Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It’s a short piece, but it resonates with me, specifically this part:

> I’m earning the most money I’ve ever made and yet I’m the least fulfilled I’ve ever been.

I’m making the most I’ve ever made and I’ve never been less happy and more depressed. I despise being a cog in a huge corporate machine, it’s like the job was designed to be as unappealing as possible.

At the same time I can’t get over the fact that I have it better than the vast majority of humanity. I feel guilty hating my job, I won’t complain to people IRL because how could I? I have it made by all accounts. This guilt completely consumes me and adds a special level of self hatred, if I’m not happy with this, maybe I never will be?

Unlike the author though I can’t just quit, so endure it I must.



Bluntly, every person I know who's expressed these kinds of sentiments is guilty of the same mistake: externalizing their happiness.

They inevitably move, only to find the new place they're in sucks, just in different ways.

Or they find another job, but just discover more things they hate there.

Or they find a new partner, only to discover a new set of annoyances.

The same psychology leads people to think they'll be happy if they finally get that new car, or that new house, or that new TV.

All of it comes from the same place: assuming that happiness is something you can find by simply changing your circumstances.

Now, don't get me wrong, there are absolutely good reasons to want to change those circumstances! But it's critical to understand that oftentimes there is no one change of circumstances, one decision, one thing that will result in happiness.

I know it's a cliche, but I think I'm old enough now to confidently say that, yes: Happiness really does start from within.


As a counter-point, I spent about 5 years pretty miserable between 3 different jobs - my complaints where the same at each organization. The profit motive was being put above all else, including employee well being, an actually high-quality service, and in some cases baseline ethics. People were constantly pressured into working more than they should, both in the short term (too many hours per week) and in the long term - vacation time that was hard or impossible to actually take. Overpromising and understaffing/tooling led to constant crunches, corner cutting, rushed low-quality deliverables, and constant fear - either that a client would be lost and blame would be placed, or that a bad client that should go would be retained to the teams detriment. Often all of this was paved over by toxic positivity. You point out the problems and they say "Look on the bright side. You are being too negative. It'll all shake out". Just pure gaslighting bullshit.

After the 3rd such place, and a complete inability to effect change - I threw in the towel and started my own agency 2 years ago. From the outset I made the purpose of the company to be quality of life, not profit. Fewer clients/hours per team member, more time to execute and put out work you are proud to hang your hat on. No assholes (teammates OR clients).

For the entirety of the past 2 years, including the hard bits of actually getting it off the ground and getting those first few customers, the difference has been night and day. My stress levels are the lowest they've been in years. My relationship with my wife is better. I never dread Monday, and rarely pine for Friday. Sometimes it really is the environment, and sometimes that environment is pervasive in a particular industry.


Had a very similar experience to you and have often dreamt about building my own company that would work the way I want it to.

But how do you get started? I have tried a few times and every time I got discouraged and it didn’t pan out. It’s just overwhelming, and I don’t know where to start. Then I’m doubting my abilities and thinking whether I really want to work like a dog for very little pay for months/years to start the business? Or maybe I’m just better off doing another 18 months stint followed by 6 months off to recover.

I know I’m not alone in this, but haven’t figured out how to get out of it.

Any insights on the above, or a blog if you’ve written about it already?


I'll try to answer this as fairly as I can by starting with the things that lined up to make it possible for me:

- I've been working in my industry for over 12 years and have amassed a decent sized network and twitter following along the way

- I don't have kids, so my costs are lower, and my time is my own.

- My wife makes good money and was supportive of me taking a hit to pay while I got things going (I didn't draw any money from the biz for the first 6 months, enabled by the next thing on the list)

- I had a close friend be willing to give me an essentially risk free, low interest loan of $30K to get things going. Enough to cover me for those 6 months. Loan was structured to be forgivable if business failed in the first 2 years, 5 year terms @ 5%, with no payments or interest accrual in the first year. Obviously a loan like this is a rarity, but if you are sitting on some savings that could be a good stand-in.

- I ran a business once before many years ago and learned a lot of the hard lessons that time (taxes/accounting/entity structure/hiring)

- I do digital marketing & WordPress dev - which means the service I sell is also a skillset most founders need (ability to market their service, set up a website). I'm also pretty comfortable selling to both a technical and non-technical audience, and I'm comfortable pitching directly to and managing the expectations of C-suite folks.

All of that combined is a pretty great place to "start from zero". Success wasn't guaranteed but I certainly wasn't going about things the hard way.

Anyway to get first few customers I started being pretty active in places where people who might need my services gathered - Slack communities, subreddits, et cetera. I tried to give insightful advice where good answers could be given in a few paragraphs. I offered to look at peoples issues directly or to solve really small problems for free + an ask to consider me for larger projects or retainer work, or to just say nice things if someone was asking for the types of services I offered.

I also pitched 2 customers who normally would have been below my going rate/retainer size as basically a "I need some case studies, someone has to go first, you'll get a bit of a deal if it's you". Once I had those first 2 customers as a base and a nice referral pipeline as a result of them and the presence in those communities I was able to grow from there.

When I had around 4-5 steady retainer clients and a bit of padding in the business account (about 4ish months in?) I started hiring help. I had a lot of previous experience hiring and working with international teams so I leveraged that to save some cash early on by hiring in the Philippines, Romania & South Africa. By the end of year 1 we were a team of 4 (myself included). Total revenue was around $200K, of which I managed to pay myself around $60K before taxes.

At the end of year 2 there is about 8 of us now including our first full time US hire. Year two was just shy of $600K in revenue and I was able to get myself back into 6-figure territory compensation wise, give everyone raises + Christmas bonuses, and still keep several months of runway in the business account. I don't expect the biz to make me a multi-millionaire any time soon (and that's not the point anyway), but things feel pretty stable at this point and growth remains strong. Results probably not typical.


Congrats, that’s a nice trajectory.

I see zero chance of being able to pull it off myself though.


I'll counter this counter-point: I started my own consulting (and later, hosting) business and they've been a slog.

The parent comment glossed over "the hard bits of actually getting it off the ground and getting those first few customers" -- it's really hard. Five years in now things are going okay, but it took a while to get back to the came total comp I had pre-starting-my-own-biz, and even now the level of work is much higher (but so is the comp...).

If I had to do it again I'm not sure I would, and would definitely do a lot of things different. The big one would be going hard on biz dev from day 1 (or even day 0; start prospecting before incorporation), with #2 and #3 being talking to an accountant and lawyer ASAP once I could afford them.


My anecdote was about finding what's important to you and making a change to that specifically. For me it was a bigger focus on quality of life and quality of product, not compensation. Sounds like compensation is more important for you so my path would not be your path. As to the hard bits - I'll be covering that in response to another commentor who asked how I got started.

Agreed on accounting & legal - though this is easier now than ever with services like Bench.co - which I set up on day 1 right after spinning up the business entity & bank account.


Are you hiring graduates? Looking for exactly this type of environment to grow and do good work.


I won't say I'm not, but I will say it's probably a bad fit if you are in the US and a developer. It's a marketing agency that also does some custom WordPress development. For US based developers it's a combination of doesn't pay awesome + PHP rather than the latest shiny thing. Our hiring focus is mostly either outside of the US, or if in the US on people who've already gotten their bag from elsewhere and are more interested in chill work than a big paycheck. We win them over not with total compensation but with things like ability to only work 20 hours a week or leeway to rabbit hole down some interesting bit of code or try out a new marketing tactic that goes well beyond what the customers budget would normally allow, merely because it scratches an itch.


Sorry if this is inappropriate. Are you hiring native Android+iOS developer? :)


Not inappropriate - but no not currently. We're a Marketing agency that also does custom WordPress dev. We're working towards diversifying a bit by also launching some internally owned monetized content sites or small software products (such as a useful paid plugin for WordPress) but that's about it at the moment.


> I think I'm old enough now to confidently say that, yes: Happiness really does start from within.

What does age have to do with it? You're one person. It's anecdotal data.

I'm old enough now (5 years later) to confidently say that, yes: Quitting my last job really did make me happier.


Same in my case. I quit my first software job because it made me feel so meaningless and depressed. I was immediately happier. I quit my second job because they overworked me. Same result.

I have less money now, but I don’t care. I’m much happier being where I am now.

People underestimate just how much work life affects your entire life.


You spend most of your life at work (at least in the US). 24 hours in a day. 8 of them spent working. 1 hour for lunch. ~2 hours getting ready for work/sleep each day. 8 hours for sleep... that leaves you with ~5 hours per day, but you also have to do chores around the house, maybe pickup/dropoff kiddos, commute (if you don't work from home), and cook dinner and clean up afterwards. If you have 2 hours a day to yourself to pursue your interests/dreams, you are "fucked".


Even if you do manage to find 2 hours to yourself, it's typically at the end of the day and you're utterly, completely exhausted. I've found that, with young kids in the mix, the best thing I can do with my hour-ish at the end of a long day is read, or draw, or just spend some quiet time with my spouse. Anything else requires mental energy that I simply don't have. Even the video games that I play at the end of the average day need to be fairly brainless or else I'm not enjoying my time.


I don't even have a wife and kids yet, but I already find many of the video games I enjoyed as a teenager to be too demanding. Fallout New Vegas was an awesome game, and I remember spending virtually my entire summer vacation one year playing through Fallout 3. I gave New Vegas another go recently and it just feels like work. It sucks. Like I just want to get through the game so it will be done.


Indeed, I resemble that remark. I've been on paternity leave for the last couple months with kid 2. I have 10 minute slivers of down time throughout the day, and I can sacrifice sleep for a few hours of focus at night. I've been playing through L.A. Noire just to cross it off my bucket list, and I shamelessly refer to walkthroughs on every case. It's an alternative to watching a TV show in the evening.

Typically when I play a game I like to explore every nook and cranny, trying to find secrets and glitches and stuff. Lately it just gives me anxiety to start a new game when I know it will be on deck for years. I've been playing through Tomb Raider since 2019 and I'm not finished yet... I think I need to consciously change my play style and expectations, and just barrel through main story lines.

I went over to a younger coworker's apartment last night to play video games, which is a very rare activity for me. Left 4 Dead was a lot of fun a decade ago. He loaded up whatever the latest call of duty zombie horde shooting game is, and it was more stressful than fun. I have an interesting anecdote about stress and Tomb Raider. In 2020 my heart AV nerves all stopped working. My effective heart rate got down to 20-30bpm, and wouldn't increase with demand. A few days before I ended up in the hospital, I tried playing Tomb Raider just to see what would happen. After about 5 minutes my peripheral vision started to black out and I felt like I was having a panic attack!


I will say for CoD specifically, since the original Nazi Zombies mode was introduced in the original World at War ("CoD 5") in 2008, the franchise has made the Zombies mode INCREDIBLY complicated. Long gone are the days of holding down a room until you and your friends are overrun. Nowadays you have to solve puzzles, do various "chores" to access things like the Pack a Punch station... It's lost all its charm.

LA Noire and other games like it (e.g. Red Dead Redemption, Destroy All Humans!) seem to have the opposite problem, where I seem to remember the game being more engaging and challenging (in a fun way) than it is now. I guess that's a result of growing up and getting "smarter".

We haven't even touched on the micro-transactions/pay-to-win stuff...

As for the panic attack- I read an interesting book recently called The Body Keeps the Score. It's about PTSD and how, even today under the DSM V, it and similar conditions aren't getting the attention they deserve. While reading this book, I realized that my "fascination" with Dead By Daylight (similar to Left 4 Dead) might be rooted in adrenaline/stress hormones rather than pleasure hormones. Indeed, I had (have) several "hobbies" that my brain seems to be interested in for the stress they cause (like stock trading, holy fuck). The book poses that my subconscious thirst for stressful activity is actually a coping mechanism that is derived from my dysfunctional attachment style to my parents and my subsequent childhood experiences. In other words, stress and worry are all I've ever known. I'm in therapy and taking an SSRI for this now, and I'm significantly better than I was, mentally.


Yeah, in the zombie game there were brightly colored vending machines, random gun dispensers you had to pay for with points, and dropped power ups. It was a lot going on.

Speaking of Red Dead Redemption, I am working toward being able to robustly stream games from my desktop computer to the living room TV. I'm hoping to try playing through Red Dead Redemption 2 once it's all set up and working. It's non-trivial, as I will soon be relocating my desktop to a detached guest house. I think the reason I am drawn to Rockstar Games is because of their level of immersion despite the relative lack of gameplay complexity. I like that the only customization in L.A. Noire is picking an outfit, and if you want a bigger gun you have to open a car trunk in the middle of a shoot-out.

I am certainly nostalgic for the games I played in my youth. StarCraft, EverQuest, Starsiege Tribes, Medal of Honor and Battlefield 2, Freelancer, the list goes on. My old friend came into town a couple years ago, and we had a small LAN party for old time sake. We spent an hour just getting StarCraft to run reliably on everyone's computers. It was just as fun as ever.

That does sound interesting, I'll have to check out that book. My wife copes with a vaguely similar sounding past. I think her "Left 4 Dead" is watching shows like Criminal Minds. Glad to hear the therapy and SSRI are helping you. It's tough.

I recently started trading individual stocks for fun, but with a relatively small principal that won't stress me out. I see so many "news" articles telling me which stocks to buy, and I've always assumed they're manipulating me into being a sucker. So, I've been blindly taking the free advice to see what happens. I'm only down about 10% right now. Also, my investment in SHIB coin is due to take off like a rocket at any moment!


I liked that LA Noire was "different" for the reasons you listed + things like picking out whether people were lying. RDR had some of that going on as well, and there really isn't anything like GTA.

The Body Keeps the Score mentioned some alarming statistics... I don't recall the exact figure, but MANY Americans are dealing with some amount of PTSD whether they recognize it or not, as a result of having a non-secure attachment style as an infant. It sounds kind of strange that a lifetime of strife could come from how your parents were with you as an infant, but the science seems clear-cut.

With stocks, generally speaking if you are reading about a stock in the news, it's too late to hop on the roller-coaster and you will get left holding the bag. Most of my money is in index funds, but it still stressed me out trading a small portion with individual stocks.

Avoid ARKK/Cathie Wood. I have no idea what she's doing. She just loaded up on TSLA, as she does when one of her picks tanks, but automakers typically trade around a 4 P/E and TSLA is still well-above that at ~$120/share. TSLA will almost-certainly fall below $100 this year and perhaps even below $50 in the longer-term.


Completely resonates with me, my time became more precious the older I got, playing a game for 20-40h with quests that feel like work, even worse, menial work (go here, gather that, bring it back) is just utterly unsatisfying and unfulfilling.

That also made me notice that, even though I played quite a few single-player games when I was younger, most of my fun with games was on multiplayer/competitive games, it could be a grind to get better but there was a practice and I could feel myself leveling up my skills and playing them better, some up to competitive levels. That's always been more satisfying to me.

Newer high budget single-player games (feels like in the past 10-15 years) also feel much more like an interactive movie than a proper game, I don't want to be clicking to interact with a movie, I like mechanics and figuring out the metagame, I realised that watching something unfold with some interactive action in-between is not really my kind of gaming.

For the last 10 years I've basically stopped playing videogames, my gaming nowadays is mostly getting together with some friends and playing tabletop, it's social, it's fun and you always get to see a different persona of the people you know.


This resonates with me completely. I was an avid gamer in the first half of my life.

Then adulthood came and I just don't have time to enjoy games. I do watch a ton of TV shows and movies because they're easy to start up, put down, or even watch while doing something else that doesn't require full attention.

I do occasionally do a Let's Play of a game that looks promising, ideally one with little commentary, where the player focuses on the story elements rather than completion (prioritizes talking to characters over a speed run, or 100% quests completed, all collectables collected, etc).

Those are unfortunately hard to find (though I'd highly recommend the Cinematic Playthrough of Last of Us for anyone interested in experiencing the medium at its absolute best).

The nice thing about a Let's Play is that you get the story elements of the game, and can 2X speed through slow dialogue, skip action sequences as soon as they become monotonous, etc. You don't get to explore at your own whim unfortunately, but I've found it a good middle ground for being able to experience (and talk about) excellent games, while investing 10-20% the time actually playing it would take (not to mention it's free). It does tend to be more enjoyable with games that are fairly linear, rather than something like Fallout where there are thousands of ways to explore the game and align your character.

Other than that, I enjoy playing board games with friends.


Oh I can relate to this as well, but I think its not just being mentally tired. Me personally I want to get through the story, I do not have time to explore the world to get to the next chapter. And I feel a lot of games nowadays have this goal of rewarding exploration at least thats what I get from youtube reviews of the games. So like you for me eventually the game just becomes more work after work


> You spend most of your life at work (at least in the US)

Where else in the world people dont spens most of their lives at work?


>Where else in the world people dont spens most of their lives at work?

I've worked in some manufacturing domains where unions negotiated the ability to essentially opt-out of large amounts of the work year. There were people who would take off Nov-Feb to essentially focus on families during the holidays, hunting, etc.

I think, to a certain extent, the fact that we're highly productive yet have an expectation to work constantly is a measure of our value systems. (Obviously, highly context and culturally dependent.)


In MOST other first-world countries, the working class has the RIGHT to elect to work less than 40 hours/5 days per week (in exchange for a proportional reduction in salary). In some cases, you must be a parent to be eligible for this.. but yeah, in places like New Zealand and The Netherlands, if you don't want to work 5 days a week, you don't have to.


That doesn’t seem to contradict “people spend their majority of lives working”


Fair enough, but unless the other guy was just being tongue-in-cheek, I took the spirit of his question to be more like "where in the world is it different from the US?"


> In MOST other first-world countries, the working class has the RIGHT to elect to work less than 40 hours/5 days per week (in exchange for a proportional reduction in salary)

I work for a large swedish company in USA. None of my coworkers in sweden work less than 40 hrs, like not even one.

So is having that choice really relevant and does it really make it different than USA.


I'm not familiar with the laws of Sweden, but a quick Google search suggests there is a law on the books limiting the workweek to 40 hours. Even if that is only marginally-heeded, it's leaps and bounds ahead of the United States.

If Swedish residents can work fewer than 40 hours at their discretion, why is it you think most in your circle do not take advantage of this?

Qualtrics released the results of a survey recently stating that 92% of Americans are in favor of a 4-day workweek (that's not necessarily 32-hours)[1]

[1]https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/four-day-work-week/


> If Swedish residents can work fewer than 40 hours at their discretion, why is it you think most in your circle do not take advantage of this?

Maybe because they want the money and working 40hrs isn't so bad? But i really have no idea.

That survey isn't directly related to your original point about working less than 40hrs.

If you are claming that its much different in other countries mere existence of some law isn't enough, it would be a stronger point if you had quoted how many people are actually taking a paycut in those countries in exchange for a day off.

Also sounds like you haven't really looked into laws of MOST first world countries ( whatever that means) yet you made that claim without any proof.


What do you mean by “fucked”? If you don’t enjoy your job, you’re fucked? Seems like you’re saying you’re fucked unless you work less hours.


Yeah, you're fucked unless you work fewer hours. By "fucked" I mean "doomed to a relatively-miserable existence". I don't care if you have a FETISH for writing code, you do not want to do it ~40 hours/week.

We need a four-day (32-hour) workweek. Give me a 20% pay cut, I don't care. Most of us here make well over $100k/year. What we need is TIME.


And in the US it is rare to be able to get health insurance without working full time. Good luck with that.


This is, of course, by design. ACA made it a bit more realistic for part-time/self-employed people to get health insurance, however if you have to get your insurance through the ACA marketplace (healthcare.gov), you ARE paying more for it than if you were a FTE drone.


>People underestimate just how much work life affects your entire life.

It would be interesting to see how cultural aspects affect this. In the West, it seems like so much of our life/identity is focused on our job. "What do you do for a living?" is one of the most common opening questions upon meeting someone. I wonder if the impact of work life on one's happiness more muted elsewhere.


Yes.

I quit and then asked: “what if I stayed and do I regret leaving” on my last 4 companies.

Universally the answer is no I don’t regret it. One imploded and laid off like 60% of people after turning into a nasty political hell hole. Another laid off massively and is now world renowned as a failed story. Another gave me zero opportunities and everyone was yelling at each other all the time.

Believe me, I tried to enter my internal universe and be happy not learning and not growing.

Being bored to death and underutilized if you feel highly talented and creative is a form of death.

Op needs to answer: What has he done in his life? Built a unicorn and IPOd it? Jet skiing with super models? Inventing cures for diseases? Or did he sort of sit in a cubicle typing and reading Reddit for the last five years.

A lot of those on here, I don’t listen to their input on what successs is.

I will never be happy until I am climbing to the highest potential I can get to. No one is going to talk me into being otherwise.


I think many of the people who say that "happiness must come from within" are making a logical leap. It's true, you could go out and make lots of life changes yet still be unhappy. But that doesn't mean /every/ life change is futile for our happiness. Perhaps you just didn't change it in the right way!

From a more scientific perspective, there have been plenty of studies done on happiness, and it's virtually undeniable that our external environment has at least /some/ effect on our happiness.[1] I'd argue that one has to ignore or dismiss a massive wealth of studies in psychology to insist that happiness only comes from within.

[1] Since I'm talking broadly, this might act as a good summary - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill


“No one is going to talk me into…” is shorthand for “I’m not open to any other ideas that don’t align with my preconceived notions.” It’s not terribly productive on a site whose guidelines try to foster an open and curious conversation.


It's supposed to be about intellectual curiosity. Not questioning other people's life choices and giving unsolicited advice.


It's a little odd to me that you would seem to expect an article and discussion on something subject like "happiness" not to have personal accounts of their subjective experience.


That's not what I said. It's an uncharitable interpretation of what I said.

By all means, people can say what makes them happy!

My point is that we have no grounds for criticizing another person's subjective experience or personal life choices, nor is that desirable as a goal for this website.


Where do you think the OP was being criticizing? I did not see them say anyone was wrong, or making bad decisions. They even made sure to equivocate by saying there's nothing wrong with trying to change one's circumstances.


I'm talking about your comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34408305


So your issue is with me pointing out that saying what amounts to "Nothing you say can change my mind" isn't conducive to conversation?

How would you say the OP adds to the discussion if what they say, almost by definition, is meant to shut down discussion? Or is your issue with pointing out HN guidelines? It feels like you're reading way more into my point than was actually there if you think I was criticizing anything related to their life decisions.

It's fine with me if someone has that point of view. But I don't think a forum like HN, which is supposed to be about fostering dialogue, is the best place to share it, or at least share it in that manner.


> So your issue is with me pointing out that saying what amounts to "Nothing you say can change my mind" isn't conducive to conversation?

I've already explained this: "It's supposed to be about intellectual curiosity. Not questioning other people's life choices and giving unsolicited advice."

You've actually warped the direct quote "No one is going to talk me into BEING [emphasis mine] otherwise" into "Nothing you say can CHANGE MY MIND". The OP is talking about how they feel, what kind of person they are, what kind of life they intend to life. Not talking about some kind of belief about a subject X.

This conversation with you is becoming very tedious, and I'm repeating myself, so I doubt that I'll be continuing.


IMO, you've failed to point to how my comment questioned anyone's life choices or gave any advice outside of following HN guidelines.

I didn't misquote; I said "amounts to" in order to indicate I was paraphrasing because it seemed like it would benefit from rephrasing since it appeared we were talking past each other. Although what you've pointed out comes across as a difference without a distinction to me. Saying "No one is going to talk to me into BEING..." is just as apt to shut down healthy conversation.


[flagged]


The point being made is that HN is meant for discussion; so I'd assume you wouldn't see any value in discussing that topic on the forum.

I think it's fair to say there are certain principles (like the idea that a minor cannot consent to a sexual relationship with an adult, or that slavery is a moral wrong) can be viewed as immutable (or, at least immutable within a certain cultural context).

However, germane to the discussion in this thread, I don't think the definition of "happiness" is one of those immutable principles.


The quote in it's full context

> A lot of those on here, I don’t listen to their input on what successs is.

> I will never be happy until I am climbing to the highest potential I can get to. No one is going to talk me into being otherwise.

What's being discussed is the definition of _success_, not happiness. And in fact, what the poster said is, this is what makes me happy and I'm not interested in anyone convincing me that shouldn't be what makes me happy.


You’re missing the even broader context. The article is explicitly discussing “happiness” and why the author isn’t happy despite being “successful” by traditional measures.

Further, some of the issue is with the imprecise definition of “happy”. The modern use of the term can be used interchangeably. What causes someone to be hedonically happy may make them eudaimonically unhappy. So IMO it’s completely warranted to have further discussion to either define the definition or bring into question if someone is chasing the right goal for them. Saying what is tantamount to “I’m not willing to discuss this” facilitates none of that.


It's exactly that imprecision that means the person making the statement gets to tell you what it means for them, and they're not unreasonable for being very explicit in telling you that you will not convince them that their definition is more appropriate.

Furthermore,

on a purely mechanical level, what you're doing here is trying to escalate scope specifically so you don't have to give the point. Just give the point.


Everything I've said is pretty clearly within the scope of the featured article or the HN guidelines. You seem to be conflating what I'm saying with something that's more argumentative.

What I'm not saying: The OP is wrong about how they go about defining happiness or what they do to achieve that goal.

What I am saying: They are misusing HN if they are so close-minded as to be unwilling to engage in discussion, or swayed by counter-arguments.

It's a red flag when somebody says they can't be convinced, particularly on a subjective topic.

Obviously, a subjective measure like happiness is up to the individual to define. I'm not disagreeing with that and I don't think any of my posts give that impression unless someone is already using a hard-focused lens to read too much into them. My point was pretty clearly stated multiple times but it seems people are primed to argue. The HN guidelines clearly state one of the intents of the forum is to foster curious conversation. If somebody makes a post that "they can't be convinced" they are no longer interested in a discussion and they are therefore misusing HN. I would make the same case if they were claiming "Red is best color and I can't be convinced otherwise." In that case, maybe HN isn't the place for you on this topic. If you want to just plug your ears and talk at someone, there's plenty of places on the internet to do that. It would be akin to someone saying "This classroom was built for learning" and I show up with my arms crossed and say I refuse to learn. Well, ok, nobody is saying you can't take that stance. But they can say you're misusing the forum provided.


One has to wonder if I've been going back and forth with ChatGPT.

People talk about having a feeling of uncanny valley when reading some of the things ChatGPT says and I must say, this must be what it feels like.

And if you're not open to the possibility that I'm speaking with ChatGPT it's because you're misusing HN.


Ha, the same thought crossed my mind as I was reading https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34420721. In fact, one of the top comments talks about the uncanny valley-ness of ChatGPT.

I guess the follow up question is: what guideline do you think I'm violating?


It's obvious you have tendencies that make it difficult for you to understand, and therefore effectively communicate, with others. The result is you cannot understand why someone would consider the expression of something as deeply fundamental as their own happiness with themselves as more important than some "guidelines" on a forum ran by people who are not themselves.

That you rely so heavily on the guidelines is telling, it's what often happens when persons don't understand the underlying principles.

Your initial post came from a place of not understanding. As we've interacted that's become more and more clear to me. I see no need to belabor this any longer.


Did you read what came after “talk me into”? I think a preconceived notion that you want to make the most of your life isn’t something that you should necessarily be open to being talked out of.


>preconceived notion that you want to make the most of your life isn’t something that you should necessarily be open to being talked out of.

Fair enough when it's just a vague, general sentiment like "making the most of your life." What is probably worth being open minded about is how you define the objective function that maximizes that potential. It might be a little odd if I defined "making the most out of my life" in the same way I did when I was six (or even 16) years old.


I have co founded a $100+ million valuation startup. I am not in the top 50%. I am not in the top 80%. I am in the very very very top 0.5%.

If you have worked in most tech jobs, at large or medium sized companies, you have not met people like me. I took risks. Major ones. I left comfort.


I've met plenty of people that took huge risks and wound up incredibly depressed. Many (most?) startup founders pour everything they have into that company. They give up money, time, health, relationships, other opportunities, etc. Most don't make it. Others will have a success on paper and then waste another year as a middle manager in a big company to get that earnout. Of course, that gets into the debate about whether they were working on the right thing at the right time -- survivorship bias is really strong on this topic.

I'm happy for your success. I assume it was earned with hard work. I hope it works out. A lot of startups with high valuations are feeling the crunch right now. Many of those will peter out and the founders will join the rest of those depressed by their life choices and/or feeling like victims of circumstance. There's far more to success than forgoing comfort and there's far more to happiness than success.

For my part, I co-founded and built two companies for ~4.5 years each: one in hardware and one in SaaS. The SaaS one was in the second batch of TechStars Boston. I had some success and I'm happy I did it. I learned a lot and it was generally fun. But, I trashed my health and wouldn't recommend others do it under the guise of happiness.

Nowadays I do industrial research on language VMs. I get paid very well. The work is gratifying. I have time for my kids, I'm learning things on the job. And I work with great people. I'll probably start another company some day because I like the variety of work and the thrill of the chase. My startup experience gave me a broad network and introduced new opportunities, but I'm only marginally better off compensation-wise than peers that worked a more conventional career. I'm almost certainly behind in terms of lifetime earnings. Many of them are impressed that I struck out and built multiple companies, but that has no real bearing on my happiness.

I'm not sure what being in the top 0.5% means without knowing the metric. If you love starting companies, have at it, but I can think of more challenging paths if you're looking to reach your full potential. Some of the smartest people I've ever met built the foundational technologies that allow SaaS to even exist while working for decades at the same company. I don't know how happy they are, but I know how impactful they've been.


I'm not sure what point you're alluding to here. I've met lots of people, some of whom I'd say took much greater risks than starting a tech company. I'm not sure if you're conflating conventional notions of monetary success with what the article is about, which is happiness.

Is your point that in order to take risks to be happy you need to be so cock-sure as to be closed minded? I tend to disagree and would probably characterize that as reckless as opposed to taking informed risks.


I'm detecting a low-level stubborn here, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

(Jet skiing with super models BTW is one of the most ephemeral ways of gratification one can seek, probably induced into you by media -have a look at Girard's theory of mimetics to understand why you even want this- and as such something that will only impress the most superficial of people, if you tell them "I super-model jet skiing" when asked what you did with your life - all of which make me believe this must be a young person writing.)


It's one of those things like "time heals all wounds". Nobody likes to hear it when the wound is fresh, but it's absolutely true. When you're younger, FOMO is much stronger. As you get older, FOMO starts to get replaced with "who gives a...". With that in mind, age might matter


Just to note, as middle aged person, the "who gives a .." might not be from a deeper wisdom due to age but cynicism.


maybe true. but for me personally, i just realized that the constant comparison of what i have vs what other people have is just dumb. as long as what i have makes me happy and the pursuit of those things isn't causing me to make bad decisions about other things, then i'm okay with it. it might be why i'm so sickened by all the ad tech as ultimately it's keying in on people's FOMO.

it might sound embarrassing to admit, but it was actually watching Fight Club and the scene animating the Ikea catalog and the accompanying monologue (and overall theme of the movie/book) really got me thinking about it. i was mid-20s when that came out, and it definitely planted a seed. people do remind me of that when i mention making soap!


"The things you own end up owning you." -Tyler Durden


Some wounds, emotional as well as physical, far from healing actually leave chronic and debilitating scars. The aphorism is far from "absolutely true."


How old do I have to become for "time heals all wounds" to work? I am 41 now, which is seemingly old for this website, but figure it might take another decade or two for that one to make sense? (How old are you?) In my so-far-limited experience, it isn't time that heals wounds, but active shifts in perspective (which of course require some time to happen but it isn't like time is doing it: I have many "wounds" that hurt just as much now as they did 20 years ago, because I have not been able to obtain any kind of closure and the thing that happened didn't retroactively change or anything... at best I just try to ignore it, but that was my same strategy right after stuff happened ;P).


It's not about age, it's about experience.

A virgin will have serious FOMO over sex. But the more experiences you have with different partners, the less special it is ie. the less FOMO you get since you've "been there done that."


I think the thing about aging is that you have less energy, so you're less likely to make energetic mistakes, and more likely to take some calm moments to think things thru.

also, if you have moderate ambitions and desires, with time you may reach a point where you've met them. Then you are less focused on those for happiness.

so I do think age has something to do with it


Age can have a lot to do with it, depending on your path through life.

The adage is generally that wisdom comes with age, and there are some things in life that are difficult to internalize until you’ve gone though the experience.

To me, it’s just another way of saying “the more life experience I gain…”.


> To me, it’s just another of saying “the more life experience I gain…”.

I believe that if you never were in a position where your job was a soul-crushig source of misery and despair, you've been lucky to live a sheltered life.

Most people don't have the privilege of picking and choosing outstanding jobs with decent work/life balance, nice colleagues, reasonable deadlines and considerate stakeholders. Most people have rent/mortgage to pay, kids to feed, and unfavourable odds of improving their life with low risk and impact on your life. I'm sure they gained a lot of life experience too.


Yes, everyone experiences life differently, and the sum total of those experiences covers a wide spectrum.

Personally, I’ve been on both sides of this conversation. Grew up dirt poor, started working as a teen to help my family make ends meet, and dreamed of a “better” life where the work I did mattered to me and the money I made would be sufficient to not constantly wonder where the next meal comes from. A constant source of that soul crushing misery and despair.

Later in life, I was fortunate enough to experience the lifestyle afforded by a Silicon Valley salary after working my ass off to get there, an “arrival” of sorts.

Younger me had no ability to comprehend how/why this high paying job would make me more deeply unhappy than I’d ever been in my life.

Life experience is contextual and relative, but important nonetheless.


> Most people have rent/mortgage to pay, kids to feed, and unfavourable odds of improving their life with low risk and impact on your life.

I would go further - majority of people on this planet live painful and miserable life.


>What does age have to do with it?

I don’t want to speak for the OP, but I think they’re using age as a proxy for “I’ve seen this same pattern enough times to…”


Enough times to... make a vast overgeneralization about human nature based on personally experienced anecdotal data.

Also, there's no evidence that the OP is older than, say, me, which is why citing age is largely irrelevant.


If it wasn’t clear enough from my post, I’m implying you are reading too much into the literal meaning of the age part of the comment. As the HN guidelines say, we should be trying to take the most generous interpretation possible.


> I’m implying you are reading too much into the literal meaning of the age part of the comment.

I'm not. In fact my previous comment would still be valid if the line "What does age have to do with it?" were omitted. The important point is that the anecdotal observations do not apply universally.


>The important point is that the anecdotal observations do not apply universally.

We are probably reading their comment somewhat differently. Because of the way they couched their statement as rooted in their personal experience, I assumed their were implying it was anecdotal and obviously not a generalizable, objective truth.


> I assumed their were implying it was anecdotal and obviously not a generalizable, objective truth.

"I think I'm old enough now to confidently say that, yes: Happiness really does start from within."


If I had said, "I've lived in enough places to conclude that southern California is really the best place" would you read that as me making a universal claim or simply relaying my subjective determination?

As I already stated, I read the OP as if the latter. Despite the often pedantic nature of HN, there's a lot of room for nuance and interpretation human communication.


That depends. If you had prefaced your remarks in the following way, then I would read it as making a universal claim.

"Bluntly, every person I know who's expressed these kinds of sentiments is guilty of the same mistake: [living outside southern California]."


> What does age have to do with it? You're one person. It's anecdotal data.

Actually an entire field of psychology is based on the idea: cognitive behavioral therapy.

But you seem like you need to pick a fight, and I'm honestly not in the mood, so carry on.


> you need to pick a fight, and I'm honestly not in the mood

"Bluntly, every person I know who's expressed these kinds of sentiments is guilty of the same mistake"


You can both be right, is the thing.


I was stuck in a loop of: wake up -> gym -> work -> pub(Wednesday and Fridays, sometimes Monday) -> TV with SO -> gaming, pretty much every week day. On weekends I'd either game all day or go surfing. I'd go on a ski holiday once a year and two other one week holidays with my SO.

That was my life for years. Then I changed _everything_. Quit job, broke up with my girlfriend, sold my flat and most of my possessions, different job, became a "digital nomad".

Now I'm "happy". I found a job that doesn't have all the things I hate about working. I can do sports I enjoy much more frequently, I'm not stuck in a loop where everyday is the same.

I guess I agree that _one_ thing most likely won't be the key to happiness. I think the key is figuring out what makes you happy(I think a lot of people don't know) and what makes you unhappy(this is usually easier to identify). Then doing more of the things that make you happy and less of the things that make you unhappy.

I'm not sure if that's what "happiness starts from within" means, but that's what worked for me.

Edit: I guess being happy also depends on the definition of the word. Depending on the definition, maybe I'm not happy.


> Bluntly, every person I know who's expressed these kinds of sentiments is guilty of the same mistake: externalizing their happiness.

I don't believe this take is fair or correct. FANG-like jobs are designed to depersonalize workers, compell them to work extremely long hours, force them to be constantly on and available, and basically live for the company, only to be pushed out of the company by design and get fired as disposable canon fodder at the slightest bump on the calendar.

The pay might be good, but it resembles a deal with the devil.

Have you ever wondered why the average tenure at some top tech companies is measured in months, and reaching a milestone like 4 or 5 years is lauded as a major achievement? I seriously doubt that so many people is just "externalizing their happiness". Sometimes it's really the job that kills you inside and does so by design, don't you think?


> FANG-like jobs are designed to depersonalize workers, compell them to work extremely long hours, force them to be constantly on and available, and basically live for the company, only to be pushed out of the company by design and get fired as disposable canon fodder at the slightest bump on the calendar.

That mostly doesn't match my experience in two ~5y stints at a FANG:

* Depersonalize: maybe; not sure what you mean by it here.

* Extremely long hours: not at all. Most people worked ~45hr/wk counting ~1hr/d of lunch. I averaged a bit less than that.

* Force them to be constantly on and available: no. One of my roles had an explicit oncall rotation where you were primary for about one week a quarter and secondary for another week. The other role had no oncall. When you were off no one expected you to be in contact, and several team members had configured their phones so that their work profile was completely deactivated outside of work hours. At times when I was excited enough about what I was doing that I wanted to work extra my manager pushed back hard, getting me to think about the impact on team culture. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34329670

* Be pushed out of the company by design and get fired as disposable canon fodder at the slightest bump on the calendar: I worked closely with ~50 people and didn't see anyone fired. The people who got somewhat close to getting fired were ones who were having trouble getting things done, but in a sustained low output sort of way that was clear to everyone they worked with and not a "slight calendar bump" sort of way.


Agreed here, there's so much scope and specialization in a large company, it takes time to make impact that often goes beyond 1-2 years. I recall in my last FAANG at Apple, the opportunities for high impact projects are often left up for the individuals to find. You're hired to do X, but nothing stops you from creating some really highly useful internal library, side projects, pitching ideas to management (they will often get rejected by sometimes accepted), etc...

And honestly, I was averaging maybe 5 hours of real work a week in some stretches. Ofcourse crunch time happens, and it is team dependent, but one has to take control of their experiences in any company or situation instead of relying on others to make their expectations happen.


I don't know if all FAANG companies are the same, but your description of the job does not match my FAANG experience at all.

It was dehumanizing in its own way because you are such a small cog in a large machine, but nobody worked long hours, nobody was forced to be available all the time, nobody really needed to sacrifice for the company (because everybody was such a small cog) and even the lowest performers I worked with could basically not do anything to get fired. Many people there were also "lifers" because the job was so easy.

Most people left due to having ambitions for more impact, not due to being burnt out.


I'm going to go out on a limb and disagree with the idea that happiness comes from within.

For two reasons: 1) it contradicts my lived experience and 2) it contradicts research.

Let's start with money. I used to be poor and now I'm not anymore. I used to have all kinds of anxieties about money, surprise surprise, once I put my nose to the grind, earned more of it, and developed a healthy financial cushion, those anxieties disappeared and I became happier.

My anecdote isn't the only data point, there's research out there which indicates that more money correlates with more happiness (though the effect has diminishing returns once you hit the upper middle class).

There are at least three really big external factors I'm aware of which are correlated to happiness in a big way.

1. Money

2. A supportive network of family and peers

3. Health and fitness

Every time we look we find that as people improve their circumstances in these areas, they report greater happiness and fulfillment in their lives.

I'm not saying that striving for inner peace and all that is necessarily a waste of time. It has its benefits. But frankly I think if you want to be happy you can do a lot worse than busting your hump to sort out the three things I just mentioned. If you're broke, sick and alone, inner peace isn't really a priority. Working on those problems is.


I'm not op but pretty sure that he wrote that "from within" thing assuming all those things you talk about are already there.

After all, we're discussing a blog post of a young bored top-earner from one of the most impressive cities in the world.


At least in my experience this is nonsense.

The circumstances of my work make a large difference to my happiness. I know because I've been in a number of different circumstances and my happiness has varied greatly.


I’ve always liked the phrase “money can’t buy happiness but it can make you less miserable.” I think the main idea is that there are certain circumstances that can bias you into an unhappy state, but merely removing what makes you miserable isn’t enough to make you happy.


Happy or less annoyed? I find when I was truly happy I cared less about external influences. For example, if it's hot, a person is annyoing, someone almost hits me with a car, or it my manager wants me to do something boring.

So maybe what some people think are the sources of their unhappiness is actually just making their unhappiness more obvious.


I don't mean the minutiae.


You can certainly improve your happiness incrementally. From little things like getting shoes that fit better to things like moving to a climate that fits you better. Reducing annoyances and distractions.

Yeah in the limit you can't achieve capital-H Happiness with a change in physical circumstance but I don't think that's what's at stake here.


Absolutely agreed!


> assuming that happiness is something you can find by simply changing your circumstances.

Thankfully I learned years ago this doesn’t work and got past this mindset. Changing circumstances has never significantly improved things for any length of time.

> Happiness really does start from within.

I’ve also never had any luck with this and am increasingly convinced some people aren’t destined to be happy.


> I’ve also never had any luck with this and am increasingly convinced some people aren’t destined to be happy.

Roughly everyone. Happiness is an unattainable construct designed to sell you more stuff and experiences. It isn’t real.

Contentment, though, now that’s achievable. But it doesn’t get talked about because it doesn’t monetize well.

The Oatmeal has my favorite explanation/take on this: https://theoatmeal.com/comics/unhappy


> They inevitably move, only to find the new place they're in sucks, just in different ways.

A recovering alcoholic friend of mine once told me this syndrome is well known in 12 step programs. They call it "doing a geographical."


No matter where you go, there you are.


I hate this quote/pop advice. For some people location really, truly does matter.

There are irredeemable places, and places that just don’t work for an individual. They key is knowing when it’s a problem instead of just running somewhere random and hoping it’ll fix all your issues.

Personally? I feel way better in sunny, dry climates. My mood improves a ton and I legitimately feel healthier. Right now I live in the exact opposite and I don’t like it.


ahhh, i’ve had jobs that made me hate life.

i’ve had jobs that didn’t feel like work.

not sure if you intended by you come off defeatist.

if i was again at a job that was making me sad or angry i’d:

1. list things i hate

2. list things i don’t mind

3. work to do more of 2 and less of 1

if after a year it’s still unbearable look for a different job. talented people have more options than they realize.


Hard to see how this meshes with published evidence about the role and importance of environmental and lifestyle factors in stress, well-being and burnout.

If anything, getting older is strongly moving me away from your mindset. To the extent that well-being is intrinsic it seems to be more about the causal relationship to environmental factors. Some people are better at managing workload, setting boundaries, avoiding stressful situations and finding a "scene" that fits their values and abilities. I've seen these people do very well.

There are plenty of people out there ready to tell you that happiness and well-being are all about attitude. But when I look at the people in my own life who have said this none of them have been particularly happy or seem to have figured things out for themselves. And it's no coincidence that some of the strongest advocates for "individual responsibility for happiness" are bad bosses and abusive spouses who have a vested interest in keeping people in bad environments.

To me, stories like this one read more true to life: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34406760#34409368.


These are very good points to ponder seriously.

You can change your circumstances in another way. Reduce your expenses despite all the money that's coming in. Then find something important to you. It feels like it should be something altruistic. Funnel money to it. But also funnel your time and energy.

Buy some property in Detroit and build a safe house there. Fly in once a month to be involved, actually forming concrete, or roofing, or whatever. Then be involved in forming the management team, and be the board chair or something.

Or found an IT version of a farmer's market. Whatever that means.

Design and build a cylindrical windmill that stinks, but can be installed on balconies to harvest $5 of energy per month. Then invite people who know what they're doing to teach you how to get that up to $20/month and cost only $50 to build. Refine it until you can distribute kits.

Launch a wheelchair repair service. Coach a 4H club.

I know recent events have made altruism look bad, but I'm not advocating... well, I guess maybe I am. I never really looked into it, so I don't know. But I know it feels kinda good to shovel a neighbor's driveway every so often.


If you’re talking about FTX, their version of altruism was donating vast sums to political parties. I would call that more power-seeking than altruism, whatever the media calls it.


I agree, but there may be a single change of circumstances that will open a path to something new. For example, if OP can accumulate enough $ to leave their job with at least a reasonable level of financial security, they might find that in the absence of the job's mental and physical overhead, heretofore obscured options would appear.


This is a great viewpoint to foster in unhappy employees who you want to stick around. Reminds me of “Who Moved My Cheese.”


> Happiness really does start from within.

100% - and for some people to excel in connecting with themselves, they need a calmer environment - or just more simplicity.

But his sentiment reminded me right away of the book "The Quest of the Simple Life" by William James Dawson.


>> Happiness really does start from within. >100% - and for some people to excel in connecting with themselves, they need a calmer environment - or just more simplicity.

Now let's go full-circle for a moment: sometimes the job, or circumstances, stand in the way of this ability to find inner peace, or sometimes just think. Even standing apart in a vacation for a few weeks gives you the ability to snap out of it. It's true in my experience that sometimes, the job needs to change.

The attitude expressed in one of the top comments above around happiness being within and not connected to changed circumstances is narrow, I've had this debate with friends who are high-achieving types. They argue that one should adapt and make the best of it, and often it's you and not the job. They also drink a lot.


To put it in another way, if we are trying to paint a canvas white, there is always a more whiter color that we haven't yet achieved. It will continue till we realise there is no perfect white or dark. Just shades of it.


I’m earning the most money I’ve ever made and I’m the happiest I’ve ever been even. It doesn't mean everything in my life is perfect, far from it, but that money is a huge help.

Doubling my salary and being paid what I am worth by doing what I wanted to do brought me a peace of mind I never had in the last five years (since I immigrated to a new country). I do not have to worry about so many things anymore, it's truly amazing and liberating. I can focus on what truly matters. I can take risks. I can plan for the future without having to go to the depression realm of looking for a better paying job.

Did I hate the jobs I did before? Some of them, but the money aspect stressed me a thousand times more than the work itself. When you don't like your job and do not have the money, you have to worry about both. When it's only your job, you know what to focus on and if you have enough savings, you can be bold and take risks.

A few years ago, I read this NYT article titled "Your Job Will Never Love You Back" [1] and that tagline is stuck in my head since then. Your work doesn't define you and even your dream work will have boring parts.

I'd suggest to go to therapy to focus and work on yourself. Better days are yet to come!

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/24/business/your-job-will-ne...


If you don't mind, which country did you come from and immigrated to? :)


Sure! France -> Canada


My approach to that problem is to oscillate between large companies where the pay is extra good and you get to see huge things but the work as a cog is not very appealing, and smaller companies / startups where work is fun and personal growth is noticeable even though it pays less. I think it also accelerates professional growth.


i've done something similar but different. when i get to the absolute breaking point of cannot stand to look at code any longer, i switch industries altogether and go back to a lower paying but much more creative field. once i get tired of essentially being a broke artist, i find a tech job again to start the process over. i also try to stave off the hatred of tech by having creative hobbies, and when i'm being a broke artist i keep up with coding trends to the best of my interest. the staving off of the hatred of tech is getting harder though. the pervasiveness of ad tech and privacy invading tech is just got me just under red lined.


What kind of art/creative projects do you work on?


for paying gigs when it's that time, video/photography work. when it's just playing/hobby time, i like to make things by hand that can be used. techy side of my is always tinkering with things to make video/photography stuff like arduino controlled things. i've made my own camera support things by milling aluminium blocks from my own designs. randomly, i even do things like make lye soaps and candles and other bath products. it always gets a raised eyebrow at first, but ends with great big smiles when people try them. it's actually my favorite thing to make simply because of it having that kind of result.

jack of many master of few


If you think you feel bad being a cog and making a lot of, money, imagine how much it sucks being a cog and making much less in the service sector. Go to a Chipotle..there is a near 100% likelihood that the people preparing your food hate their jobs way more than you hate yours.


If I worked a blue-collar/service job, making 1/5th what I make as a SWE, having to commute, stand on my feet all day, deal with customers... I'd do drugs. Like I get it. I get why people do drugs. I get why people don't save money for retirement. Life sucks SO MUCH, that it's basically the daily $5 Starbucks drink or suicide. Make no mistake, for most people, life fucking sucks. Then some of you come into that Chipotle and cop an attitude because the cashier misheard you or they got your order wrong or whatever.


> Make no mistake, for most people, life fucking sucks.

And for many, it's one small slip-up, poor choices, medical problems, etc. and they may have to look forward to these sorts of jobs ... potentially until they drop.

I have no back-up plan, and ageism is a thing. I have to play this software engineering game for as long as I can to avoid the service sector when I'm older. And I have to play it very carefully.

Right now I'm sitting pretty, good income, unlimited vacation, work from anywhere. A "dream" job. But for how much longer?

Fingers crossed. I am not sure about turning to drugs, that would likely amplify the hell and make suicide even more of a viable option.

It's a grim outlook, I try not to think about it.


Agism is a thing, in both directions. I believe I have been discriminated against for being the youngest person on the team (I often was until mid/late 20s).

Definitely though it will become an issue later in life, though I have to wonder if agism really will be a problem for us, or if it will be that we simply quit the rat race of keeping up with the industry. I'm thinking about all the older developers/engineers I have worked with over the years, and they all had one thing in common- they did not or would not keep up with the industry. Some were working with System Z mainframe stuff, some were working with VB.NET, and most moved into management.

Management is certainly one way you could save yourself from aging out (whether through agism or not keeping up).


I mean I worked at Safeway, Trader Joe’s and a bunch of other terrible jobs from age 15-27. Low skill labor/service jobs are not bad at all when you don’t have much context. Sharing one bathroom with 4 roommates who party constantly would be a nightmare for me now, but as an 18 year old who it was a paradise.

It’s all relative, and you are viewing their jobs through the lens of an engineer making 6 figures.


The "these are starter jobs!" argument is tired and invalid, because so many Americans north of 20 (30, even) are working those jobs. I almost want to say you should know I am not thinking about teenagers/college students in my previous comment.


I am just pointing out that it is all relative. My friend is a doctor who makes 500k+ and dropping to a lowly 120k would make him miserable. I also have friends who make 25/hr and are fairly content, they don't need drugs to fend off suicide like you implied.

Someone wouldn't spend 30 years working retail in utter misery the entire time, these are intelligent people who have agency. I spent ten years working these jobs and the people who were there for life were relatively content.


$25/hr isn't bad pay... Nobody at the local Chipotle is making $25/hr. That makes all the difference in the world, believe it or not. At $25/hr you and an SO also making $25 can buy a house, for example.


This honestly isn’t helpful, it’s part of why I feel so guilty complaining, someone always has it worse.


Planning an exit, if you truly want to leave, is possible and takes time (years). You don’t have to keep on but just know the time horizon is long and you need a solid plan.


society/civilization[/state/government] was meant to collectively make it better for the next generation in general. But society is not on that path anymore, it seems like there is serious decline happening in terms of quality of life all around the world. Everywhere seems to be converging to a consumerist, busier, fast, urban, sickly lifestyle.

On the flip side, it has never been easier for parents to ensure prosperity to their children. For some people, if your parents [and or spouse's parents when applicable] have saved enough to de-risk your [and your siblings'] financial situation; are there anecdotes of how to leverage that to exit the rat race [or probably not enter at all]?


With regard to your first paragraph, I'd agree in part, but to me it appears more like polarisation than decline for the majority. The changes suit some people (owning property while the market rises, as just one example) while not others. To me, it seems like a clear societal improvement for almost everyone creates more reliable prosperity - less fear of crime, dangerous behaviour, risky events, etc.

On the second point, you could obviously time inheriting assets to retire early, but I think there's risk in how it was done so that you didn't jeopardise future generations or lose purpose. There are typically existential risks for family businesses, as an example. It's easy to lose motivation/purpose if you have it easy and get things on a platter. There's exiting the rat race to retire or exiting to be self-employed in some fashion, as one consideration.


Right, it may not be a decline. But more of humanity is being pulled out of evolutionary stressors and forced into the same artificial stressors.

There is clearly not enough incentive to bring a bigger portion of a population towards a [somewhat subjective] better quality of life. This might be the polarization inherent to human nature.

So far we have done well to curb and mitigate crime, risky events, etc. Maybe the next phase will be more long-term focused including sustainability, responsible waste management, sensible regulations on fast-food and healthcare, etc.

Let owning property while the market rises benefit the few, we cultivate human capital more broadly. We have to be cautious of bloat, red-tape, short-term-thinking spreading to more systems and processes. We have to do something about education systems that seem to face too much inertia and vested interests among other reasons to not witness significant-enough innovation.

^ a few random thoughts in response to your first point


I'd be interested in stats about negative social behaviours (say household burglary, graffiti, etc) and how it relates (or doesn't) to home ownership. Is behaviour significantly different if someone feels a sense of ownership and belonging in a community?


Ownership and responsibility will be good in general for young folks. If youngsters were expected to be stewards, instead of being innovators and trailblazers and millionaires, it will be easier to belong.

Land and home ownership has become harder, financially and psychologically, even for middle class and above.

However the negative behaviors you mention is mostly younger people and they will not usually be owning homes by themselves. So your home ownership hunch might apply to the family of such actors; extrapolating, the general social fabric around potential negative actors is the realistic indicator. Which is a much more complex problem.


The time horizon is long, very long. I may make the most I ever have, but it’s a paltry sum compared to most HNers.

One way or another I will leave, it remains to be seen what that will actually mean. For now all I can do is keep putting money away and praying I get lucky.


I have gotten lucky in a small but not insubstantial way, a couple of times.

I still make less than most HNers, but it’s decent for where I am.

I don’t know what the exit plan is. It never seems like you have enough. I’ve even looked at minimum retirement savings needed and I should be good for my current lifestyle, but I don’t feel like the numbers are right or I keep coming up with excuses. There is a lot of anxiety around this.


One small screw-up and it can be all over.

I know it first hand. I got completely burnt out, ended up drinking too much, and lost everything.

At least with this career there is a chance to start over, depending on age and compensation.

But one small slip-up, whether it be a serious medical problem (especially in the US) or otherwise, and the "numbers" can be thrown out the window.

Fingers crossed.


May I ask what type of work you’re doing?

I think there’s a huge difference in the value we feel ourselves contributing based on our own interests and what our company does.

I am working in the world of peer reviewed research now, and I think that’s one of the best places I can contribute to. I’m proud every day to start working because I know I’m helping, even in a small way, the many researchers around the world moving human knowledge forward.

I used to work in avionics development, mostly for defense purposes. Some people would hate it. I liked it for awhile, and then I reached the end of learning new things there. I left shortly after that to start my own company, the peer review research-focused one.

I never want to work for ad tech. That’s not the right answer for everyone, but I’d I was working in ad tech, I’d probably feel similar to you.

What do you work on, and how does that sync with your world view?


Remember that there are a range of options between highly-paid cog and financially-independent early retiree: jobs that pay less or jobs with higher uncertainty that care more fulfilling than the huge corporate machine. You could potentially find a better situation without quitting altogether.


Or you go full corporate but cut your hours by interleaving things you enjoy, like hobbies or gym time.

What happens if you take a 90 minute bike ride each day without changing your hours at all? Would anyone notice? Would they care?

Work is about dollars per hour. Salary is a trick.


That's kinda the whole point of being salaried though isn't it? (At least for those of us in the US.) You are an exempt employee as defined by US labor law. You aren't required to receive overtime pay, and you are evaluated on your expertise and the results you deliver.

So if you can get in daily rides and still meet the expectations of your employer, awesome, you're doing it right.

You're likely also doing right by your employer, since the daily exercise is giving you lots of health benefits and keeping you performing at a high level mentally.


Tell this to my employer. They require me to log >= 40 hours per week, they have no problem with overtime but get a stick up their ass about undertime. I lie pretty much every week on my timesheet unless I happen to do overtime that week. Most people I talk to in the company do the same.


Do your hours get billed to a contract or client? Then it makes sense. It’s just a shitty contract that does not account for overhead properly

If it doesn’t, then you are just working for assholes


Nope we are not billed to any contract or client.


Public service announcement: receiving a salary != being exempt from overtime, depending on where you live. In, for example, California, exempt status depends on the actual tasks you perform and the percentage of your hours each week you spend doing exempt vs non-exempt tasks. Thus, even a C-level executive can be owed overtime if they aren’t performing truly managerial work at least 50% of the time.


Q for all who are expressing this. A lot of job descriptions today emphasize a passion for "making impact". What is lost on most of us is impact by numbers rather than impact by percentages. Eg being part of a 1000 person <insert branded platform team> your one line fix is experienced by a billion users for a minute a year. Billion sounds sexy doesn't it? Impact by numbers.

How does one frame the other way. Ie I don't care if only a 1000 users experience it, but I'd rather be part of a 10 person team pushing out while features used by 1000 users for hours each day.

I dunno if such roles exist and pay reasonably enough and are sustainable? And how does one politely disregard other kinds of impact in favor of this?


I once developed a video game plugin for a niche flight simulator, that was subsequently bought by a few thousand people.

Their response left me flabbergasted: They thanked me! Personally, by email. They actually took out time of their own busy life to write a simple thank you note.

Never in my professional life have I experienced a response anything like this. Not as a researcher, being harassed and scolded by reviewers. Not as an embedded dev, by users or contractors being blissfully unaware of my existence. Not as an open source dev, hidden behind a pseudonym and fake "professionalism" in Github bug reports. The closest thing was perhaps professional recognition amongst colleagues.

I'd rather make a big personal impact on a small number of people than a small incremental impact on a large number of people. It's way more satisfying. Come to think of it, teaching and mentoring work similarly.


They definitely exist. I’m a fairly compensated developer at a biotech non-profit. We only have tens of thousands of users of the product I work on, but the value my changes and features make is impactful because researchers are using our platform for hours every day to do research towards curing genetic diseases.

I work 40-ish hours a week, have ample vacation, and am paid enough to own a fairly basic condo in Boston, all by my late 20s. It’s not glamorous, I don’t earn $300k+ a year, and it’s certainly not a prestigious resume entry, but hey, I like my life so far. It’s definitely sustainable. Enough so that my wife and I will probably start a family soon.


I had a job like this for a few years. Escalated tech support went to the actual developers, so you really felt that impact.

For software to be sustainable with only 1000 users, it's got to be something that a small number of people use to do their jobs. Look for B2B software targeting a small niche.

The other route is software that is trying to get to a billion users, and just isn't there yet. If you get into a startup scene, you can definitely make a career of it.


>I’m making the most I’ve ever made and I’ve never been less happy and more depressed.

Maybe this is something related to older generations, but I for one have never been happier. Of course my life isn't perfect, but I would never in a million years go back to my childhood/teens/yearly 20s. I have so much more freedom to express my self, to move in the world, to see and experience things and just in general do whatever I want. I never had the capital necessary or capability to do any of these things when I was a kid.

>I despise being a cog in a huge corporate machine, it’s like the job was designed to be as unappealing as possible.

Of course I can't speak for anyone else, but I think this is part of the "dream job" myth i.e. "if you work a job you love you don't need to work a day in your lift". This is pretty much garbage advice and only works for few rare people. I accidentally fell into my niche. I don't think I would have ever applied for position such as mine, but as new graduate I got an offer that was too good to pass by (however I expected to work here for couple years, gain some money, and then move to a bigger city and find job in my actual field), but when I started I just decided that I was going to be the best in my team/department. I took couple hours every day from work time to study and I became a professional. I wouldn't say I love my job, but I'm good at it and that makes my proud which in turn gives me joy. I've been doing pretty much same thing for almost a decade now and I've never been happier.


> I despise being a cog in a huge corporate machine, it’s like the job was designed to be as unappealing as possible.

How much of your unhappiness is your job, or more so a function of having a continually growing list of responsibilities that can become to feel suffocating (e.g., marriage, kids, managing people at work, etc).

Because it can be a taboo subject, I’ve seen people misattribute their unhappiness to a single thing when it’s really a culmination of many things … and their isn’t a way to “fix” the unhappiness (you can’t “un-have” a kid)


I have no kids and I have no relationships. I don’t manage people though work, though they’d like me more involved in a bunch of stuff. All I have is the cat and a house and the house actually brought me some peace of mind.

The idea of fathering a child is legitimate nightmare fuel for me. I already feel trapped as it is, though thankfully there’s no risk of it happening.


> How much of your unhappiness is your job, or more so a function of having a continually growing list of responsibilities

I have none of the other, suggested, confounding factors. Quitting my last job was fantastic and 100% the best thing I could have conceived of to improve my life.

I also had a very similar sentiment re: cog+machine, although found it more of a combination of amusing and tragic (rather than unappealing).


A quick comment: it doesn’t make sense to compare your life and level of happiness with other people. Why not to compare with ancient doom and gloom times? What would it change to realize that you are better off than 100% of roman empire citizens? Why does it even matter? This sounds like a very weak argument meant to give you an alibi against another part of you that is unhappy, but - it just doesn’t.

The ONLY thing that is real is how YOU feel.


it's understandable why people compare - some people can only be happy if they're "at the top", which must necessitate comparison.


Generally speaking, most people are at the point where "this is the most they've ever made". Inflation and the passing of time in a given career will do that.


Fair enough, though I have taken steps back in salary before.


If you don't mind and sorry for being insensitive, why can't you just quit?


The bills aren’t going to pay themselves and jobs are limited where I live. It’s remote or nothing and remote is getting harder to find.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: