awesome! Gorgeous! Thanks!

Now, when will we be able to stage parts of files like we can with GitX? ;)

</comment><comment><USER69> It looks really nice, but I don't see myself switching from command-line Git (except for maybe when viewing logs and/or diffs). This will definitely be awesome for working with designers though.

</comment><comment><USER70> It seems there's no way to log out. This is a fairly major omission.

<comment><USER71> Simply delete your username/email and password from the app preferences window.

<comment><USER70> that doesn't log you out - all the data is still visible in the app.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> Free, too. GitHub don't mess around.

Any plans for putting it in the Mac App Store?

<comment><USER34> Yes. But the update experience for Mac App Store apps is so bad right now that it's a bit discouraging.

<comment><USER73> What about the update experience do you find so bad/discouraging?

<comment><USER34> It takes days/weeks for Apple to approve updates and then users have to consciously open the Mac App Store app and download them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> Hot damn! This is a sweet app. I've been trying to get into github but I do not like the command line. This is a sweet app and should get many n00bs like me into github.

</comment><comment><USER75> It's crashing quite a bit with me - all I do is to fire it up via /usr/local/bin/github while inside a repo. It displays the changes, but more often than not it crashes...

</comment><comment><USER76> Looks pretty good. Why doesn't it respect .gitignore files though? I opened a C++ project and it wanted to commit about thirty object files, and things like that...

</comment><comment><USER19> I've been using this app for a few hours now, and I have no idea how people can complain about it. It's freakin' amazing! I love it. Thank you!

</comment><comment><USER77> If you click "published" on your branch it will delete it!

Watch out!

<comment><USER78> Just click it again and it will re-publish it.

<comment><USER77> Not when you don't have the branch checked out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> How does this compare with Git Tower?

<comment><USER80> Well, for one thing, they both have very pretty UIs that are severely dysfunctional in exactly the same way: you can only have one window open at a time, which means you can't use the app to look at two repos at the same time.

For seriously using git for development, I find that pretty nuts.

Every time I want to browse a different repository, I have to destroy all the work I did opening the window for the current repo and drilling down through the UI to get to the part I am interested in? Seems crazy.

I think more apps would do well to learn from the windowing strategy of Mail.app on Mac. It too has a monolithic main window where everything happens --but Cmd-Opt-N creates a "New Viewer Window". Another complete window with all the power of the first. Search for foo in window 1, read mail list bar in window 2.

This sort of arrangement would make Github for Mac (and Tower) worth looking at.

As it is, if I have to throw away several seconds of work _every_ _single_ _time_ _I_ _open_ _another_ _repo_ , those seconds are going to add up -- and annoy me -- very quickly.

(By the way, just to check, I tried out making a few copies of the app and opening multiple repos that way. Just like Tower, the app started to puke modal error dialogs and show blank windows, so that doesn't work.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> Do they have a linux client?

</comment><comment><USER46> looks great, would be awesome to have keyboard shortcuts to go back/forward

</comment><comment><USER82> Oh, hey! This is awesome!

I am going to investigate this for my GitHub project.

</comment><comment><USER83> My Organization Repos don't show up.

</comment><comment><USER84> Am I justified in being disappointed this doesn't support OS X 10.4 (Tiger)?

<comment><USER85> I think you mean "Is it reasonable to be disappointed this doesn't support 10.4", in which case no, I don't think it's reasonable. 10.4 stopped being updated in Nov '07.

</comment></comment><comment><USER86> I'm sorry, but in the world of awesomely-licensed Qt and other cross-platform toolkits, why would you go out of your way to build a native app on Mac libraries and only release it for a single platform?

I can understand that OS X probably has the biggest share of GitHub visitors, but git is fully open source, GitHub seem to very much like open source, and in the spirit of that I'd expect a native app that works on as many platforms as possible.

<comment><USER87> _a native app that works on as many platforms as possible_

The definition of _native app_ has changed. It's no longer a synonym for compiled binary; or using native widget. It is not as simple as coding your UI in a cross-platform toolkit. In these days, a native app means something that feels like the built-in apps: it's beyond skinning and appearance and is more about how the app as a whole interacts with the user to get the job done. As the platforms diverge, it's now really hard - if not impossible - to make a cross-platform native app. Among Performance, Cost, Time, Scope, you can only pick three. GitHub sacrifices the scope.

<comment><USER88> The narrowing is almost due to web apps being much more full featured. Web apps _are_ the cross platform write once applications we were promised.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER89> Hmm, tried it out. Going "back" to plain old cli git. I got so used to the command line that I'm faster with it.

</comment><comment><USER90> Guys, I must get a mac!

<comment><USER91> Since you're new here I'll just give you an FYI. This kind of comment is going to get you downvotes because it doesn't add anything tangible to the discussion. We value a really high signal to noise ratio.

<comment><USER90> Noted. Thanks</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Where does it hurt? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Everywhere

<comment><AUTHOR> The struggle is real, unless we're in a simulation.</comment></comment>


How Seattle's Sound Transit plans to roll out hugely ambitious transit expansion - <AUTHOR> http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/sound-transit-formally-launches-massive-rail-bus-expansion/ <comment><USER2> I enjoyed this article, but it desperately needed a map that showed current routes and planned expansion. That map needed to be in its own image, not at a 45 degree angle with people standing in front of it.</comment>


QapTcha – Draggable jQuery Captcha - <AUTHOR> http://blogfreakz.com/jquery/qaptcha-draggable-jquery-captcha/

<comment><USER2> QapTcha create a hidden input name="iQapTcha" filled with a random password. (...) The aim of the drop is to empty this input when the drop is finished. With PHP, just check if the iQapTcha input is empty or not.

Isn't it trivial to defeat? Check if iQapTcha is loaded with the page, and then just empty the hidden inputs filled before your bot writes anything.

<comment><USER3> Yeah. This will only work against bot which fill everything with garbage and submit the form, but there are much simpler way to achieve this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Direct link: <http://www.myjqueryplugins.com/QapTcha></comment>