I wanted to buy one. I technically could squeeze it out. I talked to a few folks who owned them (ok, 2 people that I sort of knew). They universally told me to hold off, that it was really expensive, that I should have my finances in order such that spending $100,000 (at the time) would feel like losing $1,000 to cancel a vacation so you could spend time with your sick grandma. Obviously this is just an anecdote, but everyone I've met who owned (not leased!) their Porsche was quite good with money.
Make sure you can afford the maintenance and are willing to drive the wheels off of it. I drive mine often, especially road trips and fun weekend rides. But just infrequently enough that it feels good to sit down in it and crank it up. I have enjoyed many cars over the years and when we could afford a nicer one we did so.
I pretty much agree. When I still had a substantial commute (pre-WFH days), I had a cheap commuter car, because associating that thing with traffic jams didn't seem like fun.
But now that that's gone I'm even getting the groceries with the fun car. It seriously transforms a chore into something I volunteer for. And we got rid of my crappy commuter car, for family business we still have my wife's solid but boring car.
Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation, happiness, etc. buy things because they bring you joy. At least in this market you aren’t out much if a car does not make you get that feeling inside. For me my nice car is a beautiful work of engineering and art. It represents the cool things we can build as humans and reminds me I need to keep doing that myself (building, creating). It may sound trite, but it inspires me and brings me happiness in its own way. But it is the more subtle long term kind. Satisfaction is maybe a better word. And I do drive and use it. It’s time will come and go :)
I get this from two experiences. My first car was a used Alfa Romeo 75 (aka Milano). I got it because it looked really cool. I discovered it was a hell of a lot of fun to drive, high-compression normally aspirated V6 has such great throttle response. And a weight distribution that just loves to 4-wheel drift. Later I did drive a BMW for a bit, well knowing the 'BMW drivers are assholes' reputation. But I wasn't going to let some asshole drivers deny my fun. It was a Z3 roadster, but I wished it was the Z3M coupe.
I had a colleague who bought a Porsche. He went through a million hoops to be able to afford it - buying used, restoring etc.
He loved taking photos with it and they looked great. He looked literally like a million $ - dressed up, nice sunglasses, nice watch, SoCal roads etc.
He loved talking about it and genuinely enjoyed living the Porsche life.
This man got his money’s worth and much more. He bought the car and let its presence and status and demands influence his life in a multitude of positive ways.
Speaking with him and seeing this influence gave me another viewpoint and I was inspired.
Not to buy an expensive car but toward excellence in something - anything.
I have one (much less than $120k) because I really, really like driving it. I agonized over buying one for a long time. I did a lot of spreadsheets. I asked my wife whether she thinks it's crazy. In the end, after all those things checked out, I bought my Porsche a bit more than 5 years ago, and am still happy with that thing.
And I don't even track it. It's just so precise, just a joy to drive all around.
Not sure, I hope a long time? It's a 2014 Boxster S (981S) bought used, with now a bit over 60k miles on it, and it's still going strong.
It had its last big service recently and there wasn't really anything wrong with it. They replaced the drive belt (I am honestly not sure if that was necessary) and that's pretty much it. Other than that it's regular oil and filter changes, and I got a new battery once. I might be lucky, but mine seems built to last.
> Is it easy to keep up with the maintenance?
Based on the above, I'd say so, yes. It's just not something I have to think about much.
Maintenance is more expensive, though. Definitely less frequent than my Ford was, but with the much more expensive tires and the drive belt (again, not entirely sure about that...), the Porsche may still well come out more expensive. That's okay, I knew full well going in.
> Is it your "daily driver," or a 3rd car that you only use when you want to have fun?
It is effectively my daily driver now. That needs a bit of qualification:
Before WFH when I still had a daily commute, I had a crappy Ford as my commuter car and only took the Porsche on that commute when I felt like it (e.g. when I knew traffic would be light, when it was a good day...). But since I mostly work from home now, keeping the Ford in shape was annoying so I got rid of it. We still have my wife's boring car as "family car".
But the Porsche is my daily driver by virtue of being the car I usually take and took before outside of the commute, even for grocery runs and other chores. For being a 2 seater sports car, it has a surprising amount of space in frunk and trunk (remember it's a mid-engine car, so it has both), and I really mean it that it feels good to drive even in every day situations.
It's precise, you feel "in full control" (I don't mean getting into more dangerous situations, just in regular safe situations it feels like that already), more connected the road... it probably does not add anything for people who generally think driving is boring or even annoying (of which I know plenty), but I like operating cars, and when I drive other cars I honestly wish they weren't so "mushy" in comparison.
You really should try though. "Feeling the road" comes with properties that are fun or at least worth the payoff for me, but not everyone wants to be jumbled around with lots of perceivable road noise in a car with low vantage point. It's not extreme, but my wife is not a fan; she likes that I have fun with it and tolerates the ride, but she prefers traveling in her "mushy" car where driving is more, shall we say, abstracted away.
I rode in a Porshe years back. The ride didn't bother me. I'm wondering how it compares to my Tesla Model 3, which is compromised for mass appeal. (Is it a family car? A sports care? A tree-hugger car? I'm not sure, but my kids laugh when I floor it.)
Speaking of maintenance: My Tesla requires "less maintenance," but the tires are expensive. The factory tires lasted less than 30k miles and were over $1000 to replace. In contrast, my minivan with about the same miles has plenty of tread left. Shockingly, because of the tires the Tesla actually costs more to maintain than the other car.
Yes, I think Porsche is one of the sportscars that makes sense at some level.
Where I'm from — and I'm not from Italy — buying a Lamborghini makes you an instant a*hole. People think the only reason you bought that is to show off.
But that is not the case if you buy a Porsche, the NSX, or even the R8.
These are two very different sentiments. The first is buy things for you not to impress. Yours is insulting and it’s like saying “I don’t care about your hobby and I’ll insult you for having one you spend money on.”
It is interesting how common of a sentiment this is among people, I think especially engineers.
Have you ever driven a Porsche? They’re pretty cool. If you can afford it without sacrificing other important things, a Porsche (or anything cool, esp a car) can make life a lot more fun. Life is short and non-repeatable.
I read a car and driver study / survey / analysis thing a few (maybe 10) years ago and it determined overall the most enjoyable car to drive was an 89-92 Nissan Maxima.
It was sold under the special title "4DSC" Four Door Sports Car, basically a sedan version of the original 300ZX, same motor and internals.
It of course lacked some speed but this wasn't about racing but normal street driving, plenty fast for that, great suspension, built in hands free cellular, heads up display. Really was a marvel and it was compared against all cars up until the time of the article.
Different perspective, just go to the track and drive one. For ~$300-$500 it cured me of ever wanting to own one. I got to drive it hard in ways I'd likely rarely get to drive in if I owned one and it was so much cheaper.
By that logic you shouldn't buy anything at any time besides food and shelter because that money could be $$$ after appreciating for years or decades.
We only live one life, you can't try to optimize every dollar. There's a tremendous price on "investing" in your own happiness throughout every part of your life.
For a new top line one, maybe, in the UK I see them in the 10-20K range for an old one in good condition all the time. Quite a few friends have had one for a bit just to show off and lost minimal money on them. Now if you were talking about a Lambo, Ferrari, McLaren you might be nearer the mark, but who buys them who doesn't have money to burn?
<< Efficiency is highly overrated; Goofing off is highly underrated. Regularly scheduled sabbaths, sabbaticals, vacations, breaks, aimless walks and time off are essential for top performance of any kind. The best work ethic requires a good rest ethic.
Good grief, yes. When you are tired and burnt out, you find the worst kind of shortcuts.
This is in the same vein as the advice I give to the overachiever junior/mid level engineers I mentor. They're constantly searching for the next big project or optimization. In the same way you need to sleep at night to process the day, you need a few weeks off every now and again to process your life/career.
The people who like your new stuff will help you figure out how to fix it and make it good enough so the old system truly becomes obsolete, otherwise the old system will continue to exist and people will continue to use it, so that now, theres 2 options instead of just one.
Let's say that I find it annoying when people "missbehave", like people letting their dogs shit wherever and not cleaning up, or just commonly being selfish and rude.
How do I now understand myself better? Is the point that the problem is somehow in me or what does this advice mean?
I’ll add one: there is limited time in life, and you cannot implement all the advice you’ll get about how to live a good life. A doctor will tell you to take care of your health. A sociable person will tell you to have friends. A traveler will tell you to travel. A priest will tell you to know God. A careerist will tell you to work harder. An entrepreneur will tell you to start a business. The list goes on and on and on.
Life is about what you decide to do, not about what others think you should do and certainly not about what some random old person says you should do because that’s what he wishes he did.
Yes, the idiom "come to X" does mean "be acted on by X". Common usages "come to harm", "come to Jesus", "come to his/her/your/my senses" ( = rational thought).
I think what you're getting at, since we're talking about values, is déformation professionelle: valuing things that you know, and devaluing (valuing less than objectively appropriate) other things.
“All we need to do is to decide on how to spend the time that is given to us”. Gandalf knows best. The hard part is making that decision. It’s something that ideally happens once you know your personal values. But - It’s even harder to make those decisions once you realise that your values will change over time. What a pickle!
Counterpoint: meaning is a social construct and thus we derive meaning from doing activities which are essentially advice from other people (albeit implicit and not necessarily verbal).
> Life is about what you decide to do, not about what others think you should do and certainly not about what some random old person says you should do because that’s what he wishes he did.
I would take the same list and interpret as life demands prioritization. That which you choose to do gives it value, in part, because you choose not to do other things. When someone chooses to love me (like in a marriage for example) it's not just the love I receive but also the gratitude for the privilege of exclusivity.
Along those lines, almost all advice is highly contextual. You'll often hear that people criticize bad advice that is actually good advice applied inappropriately. Perhaps in the author's view, he could have benefited from taking more breaks, but in my case, it would probably be better off if I spent less time shitposting on HN.
kk isn't really just some random old person, he was Wired for all intents and purposes for a long time, he is an astounding and empathetic travel photographer and is one of Stewart Brand's best friends. I realize you were speaking generally but I hope we can all make an exception for this one random old person. Do yourself a favor and turn the pages of Asia Grace. Ageism is a hell of a drug.
He sounds impressive, and I can get with you on being anti-ageist, but saying "The guy knows how to live" just reinforces the idea that everyone has their own take on what's important, and one size doesn't fit all. My idea of living my fullest potential barely overlaps with the apparent life of the person that you admire.
Your examples and many in OP’s list are non-actionable non-concrete advice. For example, “take care of health” is non-actionable but “go running one hour after you wake up” is actionable. However, much better advice is not about what to do but what not to do. The absolute golden advice is what everyone is doing but why you shouldn’t in a specific context. This is more akin to a traveler coming out from journey and recounting what he/she considered mistakes.
Great summary, great lessons, definitely something worth fully digesting and internalizing.
But to be fair (and pedantic), at least one is untrue.
> • Handy measure: the distance between your fingertips of your outstretched arms at shoulder level is your height.
Ape Index = the difference between your arm span at shoulder level and your height. In other words, a +6" Ape Index means your arm span is 6 inches more than your height.
I think it's a good rule of thumb given that most people will be within an inch or two. My ape index is noticeably low and it's only -2.5". +/- 6" is absolutely massive.
When I was a new climber I climbed with someone who was world class and just by watching me for a short time he could tell that my ape index was low.
I've been searching through the comments for a comment about this item in the list.
I am less than 2 meters tall, but I can carry plates wider than 2 meters between my outstreched hands.
Does that now mean that I am an ape? Actually, that would explain a lot...
Like I said elsewhere in the thread, do not actually do this: candy is toxic to lots of birds and animals, and if not toxic, it is sticky, and can cause them to choke.
I mean, sure, if your end goal is to give your children anxiety, eating disorders, and unhealthy emotional associations with food (and especially w/ sweets). Not only that, but then you have to give them a bag of candy and give it to them at the end of the trip every trip or they learn that your "punishment" means absolutely nothing because you never give them "their" candy anyway. Oh, and wait to see how that scales when you have multiple children and they start to abuse each other to get the other to act out and lose candy. That'll be fun.
But I guess it'll work well to keep kids quiet in the short term, sure. Advice is a form of nostalgia - a way of picking up the past, dusting it off, and selling it for more than it's worth; and, like nostalgia, it's never as good as it is remembered.
> Oh, and wait to see how that scales when you have multiple children and they start to abuse each other to get the other to act out and lose candy. That'll be fun.
Learning about cause, effect, reaction, and manipulation are vital skills in life. Knowing and understanding them does not mean you’re a sociopath either. They’re widely useful in many aspects of life. Makes you a better poker player too.
That's one heck of a justification that one. Childhood trauma and abuse sometimes also sometimes results in functioning, well-adjusted adults with decent abuse coping skills and without crippling mental illness - that doesn't mean it's the best way to achieve that goal.
You should very much know that the null hypothesis for a proposed behavioural modification technique is that it isn't a benefit and doesn't work and may be harmful. It's on the proposer to show otherwise.
What's less harmful when it comes to human health and safety in non-essential activities, to assume no risk of harm or injury or to assume risk of harm or injury? I assert that the null hypothesis is that it does not have a benefit and is harmful. This is not an assertion of fact, simply a position of likelihood and a judgement that doing a physical and emotional punishment to a person is generally harmful and that doing so must be balanced against ensuring a just outcome. This is not an unreasonable stance. You, on the other hand, if I understand properly, are saying that we should be able to do whatever we like to a punish person unless we show it directly causes harm. Down that road lies such human rights abuses that holding such views should be considered unconscionable.
> What's less harmful when it comes to human health and safety in non-essential activities, to assume no risk of harm or injury or to assume risk of harm or injury?
I agree with this statement. Assume a risk.
> I assert that the null hypothesis is that it does not have a benefit and is harmful.
Why did the word 'risk' disappear here? I don't think that's a good null hypothesis at all.
> You, on the other hand, if I understand properly, are saying that we should be able to do whatever we like to a punish person unless we show it directly causes harm.
And you need to make sure you're looking for both positive and negative effects.
"It's harmful" is a huge bias for a null hypothesis.
> Then what are you saying?
That you shouldn't assume it is harmful.
I didn't say anything about what parents should be "able to do". I didn't even give an opinion on the candy thing. I just think your justification is a big overreach.
But also a null hypothesis implies you're currently doing the testing, so that's a different scenario too...
I love the vision of trying to manage this with multiple kids with different candy dislikes and likes. It'd be a free-for-all to see who could get you to throw the most of their siblings favorite candy. Honestly I think they'd have a ball.
Plus you're littering all over the place. That sucks.
Maybe, be nice to kids and don't harm them ? You are teaching and encouraging the behavior "blackmail to get what you want" by doing that.
Instead you could use non violent communication to get by. Tell them how you feel, how you feel hurt by their behavior. Maybe they start talking about how they are hurt being stuck 8h in the car ? And maybe both of you will feel compassion and a way to minimize the damages.
They're not as valuable as you might think. LL.com's go for >$1M but LL.org's and LL.net's are in the $10K-$50K range.
I missed registering kl.com by a few weeks and had to settle for kl.net. This was back 1995 when you had to email a template to Internic and wait about three weeks for a reply. In the template you had to provide working nameservers. I had put down some random hostnames for nameservers since I wasn't running my own yet and it was rejected after the usual three week delay. By the time I had nameservers set up a few weeks later a law firm had registered kl.com.
With working nameservers I was able to register maj.com (have since sold it) and finally kl.net which I plan to keep til I die.
Having a personal domain that's only 6 characters long is pretty handy at times. If it were a .com, it would be hard not to sell it for $1M, but a .org/.net that might get you a car is something you can keep.
> A wise man said, “Before you speak, let your words pass through three gates. At the first gate, ask yourself, “Is it true?” At the second gate ask, “Is it necessary?” At the third gate ask, “Is it kind?”
What is kind? I am the straight shooter type. In the past I've gotten critiques from people about the way I speak, but also told by some people that the way I speak is fine. Maybe people just prefer different things.
There's a subtle blend of straight and kind. Whatever the thing you have to say, if you have that person interest in mind it's still kind, even if it's tough.
This makes sense, to a degree. But at the extreme, the speaker should absolutely take care to avoid being overbearing, condescending, patronizing, etc. Many delusional people think, "I am saying/doing this for YOUR own good", so simply believing that you have the other person's interest is not enough.
Or rather, in order to TRULY have someone else's interest in mind, you have to incorporate things like condescension as in-scope requirements for your communication. Otherwise, even good advice delivered in a straightforward but condescending manner, won't get through (which means, the person won't benefit, which means you the speaker failed to achieve the thing that would help advance their interest due to your poor communication).
It’s not even just the lack of benefit caused by the message not getting through. I think people who communicate too intensely, too aggressively, forget that the communication is part of the listener’s life. If someone feels like shit when they talk to you, you’re already in the red for whatever net impact you want to have on their life.
Context, delivery, and choice of words matter. For example:
* Give praise in public
* Criticize in private
* Any criticism offered should be constructive
* Any criticism offered should be of ideas and actions, not individuals--regardless of how strongly one may feel
* When in an argument, discussion, or debate, argue to the best possible interpretation of an idea or statement. Doing anything less is in bad faith, at which point you are not arguing to persuade but rather to make a point.
I'm sure there are many other such examples. I highlight criticism here as in my experience critical statements tend to be most often given or taken badly.
> at which point you are not arguing to persuade but rather to make a point
Excellent concept. I think I get caught up in making points, and this framing will help me do better and making persuasion or agreement the final goal.
It’s an easy transition to make. I find dialog like this is a lot like a meeting: without a good agenda and some level of rigor it’s easy for a conversation to go places you don’t intend it to go.
For me, it helps to pause often and filter what I say before I say it as I often get carried away with topics I’m excited by or passionate about.
I interpret "Is it kind" as: "Will it have a desirable outcome" / "Will the listener receive this with the appropriate intention".
Telling someone who made a mistake: "You screwed up" may be true and necessary, but saying something such as "Let's try that again" will likely lead to a better conversation and learning opportunity.
Why, saying a thing which is untrue is at best a mistake, at worst, a lie. Saying a thing which is obviously unnecessary is spamming. It has nothing to do with being straight.
Being kind, at the very least, improves the chances that you will be heard. If you have something true and necessary to say, it's a shame to say it in a way that turns people against you, and against your message.
To me, "kind" implies taking time and effort for someone, investing in them. That might mean engaging in conflict with them, if that seems to be what they need.
"Nice," on the other hand, suggests to me being polite, delicate, and never making anyone uncomfortable.
Niceness makes no enemies and wins no friends. It benefits the nice one more than anyone else, and is principally a strategy for staying out of trouble.
Kindness costs the giver something, sometimes the risk of giving offense, sometimes their time, sometimes the loss of power and influence because of making an unpopular choice that helps someone who really needed it. It is principally a strategy for taking care of others.
Okay, to me kind means the definition "having or showing a friendly, generous, and considerate nature."
I'm not familiar with what you're describing, but I saw another reply with a twitter thread explaining something similar to what you're proposing, so perhaps I'm just out of the loop.
"When I describe East Coast vs West Coast culture to my friends I often say "The East Coast is kind but not nice, the West Coast is nice but not kind," and East Coasters immediately get it. West Coasters get mad."
Sorry but if that is literally what they said, I think they might not have been "shooting straight" with you. And this is obviously speculation, but perhaps that could have been because they didn't feel it was worth the potential blunt response they might have received from you if they said otherwise?
Just don’t be mean. I read this a while ago, then observed an interaction at a bar that made me want to respond:
A party kept moving from table to table. I have no clue why. But the waiter would need to go and clean every table that they left, for both basic sanitation reasons as well as COVID. Waiter didn’t know what to do to get them to stop. So he goes to bartender to tell him the issue.
Bartender immediately says to them: “guys, every time you move we have to clean a table so pick a spot“. Party never moves again.
Bartender could have thrown a bunch of “if you don’t mind”, “we’d really appreciate”, “please”, etc’s in, but didn’t. They also could have thrown some less pleasant adjectives in, but again didn’t. They explained the problem, proposed a solution, and left it at that. That’s the “nice” thing, IMO. Anything else is patronizing or aggressive.
Maybe not patronizing, but it does hurt your case. My team recently went though to remove “please” from all dialogs because user testing found phrases like “please reload to active X” resulted in more people ignoring the dialog and later wondering why X wasn’t activated than just “reload to active X”. I assume the bartender has run similar experiments.
There’s a trope going around that people on the East coast (of the US) are kind, but not nice. While people on the West coast are nice, but not kind.
For example, if you get a flat tire on the West coast someone will come by and say “Aww man, you got a flat tire. That’s a real bummer man, that sucks”. and then they’ll walk away without doing anything useful.
Whereas on the East coast someone will see you trying to change your tire and say something like “What the fuck are you doing you stupid asshole? Didn’t anyone teach you how to change a tire? Are you frickin retarded or something?” and then they’ll change the tire for you.
One thing ‘straight shooters’ including me can overlook is that the listener isn’t in your head, and there are usually multiple interpretations of what someone says.
Especially when you factor in what might be implied by what you said. Or what different implications a person might take away from what you said than what you meant, because their context or assumptions are different.
One aspect of being kind (which I am working on) is trying to imagine different ways a simple, matter of fact, direct statement could be interpreted given everything the other person brings to the conversation.
• About 99% of the time, the right time is right now.
Home refinance? Travel during a pandemic?
• No one is as impressed with your possessions as you are.
Search HN for Elon Musk
• Dont ever work for someone you dont want to become.
Search HN for Musk, Gates, Jobs, Ellison, Dorsey, Graham, Thiel,
• Cultivate 12 people who love you, because they are worth more than 12 million people who like you.
If I knew 12 million people I would have little time for the 12, most likely just my immediate family and primarily offspring
• Dont keep making the same mistakes; try to make new mistakes.
Retirement plans come to mind. Relationships is another one where I don’t want new mistakes
• If you stop to listen to a musician or street performer for more than a minute, you owe them a dollar.
My dollar and a vote to value culture, people, art, expression even not to my liking. This applies to any creative endeavor to be consumed.
• Anything you say before the word “but” does not count.
I love ice cream, it it gives me gas.
• When you forgive others, they may not notice, but you will heal. Forgiveness is not something we do for others; it is a gift to ourselves.
Don’t learn to forgive. Learn to forget. Better yet learn to not become attached to become angry.
• Courtesy costs nothing. Lower the toilet seat after use. Let the people in the elevator exit before you enter. Return shopping carts to their designated areas. When you borrow something, return it better shape (filled up, cleaned) than when you got it.
Sure. Treat others as you want to be treated. I think I have heard that one before.
• Whenever there is an argument between two sides, find the third side.
Slavery. Abortion. Access to the ballot. Immigration. Nuclear war. Child sex trafficking.
I wonder if it's not in politics / war books too. Tap into others pride and principles to ensure their motivation for your goals. Internet "truth" is a great example, but I've seen this at work too, if you spin your question in a way to tickle others need for validation or superiority, all of a sudden you have a very strong engagement.. while on average people will refuse to help you. I don't like manipulating people, but society can be a never-ending source of absurdly high friction that any trick to avoid wasted energy is a strong survival skill to me.
> Courtesy costs nothing. Lower the toilet seat after use. Let the people in the elevator exit before you enter. Return shopping carts to their designated areas. When you borrow something, return it better shape (filled up, cleaned) than when you got it.
Sorry, this one depends on the old "if everyone would just..." It does cost something, and it's the price we ought to be willing to pay for a civil society. But it's also long been non-reciprocated (in my experience) and so I'm done with self sacrifice in the name of the common good (to the extent I can untrain it out of myself).
Is this a prescription for the rest of us? What should happen when I encounter you, perhaps at an inconvenient time? Is the answer, “don’t know them, can’t be bothered, couldn’t care less?”
It asolutely isn't a prescription for the rest of us, its terribly a-social. It demands that "stop caring" is defined as "do the minimum harm, and do the maximum nice, within the limits"
Well... there are people who go through life blowing off everyone they can. That is, as you say, terribly a-social. It's not a healthy way to live.
At the same time, there are also people who feel free to write a check, sign your name to it, and expect you to cash it. (They would do this financially if they thought they could, but mainly they do it emotionally.) If you let people do that to you, that also is not a healthy way to live.
So there's a balance between being asocial and being a doormat. Don't be either one.
My neighbor thinks as you do: he revs his car and motorcycles engines at night while we try to sleep. Therefore, we suffer.
(yes, we've asked him to stop)
I’m sorry that you feel like you don’t get your end out of the deal, but it’s a bad idea to fully embrace a “race to the bottom” mentality. Most people who don’t reciprocate behaviors in a healthy society fail to do so because nobody else around them does so — doing the right thing for its own sake can be a powerful motivation for those around you.
Sometimes I'm less concerned about the total outcome as I am that the rules claimed are the rules observed. To use a relationship example I don't get mad so much because you cheated on me so much as because you lied about exclusivity.
I don't get mad that I pay taxes, but that I also don't see societal improvement happening proportional to what I pay... (and that there always seems to be none left in the communal basket when I have a bad day...)
That makes perfect sense to me: a feeling of consistency is the strongest component of justice (or injustice).
Here’s my 0.02c: you can be justified in perceiving injustice (against yourself, or more generally) and simultaneously be unjustified in reacting to that injustice. Less roundabout: two wrongs don’t make a right, and what is right is virtuous in its course of action (in the sense that acting right encourages other people to act right, when doing so isn’t tied to a negative emotion like shame.)
It also creates a strange dynamic between you and others. If I 100% of the time will fill up a car I borrow when I return it, then what happens when someone borrows mine and returns it with the tank 20% lower than when I gave it to them? Get upset? Quietly pity them with some sanctimonious "they know not what they do" feeling?
If you feel it is important to behave in a certain manner it is hard not to judge others by the same standards. Can you hold yourself to an extremely high level of courtesy without judging others?
> Can you hold yourself to [...] high level of courtesy without judging others?
Yes, and this is a worthwhile challenge to accept if you feel it's indeed a challenge.
Life gets more enjoyable if it's not treated as a zero-sum-game with expectations of reciprocity. Pay it forward; don't assume to be paid back. Be the change you want to see.
You can and should do what you believe is right without being upset that the rest of the world acts differently.
(BTW: I object to that the examples of returning borrowed car with gas filled up,lowering toilet seats, letting people leave elevators and returning shopping carts in the right place are "extremely high levels of courtesy". It's just basic simple things. Regardless of how social norms in your immediate vicinity may deviate)
I wouldn’t be upset or pity someone who doesn't refill the tank — I just wouldn’t go out of my way to help them again, like I would for someone who does refill it. If you make a point of showing your appreciation when I do you a favor, I’m much more likely to do you more favors in the future.
If courtesy cost nothing, it means it has no value, why would you do something of no value ?
Another similar issue is to confuse work and employement. Typically raising childrens is a lot of work, but it is not employement. (Womans have been working since loooong ago, just not getting paid for it)
"Dont keep making the same mistakes; try to make new mistakes" damn this one really hit me. So easy to stay in my comfort zone when there's so much else I could do.
Aim to die broke. Give to your beneficiaries before you die; it’s more fun and useful. Spend it all. Your last check should go to the funeral home and it should bounce
> Your last check should go to the funeral home and it should bounce
Not GP, but this line in particular is dangerous -- that funeral home will do everything they can to harass whoever they can to get their money. Is that how you want to be remembered by your next of kin? Speaking from experience (homicide of a college student, so no blame for not paying), homes will charge tens of thousands just to release the body.
Lots of reasons. A basic one: the government (US) is gonna tax the assets you give to other people on some part of the transfer if it doesn't happen through inheritance, at which the beneficiary would otherwise get a stepped up cost basis.
To be fair it is a decent estate planning strategy to give the right amount away before not after you die. This also saves your heirs from a certain amount of fighting which tends to happen. I don’t know about being completely broke and timing that is quite hard. It’s the kind of thing you want to talk to your lawyer about though not the internet.
I too came to criticise this line, on the basis it incurs a cost on others after you die, but it has merit: Let others decide how lavish to make your funeral, including leaving your body out for dogs to eat: you don't need to care, so why spend?
if you do chose to pay, make it as cheap as possible within the constraints of your circumstances. Leaving your body to science is cheap and useful.
649 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 328 ms ] threadReminds me of: if you own a Porsche, all I know is that you're $120K less rich
Things are meant to be used. If you aren’t using it, what’s the point?
But now that that's gone I'm even getting the groceries with the fun car. It seriously transforms a chore into something I volunteer for. And we got rid of my crappy commuter car, for family business we still have my wife's solid but boring car.
The trick is recognizing if this will be fleeting or long lasting.
I had a colleague who bought a Porsche. He went through a million hoops to be able to afford it - buying used, restoring etc.
He loved taking photos with it and they looked great. He looked literally like a million $ - dressed up, nice sunglasses, nice watch, SoCal roads etc.
He loved talking about it and genuinely enjoyed living the Porsche life.
This man got his money’s worth and much more. He bought the car and let its presence and status and demands influence his life in a multitude of positive ways.
Speaking with him and seeing this influence gave me another viewpoint and I was inspired.
Not to buy an expensive car but toward excellence in something - anything.
And I don't even track it. It's just so precise, just a joy to drive all around.
Is it your "daily driver," or a 3rd car that you only use when you want to have fun?
Not sure, I hope a long time? It's a 2014 Boxster S (981S) bought used, with now a bit over 60k miles on it, and it's still going strong.
It had its last big service recently and there wasn't really anything wrong with it. They replaced the drive belt (I am honestly not sure if that was necessary) and that's pretty much it. Other than that it's regular oil and filter changes, and I got a new battery once. I might be lucky, but mine seems built to last.
> Is it easy to keep up with the maintenance?
Based on the above, I'd say so, yes. It's just not something I have to think about much.
Maintenance is more expensive, though. Definitely less frequent than my Ford was, but with the much more expensive tires and the drive belt (again, not entirely sure about that...), the Porsche may still well come out more expensive. That's okay, I knew full well going in.
> Is it your "daily driver," or a 3rd car that you only use when you want to have fun?
It is effectively my daily driver now. That needs a bit of qualification:
Before WFH when I still had a daily commute, I had a crappy Ford as my commuter car and only took the Porsche on that commute when I felt like it (e.g. when I knew traffic would be light, when it was a good day...). But since I mostly work from home now, keeping the Ford in shape was annoying so I got rid of it. We still have my wife's boring car as "family car".
But the Porsche is my daily driver by virtue of being the car I usually take and took before outside of the commute, even for grocery runs and other chores. For being a 2 seater sports car, it has a surprising amount of space in frunk and trunk (remember it's a mid-engine car, so it has both), and I really mean it that it feels good to drive even in every day situations.
It's precise, you feel "in full control" (I don't mean getting into more dangerous situations, just in regular safe situations it feels like that already), more connected the road... it probably does not add anything for people who generally think driving is boring or even annoying (of which I know plenty), but I like operating cars, and when I drive other cars I honestly wish they weren't so "mushy" in comparison.
You really should try though. "Feeling the road" comes with properties that are fun or at least worth the payoff for me, but not everyone wants to be jumbled around with lots of perceivable road noise in a car with low vantage point. It's not extreme, but my wife is not a fan; she likes that I have fun with it and tolerates the ride, but she prefers traveling in her "mushy" car where driving is more, shall we say, abstracted away.
Speaking of maintenance: My Tesla requires "less maintenance," but the tires are expensive. The factory tires lasted less than 30k miles and were over $1000 to replace. In contrast, my minivan with about the same miles has plenty of tread left. Shockingly, because of the tires the Tesla actually costs more to maintain than the other car.
Where I'm from — and I'm not from Italy — buying a Lamborghini makes you an instant a*hole. People think the only reason you bought that is to show off.
But that is not the case if you buy a Porsche, the NSX, or even the R8.
Have you ever driven a Porsche? They’re pretty cool. If you can afford it without sacrificing other important things, a Porsche (or anything cool, esp a car) can make life a lot more fun. Life is short and non-repeatable.
I am an engineer and I don’t have a Porsche.
It was sold under the special title "4DSC" Four Door Sports Car, basically a sedan version of the original 300ZX, same motor and internals.
It of course lacked some speed but this wasn't about racing but normal street driving, plenty fast for that, great suspension, built in hands free cellular, heads up display. Really was a marvel and it was compared against all cars up until the time of the article.
I think a Porsche or Acura TSX was #2.
We only live one life, you can't try to optimize every dollar. There's a tremendous price on "investing" in your own happiness throughout every part of your life.
I bookmarked the page and yet I will have forgotten about it tomorrow.
[0]: https://forlater.email/
If HN ever needs a new motto!
Good grief, yes. When you are tired and burnt out, you find the worst kind of shortcuts.
"but" does not count.
TFTFY
A more apposite version of 'think outside the square'.
If people are paying to hear the hits, you should play them. It's part of the job.
People love it when something they depend on is shut down and replaced with something new, incomplete, and buggy.
This is a shittier outcome for most people, but hey, at least you got promoted!
This is one of the truest things I've ever read.
Agreed, it's a valuable insight.
Let's say that I find it annoying when people "missbehave", like people letting their dogs shit wherever and not cleaning up, or just commonly being selfish and rude.
How do I now understand myself better? Is the point that the problem is somehow in me or what does this advice mean?
CalTrain explained.
If you aim to be on time, sometimes you’ll be late.
And if you aim late you’ll be late.
So the only certainty is found by being late.
Life is about what you decide to do, not about what others think you should do and certainly not about what some random old person says you should do because that’s what he wishes he did.
The second is an incredibly uncharitable take on a well-crafted list.
"Where some have found their paradise, others just come to harm." - Law of Joni Mitchell
"Don't do things for the wrong reasons."
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument
In simpler terms: what's good for some is bad for others.
"I come to the beach to relax, but others come to party."
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9formation_professionnel...
"The only productive way to answer “what should I do now?” is to first tackle the question of “who should I become?”"
I would take the same list and interpret as life demands prioritization. That which you choose to do gives it value, in part, because you choose not to do other things. When someone chooses to love me (like in a marriage for example) it's not just the love I receive but also the gratitude for the privilege of exclusivity.
https://kk.org/books/asia-grace/
sneaky edit: if I could get life advice from any random old person, he would definitely be on my short list. The guy knows how to live.
And that's fine; I read the point about "knowing how to live" to mean: he knew the life _he_ wanted to live, and lived it.
I found everything written to be insightful and I resonated with a lot of it mostly because I picked up most of it in my own travels.
But to be fair (and pedantic), at least one is untrue.
> • Handy measure: the distance between your fingertips of your outstretched arms at shoulder level is your height.
Ape Index = the difference between your arm span at shoulder level and your height. In other words, a +6" Ape Index means your arm span is 6 inches more than your height.
Apparently this nomenclature is popular in the climbing community, where relatively long wingspan is an advantage.
When I was a new climber I climbed with someone who was world class and just by watching me for a short time he could tell that my ape index was low.
This guy is my hero
A psychological game of mutually assured destruction.
But I guess it'll work well to keep kids quiet in the short term, sure. Advice is a form of nostalgia - a way of picking up the past, dusting it off, and selling it for more than it's worth; and, like nostalgia, it's never as good as it is remembered.
Learning about cause, effect, reaction, and manipulation are vital skills in life. Knowing and understanding them does not mean you’re a sociopath either. They’re widely useful in many aspects of life. Makes you a better poker player too.
What you're asserting goes miles beyond 'may'. You're making extremely strong claims with no evidence.
I agree with this statement. Assume a risk.
> I assert that the null hypothesis is that it does not have a benefit and is harmful.
Why did the word 'risk' disappear here? I don't think that's a good null hypothesis at all.
> You, on the other hand, if I understand properly, are saying that we should be able to do whatever we like to a punish person unless we show it directly causes harm.
I am not saying that.
What null hypothesis would you prefer?
> I am not saying that.
Then what are you saying?
"It has no lasting effects", probably.
And you need to make sure you're looking for both positive and negative effects.
"It's harmful" is a huge bias for a null hypothesis.
> Then what are you saying?
That you shouldn't assume it is harmful.
I didn't say anything about what parents should be "able to do". I didn't even give an opinion on the candy thing. I just think your justification is a big overreach.
But also a null hypothesis implies you're currently doing the testing, so that's a different scenario too...
Plus you're littering all over the place. That sucks.
Instead you could use non violent communication to get by. Tell them how you feel, how you feel hurt by their behavior. Maybe they start talking about how they are hurt being stuck 8h in the car ? And maybe both of you will feel compassion and a way to minimize the damages.
I missed registering kl.com by a few weeks and had to settle for kl.net. This was back 1995 when you had to email a template to Internic and wait about three weeks for a reply. In the template you had to provide working nameservers. I had put down some random hostnames for nameservers since I wasn't running my own yet and it was rejected after the usual three week delay. By the time I had nameservers set up a few weeks later a law firm had registered kl.com.
With working nameservers I was able to register maj.com (have since sold it) and finally kl.net which I plan to keep til I die.
2. Spin up another NFT hysteria
3. You know what happens here
Not Financial Advice ™
2. Sell to people trying to execute above strategy
3. buy lambos
This IS financial advice and totally legit.
What is kind? I am the straight shooter type. In the past I've gotten critiques from people about the way I speak, but also told by some people that the way I speak is fine. Maybe people just prefer different things.
I myself prefer people speaking straight to me.
I think I am kind, but not nice.
Or rather, in order to TRULY have someone else's interest in mind, you have to incorporate things like condescension as in-scope requirements for your communication. Otherwise, even good advice delivered in a straightforward but condescending manner, won't get through (which means, the person won't benefit, which means you the speaker failed to achieve the thing that would help advance their interest due to your poor communication).
* Give praise in public
* Criticize in private
* Any criticism offered should be constructive
* Any criticism offered should be of ideas and actions, not individuals--regardless of how strongly one may feel
* When in an argument, discussion, or debate, argue to the best possible interpretation of an idea or statement. Doing anything less is in bad faith, at which point you are not arguing to persuade but rather to make a point.
I'm sure there are many other such examples. I highlight criticism here as in my experience critical statements tend to be most often given or taken badly.
Excellent concept. I think I get caught up in making points, and this framing will help me do better and making persuasion or agreement the final goal.
For me, it helps to pause often and filter what I say before I say it as I often get carried away with topics I’m excited by or passionate about.
Telling someone who made a mistake: "You screwed up" may be true and necessary, but saying something such as "Let's try that again" will likely lead to a better conversation and learning opportunity.
Being kind, at the very least, improves the chances that you will be heard. If you have something true and necessary to say, it's a shame to say it in a way that turns people against you, and against your message.
You can say what someone got right and also say it would be even better with this correction.
Or you can call them a useless moron who doesn't know what they're on about.
Shoot straight, but don't leave people feeling bad about themselves.
The answer is always[0] "Perfect", "Yes, and...", or sometimes "Oh, what if...".
[0] Yes this is hyperbolic. Everything has exceptions sometimes.
To me, "kind" implies taking time and effort for someone, investing in them. That might mean engaging in conflict with them, if that seems to be what they need.
"Nice," on the other hand, suggests to me being polite, delicate, and never making anyone uncomfortable.
Niceness makes no enemies and wins no friends. It benefits the nice one more than anyone else, and is principally a strategy for staying out of trouble.
Kindness costs the giver something, sometimes the risk of giving offense, sometimes their time, sometimes the loss of power and influence because of making an unpopular choice that helps someone who really needed it. It is principally a strategy for taking care of others.
That's how I see it, anyway. YMMV.
I'm not familiar with what you're describing, but I saw another reply with a twitter thread explaining something similar to what you're proposing, so perhaps I'm just out of the loop.
The senses I associate with the two words are probably more connotations than denotations, though.
"When I describe East Coast vs West Coast culture to my friends I often say "The East Coast is kind but not nice, the West Coast is nice but not kind," and East Coasters immediately get it. West Coasters get mad."
[1] https://twitter.com/jordonaut/status/1352363163686068226
I'm deeply confused, but it's not worth arguing about.
Sorry but if that is literally what they said, I think they might not have been "shooting straight" with you. And this is obviously speculation, but perhaps that could have been because they didn't feel it was worth the potential blunt response they might have received from you if they said otherwise?
A party kept moving from table to table. I have no clue why. But the waiter would need to go and clean every table that they left, for both basic sanitation reasons as well as COVID. Waiter didn’t know what to do to get them to stop. So he goes to bartender to tell him the issue.
Bartender immediately says to them: “guys, every time you move we have to clean a table so pick a spot“. Party never moves again.
Bartender could have thrown a bunch of “if you don’t mind”, “we’d really appreciate”, “please”, etc’s in, but didn’t. They also could have thrown some less pleasant adjectives in, but again didn’t. They explained the problem, proposed a solution, and left it at that. That’s the “nice” thing, IMO. Anything else is patronizing or aggressive.
But I do think this is generally a good example. Don't water it down if you are setting a boundary.
If you are asking a fellow human being individually, I think treating others with respect only helps build a strong culture.
For example, if you get a flat tire on the West coast someone will come by and say “Aww man, you got a flat tire. That’s a real bummer man, that sucks”. and then they’ll walk away without doing anything useful.
Whereas on the East coast someone will see you trying to change your tire and say something like “What the fuck are you doing you stupid asshole? Didn’t anyone teach you how to change a tire? Are you frickin retarded or something?” and then they’ll change the tire for you.
Especially when you factor in what might be implied by what you said. Or what different implications a person might take away from what you said than what you meant, because their context or assumptions are different.
One aspect of being kind (which I am working on) is trying to imagine different ways a simple, matter of fact, direct statement could be interpreted given everything the other person brings to the conversation.
I have not once seen a person say this about themselves and not be an asshole instead of a "straight shooter".
• About 99% of the time, the right time is right now.
Home refinance? Travel during a pandemic?
• No one is as impressed with your possessions as you are.
Search HN for Elon Musk
• Dont ever work for someone you dont want to become.
Search HN for Musk, Gates, Jobs, Ellison, Dorsey, Graham, Thiel,
• Cultivate 12 people who love you, because they are worth more than 12 million people who like you.
If I knew 12 million people I would have little time for the 12, most likely just my immediate family and primarily offspring
• Dont keep making the same mistakes; try to make new mistakes.
Retirement plans come to mind. Relationships is another one where I don’t want new mistakes
• If you stop to listen to a musician or street performer for more than a minute, you owe them a dollar.
My dollar and a vote to value culture, people, art, expression even not to my liking. This applies to any creative endeavor to be consumed.
• Anything you say before the word “but” does not count.
I love ice cream, it it gives me gas.
• When you forgive others, they may not notice, but you will heal. Forgiveness is not something we do for others; it is a gift to ourselves.
Don’t learn to forgive. Learn to forget. Better yet learn to not become attached to become angry.
• Courtesy costs nothing. Lower the toilet seat after use. Let the people in the elevator exit before you enter. Return shopping carts to their designated areas. When you borrow something, return it better shape (filled up, cleaned) than when you got it.
Sure. Treat others as you want to be treated. I think I have heard that one before.
• Whenever there is an argument between two sides, find the third side.
Slavery. Abortion. Access to the ballot. Immigration. Nuclear war. Child sex trafficking.
It was that you didn't assume good faith when reading. That doesn't add value with exception for scammers, charlatans, and thieves.
tons of obvious counterexamples to his advice
"The best way to get a correct answer on the internet is to post an obviously wrong answer and wait for someone to correct you."
- M. G. Scott
(Do a ctrl+F on "correct answer")
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Cunningham#Cunningham's_L...
Sorry, this one depends on the old "if everyone would just..." It does cost something, and it's the price we ought to be willing to pay for a civil society. But it's also long been non-reciprocated (in my experience) and so I'm done with self sacrifice in the name of the common good (to the extent I can untrain it out of myself).
How’s that working out for you?
At the same time, there are also people who feel free to write a check, sign your name to it, and expect you to cash it. (They would do this financially if they thought they could, but mainly they do it emotionally.) If you let people do that to you, that also is not a healthy way to live.
So there's a balance between being asocial and being a doormat. Don't be either one.
I don't get mad that I pay taxes, but that I also don't see societal improvement happening proportional to what I pay... (and that there always seems to be none left in the communal basket when I have a bad day...)
See?
Here’s my 0.02c: you can be justified in perceiving injustice (against yourself, or more generally) and simultaneously be unjustified in reacting to that injustice. Less roundabout: two wrongs don’t make a right, and what is right is virtuous in its course of action (in the sense that acting right encourages other people to act right, when doing so isn’t tied to a negative emotion like shame.)
However it doesn't fix the sink on my resources and the relative gain on others. This gets extra fickle when it's in a competitive environment
If you feel it is important to behave in a certain manner it is hard not to judge others by the same standards. Can you hold yourself to an extremely high level of courtesy without judging others?
Yes, and this is a worthwhile challenge to accept if you feel it's indeed a challenge.
Life gets more enjoyable if it's not treated as a zero-sum-game with expectations of reciprocity. Pay it forward; don't assume to be paid back. Be the change you want to see.
You can and should do what you believe is right without being upset that the rest of the world acts differently.
(BTW: I object to that the examples of returning borrowed car with gas filled up,lowering toilet seats, letting people leave elevators and returning shopping carts in the right place are "extremely high levels of courtesy". It's just basic simple things. Regardless of how social norms in your immediate vicinity may deviate)
Another similar issue is to confuse work and employement. Typically raising childrens is a lot of work, but it is not employement. (Womans have been working since loooong ago, just not getting paid for it)
Not everything is transactional and zero-sum.
No.
And now you have made me do the same.
Not GP, but this line in particular is dangerous -- that funeral home will do everything they can to harass whoever they can to get their money. Is that how you want to be remembered by your next of kin? Speaking from experience (homicide of a college student, so no blame for not paying), homes will charge tens of thousands just to release the body.
if you do chose to pay, make it as cheap as possible within the constraints of your circumstances. Leaving your body to science is cheap and useful.