7 ms·

Hi there, old person here. Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. I had vowed to myself that I would completely and totally retire, Finally, at 65. But then, this "thing

Hi there, old person here. Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. I had vowed to myself that I would completely and totally retire, Finally, at 65. But then, this "thing" cropped up and the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I wonder, am I crazy. But I feel passion for this project. So, I am throwing myself into the fray again, there is no logical reason to do so. So, Rudy, I understand.

tough 3y ago
hey, not so old but feeling old to not have done much yet, thanks for reminding me that I can still be kicking 35 years from now. I'd say if you have the fire go for it fren
iamflimflam1 3y ago
If you’ve still got the energy, why not? I think the most important thing is are you enjoying it? Does it feel fulfilling? There’s a lot of pressure to conform to what’s expected of you and if you can ignore that you’ll probably be much happier than most people.
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  Because arguably it reduces demand for the next generation to do their thing. And if too many do it then it also becomes a necessity for more in the same age cohort to afford housing and transportation.
  - theptip 3y ago
    Pretty offensive to suggest that someone should “step aside for the next generation”. Personally I’d rather work for someone with more experience (all else being equal), but ultimately the best ideas and execution will win.
    - paulryanrogers 3y ago
      Not suggesting people go off and die, or be thrown off a cliff. Rather that they consider there are some downsides to society at large if they unnecessarily work late in life. FWIW, I was responding to the question "why not? [keep working]".
      - pedrosorio 3y ago
        This seems like a counterintuitive idea. Older people helping to make more products/services is a downside to society at large? I would understand if “working” was a competition for limited resources. But if it is, in fact, a value generating activity, how does it harm society at large? e.g. Having more doctors work until later, if they are capable, is not a net positive for our society’s ability to provide healthcare?
        paulryanrogers 3y ago
        Some demand for workers scales well, virtually unlimited. Yet many are not. And as tech quickly takes more and more jobs, older workers contribute to the competition for shrinking demand for human labor. Now advances in tech may continue to increase demand for workers elsewhere, once training and workers catch up. Or maybe not as much as roles are lost.
        vasco 3y ago
        So what if demand scales differently. Should foreigners go back home to leave jobs to nationals? Should women stay home to leave jobs for men? Unless you answer yes to those, why would you choose another arbitrary category like age to do the same? I hope you're never old with people around you that think the same as you think now. Either you can do the job or not.
        paulryanrogers 3y ago
        I didn't choose the category, the question was why not work late in life. I proposed one likely downside. As to immigration and women and others, it can be argued the end game of every able bodied adult working until death is quite dark -- even if it begins with most of them finding some enjoyment in it. When I'm old I hope my family encourages me to find joy and meaning outside employment, once the finances have been secured for retirement.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - csomar 3y ago
    This assumes the economy is a zero-sum game. It is not, or it shouldn't be.
    - nine_k 3y ago
      The problem is that it's not economy, it's academy.
  - ekianjo 3y ago
    > Because arguably it reduces demand for the next generation to do their thing. Another "the cake is finite" dumb argument?
  - nine_k 3y ago
    "Stepping aside" makes sense if you are in a singular position, like the CEO of a company. Most positions are not like that. Even though tenured positions in a university is a finite resource, having a highly productive professor on such a position is beneficial, no matter the age. The problem here is in they way science is financed, not in the glut of Nobel laureates refusing to leave.
    - eropple 3y ago
      It does, however, create a pipelining problem: there's very little reason for someone who wants to become a professor to stick through literal decades of adjunct hell to maybe get a tenure-track position when somebody decides they're finally ready to let go of theirs (and the paycheck that comes with it, which is not large but certainly incentivizes staying a long time). Tenure is a great and necessary phenomenon, but it is one of the best examples of the folks who get it needing to be more broad-minded than themselves.
jacquesm 3y ago
> Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. Congrats! > the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I'm still pretty active (58) but there is no way I'm going to do another run, I'm happy tinkering with stuff, spending time with kids and working on average 3 to 4 months per year. I always saw money as a means to an end, just another tool in the toolbox. I don't need more of it so that part of the drive is gone and I'd much rather spend a day playing piano or fixing something than that I'd want to be worried about metrics, investors, customer acquisition, payroll and the bi-annual whack over the head from the fourth dimension that throws all your carefully laid plans into disarray. But I do very much wish for you to succeed at whatever endeavor you've got lined up and I'm curious to hear about it. Much, much good luck with your plans.
- zw123456 3y ago
  I am sort of blown away by the response to my post. I feel like I need to respond. But the posts from so many people are so amazing. I have "retired" a couple of times, but I keep coming back because, this is fun. The thing I want to do, it has to do with a new technology that would revolutionize LEOS technology, at least, that's what I think. And, I have some models that support that. Who cares? Millions of people who can't afford a decent internet connection, or one at all. If I say more, I could spoil it. But what if we could do both. Turn a small reasonable profit and provide connectivity, well, everywhere. And decently. That's my dream. It's OK to laugh. I do too. But heck. What else am I supposed to do. Why not take a shot with a kooky idea. So here I go, fingers crossed and all that.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    Godspeed, if I can help in any way definitely ping me.
- ChuckMcM 3y ago
  This situation/attitude is exactly the thing that great people end up in. As I've mentioned previously I have known a lot of people that developed enough wealth over time to "retire."[1] And by retire I mean choose to work on what they wanted to work on, and not work if they didn't want to. I once explained as "being a consultant with infinite days of paid vacation." Some folks like Jacques and the GP author are "old" (as in > 50 yrs old, (me too)), some I know are "young" in that they are under 40. In very general terms I see three "types" as most common, the first type are what I think of as "score keepers" who equate bank balances with their "score" in life and a bigger score than their peers mean they "win" life. This is not a point of view that I really understand, but I generally think that is because in my younger years I lived in Las Vegas and knew other kids whose parents were professional gamblers. Their life was really random in terms of how much money was available that year/month/week/day. Money came and went based most on luck, and less on skill. As a result these folks understood money wasn't the definition of how "good" they were, just how lucky. That is how I translated equity earnings from stock options / grants. If you happened to get lucky then you got some wealth, if not well it didn't change the quality of your work or your abilities. I see this a lot in the second type of person which is they are happy to not have to worry about money, but they don't "need" to generate any more. So they follow their passions which can be very different. One friend of mine became a patent attorney because they really liked the law and how that system worked. The third type is the person that "fails" at retirement (I put it in quotes because I don't think of it as failing, just a different path) and they miss the technical/intellectual challenge and the camaraderie of being in a group working on tough problems. If you get to be senior enough you come to realize that you can get more done as a group of blended skills than you can as individuals. Recreating that in a non-company way is hard.[2] As a result people often "go back to work". My favorite example of this is Guido Van-Rossum, who "retired", got bored, and then went to work for Microsoft. Tenured professorships are excellent for this third type as well. There isn't an industrial equivalent (there used to be, tech companies would have the title of "Fellow" but the grind of MBAs on margin over innovation has pretty much killed those in most places). [1] Not a flex, I just happened to be part of a number of companies that were generous with stock options and grew into larger companies. These are not founders, they are regular employees whose stock options ended up being worth enough that they could diversify them into something they could live off of. [2] I proposed a member-benefit type company arrangement that would address this need but have so far not pushed the idea into existence.
DocSavage 3y ago
65 is the new 45 :) Sounds like there's a perfectly logical reason to do the 3rd startup: you're passionate about it. Best of luck!
malux85 3y ago
Self actualizataion is at the top of maslow's hierarchy of needs ... go for it and be your best self! All the best!
fakedang 3y ago
On the opposite note, I'm planning to retire the day before my 30th birthday that's coming soon. Not that I'm going to be completely divorced from my firm, but I've delegated most of the day to day work. I'm planning to spend the rest of my time working on some startup ideas, as well as focusing time spending with family and friends (especially some close ones who have less time than me). I originally planned on getting my MBA from HBS, but due to some of the above circumstances, I decided to delay those plans. They were very understanding though.
leeoniya 3y ago
Budd : They say the number one killer of old people is retirement. People got a job to do, they tend to live a little longer so they can do it. I've always figured that warriors and their enemies share the same relationship. (Kill Bill: Vol 2)
- incompatible 3y ago
  By "retirement", people generally mean no longer working for money. That doesn't mean you can't find things to do.
  - mc32 3y ago
    Yeah, but the popular image is the kind you see in the moving picture "About Schmidt"
    - thret 3y ago
      We stopped calling them moving pictures in 1910. They're motion pictures now.
      - serf 3y ago
        I read it as 'moving' (emotionally stirring) picture (a common-use colloquial for 'movie'; A film – also called a movie, motion picture, moving picture, picture, photoplay or (slang) flick) and that it is -- definitely emotionally stirring. It was amazing to me, having watched it many years previous, that it was essentially a 1:1 representation of my widowed father. when I watched it recently it was less funny than I had remembered it, much sadder. I think that's because I had realized that it wasn't as much of a satire/parody than I had thought originally.
        xapata 3y ago
        The audience is rescued from the sad moments by letters to Ndugu. I remember a couple times being on the edge of tears, only to cheer up when I heard, "Dear Ndugu."
onecommentman 3y ago
The prof sounds like a great guy in a great situation. I assume he has a spacious office on a beautiful campus and in full control of the work he is pursuing. I get the same feeling reading he is working at 100 as when I see a loving group of friends and family egging on a married couple celebrating their 75th wedding anniversary to get them to kiss. You just want to pinch their cheeks so hard… Should working to 100 be aspirational, or even thought desirable, for 99.9999% of the population? Of course not. Is it admirable to continue to work in a job where others (who you may or may not respect) determine the nature of the work and work environment…for one millisecond longer than you must? I don’t think so, not beyond a personal sacrifice to be made if the work is of unique critical importance to the direct well-being of people and the planet. Even then, think really hard about it. Is it admirable to take up a slot in a fulfilling career area when so many young deserving candidates are knocking at the door? Not to me. Should you pursue your personal passions in any way that suits you in your golden years, when economic issues are not a priority? Absolutely. But who is this self-identified “old person” who is only now turning 65? Just a young punk I say. Take your hippity-hoppity music someplace else…
bjelkeman-again 3y ago
I am 59, and this is my seventh new company, third startup with external funding. We just closed a €1M Euro grant for our work and are well placed for the next funding round during the autumn. You are not crazy, if it is something you are passionate about. I tend to work on things I expect to take a decade or so before I step off. I really don’t feel that being a bit older is a detriment. I work smarter than I did and I get to work on things that really mean something for me, and maybe the world at large. I say, go for it and best of luck!
- computerdork 3y ago
  btw, what's (roughly) the new idea you're working on? If you're at liberty to mention it (am just curious:)
  - bjelkeman-again 3y ago
    Can see it in my profile. Closed loop food production systems. Only natural processes.
teekert 3y ago
I have this theory: Humans have a spectrum for "worrying about things" or "things deemed important", let's call it 0 to 1. Things you don't worry about are 0. During normal life you worry about some things, and stuff surrounding work may even approach 1. Normal, because your family's well-being may depend on it. Then you retire or become unemployed and the 0 to 1 spectrum starts to drop in scope, the spectrum starts to cover a much narrower reality. Soon you worry and get annoyed by your neighbor not taking good care of his lawn or kids skating through the park... I've seen it happen to people retiring, I was once unemployed for 10 months and I felt it happen to me too. I then thought: Perhaps for me the working life, life filled with intellectual challenges, may never loose its appeal?! I will just have to make sure to make work more fun by getting rid of the boring parts and focus on the the fun parts. Then, at 67, why would I stop if I got to an almost "pure fun" state? Of course what is fun is also determined by what you are good at so I have no idea what that "work" will look like. Just a thought from a 41 y/o.
- influx 3y ago
  I’ve taken off a year and a half from work and similar to your theory, I have the same amount of stress in my life, I just apply it to non work parts of my life. I was shocked.
  - teekert 3y ago
    Yes, that's indeed how I felt. Idk, I do think there are people that don't experience this effect or perhaps less. In general I've felt best when I was making or doing something I felt was really worth doing. Happy clients, difficult work (by my own standards, but also, I like to think by humanity's), lots of time spend highly focused.
- throwaway98797 3y ago
  i get antsy after 6 months off i’m exploring new subjects new challenges the biggest thing is that you have to talk about something if you aren’t working that something could be family, tv, or hobbies but you got to talk about something if you’re world gets too small you have only simple things like tv 2 video games shows to talk about and for me that never felt enough i like a sprinkle of drama in my life i too am in my 40s
rkhacker 3y ago
My question to self is - retire to do what?
- sn9 3y ago
  The things you didn't have time to do when you had to work full time. You could travel, study a field deeply, read books in their original language, teach or mentor, etc. You don't have anything you've always wished you could find more time to do properly?
- adventured 3y ago
  Depending on the context of course - retire from a career to pursue one's passions. Retire as a software engineer, pursue business ideas. Tinker. Maybe build wood cabinets and chairs. Picture someone that just spent the last 30 years writing C, C++, Java (whatever) code, and maybe doing various lower level management roles. The age of AI has broken into an open gallup; said person is 55-65 years old, maybe now is a good time to have fun with their capabilities instead. So now they're learning Python instead of punching a 9-5 time clock, messing with LLMs or Stable Diffusion extensions. You get the idea. We have hit an inflection point the scale of the World Wide Web circa the mid 1990s. There's a lot to do. Vast new territory to explore and it's moving fast. It feels a lot like the mid 1990s did in terms of speed. It feels like "internet time" has returned. It's damn exciting again. For younger people here that are completely unfamiliar with the phrase "internet time." Vaguely the idea or sense of experience that development online circa the 1990s was moving abnormally fast compared to everything else (this is from 2001, when people still understood the original context of the phrase): https://www.technologyreview.com/2001/04/01/275725/the-myth-of-internet-time/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2001/04/01/275725/the-myth-...

tough 3y ago

hey, not so old but feeling old to not have done much yet, thanks for reminding me that I can still be kicking 35 years from now. I'd say if you have the fire go for it fren

iamflimflam1 3y ago

If you’ve still got the energy, why not? I think the most important thing is are you enjoying it? Does it feel fulfilling? There’s a lot of pressure to conform to what’s expected of you and if you can ignore that you’ll probably be much happier than most people.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
Because arguably it reduces demand for the next generation to do their thing. And if too many do it then it also becomes a necessity for more in the same age cohort to afford housing and transportation.
- theptip 3y ago
  Pretty offensive to suggest that someone should “step aside for the next generation”. Personally I’d rather work for someone with more experience (all else being equal), but ultimately the best ideas and execution will win.
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    Not suggesting people go off and die, or be thrown off a cliff. Rather that they consider there are some downsides to society at large if they unnecessarily work late in life. FWIW, I was responding to the question "why not? [keep working]".
    - pedrosorio 3y ago
      This seems like a counterintuitive idea. Older people helping to make more products/services is a downside to society at large? I would understand if “working” was a competition for limited resources. But if it is, in fact, a value generating activity, how does it harm society at large? e.g. Having more doctors work until later, if they are capable, is not a net positive for our society’s ability to provide healthcare?
      - paulryanrogers 3y ago
        Some demand for workers scales well, virtually unlimited. Yet many are not. And as tech quickly takes more and more jobs, older workers contribute to the competition for shrinking demand for human labor. Now advances in tech may continue to increase demand for workers elsewhere, once training and workers catch up. Or maybe not as much as roles are lost.
        vasco 3y ago
        So what if demand scales differently. Should foreigners go back home to leave jobs to nationals? Should women stay home to leave jobs for men? Unless you answer yes to those, why would you choose another arbitrary category like age to do the same? I hope you're never old with people around you that think the same as you think now. Either you can do the job or not.
        paulryanrogers 3y ago
        I didn't choose the category, the question was why not work late in life. I proposed one likely downside. As to immigration and women and others, it can be argued the end game of every able bodied adult working until death is quite dark -- even if it begins with most of them finding some enjoyment in it. When I'm old I hope my family encourages me to find joy and meaning outside employment, once the finances have been secured for retirement.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- csomar 3y ago
  This assumes the economy is a zero-sum game. It is not, or it shouldn't be.
  - nine_k 3y ago
    The problem is that it's not economy, it's academy.
- ekianjo 3y ago
  > Because arguably it reduces demand for the next generation to do their thing. Another "the cake is finite" dumb argument?
- nine_k 3y ago
  "Stepping aside" makes sense if you are in a singular position, like the CEO of a company. Most positions are not like that. Even though tenured positions in a university is a finite resource, having a highly productive professor on such a position is beneficial, no matter the age. The problem here is in they way science is financed, not in the glut of Nobel laureates refusing to leave.
  - eropple 3y ago
    It does, however, create a pipelining problem: there's very little reason for someone who wants to become a professor to stick through literal decades of adjunct hell to maybe get a tenure-track position when somebody decides they're finally ready to let go of theirs (and the paycheck that comes with it, which is not large but certainly incentivizes staying a long time). Tenure is a great and necessary phenomenon, but it is one of the best examples of the folks who get it needing to be more broad-minded than themselves.

jacquesm 3y ago

> Tomorrow is my 65th birthday. Congrats! > the day after tomorrow, I am pitching my 3rd startup to investors. I'm still pretty active (58) but there is no way I'm going to do another run, I'm happy tinkering with stuff, spending time with kids and working on average 3 to 4 months per year. I always saw money as a means to an end, just another tool in the toolbox. I don't need more of it so that part of the drive is gone and I'd much rather spend a day playing piano or fixing something than that I'd want to be worried about metrics, investors, customer acquisition, payroll and the bi-annual whack over the head from the fourth dimension that throws all your carefully laid plans into disarray. But I do very much wish for you to succeed at whatever endeavor you've got lined up and I'm curious to hear about it. Much, much good luck with your plans.

zw123456 3y ago
I am sort of blown away by the response to my post. I feel like I need to respond. But the posts from so many people are so amazing. I have "retired" a couple of times, but I keep coming back because, this is fun. The thing I want to do, it has to do with a new technology that would revolutionize LEOS technology, at least, that's what I think. And, I have some models that support that. Who cares? Millions of people who can't afford a decent internet connection, or one at all. If I say more, I could spoil it. But what if we could do both. Turn a small reasonable profit and provide connectivity, well, everywhere. And decently. That's my dream. It's OK to laugh. I do too. But heck. What else am I supposed to do. Why not take a shot with a kooky idea. So here I go, fingers crossed and all that.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Godspeed, if I can help in any way definitely ping me.
ChuckMcM 3y ago
This situation/attitude is exactly the thing that great people end up in. As I've mentioned previously I have known a lot of people that developed enough wealth over time to "retire."[1] And by retire I mean choose to work on what they wanted to work on, and not work if they didn't want to. I once explained as "being a consultant with infinite days of paid vacation." Some folks like Jacques and the GP author are "old" (as in > 50 yrs old, (me too)), some I know are "young" in that they are under 40. In very general terms I see three "types" as most common, the first type are what I think of as "score keepers" who equate bank balances with their "score" in life and a bigger score than their peers mean they "win" life. This is not a point of view that I really understand, but I generally think that is because in my younger years I lived in Las Vegas and knew other kids whose parents were professional gamblers. Their life was really random in terms of how much money was available that year/month/week/day. Money came and went based most on luck, and less on skill. As a result these folks understood money wasn't the definition of how "good" they were, just how lucky. That is how I translated equity earnings from stock options / grants. If you happened to get lucky then you got some wealth, if not well it didn't change the quality of your work or your abilities. I see this a lot in the second type of person which is they are happy to not have to worry about money, but they don't "need" to generate any more. So they follow their passions which can be very different. One friend of mine became a patent attorney because they really liked the law and how that system worked. The third type is the person that "fails" at retirement (I put it in quotes because I don't think of it as failing, just a different path) and they miss the technical/intellectual challenge and the camaraderie of being in a group working on tough problems. If you get to be senior enough you come to realize that you can get more done as a group of blended skills than you can as individuals. Recreating that in a non-company way is hard.[2] As a result people often "go back to work". My favorite example of this is Guido Van-Rossum, who "retired", got bored, and then went to work for Microsoft. Tenured professorships are excellent for this third type as well. There isn't an industrial equivalent (there used to be, tech companies would have the title of "Fellow" but the grind of MBAs on margin over innovation has pretty much killed those in most places). [1] Not a flex, I just happened to be part of a number of companies that were generous with stock options and grew into larger companies. These are not founders, they are regular employees whose stock options ended up being worth enough that they could diversify them into something they could live off of. [2] I proposed a member-benefit type company arrangement that would address this need but have so far not pushed the idea into existence.

DocSavage 3y ago

65 is the new 45 :) Sounds like there's a perfectly logical reason to do the 3rd startup: you're passionate about it. Best of luck!

malux85 3y ago

Self actualizataion is at the top of maslow's hierarchy of needs ... go for it and be your best self! All the best!

fakedang 3y ago

On the opposite note, I'm planning to retire the day before my 30th birthday that's coming soon. Not that I'm going to be completely divorced from my firm, but I've delegated most of the day to day work. I'm planning to spend the rest of my time working on some startup ideas, as well as focusing time spending with family and friends (especially some close ones who have less time than me). I originally planned on getting my MBA from HBS, but due to some of the above circumstances, I decided to delay those plans. They were very understanding though.

leeoniya 3y ago

Budd : They say the number one killer of old people is retirement. People got a job to do, they tend to live a little longer so they can do it. I've always figured that warriors and their enemies share the same relationship. (Kill Bill: Vol 2)

incompatible 3y ago
By "retirement", people generally mean no longer working for money. That doesn't mean you can't find things to do.
- mc32 3y ago
  Yeah, but the popular image is the kind you see in the moving picture "About Schmidt"
  - thret 3y ago
    We stopped calling them moving pictures in 1910. They're motion pictures now.
    - serf 3y ago
      I read it as 'moving' (emotionally stirring) picture (a common-use colloquial for 'movie'; A film – also called a movie, motion picture, moving picture, picture, photoplay or (slang) flick) and that it is -- definitely emotionally stirring. It was amazing to me, having watched it many years previous, that it was essentially a 1:1 representation of my widowed father. when I watched it recently it was less funny than I had remembered it, much sadder. I think that's because I had realized that it wasn't as much of a satire/parody than I had thought originally.
      - xapata 3y ago
        The audience is rescued from the sad moments by letters to Ndugu. I remember a couple times being on the edge of tears, only to cheer up when I heard, "Dear Ndugu."

onecommentman 3y ago

The prof sounds like a great guy in a great situation. I assume he has a spacious office on a beautiful campus and in full control of the work he is pursuing. I get the same feeling reading he is working at 100 as when I see a loving group of friends and family egging on a married couple celebrating their 75th wedding anniversary to get them to kiss. You just want to pinch their cheeks so hard… Should working to 100 be aspirational, or even thought desirable, for 99.9999% of the population? Of course not. Is it admirable to continue to work in a job where others (who you may or may not respect) determine the nature of the work and work environment…for one millisecond longer than you must? I don’t think so, not beyond a personal sacrifice to be made if the work is of unique critical importance to the direct well-being of people and the planet. Even then, think really hard about it. Is it admirable to take up a slot in a fulfilling career area when so many young deserving candidates are knocking at the door? Not to me. Should you pursue your personal passions in any way that suits you in your golden years, when economic issues are not a priority? Absolutely. But who is this self-identified “old person” who is only now turning 65? Just a young punk I say. Take your hippity-hoppity music someplace else…

bjelkeman-again 3y ago

I am 59, and this is my seventh new company, third startup with external funding. We just closed a €1M Euro grant for our work and are well placed for the next funding round during the autumn. You are not crazy, if it is something you are passionate about. I tend to work on things I expect to take a decade or so before I step off. I really don’t feel that being a bit older is a detriment. I work smarter than I did and I get to work on things that really mean something for me, and maybe the world at large. I say, go for it and best of luck!

computerdork 3y ago
btw, what's (roughly) the new idea you're working on? If you're at liberty to mention it (am just curious:)
- bjelkeman-again 3y ago
  Can see it in my profile. Closed loop food production systems. Only natural processes.

teekert 3y ago

I have this theory: Humans have a spectrum for "worrying about things" or "things deemed important", let's call it 0 to 1. Things you don't worry about are 0. During normal life you worry about some things, and stuff surrounding work may even approach 1. Normal, because your family's well-being may depend on it. Then you retire or become unemployed and the 0 to 1 spectrum starts to drop in scope, the spectrum starts to cover a much narrower reality. Soon you worry and get annoyed by your neighbor not taking good care of his lawn or kids skating through the park... I've seen it happen to people retiring, I was once unemployed for 10 months and I felt it happen to me too. I then thought: Perhaps for me the working life, life filled with intellectual challenges, may never loose its appeal?! I will just have to make sure to make work more fun by getting rid of the boring parts and focus on the the fun parts. Then, at 67, why would I stop if I got to an almost "pure fun" state? Of course what is fun is also determined by what you are good at so I have no idea what that "work" will look like. Just a thought from a 41 y/o.

influx 3y ago
I’ve taken off a year and a half from work and similar to your theory, I have the same amount of stress in my life, I just apply it to non work parts of my life. I was shocked.
- teekert 3y ago
  Yes, that's indeed how I felt. Idk, I do think there are people that don't experience this effect or perhaps less. In general I've felt best when I was making or doing something I felt was really worth doing. Happy clients, difficult work (by my own standards, but also, I like to think by humanity's), lots of time spend highly focused.
throwaway98797 3y ago
i get antsy after 6 months off i’m exploring new subjects new challenges the biggest thing is that you have to talk about something if you aren’t working that something could be family, tv, or hobbies but you got to talk about something if you’re world gets too small you have only simple things like tv 2 video games shows to talk about and for me that never felt enough i like a sprinkle of drama in my life i too am in my 40s

rkhacker 3y ago

My question to self is - retire to do what?

sn9 3y ago
The things you didn't have time to do when you had to work full time. You could travel, study a field deeply, read books in their original language, teach or mentor, etc. You don't have anything you've always wished you could find more time to do properly?
adventured 3y ago
Depending on the context of course - retire from a career to pursue one's passions. Retire as a software engineer, pursue business ideas. Tinker. Maybe build wood cabinets and chairs. Picture someone that just spent the last 30 years writing C, C++, Java (whatever) code, and maybe doing various lower level management roles. The age of AI has broken into an open gallup; said person is 55-65 years old, maybe now is a good time to have fun with their capabilities instead. So now they're learning Python instead of punching a 9-5 time clock, messing with LLMs or Stable Diffusion extensions. You get the idea. We have hit an inflection point the scale of the World Wide Web circa the mid 1990s. There's a lot to do. Vast new territory to explore and it's moving fast. It feels a lot like the mid 1990s did in terms of speed. It feels like "internet time" has returned. It's damn exciting again. For younger people here that are completely unfamiliar with the phrase "internet time." Vaguely the idea or sense of experience that development online circa the 1990s was moving abnormally fast compared to everything else (this is from 2001, when people still understood the original context of the phrase): https://www.technologyreview.com/2001/04/01/275725/the-myth-of-internet-time/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2001/04/01/275725/the-myth-...