3 ms·

Sadly this article about the value of your life is written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does. This assumes he holds

by maayank 14y ago

Sadly this article about the value of your life is written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does. This assumes he holds that exact idea to which he replies in the article and that he holds it true to all things in life. At some point you do need to face outsourcing a chore or doing it yourself. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment for the millionth time or to battle with transporting heavy & bulky furniture. As said in the last paragraph, if you prefer to make a non-monetary decision then sure, do it, just be conscious about it and don't blindly follow a false (or a very nuanced) principle.

eevilspock 14y ago
[Are you pretending that you are not the author?] But that's not what your article was about! You weren't pushing a rough awareness of opportunity cost, you were saying that it's a "fallacy" because in most cases you can't calculate it down to the penny. See my other comments. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment What about the value of a less stratified society? Ever see Metropolis or read Brave New World? Ever live in a country like Brazil or India where the moneyed have servants to do everything from cooking, driving (few in India drive their own car!), and even raising their children? Yes, I want those people to have jobs, but no, I don't want to live in a world like that, or anything like Metropolis. And I don't want to be so elite and spoiled that cleaning my fucking toilet is beneath me. I make well into 6 figures, though I just quit that job and will likely make much much less to contribute something better to this world than I have been, something better than what pure and cold capitalism has been telling me is valuable.
- maayank 14y ago
  But that's not what your article was about! First, relax. No need for name calling (in your earlier comment), no need for getting overly excited with exclamation marks. Maybe there's a case to be made for better authorship and I welcome feedback, but as an honest suggestion please read http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html. It is very helpful as a guideline for making constructive criticism. Second, different reasons for why the principle doesn't hold water resonate with different people. If it doesn't resonate with you because some other reasons seem to you more profound then please add to the discussion (as you've done in different comments), just be wary to do it well even when very passionate about the subject.
- eevilspock 14y ago
  "Written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does" is not "name calling". It's an accurate expression of my reaction, which is a fair characterization of the voice of your article. Though PG is not god, feel free to ask him. It's certainly no worse than "overly excited", which is a pretty lame dismissal of both my points and my passion. The exclamation point was incredulousness at your non-sequitor, you being the author of the article and the instigator of this whole thread.

by maayank 14y ago

eevilspock 14y ago

[Are you pretending that you are not the author?] But that's not what your article was about! You weren't pushing a rough awareness of opportunity cost, you were saying that it's a "fallacy" because in most cases you can't calculate it down to the penny. See my other comments. I for example see no learning/entrainment value out of cleaning my apartment What about the value of a less stratified society? Ever see Metropolis or read Brave New World? Ever live in a country like Brazil or India where the moneyed have servants to do everything from cooking, driving (few in India drive their own car!), and even raising their children? Yes, I want those people to have jobs, but no, I don't want to live in a world like that, or anything like Metropolis. And I don't want to be so elite and spoiled that cleaning my fucking toilet is beneath me. I make well into 6 figures, though I just quit that job and will likely make much much less to contribute something better to this world than I have been, something better than what pure and cold capitalism has been telling me is valuable.

maayank 14y ago
But that's not what your article was about! First, relax. No need for name calling (in your earlier comment), no need for getting overly excited with exclamation marks. Maybe there's a case to be made for better authorship and I welcome feedback, but as an honest suggestion please read http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html. It is very helpful as a guideline for making constructive criticism. Second, different reasons for why the principle doesn't hold water resonate with different people. If it doesn't resonate with you because some other reasons seem to you more profound then please add to the discussion (as you've done in different comments), just be wary to do it well even when very passionate about the subject.
eevilspock 14y ago
"Written by an accountant, or at least someone who sees things as a bean-counter does" is not "name calling". It's an accurate expression of my reaction, which is a fair characterization of the voice of your article. Though PG is not god, feel free to ask him. It's certainly no worse than "overly excited", which is a pretty lame dismissal of both my points and my passion. The exclamation point was incredulousness at your non-sequitor, you being the author of the article and the instigator of this whole thread.