4 ms·

I am rich enough (I could retire at 25 or so which is 25 years ago after I sold my first company), but I never had any drive to make much more as that type of w

I am rich enough (I could retire at 25 or so which is 25 years ago after I sold my first company), but I never had any drive to make much more as that type of work needs all kinds of boring stuff I don't want. I like to build stuff and sell it and move on, not suck up to VCs, have 1000s of employees, make business plans or any of that. So I build stuff and exit once done and making money. Even with smarter investment choices, I could've had a lot more, but I don't find that interesting either. Building stuff; only thing I care about.

cudgy 2y ago
Were you lucky?
latexr 2y ago
I don’t understand how this relates to the article. Are you saying you got rich enough to retire by 25 on pure talent? Or are you saying that for anyone to achieve that kind of wealth by 25 it is obvious luck (or generational wealth) had to be involved? Are you agreeing, disagreeing, is this just a humble brag? I truly am having trouble making sense of the purpose of your comment. Would you mind clarifying?
- naming_the_user 2y ago
  He is saying that he could be much wealthier but chooses not to be because he has other priorities. This is evidence that other factors than luck play a role.
  - latexr 2y ago
    > This is evidence that other factors than luck play a role. How is that evidence? That is like playing the lottery once and winning, then saying you could be much richer if you continued playing the lottery but choose not to because you have other priorities.
    - naming_the_user 2y ago
      Even in the thought experiment you give, which obviously has very little to do with someone working without putting significant capital at risk - if the lottery is EV negative, then although the first win may be luck, the choice to stop playing after the first win is not luck but skill :)
      - latexr 2y ago
        > the choice to stop playing after the first win is not luck but skill That would only be true if you said you chose to stop playing because you knew you were going to lose. But in the example (which was based on your point) the person is claiming they would continue winning if they continued to play. Respectfully, I’m waiting for an answer from the author of the post. They wrote it, they’re the ones who can explain what they meant. This speculative conversation we’re having isn’t going to get us closer to the truth of someone else’s intention.
        naming_the_user 2y ago
        The person posting is not speaking about gambling, but about working and building businesses. I'm not sure why you are using a lottery as a comparison. The reasonable worst case with any application of skill (e.g. don't put your entire net worth into a risky business) is that they end up roughly where they started.
        latexr 2y ago
        It’s called an analogy, and it was made specifically to address a point you made (which is why I quoted you, not them).
        naming_the_user 2y ago
        Sure, but it's not analogous, because your scenario has significant downside. A person with the correct skills can choose to work at a charity or at say, a well paying software job. One choice gives them more money than the other and there is no luck involved. This is self evident really, I assume that you also do know this, but then it's confusing when people focus on luck as if most people are even playing the game at all. edit: Actually, that's probably a better way of framing it. The upper bound on wealth for a person is very much luck based, but almost no-one is operating remotely close to their skill cap, so in practice it doesn't matter that much. You might need luck to make a billion, but to make a few million just needs dedication barring some obvious handicaps such as e.g. being born in North Korea.
bjornsing 2y ago
> So I build stuff and exit once done and making money. Sounds nice. Any recommendations on how to get into this game? E.g. how / where do you find your exits?

cudgy 2y ago

Were you lucky?

latexr 2y ago

I don’t understand how this relates to the article. Are you saying you got rich enough to retire by 25 on pure talent? Or are you saying that for anyone to achieve that kind of wealth by 25 it is obvious luck (or generational wealth) had to be involved? Are you agreeing, disagreeing, is this just a humble brag? I truly am having trouble making sense of the purpose of your comment. Would you mind clarifying?

naming_the_user 2y ago
He is saying that he could be much wealthier but chooses not to be because he has other priorities. This is evidence that other factors than luck play a role.
- latexr 2y ago
  > This is evidence that other factors than luck play a role. How is that evidence? That is like playing the lottery once and winning, then saying you could be much richer if you continued playing the lottery but choose not to because you have other priorities.
  - naming_the_user 2y ago
    Even in the thought experiment you give, which obviously has very little to do with someone working without putting significant capital at risk - if the lottery is EV negative, then although the first win may be luck, the choice to stop playing after the first win is not luck but skill :)
    - latexr 2y ago
      > the choice to stop playing after the first win is not luck but skill That would only be true if you said you chose to stop playing because you knew you were going to lose. But in the example (which was based on your point) the person is claiming they would continue winning if they continued to play. Respectfully, I’m waiting for an answer from the author of the post. They wrote it, they’re the ones who can explain what they meant. This speculative conversation we’re having isn’t going to get us closer to the truth of someone else’s intention.
      - naming_the_user 2y ago
        The person posting is not speaking about gambling, but about working and building businesses. I'm not sure why you are using a lottery as a comparison. The reasonable worst case with any application of skill (e.g. don't put your entire net worth into a risky business) is that they end up roughly where they started.
        latexr 2y ago
        It’s called an analogy, and it was made specifically to address a point you made (which is why I quoted you, not them).
        naming_the_user 2y ago
        Sure, but it's not analogous, because your scenario has significant downside. A person with the correct skills can choose to work at a charity or at say, a well paying software job. One choice gives them more money than the other and there is no luck involved. This is self evident really, I assume that you also do know this, but then it's confusing when people focus on luck as if most people are even playing the game at all. edit: Actually, that's probably a better way of framing it. The upper bound on wealth for a person is very much luck based, but almost no-one is operating remotely close to their skill cap, so in practice it doesn't matter that much. You might need luck to make a billion, but to make a few million just needs dedication barring some obvious handicaps such as e.g. being born in North Korea.

bjornsing 2y ago

> So I build stuff and exit once done and making money. Sounds nice. Any recommendations on how to get into this game? E.g. how / where do you find your exits?