3 ms·

> that many of the things I spent money on As I've aged, my perspective has become 'many of the things I spent time on'. I can make more money. As far as how

> that many of the things I spent money on As I've aged, my perspective has become 'many of the things I spent time on'. I can make more money. As far as how to spend that time, I try to spend a lot on a few exceptionally valuable things. Donald Knuth expresses it well when talking about email: Email is a wonderful thing for people whose role in life is to be on top of things. But not for me; my role is to be on the bottom of things. What I do takes long hours of studying and uninterruptible concentration.[0] (I'm not Knuth so I can't say it's my role, but it's my goal.) For my personal life, I've decided that nothing is more valuable than loving relationships (platonic or romantic), so that is where I try to spend my time. [0] https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/email.html https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/email.html

taeric 8y ago
Amusingly, I've found trying to digest many of Knuth's writing has been very enjoyable for me as I've gotten older at computer science. I get an odd sense that the industry doesn't respect his particular style and contribution as much today as it used to. Which is a shame. He is much more empirical than he is often presented. More, he is willing to discuss his mistakes and false starts. Something I don't recall having seen in many other works. (Mayhap I'm just having confirmation bias.) I almost posted something about having nothing being worth more than my relationships. I certainly feel that, to a large extent. However, I also have trouble separating my work from my life. To the extent that I'm not even sure I want to.
- barrkel 8y ago
  You are what you do. You spend so much time in life working, and your work is your main function in your integration with the rest of society (and all the relationships that entails). And I think there's a certain humility to be found in that, in identifying yourself with your work, and a job well done, as opposed to your work being about you, a reflection of your ego. (Those two ideas might sound like they're the same thing, but I don't think they are.) Identity is often contextual. When you're with friends, you're one person, when you're at work, you're another, and yet a third with relatives. You can hear it when people's accents change when talking on the phone, their bearing changes according to their interlocutors. If who you are is the sum of the contexts your exist in, full retirement is a kind of death.
  - taeric 8y ago
    I've gone a bit further than that. You simply are. What you do is what you are choosing to do. In some ways, it is easy to see how you can be "defined" by what you do. But that is easily a distraction in many cases. Consider, few of us consider ourselves defined by how much we sleep. In large, we are defined by what we define ourselves by. Sure, there are extreme cases where the world defines someone or something. But by and large, those are the exceptions.
    - barrkel 8y ago
      Sleeping people are little more than dead, but we don't sleep all the time. I don't think we get to define ourselves. I think we are mostly the sum of our responses to stimuli.
      - taeric 8y ago
        I don't think we disagree that much. I'm more saying that there is no external definition of what we are. Most people are unknown to history. You can get bummed out about that, and it is intimidating. However, it also means you are not necessarily held to any external definition. I think this view has serious limits. In large, being in complete control of yourself is a luxury most people don't have. To that end, the views that folks can somewhat legitimately hold of themselves are greatly limited by their circumstances. To play with both of our views together, the interpretations that you can honestly hold are going to be the responses of the stimuli you are subjected to. Which is my way of saying to try not to get hung up if you are disappointed with any of the current state. It is, in many ways, fleeting. Keep what you can of what you like. Similarly, though, the fleeting nature of things is also irrelevant. If you liked something, continue to have liked that thing. No reason to change, unless you want to. This sounds slightly contradictory to my earlier point. However, the things I collected now hold no value. That I collected them, though, I can fondly remember. If that makes sense.
  - forapurpose 8y ago
    > You are what you do. I used to argue that, but it omits our entire internal life. Our internal lives are so much greater in scope and, I think, by far the majority of our experiences.

taeric 8y ago

Amusingly, I've found trying to digest many of Knuth's writing has been very enjoyable for me as I've gotten older at computer science. I get an odd sense that the industry doesn't respect his particular style and contribution as much today as it used to. Which is a shame. He is much more empirical than he is often presented. More, he is willing to discuss his mistakes and false starts. Something I don't recall having seen in many other works. (Mayhap I'm just having confirmation bias.) I almost posted something about having nothing being worth more than my relationships. I certainly feel that, to a large extent. However, I also have trouble separating my work from my life. To the extent that I'm not even sure I want to.

barrkel 8y ago
You are what you do. You spend so much time in life working, and your work is your main function in your integration with the rest of society (and all the relationships that entails). And I think there's a certain humility to be found in that, in identifying yourself with your work, and a job well done, as opposed to your work being about you, a reflection of your ego. (Those two ideas might sound like they're the same thing, but I don't think they are.) Identity is often contextual. When you're with friends, you're one person, when you're at work, you're another, and yet a third with relatives. You can hear it when people's accents change when talking on the phone, their bearing changes according to their interlocutors. If who you are is the sum of the contexts your exist in, full retirement is a kind of death.
- taeric 8y ago
  I've gone a bit further than that. You simply are. What you do is what you are choosing to do. In some ways, it is easy to see how you can be "defined" by what you do. But that is easily a distraction in many cases. Consider, few of us consider ourselves defined by how much we sleep. In large, we are defined by what we define ourselves by. Sure, there are extreme cases where the world defines someone or something. But by and large, those are the exceptions.
  - barrkel 8y ago
    Sleeping people are little more than dead, but we don't sleep all the time. I don't think we get to define ourselves. I think we are mostly the sum of our responses to stimuli.
    - taeric 8y ago
      I don't think we disagree that much. I'm more saying that there is no external definition of what we are. Most people are unknown to history. You can get bummed out about that, and it is intimidating. However, it also means you are not necessarily held to any external definition. I think this view has serious limits. In large, being in complete control of yourself is a luxury most people don't have. To that end, the views that folks can somewhat legitimately hold of themselves are greatly limited by their circumstances. To play with both of our views together, the interpretations that you can honestly hold are going to be the responses of the stimuli you are subjected to. Which is my way of saying to try not to get hung up if you are disappointed with any of the current state. It is, in many ways, fleeting. Keep what you can of what you like. Similarly, though, the fleeting nature of things is also irrelevant. If you liked something, continue to have liked that thing. No reason to change, unless you want to. This sounds slightly contradictory to my earlier point. However, the things I collected now hold no value. That I collected them, though, I can fondly remember. If that makes sense.
- forapurpose 8y ago
  > You are what you do. I used to argue that, but it omits our entire internal life. Our internal lives are so much greater in scope and, I think, by far the majority of our experiences.