Late bloomer, not a loser. (I hope)  - <AUTHOR> http://500hats.com/late-bloomer <comment><USER3> Well he's not a late bloomer to the vast majority of people.

I think no matter your lot in life, if you're competitive, you get the feeling that you missed out on a lot that you _could_ have accomplished. Stories of kids learning programming at 6, or starting companies at 16, etc, feed into this.

Even I feel like I would be much farther "ahead" if I had only started programming before high school, if I had been more gung-ho about college, if I had gone to California in 2010 after graduation instead of remaining in New Hampshire. I don't even know any programmers in person outside of my work. My "network" isn't something to put on a pedestal.

And yet by all accounts I live an _extremely_ comfortable life, I wrote enough to get noticed and get a book deal just two years out of college, my friends think I'm of superhuman intellect, I'm able to walk to work every day, etc.

I think the kind of worry in this post is a response to the world born out of hyper-competitiveness, and I don't think its a healthy one. It's not a positive message, and the events that could turn it into a positive message for this person, the qualifications for "not being a loser", should never involve anything five or six sigma from the norm.

Look around you and relax. You've probably already won.

<comment><USER4> I found it difficult to relate to his position. By all accounts, he is already very successful and, more importantly, financially independent so he has the freedom to do anything he likes. Labeling that kind of lifestyle as either "late blooming" or "being a loser" is a gross insult to the _majority_ of people who are still trying very hard to achieve his level.

By his standards, I'm worth less than a handful of dirt. While I have achieved some modest level of financial freedom, I didn't do _anything_ as cool as that guy yet. And if I do some day, I'll remember to be thankful for it instead of whining publicly about not being Bill Gates.

For some people the realization that you're _never done_ , that there is always something cooler to do, is apparently very depressing. Personally though, I'm glad it's that way. As long as you're healthy and capable the future is wide open. I find this much more inspiring than the idea that somewhere there is a big cosmic finish line waiting just for you to fall short of.

<comment><USER5> He doesn't feel successful because he doesn't identify with any of the stuff he's doing. He always feels like what he's doing is a product of his environment, or someone else's idea. If he had set out to become a lecturer at Stanford and definitively achieved it, then he would feel successful. But his experience is that he stumbled into it, he doesn't feel like that's who he is or even really what he wants to do. So it doesn't feel like a success, it feels like a passing accident.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, I sure do hope he finally does that one thing that nobody, absolutely nobody can deny is important -- something as big as, say, a Twitter knockoff for the enterprise. Then he'll never have any nagging doubts about himself ever again.

Hey, far be it from me to criticize someone who's trying to make a mark in the world. I myself am just past 40, a former child prodigy, not very successful in Silicon Valley, and still feel I have some creative works in me which are yet to be realized.

Where I have sincere worries for Dave is that he doesn't seem to have a specific idea of what would count as success -- other than, maybe, it would be big enough and impress enough people that it would silence his demons. I don't know Dave, but I have a strong suspicion that this is also what led him to slack off at university -- rebelling against this idea that if he isn't the smartest and most successful, he's nothing. Because it makes every minor setback a bitter failure, and even success turns to ashes in your mouth.

His mission statement shouldn't be that he wants a better epitaph. Other people get to write his epitaph, and by that time he'll be fucking dead. It's out of his control. What is in his control: whether his life was meaningful to himself. Did it express his unique talents, did it give him and others joy, did it help others? Did he make his own rules about how to evaluate his life or was he a slave to the caprices of fame and fortune? And this is about so much more than just a career.

I think I'll just leave this here. A clip from The Wire.

"The job will not save you."

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b54EEpdv9q8>

<comment><USER7> > Wow, I sure do hope he finally does that one thing that nobody, absolutely > nobody can deny is important -- something as big as, say, a Twitter knockoff > for the enterprise. Then he'll never have any nagging doubts about himself > ever again.

In my experience, the degree to which you're successful has no effect on those doubts. I've put out a number of highly successful pieces of software, had a ton of attention in the press (technical and not), etc; I still feel like I'm largely failing to live up to my abilities, and that I peaked when I was 17. Maybe I need something hyper-successful that makes me a ton of money, but I doubt even that will kill the doubts.

At the end of the day, it just comes down to saying "this is what I've done, and who cares if I could've maybe, possibly done better?" but that's not so easy.

<comment><USER8> This is really quite germane: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86x-u-tz0MA>. While she talks about writing, I think it applies to the kind of thing you are talking about here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Oh, rundmc is Dave McClure? I missed that on the first read. Even though I know he's behind 500Startups, I just didn't even think that he could consider himself a failure. I started to write a comment saying that "the author" was far from being that, but now that I realize who the author actually is, I'm thinking "what?! are you high?".

Anyway, I related _a lot_ to the first few paragraphs (maybe until he was about the same age I am now actually, which makes me hopeful :) ): I was good in school, got accepted in the best French engineering school where I discovered as well that "hard work and regular, consistent effort was also required". I did not really produce that hard work and consistent effort.

The thing is that I hadn't really thought about what I wanted to do at that point: HS students that are good in Math and Physics go to Engineering schools and that's just what I did. Check. But now what?

So I went for Computer Science a bit after eliminating the other options. Then moved to the US still without thinking in terms of career and what I _really_ wanted to do. This has lead to taking jobs in tech but without enough consideration to where it would lead me.

So now, after a few years of jobs as "not a developer but something else" and years doing programming as a hobby after work, I realize that maybe I should just find a job as a developer. Problem is that companies look at my resume and it doesn't quite "match" what they're expecting for someone who is that many years after his master.

Long story short: I, too, feel like a late bloomer that hasn't filled his expectations from earlier successes. However, I don't run a fund, haven't worked for successful startups and am not friend with Sean Parker. Does that make me a failure? No, but I know I can do better. The good news is that I have 15 years to catch up with you, Dave!

<comment><USER10> Always good to stumble upon fellow alums from the "best French engineering school" here on HN :)

<comment><USER9> I'll say that I tend to be self-conscious about saying "the best school", but it is what it is, right? And, looking at how little it's been serving me over here (in the Bay Area), I should at least be able to say it in a random HN comment… :)

<comment><USER11> No it's not what it is.

<comment><USER10> Care to elaborate? :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> At 33, I was single, penniless and back living with my parents. I had spent my twenties partying and getting drunk, somehow managing to carve out a career as a middling journalist during the sober bits. Journalism does not pay well and I was always teetering over the edge of my overdraft limit.

In my early thirties, I sobered up a little and noticed that my career was going nowhere. I decided to sack in my reasonably secure job in publishing and move from Manchester (a provincial city in the UK) to the capital London. Big mistake. I struggled to get a job, got into debt and, eventually, in desperation, asked to move in with my parents.

So there was I - a guy who had always valued his independence, who had on several occasions even mocked people who lived with mum and dad - staying in a tiny room in his parent's house. I was the epitome of a loser.

I am now nearly 40 and my life situation has improved immeasurably. I am married to a wonderful lady, I own a house, I have a couple of reasonably successful projects-cum-start-ups that pay the bills and free me - <USER2> forever - from having to work for someone else. I am not a mega-success on the world stage but, compared with where I was at 33, I am in a very good position.

I suppose what I am saying here is that one can bloom at anytime, early in life or late in life. I would also add that being a programmer (I got a job as a web developer a couple of years after leaving my parents house) gives one a far greater chance of financial and business success than if you are involved in most other professions. Try doing a start-up if all you know is nursing or stacking shelves.

So we are lucky in that we have a skill that can turn-around our lives at potentially any time.

<comment><USER13> Are you back in Manchester then?

I personally wouldn't call it "a provincial city" (it's very sparse, but overall Greater Manchester is home to 3 million people, on par with Birmingham and Glasgow for the title of "most populous urban conglomerate in the UK" just behind London); of course it's nothing like the capital, but it does provide a fairly good lifestyle at a fraction of London prices. There is usually at least one good restaurant for almost any cuisine you'd care about (except maybe my beloved Erithrean), and any movie worth watching will be at the Cornerhouse at some point. Granada/ITV also attracts quite a few glamorous models, if that's your thing. The only real problem in Manchester is the depressing weather, but it's not like London is so much better in that regard.

My point is that London is on a scale shared with very few cities around the world, but that doesn't make all other British cities "provincial" -- some of them are, some of them are not.

<comment><USER12> Not back in Manchester. Still in London. But, yes, Manchester is a great city with a great culture. I have a fondness for the place that I will never have for London, and one day may return.

I did not intend to use 'provincial' in any derogatory way but to explain to non-UK readers that Manchester is in the UK's provinces.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is kind of inspiring. As someone who wrote their first line of code at 25 and won't be able to shed the "intern" title until I graduate at almost 28, it's really easy to feel like I screwed myself over by not being where I am now 5+ years ago. Especially so in an industry where the younger you are the better and there are stories of people in their 40s having a problem finding work.

The real kicker is that I actually consider myself a pretty good programmer, at least for my experience level. As stated, I've been programming for about 2 years and I'm the primary contributor on a project that is deemed to be the "number one priority" for our application. But how good of a programmer would I have been had my parents bought me a computer when I was a kid? Or even when I was a teenager? I didn't even really know I liked computers until I was around 21 and even if I knew what the hell programming was then, I definitely wouldn't have been able to afford college.

So I guess there's still a decent likelihood that I'll need to be transitioning out of programming less than 15 years into my career, but hopefully there's still plenty of other opportunities for me to do great things for the next 20 or so years after that.

<comment><USER15> To be honest, I wouldn't worry too much. Everyone is like "I was programming since I was 10!" Nobody ever asks what they were programming at 10, most people wrote relatively simple stuff until they grew up and got a professional job.

Now to wait for replies from people who designed OSes when they were 12 :)

<comment><USER16> I've been programming since I was 12. I would say the only advantage it gave me was an unshakeable faith in my ability to figure things out - it really built up my problem-solving skills and gave me an attitude of "I'm going to figure this out somehow, even if I have to stay up all night" that I've noticed is missing in many new developers.

However, the idea that people who start this early have a 10 year head start on someone who starts at 22 is silly. Maybe for child prodigies this is true, but I was neither driven nor intelligent enough then to learn at the rate I do now. I distinctly remember being incredibly confused by the syntax of for loops, and being unable to solve trivial C++ compiler errors because I had no idea how to approach debugging them or where to find more information. I also had a casual hobbyist approach, where if something wasn't working, I would just give up and go play outside with my friends. Even with all the resources we have today, I don't think I had the mental faculty back then to design an OS. :)

Also, learning programming now is an order of magnitude more effective nowadays, with all the free online resources, new languages and frameworks, and public interest in the subject. Back in 2000, Arduino didn't exist, there were no decent web frameworks or JS libraries, and I remember sadly giving up on trying to build a robot because the only books I could find on the subject were university textbooks that required proprietary tech provided by the prof.

<comment><USER17> Your story rings true for me. I dabbled in programming in my teens, but like you I was a hobbyist at best. When things got tough I would just give up. Programming seemed really hard and I just couldn't figure out how people who did it knew all the stuff they did (this was the mid 90's and there was no stackOverflow if things went wrong).

I didn't really start taking it seriously until I was in my mid twenties by which time the quality and quantity of free educational material, languages and tools for programmers had exploded. Learning how to program has never been easier. It's really a great time to be in this field, beginner or otherwise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Dave's dilemma is far too familier to a lot of people in the tech scene in general, and bay area in particular. Bay area attracts the brightest minds from across the globe. All of them have been at the top of their high school classes. They have all been told from a very young age that they are destined to doing something great in life. They not only expect themselves to do better than themselves but pretty much demand it.

But when you have so many smart people trying to be more successful than their peers the definition of success changes. The bar rises and just building and selling a successful company doesn't seem good enough. You have to start the next Facebook, or the next Twitter.

IMHO, the best measure of success is not absolutes but a relative one. Compare your current self with your self from 2 years ago and ask if you are a better, more successful person.

By that measure Dave has done exceptionally well in the past few years.

<comment><USER19> Even comparing your present self to your past self is fraught with numerous biases. Humans have imperfect memories, so they only remember most interesting events from the past. Based on the few remembered details and a vague sensation of your self 2 years back, you would construct a full detailed description and compare it to your present self. But you forget that the past self that you have constructed is influenced a lot by your experiences in these past 2 years. Your past self really wasn't what you think it is.

You cannot accurately compare yourself over a time period. Moreover, on which dimensions are you going to compare? Say if I had a successful software company, but I give it up and move to Paris to become a mediocre painter, a vocation I'm currently enjoying a lot (but can't say if I keep enjoying it forever), have I made a good or a bad decision? Have I "progressed" in life or not?

Key should be to not overanalyze life, but rather simply live it as if it is not that important (in face of death, it isn't). Life should not be obsessively optimized. You can spend your whole life analyzing what you have done and still find yourself dissatisfied.

<comment><USER18> >Even comparing your present self to your past self is fraught with numerous biases.

This is definitely true. But you probably have a better idea of how successful/happy you were 2 years ago than your peers right now.

>Moreover, on which dimensions are you going to compare

Yes the dimensions have to be defined. If you wanted to be more creative or wanted to live abroad (assuming you are not from France), then you have progressed in life. But if you wanted to write more software than this is a regression.

>Key should be to not overanalyze life, but rather simply live it as if it is not that important.

Different strokes. You don't have to. But if you ever ask a question to yourself about whether you are successful or not, or happy or not you might want to measure somethings. I don't think it's a bad idea to look back once in a while and see where you have come to in life.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Life is not about winning or losing, life is simply an existence where we have to spend time without getting chronically bored. For some it may be startups, for others it may be spending happy times with the family. If you consider anyone else more "successful" than yourself (say a founder of a recently IPOed company), do you think s/he is happier or more satisfied than you are? How about if you get to know the founder recently went through a bitter divorce and also that his board doesn't have faith in him and is actively planning to fire him. Different levels of so called "success" are simply different modes of living, each mode bringing its own nuances or subtleties. From media or personal stories, all we hear about other "successful" people is better parts of their lives. The boring or bad events are seldom talked about.

Once you are beyond basic poverty, your basic self (and happiness levels) more or less remains the same (no matter what you do or where you go). It's a myth that "success" _should_ be had and a worthwhile life is the one in which something worthwhile (as defined by the society, and not you) was achieved.

</comment><comment><USER20> _Wired.com: How do you maintain your optimism?

Musk: Do I sound optimistic?

Wired.com: Yeah, you always do.

Musk: Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work._

Whatever the odds you face, there is nothing in life you cannot achieve, if you have committed yourself wholeheartedly to the cause.

Old/Young. Experienced/Inexperienced. Adept/Inept. Knowledgeable/Ignoramus. Prodigy/Late Bloomer. Nothing matters in the end.

Cause when we are done and dusted and look back at our time, we will find that it was a journey that couldn't have been any other way. We made it what it was and it lies their for us to cherish.

So don't hold yourself back. Nothing in this world is to be done or not to be done. The conscious/unconscious/subconscious rules that we follow every day were not there to start with and they are neither eternal.

Go out there and change your world. Become the Newton. Become the Napoleon. Become the Buddha. Become the Gandhi.

Remember, there are no rules and there never will be.

<comment><USER21> What you sound is pleasing to me, but it also makes me anxious. As one of your listed role models might say, I don't know if it's really so helpful to pin such wild hopes to yourself. When I start feeling like a failure, it helps me to stop comparing myself to Napoleons, but rather to focus on exactly who I am now and what I want now, and to live according to my own personal life schedule.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This I think is a trap we arrive at when we compare ourselves to others. It's safer for one's emotions to compare and contrast yourself to yourself in years prior.

The least usable fuel in this industry is depression. Don't subject yourself to it and ignore everyone else. Support them in their endeavors, high-five them in their success but do not compare yourself to anyone else otherwise it won't take but a few days to arrive at the bottom of $some-random-vice and you'll be writing blog posts like this one second-guessing yourself.

(I second guess myself daily and often wonder what the hell I'm doing pretending to be a CEO of an IT firm of all things. Yet have managed to remain in business as long as I have -- and help all sorts of people pay their mortgages, support their families and challenge themselves daily in the work they do for me. That's something I derive sheer joy from.)

Admittedly the remainder results from my faith, but that's another post altogether.

<comment><USER23> One thing I've learnt is that we're all making it up as we go. So did our parents. I'm actually amazed that people _actually_ listen to us when we clearly have this weird feeling that "Shit, I have no clue but fuck it let's do it live". You know you've had that feeling as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Silicon Valley is a funny place, a lot like Wall Street where the big winners are viewed to have the absolute qualities of success. In reality, even once you reach a threshold of competency and capability, its still a big gamble and the big winners are the lucky benefactors of Black Swan events. Of course, I'm referring to Nassim Nicholas Taleb's reflection of uncertainty and randomness as it applies to success in investing.

On the other hand, Silicon Valley creates a dynamic where things change rapidly and some of the smartest people in the world are constantly pushing the limits. This creates an opportunity where if you are honest with yourself you have to say _"I need to get better"_ \- and this self-perception is a gift to be cherished over and over again. No losers when you look at the game this way.. just people who will grow and grow and others who won't.

</comment><comment><USER25> I think that part of the issue here (that I haven't really seen mentioned) is that when you're so close to others who've been successful but you aren't as successful as them, then it's easy to feel like a failure of some sort.

In short, it's easy to feel like an ugly girl when you're standing next to the prettiest girl in class.

Dave seemed like something of a child prodigy. Like he said he didn't get an advanced degree. He was around people at PayPal who went on to create $1B+ companies. He's worked with Sean Parker. Those are achievements in themselves. But when you keep that kind of company and you haven't done what they did, it's easy to feel like you're lagging.

My old manager from my first job was one of the founders (and current CTO) at Gilt. One of my old college buddies who was also a coworker (under that same manager) went with him early on to build Gilt. Today I consider both of them incredibly successful. In comparison to them, they've achieved way more than I have.

</comment><comment><USER26> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imposter_syndrome>

Pressure to succeed in ones youth is ubiquitous in certain industries.

I think this song about the music industry pretty much sums it up: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca9GJ6mMxLw>

<comment><USER27> Another possibility is <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/false_modesty>

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> "It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."

\-- Teddy R.

</comment><comment><USER29> It's a totally different world these types of people live in to mine. I read the blog post, it was nicely written and a seemingly heartfelt reflection of a mans own position in life but I guess it's difficult to feel he's been anything other than a success already.

Perhaps it's all relative and compared to Sean Parker's bank balance he's a dismal failure but to reach 40 and have "a little under a million" in liquid assets and to have been able to dabble in angel investing for several years just doesn't seem that bad a life.

<comment><USER30> Agreed. I count myself fortunate to not live in that keeping up with the Jones mentality, because that is how I read it. A man must measure his worth by who he is, his character, respect given and received, and the love he gives and receives.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Shit, except for all the cool places he's worked in the tech industry and all the people he's met, and all the success he's had, and of course the fact he has a lot more money than I do, this guy is _me_.

I hope to God I'm a late bloomer, too.

<comment><USER32> he might not be as wealthy as you think: <http://www.quora.com/How-much-is- Dave-McClure-worth>

<comment><USER31> A week ago I had seven dollars in the bank. Granted, that was after moving the household to Europe again and I do have accounts receivable, but financially I'm at the point where when I'm not actually underwater I feel successful.

Having "a little less than a million" as a pad would reduce my stress considerably.

<comment><USER33> My wife and I went out for a celebratory dinner recently when our net worth finally turned positive after years of grad school.

<comment><USER31> The question is: did the dinner put you back into the red? If not, maybe it was warranted. :-)

<comment><USER33> Only briefly. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> @Dave: You will never be the person you thought you could have been. You will only be wildly different. And often, wildly, differently . . . successful, as you've shown the world. The same is true for all of us - we're never what we thought we'd be but we dream up new stuffs along the way. Retrospect and all that. It's too easy to look back but all the action is in the future. Look forward and be _there_.

I find I have the same self-crisis about once a week and maybe more often now. Nobody on HN knows me. I haven't shaped anything in the industry. Even if I'm ultimately successful by my own standards, nobody will probably know. I don't care. My stealth agenda won't make me rich or famous or even worth noticing. I just want to fundamentally change the way we test software and the way we think about quality ("the 'q' word" - ugh). Nobody's gonna care about that until a change happens that nobody now thinks is worth pursuing. It doesn't mean that it's not worth accomplishing, though. But that's who I am.

You, sir, are not I. You are known and have accomplishments. You're already living the dream. Well . . . some dream. Not mine and I guess not yours. But the point is that you're already doing your thing. Damn the torpedoes! Go as fast and as hard and as broadly (and as whatever you like) as you can in the way you'd like to most. Nobody's going to lift a finger to stop you. People will likely complain one way or another after the fact but at the end of the day all you have left is your life and your loves and there's no other way to measure your success than those things you hold closest to you.

Don't give up!

</comment><comment><USER35> We compare ourselves with our perceived peer-group. But we tend to self-select peer groups that are not too far from our own level. On the other hand, most of us looks to role models, which are pretty much by definition more successful than ourselves.

We rarely compare ourselves to the people we consider we've already firmly surpassed. We might hang out with existing friends that we feel we're more successful than, but we're trying to meet that new potential employer that's above where we think we'll go next; we're trying to hook that huge important client; we're more eager to network with people we see as hugely successful; we want to learn from the people we consider smarter than ourselves, and so on.

Not only that, but outside our own circle, the successful people are far more visible. For every successful founder there are hundreds that failed, gave up, never even got a company funded, and so on that we will never hear about.

I've been through several startups. Some I co-founded. Others where I was the first guy or first 2-3 people brought in, on substantial equity. Been involved in a number of VC deals. But no big exits. Nothing enough to retire on. Not paid of my mortgage.

It'd be easy for me to write a similar post about my career. Lots of companies that could've, should've made it big.

Yet, years ago I realized that the moment I founded my first company, I was more successful as a founder or "startup guy" than most people - most people who want to start a company never even try, and fewer succeed. Each subsequent one, I've left some mark or other. So I've not founded another Google. But I've done enough. I want to do more. Lots more. But I've still done enough that I have plenty to be proud of without feeling a need for everyone to know about it.

(though he things I'm the _most_ proud of these days no longer have anything to do with my work at all)

</comment><comment><USER36> The irony is that to 95% of Americans he's led a very successful life.

Not that I don't understand the point. It's all relative.

<comment><USER37> When you're in SF/Bay Area and trying to compete with the likes of LinkedIn, Yammer, etc, you're constantly bumping into that top 5%.

<comment><USER38> There's a tendency to overrate the talent at these well known companies. Remember, LinkedIn didn't salt its passwords...

<comment><USER39> So? they're worth billions.

<comment><USER38> What does that have to do with anything mentioned here?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I see a few knocks on Dave. What he should be valuing more, why he should(n't) consider himself successful, what other smart people think about what he said from their own perspective.

Well, he opened himself up. In a world where opinions about others are far more numerous than people standing up and saying "this is my story, from the heart. these are my faults and failures, and my dreams". I find that more valuable than 100 posts blowing their own horn. It's the most basic story of all, shared by many, and one of the hardest to write.

</comment><comment><USER41> Dave McClure is a Get for Dustin Curtis' Svbtle network.

It's fun to watch this thing develop.

<comment><USER42> There is a signaling effect from using Svbtle (Their aim is to signal "you are going to be reading good content") but it's hard to understand why you wouldn't want to use your own design and brand for your site. You are ceding control of your online brand to their design framework.

<comment><USER43> I humbly disagree: As a writer, I'd like my design handled for me. I just want to be able to write the best piece within reach & present it to the world in a way that will gain mass distribution.

Besides that, as a reader, it's easy to detect the Svbtle "look" & know that this article will probably be worth my time.

<comment><USER44> This is exactly right. As soon as I see that blog theme, I recognize it as 'this is gonna be a good article.'

The only nitpick I have about the site is I think the font is 'too wide.' That's just a personal preference of course.

<comment><USER26> > This is exactly right. As soon as I see that blog theme, I recognize it as > 'this is gonna be a good article.'

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batesian_mimicry>

Such a signal is vulnerable to knockoffs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> someone needs a reality check.

if he considers that kind of life "failure", he is going to lead a very depressed life unless he wins a few lotteries

<comment><USER33> couldn't agree more. "i only made a little money" -- enough to have started angel investing in 2004 after exiting paypal.

enough money to live in one of the most expensive places on earth, probably without having to work too much? check. a family and (apparently) happy marital relationship? check. moderately successful times working at important companies? check.

Sure, it's good to be ambitious and set high goals. But the dude needs to get a grip. If he wants to achieve more, fine. But there's no universal standard by which he's a "failure". At the end of the day it's up to him and he'd do well to admit it.

<comment><USER46> A friend once took a 30 minute car ride with two successful people, both multimillionaires, back when that meant something. He asked them how much money they would need to feel financially secure. By the end of the trip they had bid each other up so far that they agreed that it would take a large multiple of their current net worths, just to feel truly safe and independent enough to retire.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> In 2008, Gladwell wrote an excellent article on this same topic:

<http://www.gladwell.com/2008/2008_10_20_a_latebloomers.html>

An excellent quote from the article:

"The Cézannes of the world bloom late not as a result of some defect in character, or distraction, or lack of ambition, but because the kind of creativity that proceeds through trial and error necessarily takes a long time to come to fruition."

</comment><comment><USER48> Not sure this guy has much to complain about - wife, kids, money, intelligence, plenty of opportunities. Maybe he just enjoy his life instead of wishing he was some hot shot.

</comment><comment><USER49> I'm only 30, and I feel like I've made a million wrong turns. There are many people, who at my age, have already created their own billion-dollar company. However, I only work on what I believe in (aside from the mundane work I do to pay the bills), which I readily acknowledge is probably the worst route to traditional (i.e. monetary) success. There are many ways to flip a worthless company for a profit in the software world, but history does not remember people for their wealth, or even (temporary) fame. If I die poor and unknown, I still consider myself a success, because I spent my life doing things that I perceived as meaningful. Find interesting, unsolved problems (not necessarily in software), and pursue them to the end. You will remain a "late bloomer" so long as you live life passively.

<comment><USER50> I'm guessing very few people have _actually_ created a billion dollar company by the time they're 30. Just sayin.

<comment><USER49> I'm a fan of exaggeration ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Boy I felt like reading my own story, except I hadn't had brilliant parents that would give me good genes for a start and force me to be productive instead of lazy (so I wasn't working for huge corps like OP).

But regardless this post made me think that if you treat your body well (healthy food, gym, as little stress as possible) and you hadn't had some genetical disadvantages then your brain stay quite young forever, and you are like a fine wine: you age well and gather wisdom all the time. Truly, the only thing stopping OP from learning from his mistakes and trying again, learning and trying again and again is his approach that I _may be_ too old. You are not! How old you are only matters whether you will personally make a big deal out of it or not. Don't let it stop you from trying again.

</comment><comment><USER52> I really like this post, it resonates with me as well. I have parallels with Dave's story -- mostly figuratively, but still felt like I've been along the same ride with him.

The fact that Dave is still going strong at 46 and trying to make a difference shows there is _much_ more substance to him than many others I know in this business. If there is one thing I've observed, it's how the perceived "lack" of success in those who expected great things of themselves have knocked so many people off their perch.

Good job, Dave. In my book, the very fact you recognize this in yourself qualifies you as successful.

</comment><comment><USER53> Sounds to me like he is suffering from a social comparison bias. A few peers may have done better than he, but I am sure there are those out there that would say he has done pretty good.

<comment><USER54> I've heard that grad students go through something very similar when they go to grad school: feelings of inferiority and fears of being "exposed" as fake when surrounded by so many other intelligent people.

I've never worked for a start-up but imagine the start-up scene works the same given the common stereotypes: success stories of 20-year-olds, hyper intelligent ivy-league drop-outs, etc. I don't know whether they're the rule or the exception to it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Feeling like a (comparative) failure can help one to sympathize with people who really _are_ less fortunate --- you start to realize that maybe it's not entirely their fault.

</comment><comment><USER56> Great post Dave, and somewhat inspiring for someone nearing the end of their twenties who feels like he's only just hitting his straps now.

<comment><USER57> Mid 20, same shit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Doc Searls (who enjoyed a lot of success in the late 90s) once said that nobody knew him for anything he did before he was 50.

</comment><comment><USER59> I'm confused. In my mind Dave is already a success.

I guess he's just in a rut. I read a great book called "How High can You Bounce?" It's all about if you've taken a downturn how can you spin it to your advantage so you rebound better off than where you were before the fall. Knowing this is possible is simply the first step.

Think Dave just needs some bounce.

<comment><USER60> "I'm confused. In my mind Dave is already a success."

Virtually everyone is a failure depending upon who or what they compare themselves to.

The odds against being a pro basketball player are astronomical -- everyone in the NBA is a huge success relative to those who didn't make it, but if they aren't Kobe Bryan, Lebron James or Dwyane Wade they may consider themselves failures. And even the top active guys live in the shadows of Jordan, et al.

I'm pretty sure this is the root of dmc's problems. The nature of his work has him surrounded by insane statistical outliers (some of whom are probably more lucky than 'good', though I'm sure there are both). His feeling like less than a success in this situation is unfortunate, but probably a perfectly normal human response.

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> So you're a loser now when you have a bachelor degree, a job and good health? Times have changed.

</comment><comment><USER62> I'm almost 19 and I feel like I'm not moving fast enough sometimes. I've already worked for two successful startups and am in an accelerator program as a designer cofounder. I love what I do and I can honestly say I have one of the best jobs in the world and the people I've met are amazing, I'm just scared of losing out on time.

This really made me see that I don't have just a few year window to do well, but it's a life long thing. I would have never guessed I'd be doing what I'm doing now a year ago, and I have no idea what I'll be doing a year from now, but I figure if I just keep doing what I love and building awesome products, I'll always be happy.

<comment><USER9> Hell yeah you have time! You're _only_ 19 and you seem to know what you want to do for the foreseeable future, have co-founded a company, worked at two successful startups… I have yet to do any of these. (well, maybe I do know what I want to do? Maybe…)

You're so ahead of most people, it's almost tempting to downvote you for humblebrag. It's like people who complain because they do only [good measurement of self in a domain] in [said domain]. (I would give a sport example, but I couldn't give you a realistic one)

<comment><USER62> Yes, like the gorgeous girls that call themselves fat, it pisses me off. I feel like though I've done this, but I'm still not financially secure, I worry about a paycheck, and people still don't respect what I do and think I should be in college. So it just makes me wonder, ya know?

<comment><USER9> Don't get me wrong: I'm not blaming you. I think a lot of people, if not most, are insecure or at least unsure about their accomplishments.

I feel that it's not really discussed: you might receive kudos from the family, but they're often outside your domain, so "it doesn't count". You might have some kind of role model: "I want to be like that guy", but that guy rarely looks back to acknowledge _your_ accomplishments. (and he's probably looking up to somebody else too) If anybody does, it's mostly people "lower than or equal to" you that do: at best your peers, at worst people who don't really know what they're talking about.

So it's hard to see yourself in the proper referential…

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> I'm not quite sure what the point of this blog post is. I guess it's to re- start his blog, and restarting a blog often lacks a good hook, and may be heavy on the backstory. Hopefully this is a starting point, not a destination.

</comment><comment><USER64> Clearly, this individual's problem isn't that he hasn't found Shangri-La, it's that he needs a new compass. Dave, Samuel Taylor Coleridge was just hallucinating. Kublai Khan's pleasure dome is right next to you every morning, and she's [presumably] gorgeous. The sun still rises on the bankrupt, and many of them do absolutely fulfilling things with those days, even if it's beating an old game or learning to catch more fish.

Or to speak more plainly, cash is but one axis on the graph of success, and often it is the very worst of them. Winning is having the strength to disregard it.

</comment><comment><USER65> Wow.

As in "holy shit that was inspiring."

</comment><comment><USER66> Wow... late to this article but can only add one thing. The OP is me... (not literally but figuratively in every way). 42 in a week... a whole lot of 'shoulda/coulda' behind me and feeling like an unaccomplished elder in a field of successful kids. His article hit me pretty hard. At the minimum it makes me feel a little less alone in my thoughts. If the OP reads this please feel free to touch base if you would like a fellow late bloomer to chat with.

</comment><comment><USER67> Love the optimism and ambition. It hurts to read how hard you are on yourself, but I hope you achieve your goals and relax a little :). Good luck with your incubator.

</comment><comment><USER68> Read this article about people who made a bit of money in the first dotcom boom, lost it, and were seeking more again in 2005:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/05/magazine/05RATPACK.html?_r...](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/05/magazine/05RATPACK.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all)

Interesting to note how many of them have become billionaires in just a few short years. Peter Thiel, Mark Pincus, Reid Hoffman, ...

</comment><comment><USER69> For all the self-deprecation in the post, I think we can all empathise, at the very least with:

> and so here I am: still standing in the arena, in hand-to-hand combat with > demons mostly of my own > making, aiming to make a small dent in the > universe. nowhere near a great success story, yet > fighting the good fight > and perhaps helping others to achieve greatness as I attempt a bit of my > > own.

</comment><comment><USER55> See also "The importance of being prolific" [1], also posted here yesterday [2].

[1] [http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/ct- ae-0624-proli...](http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/ct- ae-0624-prolific-artists-20120622,0,1889158,full.column)

[2] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4212680>

</comment><comment><USER70> things can sometimes feel so daunting as we toil away night and day for years without end on our hopes and dreams, reading his honesty and admission helps (at least me) put it in perspective that we still have time to keep going relentlessly while we force our dreams to come true (i hope).

as long as we are so lucky to be here another day to keep going.

</comment><comment><USER71> You sound like a man who has found his centre - even if you still Want to go find it somewhere else. I, and many others here appreciate the honesty, and I certainly feel the same way on a daily basis.

I wish you good luck with the business, but much much better luck with your family.

</comment><comment><USER72> I was with you when I read the title, I was with you upto the point you mentioned that you weren't ready for the consistency & hardwork college requires, and then you went from "someone like me" to "someone who hasn't done as well as the people around him".

</comment><comment><USER73> Is not capitalizing the first word in a sentence the thing to do now?

</comment><comment><USER74> But maybe self permanence is not so important. Perhaps it would be more accurate not to associate yourself with your past so much.

</comment><comment><USER75> I'm 19 yet I feel I can relate in some way.

<comment><USER76> You're 19, you have so much ahead of your life ahead of you rather than behind. Go look in the mirror and smile...You can start from scratch today, and in a decade still be ahead of 99.999% of your age group, and even people twice that age as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> I actually see this as Dave's backwards way of saying:

"Whatever your situation right now - its okay. Keep working."

</comment><comment><USER78> Fellow failure here. Anyone want to kick off a #failaholics hashtag on twitter?

</comment><comment><USER79> "[...] before I ended up with just a broken spirit and a comfortable life."

Loved this quote.

</comment><comment><USER80> Compare and despair. Gotta watch out for that!

</comment><comment><USER81> Good luck!

A modern Robert Frost....

</comment><comment><USER82> So @Dave isn't Marc Andreesen or Larry Page. So f-ing what. The only tragic thing is that he hasn't figured out yet that work != life.

I'm in a similar demographic as @Dave, live in palo alto, near his age. Had some really good successes 10-15 years ago, and nothing since then.

My big activities for the past decade have been climbing, skiing and raising my kids. Some of my friends kept working and now have vineyards and foundations. And sometimes it stings that I don't fly private jets or have anything really impressive to brag about.

But I had years of board-meetings, soaking up the one-upmanship. Once you become conscious of the non-stop compulsive attention seeking, there is a certain emptiness to it. So I stepped away from that, and I wouldn't trade a vineyard for the experiences I've had.

Now I'm starting on a new company, working very hard with high confidence. But if this company doesn't see a monster outcome, I won't feel like a loser. My prime motivation is the products, the people, and the competition, all of which I love.

IMHO we are in a golden age of software. To me it feels like being in the major leagues where everyone who participates is lucky as can be.

<comment><USER83> I like the original post by @Dave and the honesty that comes through. I also like this reply. Life can feel so frenetic and short on time sometimes, and yet very, very long - too long even - at other times. Time is really a very elastic perception.

The bottom line is you need to figure out what you want in life and how you define success. Hopefully at some point we all come to realize that while wealth, power or fame/recognition, etc. are excellent motivators, as an end such goals are rather hollow and empty. If and when one finally realizes that, then it really doesn't matter at what age you realize that, just as long as you've enjoyed what you've spent your time doing, and have picked up some good friends and family along the way. That's when you throw out the self-induced angst and hurry to "achieve something" and just do your thing, living in the moment. Of course, life is much easier the earlier one clues in on this. :)

<comment><USER84> Scientists have already done great work in this area. "Success" doesn't bring happiness:

<http://chrisyeh.blogspot.com/2005/12/meaning-of-life.html>

Here's the money quote:

"In the book, Deci talks about a study which discovered that humans have six basic aspirations. The first three, the extrinsic aspirations, are to be rich, famous, and good-looking. (Actually, rich/powerful and famous/well-liked, but why ruin a euphonious phrase?) Sound familiar?

The second three, the intrinsic aspirations, are to have good relationships with the ones you care about, to achieve personal growth, and to feel like you contribute to your community.

Deci's work showed that people who focused on extrinsic aspirations (regardless of whether or not they achieved them) tended to display narcissism, anxiety, and depression, while the people who focused on instrinsic aspirations displayed a strong sense of well-being."

<comment><USER85> I was looking for a citation for this study and found a good overview on Wikipedia (with citations), in case others are interested.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination_theory>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> Are these things the compass to success? That's rather depressing.

I can relate a little. I dropped out in grade 11. Built N. America's first fully graphical ecommmerce site (1992), Canada's first Windows IIS webserver (sorry), country's first 56K internet access, $10M IPO in 1998, client list includes Eckhart Tolle and Oprah.

So what.

I recommend you learn success from those that who mastered it over the eons, and they don't live anywhere near Silicon Valley.

Here's one example;

"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" -- Jesus Christ

<comment><USER87> What graphical ecommerce site was that? Given it predates Mosaic and the commercial use of the web I'm surprised its not more well known.

<comment><USER86> Before the interweb was popular they had this little thing called a BBS and RoboBOARD/FX

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RoboBOARD/FX>

<comment><USER88> Here is San Diego at the height of BBS'ing with about 1,100 boards very few used RoboBoard. Must have been much more popular in Canada.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER89> I've come to the conclusion that success in business is like the game Rochambeau (Rock, Paper, Scissors). People will argue to death whether it's a game of luck or skill, and often it gets very emotional, with people who've had success attributing it to skill and the rest attributing their lack of success to bad luck. In reality, it's neither. It's a game of _strategy_ in the academic, game-design sense (interaction rather than individual skill as the driver of outcome) but often with very little information that would indicate what the good strategies are. Rochambeau has no randomizer (no dice or shuffled cards) and is a skill game _if_ you can predict the other guy's moves. Iterated, it becomes somewhat of a skill game. Same with business. Iterated, both become games of making choices, often with no idea what good and bad choices are, because useful information is so thin on the ground. Business is obviously not "random" in a true sense, but it's obviously not a pure-skill game because so many idiots get lucky and a lot of really talented people (like DMC) don't. It's a game of making iterated choices, often with little or no information that would inform them, and the luck factor comes out of the opacity.

How does this relate to OP? DMC is a highly talented person, but he's in his mid-40s, he's worked in the supposedly meritocratic startup sector (and, as with trading, the definition of success in VC-istan _is_ making money; if you've been in VC-istan for 2 decades and haven't made fuck-you money, you haven't won) and his net worth (as he admitted on Quora) is less than $1m. Given that, it's fair to say that he probably hasn't played his cards right. That doesn't make him unskillful or weak or "a loser"-- far from it, and I'm sure that none of those are true. It doesn't make him any less of a person, or any less smart, than the more successful people. It just makes it a good bet that if he could rewind to 20 and play from there again, he'd have a lot more success.

And ultimately, the reason why many of us are sitting here not being rich and outlandishly successful when people of similar or inferior talent smash $500m+ exits is that, when faced with a thousand identical-looking doors, one with a pot of gold behind it, they had the "insight" to pick door #467 while we picked #822 or #134 or #915. Some of us pick #467 at the next opportunity but, of course, the next time the pot of gold is behind #719.

I think the best thing to do is to back away from the VC-istan insanity, and pretend all that garbage doesn't exist. As long as I'm growing my skillset by 20 to 25% per year (which is not hard to do, because returns from increasing skill in technology are exponential) I feel like I ought to be happy with that. It can be difficult to be satisfied with this (first world problems) when you see unqualified idiots getting funded in enormous amounts, and then getting acquisitions and EIR gigs as welfare checks because they have powerful friends... so it takes some discipline and maturity not to be annoyed... but sanity is worth it.

<comment><USER90> Thank you for this post. I'm in nearly the same boat (41 years old, < 1M net worth, on my fifth startup with < 100k to show for those efforts) and watching seemingly complete idiots pass me by. I'm too old to be infuriated by the vagaries of chance, however, it does make me wonder if I've done something wrong. I suspect that the numbers are slightly skewed - that there are far fewer people having wild success than the media would have us believe.

<comment><USER89> The conclusion that I've come to is that VC-istan isn't actually technology, at least not in this current social-media fueled bubble. It's old-fashioned social climbing and self-promotion with a bit of technology in the back end.

Do startups _actually_ succeed based on technical merits, or on how well they market themselves? In this social media bubble, it's the latter. I'm not going to claim that technical skill doesn't matter. I just don't think it matters as much. You can back-fill the technical stuff by hiring the right people (contrary to our overblown claim that non-technical CEOs have no hope of finding technical talent because they can't individually judge it) but if you build great technology and can't sell it, you never get off the ground.

It's _exceptionalism_ that leads people to think that the VC ecosystem is in some way (or should be) morally superior to Wall Street, Hollywood, the fashion industry, or Madison Avenue. Sure, what we do is cerebral, but so was advertising in the _Mad Man_ era. VC-istan isn't worse than these other industries, but it's not better. When you have a "creative" industry, there are a lot of opportunities to do great work and profit by doing so. But there are also smiling-idiot narcissists who pile in and fuck everything up because they think they're "creative"... and of course, what gives them this opportunity is that there are other idiots in power who will put them ahead of the people of substance like us because they don't know any better.

It's the _expectation_ of meritocracy that makes us unhappy, but human organizations and ecosystems and societies all turn to shit over time no matter what so this is an unreasonable expectation.

There is a place for people like us, the virtuous soldiers who get rich slowly, building our skillset until we're just really good at a few things... but there's also a place for smiling idiots. And smiling idiots are always going to be the "cool kids", and it's the cool kids (not people of substance) who get those stupid TechCrunch articles written about their 7-Couric products. It's the expectation of fairness in human structures, which is just unreasonable at scale, that creates the unhappiness.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> Why are none of the sentences capitalized? It makes it difficult to read (so I didn't finish it).

What I did read wasn't very interesting anyway, so no big loss.

<comment><USER92> davemcluredoesntcareaboutfontsorcapitalizationorwhatyouthink.

<comment><USER92> The downvoters obviously don't know Dave.

<comment><USER68> Would he really say 12 words where one of them isn't "fuck", though?

<comment><USER92> Touché.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER93> How exactly does his position equate to being a "late bloomer"? Even if he hadn't done everything he did in the last 10 years, he would still have achieved more than 99.99999% of the world population. Think about that to get some perspective. I think he's being ridiculously harsh on himself.</comment>


Insurance billing codes for injuries resulting from spacecraft - <AUTHOR> http://boingboing.net/2011/09/12/medicare-billing-codes-for-injuries-resulting-from-spacecraft.html

<comment><AUTHOR> On second thought this might be a better link: [http://graphicsweb.wsj.com/documents/MEDICALCODES0911/#term=...](http://graphicsweb.wsj.com/documents/MEDICALCODES0911/#term=spacecraft)</comment>


Google Analytics Shout out: Annotations - <AUTHOR> http://analytics.blogspot.com/2010/07/shout-out-about-annotations.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Does anyone else annotate their Google Analytics (or is it just us (<http://www.olark.com>) ;-)

-Ben

<comment><USER2> Just started to at WePay, and it has changed my world.

Especially good for big press and turning certain ads (fb and google) on and off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This resonates a lot with the startup we're doing. Some sentences even look like taken from our pitch. Very encouraging to see one more proof of demand :) Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER4> When did they add this feature? I had no idea it existed but suggested they add it a few years (?) ago - will have to look around for it.</comment>


Who Really Rules? - <AUTHOR> http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whoreallyrules <comment><USER2> Aaron describes the problem of governments being controlled by special interests (in this case, a group of local businessmen). That is indeed a serious problem - a problem with how politics works at the moment. I'd like to see some proposed solutions. Libertarians would suggest that reducing the scope and power of the government would help, because a shadowy cabal won't be interested in capturing government power if there's little power to capture. But that seems to be a uniquely libertarian point of view. Recently, Aaron proposed that activists become politicians and attempt to win elections. Is that a practical, sustainable, and/or complete solution?

<comment><USER3> Aren't "activists" also a case of special interests trying to control government? Your comment uses unwritten assumptions that I'd like to be made explicit. :-)

<comment><USER2> Actually I agree with you; I hold the libertarian view I described, and replacing shadowy cabals with left-wing activists is not my idea of an ideal solution. But I know that some people hold the view that those who are elected have legitimate power (as opposed to any unelected group). I wanted to know whether anyone would argue that "more democracy" is the solution to the problem of special interest groups having undue political influence.

<comment><USER4> Except that the libertarian vision just means that there is no formal negotiation tool that the diverse special interests can use to settle their differences and arrive at a _modus vivendi_. All that is left is money, power or naked violence; and the vast majority of people have little money, almost no power and are unwilling to risk violence. So the 'libertarian' vision results in less freedom for most people.

To use a metaphor from physics, the libertarian ideal is not a stable equilibrium, it isn't even on the path of a stable cycle. It's trying to balance a pencil on the pointed end.

<comment><USER5> Wrong, there can be a lot accomplished without money through voluntary collaboration. In fact that is the essence of libertarianism. Respect that others may disagree with you, and that you have no right to point a gun at their head to make them obey you.

<comment><USER4> I have no interest in compelling others to do more than leave me alone; the fact that this is not universally true means that I must either be prepared to meet violence with violence, or delegate the job to others.

As I said libertopia is not a stable equilibrium. It collapses into violence and warlordism if there is even one defector.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Very interesting. I have discovered an incredible number of interesting books on social sciences that have changed my beliefs about very fundamental issues through Aaron. Punished by Rewards was one. I am just beginning to read "Explaning Social Behavior" and this one will probably be next.

</comment><comment><USER7> For those wanting the short version: powerful businessmen really rule the government.

<<Sigh>></comment>


How Ninja become gaming's first crossover star - <AUTHOR> http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/24710688/fortnite-legend-ninja-living-stream <comment><USER2> These twitch streamers and their relationship to their audiences reminds me a lot of William Gibson's simstim celebrities in the Neuromancer trilogy.

</comment><comment><USER3> _Every day, people tune in by the hundreds of thousands to watch him play, and he 's making bank doing it. The most commonly reported figure is $500,000 a month. Blevins suggests the number is closer to seven figures._

And then later:

 _" Until my family is taken care of. Say this ends tomorrow, we don't have enough for the rest of our lives. I tell Jess, 'Honey, we're not going to have that much quality time this year, or even next year. But if we do this right and I continue to grind for a couple more years, we can set ourselves up, and our family and our family's family, for the rest of our lives.'"_

Even though he makes so much money I wouldn't want to be in his shoes. He doesn't seem to have a good, relaxed life. One vacation in 8 years while making 500k+ a month? Why...?

<comment><USER4> It's pretty god damn smart, work hard for 10 years and have generational wealth for the rest of your god damn life. He knows that this was a lucky break of fame, and as celebrities rise and fall with fads.

It's way better than most startups.

<comment><USER5> There's got to be some boundary, though. The guy streams every single day. Doesn't even take one weekday off. That's not healthy.

<comment><USER6> Working until you're 80 isn't healthy either. given the choice I'd rather do 10 years with no free time than 60 years with only a tiny bit of free time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "I play Fortnite every day, Mom. It's my dream to play Fortnite." \- What a world we live in now a days...

<comment><USER8> Oh the stress of modern celebrity! I'd give you all my pity but I already spent it raising children and paying a mortgage and working for sociopaths.

Having said that, now I fucking well WANT to play Fortnite every day

<comment><USER9> Heaven is being able to play fortnite every day. Hell is _having_ to play fornite every single day.

<comment><USER8> I'm not seeing any "have to" in any of this anywhere, except in the woe-is-me voluntary victim handbook.

<comment><USER10> He has to play fortnite just like we have to go to our jobs. Sure, we can just not show up anymore, but that will loose you your income.

Of course, he has a bit more flexibility, but so does an employee who yields the company a million each month, and takes home half of that.

<comment><USER8> "a bit more flexibility" and "half a million take-home per month" aren't in the same ball park (to paraphrase Pulp Fiction: it ain't even the same sport)

Apologies if I'm coming off as offensive or patronising, but I really truly cannot see what there could possibly be to complain about that isn't entirely within their control to change.

I think there's a bigger picture that you might not be stepping back far enough to look at.

<comment><USER10> What I tried to say was, if you have an employee who yields you half a million each month, you're probably not gonna fire him if he says "hey im gonna take off tomorrow".

But yes, they obviously can just not stream for a single day, but it costs him. According to the article, not streaming a day looses him 15,000 subs (assuming the default cut of 50% of 5$) thats 37k lost, per day, and it adds up.

Ninja seems to be aware that his stream wont live forever, that his fame is on a timer, like anyone on the internet. So he's trying to save up as much money as he can, to support his family after his fame dies down.

Lets be generous and assume $200k spent per year for rent/mortage, food and all that fun stuff. A day streaming means he has 2 months less buffer, before his money would run out. 4 Months, if you're spending 100k a year.

Choosing between 1 day of work, and 4 months of work, seems pretty easy to me, even if that single day sucks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Toxicity in gaming + virtual communities (particularly against women) seems to be an issue that no company has a great grasp on.

I recently gave Fortnite a try and ended up turning chat off due to relentless abuse by someone that sounded like they were pretty young. It made me a bit sad - I met some of my best friends growing up online in irc channels playing CS, WoW, etc - not sure if I would be able to do so today.

Also Polygon article where Ninja talks about why he doesn't stream with female gamers (for whatever reason espn didn't link...) -

[https://www.polygon.com/2018/8/11/17675738/ninja-twitch- fema...](https://www.polygon.com/2018/8/11/17675738/ninja-twitch-female- gamers)

<comment><USER12> That article is really strange to me. On one hand, he's probably 100% right. There's no other way to avoid rumors and jokes like that. On the other hand, that's a completely unacceptable excuse to bar women from something. Can someone refuse to hire a female secretary out of respect for their wife?

<comment><USER13> That's a dumb analogy and bordering on being disingenuous. He's not barring women from something...you know that. And the people that he plays with are not his employees. You know that too.

<comment><USER12> Getting to stream with Ninja would have a large, direct effect on their income, not to mention the promotional aspect.

But sure, lets instead imagine a male-only social club that directly promotes the business and career interests of it's members. That would get shut down _real_ fast.

<comment><USER14> If a pro tennis player declined to play in mixed doubles to shield their spouse from paparazzi gossip, would you call them sexist?

<comment><USER15> What Joe Random would call them isn't so interesting, but the legal question is (can be, I haven't had my coffee yet...)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Auto Industry TV Ads Claim Right to Repair Benefits 'Sexual Predators' - <AUTHOR> https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qj4ayw/auto-industry-tv-ads-claim-right-to-repair-benefits-sexual-predators <comment><USER2> This is so incredibly foul. It reeks of the kind of authoritarianism that seems to be popping up left and right all around the world. I am dismayed.

<comment><USER3> It's more like the fight-or-flight response of a cornered animal.

They're attempting a "Hail Mary". Poorly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't see why it's not already happening if it were true. The only rape taking place is when you step into the dealership and they BS you to charge as much as possible.

</comment><comment><USER5> What the actual eff? A rogue employee at a "licenced" repair shop could also do this! This has got to be against even the most Neanderthal of advertising standards!

</comment><comment><USER6> At least Apple doesn't stoop this low.</comment>


Lawrence Lessig interviewed on Aaron Swartz - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFGa9sGKqpE

<comment><AUTHOR> Part of a one-hour special from Monday (the full video is on democracynow.org).</comment>


US lifetime travel bans for anyone connected to Canada's legal cannabis industry - <AUTHOR> https://www.straight.com/cannabis/1101001/us-reportedly-issuing-lifetime-travel-bans-anyone-even-remotely-connected-canadas <comment><AUTHOR> Title edited from "U.S. reportedly issuing lifetime travel bans for anyone even remotely connected to Canada's legal cannabis industry" to fit length limit.</comment>


Newegg refuses to repair defective laptop because user installed Linux - <AUTHOR> http://consumerist.com/2012/06/newegg-installing-linux-on-your-computer-is-basically-the-same-as-breaking-it.html <comment><USER2> I am a Linux user, and I have wrecked laptops with it before. It is easy to overheat or otherwise abuse a laptop by having improper configs.

For example, I had a battery become unusable because Linux often failed to sleep when the lid was closed because some dialog box was blocking. It would run in the bag with no ventilation when I didn't realize it until the battery drained and it would fail to shutdown until the hardware fail-safes took over and I realized my backpack was too hot to hold. Did this a few times and the last time, the battery wouldn't charge anymore. After getting a new battery I became very conscientious about whether it actually was asleep before I put it in the bag.

I have had this happen in Windows before as well, in one case it would wake up if I forgot to turn off my Bluetooth mouse when I put it away. Since it was already closed, there was no trigger to go back to sleep so it would run itself dead in the bag and eventually the plastic near a hot component melted. Turns out there is an option in the Windows device manager to tell it not to wake on Bluetooth that prevents this.

However a defect in the factory-installed operating system that causes failure is something you have to warranty. A defect in the user-installed operating system is not. However, I have no idea how they could trace the problem to the operating system. Not sure how they would ever know that Linux is installed. Any good Linux user would wipe the hard disk before returning a computer to the manufacturer for repair :)

<comment><USER3> I am a Linux user for years now, and I have never even come close to wrecking anything with it with 'improper configs' or otherwise, on a laptop or desktop.

The problem you describe is not a matter of an 'improper config' wrecking a laptop due to the awful user-unfriendliness of Linux. It is a matter of you messing with something you didn't understand, jamming the machine in a bag to overheat, and then having to replace the battery.

There does not exist an operating system which is impervious to this kind of nonsense.

<comment><USER4> What you say is completely incorrect.

Linux distributions (keyword: distributions) have often shipped in a default configuration which can result in damage from overheating. There's no need to accuse the OP of "messing with something he doesn't understand."

Vendors often perform QA on hardware to ensure that it operates properly in conjunction with an operating system. When hardware is designed such that it requires particular operating system behavior to prevent damage then it is absolutely reasonable to require that operating system be used to maintain the warranty. Closing the lid of a laptop is completely normal behavior -- and it's a fact that many linux distributions ship with a configuration that will not properly suspend the device, leading to potential damage.

This is not a matter of "user unfriendliness." This is primarily a matter of hardware vendors limiting their testing to the behavior of certain operating systems (and thus limiting their warranty -- you can't warranty what you haven't tested; what isn't well-specified). I wouldn't be surprised if Apple refused to warranty a device which had Windows installed on it.

There's no need to get religious here. It's merely an issue of vendor support, and hardware which relies on particular OS behavior to operate safely.

<comment><USER5> Just to be clear, the issue has more to do with the vendor-supplied OS vs consumer-installed OS. My biggest overheating-when-should-be-sleeping issues have almost always been Windows on a Dell. But I have had it happen on a Cr-48 and MacBook as well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> File a chargeback. Show your credit card company the return policy and how you didn't violate it, and you will get your money back.

This is precisely why you should _always_ pay with a credit card online.

<comment><USER7> I am not to familiar with credit cards and their fraud or return policies. Why exactly is it easier to refute charges with a credit card, more so than a debt card?

<comment><USER8> Debit cards carry reversal rights as well - at least in the United States. It's simply a mechanism to protect credit and debit card holders against technical issues, quality issues, fraud, etc.

<comment><USER6> Reference? This contradicts everything I've read up to this point and I'd like to verify it.

<comment><USER9> <http://whatconsumer.co.uk/visa-debit-chargeback/>

Seems to have been big news in the UK. Having trouble finding the same for the US, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> For what it is worth I actually contacted newegg at <http://help.newegg.com/app/ask/site/US/category/74> and asked them what they thought.

I'm a big fan of newegg and hope they continue to bring competition to amazon. I am hoping this is just a small oversight and it will be corrected shortly.

<comment><USER11> I stopped being their fan when their return policies changed. Now there is something called "Restocking fee" and I have to pay for shipping?? I don't think so.

I use Newegg to research products but once I find what I am looking for, I search for the model on Amazon and end up purchasing there, knowing return policy is much better for customers.

<comment><USER12> Heh, me too. Also, I just discovered <http://pcpartpicker.com/> yesterday. Looks pretty cool. I might do my research there and buy on Amazon. I might feel a little less guilty. :) The restocking fee policy (which screams "shady retailer" to me) on Newegg is only reason I stopped shopping there.

OTOH, Newegg seems to have a much larger catalog of tech items than Amazon.

Also the search feature on Amazon is quite bad: try searching for '16 gb ram' and sort by price. It will insist on showing you 2 gb packs also.

Everything except the default sort order sucks. Which doesn't inspire confidence that Amazon isn't listing the items with the highest margins on top.

<comment><USER13> Out of curiosity, how did you hear about pcpartpicker? (I created it, so I'm always interested to know how people find out about it. Hope you find it useful!)

<comment><USER12> Saw a build on a post in the the hackintosh sub-reddit, the link to which was posted here on HN. Great site.

Since you're here, I'm going to file a bug. :) I just noticed that the following motherboard isn't showing an amazon price for me: [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-motherboard- gaz68xud3h...](http://pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-motherboard-gaz68xud3hb3)

although amazon has it: [http://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-Intel- DDR3-Motherboards-GA-Z6...](http://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-Intel- DDR3-Motherboards-GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3/dp/B00518M74I/)

<comment><USER13> Thanks! I've fixed up the motherboard price for Amazon, though the price I list is when fulfilled from Amazon.com directly and not from their marketplace merchants.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What gets me is "system cannot be resold as received" - I mean, sure, a customer should wipe their data off the disk... but would NewEgg really ship a system to a new customer without doing a fresh install of the OS if it was running Windows?

<comment><USER15> Don't know about NewEgg, but I have personally received a windows PC from Staples (UK) that already had a user account for 'dave' on it.

I am not a Dave.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> And so the day has come in which Newegg has become just another internet retailer.

<comment><USER17> Their site has been steadily getting more annoying to use for a while now. It feels like they want to be Amazon.

<comment><USER18> Who wouldn't?

<comment><USER17> There's money to be made in providing the best experience for purchasing computer equipment, which is what Newegg used to provide. Newegg has lost the focus necessary to maintain that experience; e.g. [http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA01200095...](http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA01200095Y0)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I always wonder wether an incorrectly configured ubuntu kernel or drivers could actually damage modern computers. I remember viruses from the 80's that supposedly could kill the machine by asking the bios to increase and decrease voltages or hdd spin in such a way it would deal physical damages to the machine. Might have been a computer legend though.

Note: When returning laptop, desktop, smartphone or anything I always tend to be anal retentive and put everything back in place, including software and OS so there are no arguing wether the problem is software or hardware (obviously I only need to send back hardware defective devices).

</comment><comment><USER20> Tangential to this story but anecdotally I've been hearing of lots of situations recently where newish laptops have had screen problems soon after purchase and the brands involved have varied (ASUS, Lenovo, Acer, etc). And by "screen problems", I mean electrical ones either with the panel itself or with the controller, resulting most often in parts of the screen or the entire screen dancing towards full white.

I wonder if there is some shared panel manufacturer who has been dropping the ball lately?

<comment><USER21> It's probably just a coincidence. Most electronics have a manufacturing failure rate so these things can happen.

<comment> excuse-me And a screen problem is pretty much obvious to anyone straight away.

Intermittent problems on anything else will either not be noticed by ordinary users or blamed on Windows!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I had a really bad experience in the past with Newegg and their lower levels of customer service. At one point I documented and blogged it, but that blog is no longer up unfortunately.

Anyway, the good news is that once I got in touch with someone higher up the chain they were like, "That never should have happened" and worked to make it right. It just took a ton of kicking and screaming to get there, which really wasn't worth it on my part, but in the end, they did the right thing.

One thing I'm seeing more and more is that companies are holding back their lower tier support employees from actually being helpful. For example, have you _ever_ had one of those "Instant Online Chat Support" things help you out? No, they are always so unempowered its not even funny.

<comment><USER23> I've used an "Instant Online Chat Support" for TurboTax (answering questions) and at my auto repair company (to schedule appointments). Worked fine for me. When done well, it can be vastly superior to phoning in. But like you said... the people on the other side need to be empowered.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I have had bad customer service from NewEgg in the past I'm not surprised by this. Now I buy almost everything off Amazon and only go to Newegg for stuff that can't be DOA (cables and such)

<comment><USER17> I would definitely shop monoprice over newegg for cables.

<comment><USER25> Not that Newegg sells them, but I've had bad luck with Monoprice's analog cables (1/4" or XLR).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Note that the NewEgg's refusal is based on the original OS being missing rather than a new OS being installed according to that email. My guess is that the user formatted the HD before installing Linux. Most OEM PCs now come with a recovery partition which is used to perform a factory reset. If the user erased this partition, then NewEgg would be unable to reset the device to its initial state for testing. It would be similar to the user returning the device by not returning important CDs.

</comment><comment><USER27> This is not the community they want to alienate.

<comment><USER28> Agreed. Surprising response from Newegg - we've had no problem returning machines that were defective here at work. Filing a chargeback appears to be the best solution in this case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> NewEgg has really lost their way over the past 2 or 3 years. I have gone from don't even check anywhere else to checking NewEgg last. Amazon almost always beats them on price now.

</comment><comment><USER30> Is it at all possible that Linux Mint in some way collided with a driver or some other critical infrastructure?

<comment><USER31> My thought exactly. I'm kinda curious as to what harm linux floffin off can do. Don't get me wrong, I still use and love Linux, but there is always a problem with linux, so far it's always in software/doesn't affect hardware, but I guess it's possible to do damage to the hardware?

<comment><USER3> I have never heard of the mere act of installing Linux damaging any hardware, ever. I would like to hear substantiation before I start believing that.

Back in the day you could hose your CRT by trying to set a graphics mode it didn't support, but that would take a special effort to do.

<comment><USER32> <http://lwn.net/Articles/300202/>

Can't find the followup that explains the actual bug, but it had to do with the kernel unmapping some unneeded memory and ...blah... and whacking random garbage into the eeprom of the network card. All you had to do was boot linux once and your network card would never work again, at least until you went to the trouble of flashing it.

<comment><USER3> The post is titled "e1000e and the joy of development kernels"

This is hardly a matter of 'improper config'!

Why on EARTH are you running DEVELOPMENT KERNELS (not just talking about newish kernels) on your bare hardware? Is that something normal users would do? Why? How would they even acquire and install them?

How do you expect to ensure that bleeding edge open source development drivers cannot be used to do stupid things? Some kind of legal prohibition on making any drivers until you have been vetted by some central committee?

<comment><USER32> ??? You wanted an example of linux damaging hardware, I gave you one. I'm sorry it's not to your liking.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I have had HP India refuse servicing my laptop (its speakers went kaput) because I had VLC installed. According to them, greater than 100% sound amplification in VLC was to blame.

</comment><comment><USER34> It doesn't matter who the vendor is, extended warranties from the retailer are braindead.

<comment><USER21> It was an RMA, not an extended warranty repair. But I agree with you anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is NewEgg's chance to either gain or lose 1% of its customer base. Since margins are so tight on computers, and NewEgg costs for software support will decline, isn't this a no-brainer from a business perspective?

<comment><USER29> I think their customer base of people who use Linux, might want to use Linux, or who are just plain disgusted by this behaviour is way way more than 1%.

Remember that the people who will be upset by this (techies) are the same ones who put NewEgg on the map to start with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Newegg used to be awesome - I have spent thousands in the last 6 years with them, but their customer service is terrible. Their customer service pretty much reads a script and keep repeating the same thing.

I think all companies have a life cycle: 1\. New company, so customer is treated well/ 2\. Company grows and becomes successful 3\. Company needs to show ever increasing profits. Starts taking shortcuts to save money, and starts to ignore what made them great in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER37> I now try to buy all my electronics at Amazon instead of NewEgg or TigerDirect due to the poor return policies at Newegg and TigerDirect with DOA items. NewEgg used to be better than it is now but they have gone downhill in the past two years. TigerDirect has always had poor return policies.

</comment><comment><USER38> The policy quoted states you can't return it even if it is opened.

"The following conditions are not acceptable for return, and will result in the merchandise being returned to you: Any desktop PC, notebook or tablet PC that has been opened"

</comment><comment><USER39> Looks like they've fixed this specific problem.

[http://consumerist.com/2012/06/newegg-no-well-totally- take-r...](http://consumerist.com/2012/06/newegg-no-well-totally-take-returns- after-you-install-linux.html)

</comment><comment><USER40> I don't buy at newegg or have any other incentive to side with them but... in my past experiences, Linux didn't really have the most compatible hardware drivers. Am I the only one to think that?

<comment><USER41> this is a thinkpad. they've always been the top-end linux hardware of choice. i've had thinkpads for decades with linux. as long as you select the right wireless card there are no issues - distros even have special packages for thinkpad compatability.

<comment><USER42> Not just that, in fact, a guy from Canonical commented on reddit saying that this specific model was certified for ubuntu.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> They need to put presser on Newegg managers. It's simply ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER44> Couldn't she just reinstall windows and send it back?

<comment><USER45> That would depend on how dead the machine is.

Let's assume we're talking about a dead screen, motherboard or power supply.... it's going to be hard to re-install windows then.

<comment><USER46> You could get a second hard drive. Pull the first one out, put the second one in, do whatever you want. When/if it's time to return, put the first drive back in. They'll wonder why you've barely used it but whatever.

I did this when laptops were $1500. Now that they are $400 it's usually not worth the bother.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> excuse-me I bought 10 identical Shuttle PCs from newegg.

One was DoA and I returned it with an RMA - they sent it straight back to me because I had returned it in the wrong box. The serial # on the machine didn't match the barcode on the box!

They seriously expect you to keep the individual box for every unit? Or are they just a scam that try and stop you every returning anything?

Anyway - haven't bought anything from them since.

<comment><USER47> If you had said you were returning a two year old unit for warranty repair, and it was denied because you did not use the original box, I would sympathize with you. Expecting you to keep all your boxes for years would clearly be ridiculous.

But for a DoA unit? You couldn't keep the box for a few hours or days? Seriously?

<comment><USER48> Picture this: You bought 10 of something, all identical items (minus some sn on the box). You throw away the packaging material for 8 or 9 of the 10 items (remember, it's all identical). You then have a device DOA/fail that isnt the EXACT packaging you saved. What difference would it make to newegg take the item out of the box and scan the barcode inside? A little customer service goes a long way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> If you would like to petition Dell to start to include Ubuntu/Fedora/RHEL on all of their machines and stop the whole "Dell Recommends Windows 7" monopoly cartel join this idea on ideastorm and let's try to get our voices heard...

Dell Ideastorm Multiboot Linux: [http://www.ideastorm.com/idea2ReadIdea?id=0877000000006ixAAA...](http://www.ideastorm.com/idea2ReadIdea?id=0877000000006ixAAA&v=1339437474096)

Dell Linux & Windows on all Laptops/Desktops: [http://www.ideastorm.com/idea2ReadIdea?Id=087700000008iglAAA...](http://www.ideastorm.com/idea2ReadIdea?Id=087700000008iglAAA&v=1339424370822)

Dell Sputnik Ubuntu Laptop: [http://www.ideastorm.com/Idea2SessionIdea?v=1339521444920...](http://www.ideastorm.com/Idea2SessionIdea?v=1339521444920&id=a017000000hIx3bAAC)

</comment><comment><USER50> Newegg: party like it's 1999...

<comment><USER50> downvoters clearly haven't been linux users cca 1999...</comment></comment>