6 ms·

Build great stuff and don't be greedy - set an example. Make those greedy over mediocrity look bad. Build for the sake of building, because that's reward enough

Build great stuff and don't be greedy - set an example. Make those greedy over mediocrity look bad. Build for the sake of building, because that's reward enough.

WaxProlix 9y ago
This naive approach likely leads to the head-down artist or creator being exploited by the greedy manager/agent/parasite/whatever, not some sort of life changing event for those who see this person's work and suffering with profit left on the table.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  If you're naive, but not being greedy doesn't require naivety. In fact it probably requires some awareness to understand that money can be an anchor. You're making $140k a year. Nice. How much of your time and attention and energy are you trading for that? Is it worth it?
dsacco 9y ago
Maybe that's enough of a reward for you, but personally I work because I like to get paid. The fact that I enjoy my work immensely is just a happy accident. There are things I enjoy doing even more than my work - much more so! - and if I did not need to get paid, I'd be doing those things instead.
- proofofstake 9y ago
  Just wondering: If you got so rich from crypto currency that you could retire, would you retire? Start your own company? Just do fun stuff? Or keep working? I myself work, to occupy myself with interesting problems, so I would keep doing this, regardless of my wealth.
  - dsacco 9y ago
    Wealthy enough to really never work again? Yes, I'd absolutely "retire." I'd still "work", in the sense that, say, angel investors work, or people own real estate; I'd also still write software in my free time. But for the most part, no I wouldn't continue doing what I do now because I'd stop consulting and I would never again be an individual contributor. I'd probably devote "professional focus" to investing and academic research in math and cryptography while traveling all over the world like Tom from Myspace. I think in conversations like this the dimension people like myself are talking about is freedom. I'd still work on what I'm passionate about even if I was wealthy, I would just cease doing it in a way that I don't have total control and direction over my work. That circles back to my original point - my passion for my work is not nearly enough of an incentive for me to do it if I'm not doing it with total autonomy.
    - nevertoolate 9y ago
      But, but what about love, friendship and the feeling of connectedness? Is freedom what people should desire?
pavel_lishin 9y ago
> Build for the sake of building, because that's reward enough. My daughter can't eat the sake of building.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  I didn't literally mean do it for free. There's a tradeoff between comfort and freedom that's different for different people.

Build great stuff and don't be greedy - set an example. Make those greedy over mediocrity look bad. Build for the sake of building, because that's reward enough.

WaxProlix 9y ago

This naive approach likely leads to the head-down artist or creator being exploited by the greedy manager/agent/parasite/whatever, not some sort of life changing event for those who see this person's work and suffering with profit left on the table.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
If you're naive, but not being greedy doesn't require naivety. In fact it probably requires some awareness to understand that money can be an anchor. You're making $140k a year. Nice. How much of your time and attention and energy are you trading for that? Is it worth it?

dsacco 9y ago

Maybe that's enough of a reward for you, but personally I work because I like to get paid. The fact that I enjoy my work immensely is just a happy accident. There are things I enjoy doing even more than my work - much more so! - and if I did not need to get paid, I'd be doing those things instead.

proofofstake 9y ago
Just wondering: If you got so rich from crypto currency that you could retire, would you retire? Start your own company? Just do fun stuff? Or keep working? I myself work, to occupy myself with interesting problems, so I would keep doing this, regardless of my wealth.
- dsacco 9y ago
  Wealthy enough to really never work again? Yes, I'd absolutely "retire." I'd still "work", in the sense that, say, angel investors work, or people own real estate; I'd also still write software in my free time. But for the most part, no I wouldn't continue doing what I do now because I'd stop consulting and I would never again be an individual contributor. I'd probably devote "professional focus" to investing and academic research in math and cryptography while traveling all over the world like Tom from Myspace. I think in conversations like this the dimension people like myself are talking about is freedom. I'd still work on what I'm passionate about even if I was wealthy, I would just cease doing it in a way that I don't have total control and direction over my work. That circles back to my original point - my passion for my work is not nearly enough of an incentive for me to do it if I'm not doing it with total autonomy.
  - nevertoolate 9y ago
    But, but what about love, friendship and the feeling of connectedness? Is freedom what people should desire?

pavel_lishin 9y ago

> Build for the sake of building, because that's reward enough. My daughter can't eat the sake of building.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
I didn't literally mean do it for free. There's a tradeoff between comfort and freedom that's different for different people.