5 ms·

This still makes it superfluous. Very few people are ever going to achieve the success that Patrick has. If earning such a huge income off of various lifestyle

by ruswick 14y ago

This still makes it superfluous. Very few people are ever going to achieve the success that Patrick has. If earning such a huge income off of various lifestyle businesses was within reach of most people, they would be doing it. Stories like Patrick's usually involve a rare amount of luck and certain intangibles that most people don't possess (things like a large network, notoriety, etc.) So reading these things is innately a waste of time. Moreover, the fact that he needs to enumerate his income so thoroughly just makes it makes it insufferable while not contributing to the ostensible point. He does not need to discuss the financials so particularly when educating others on how to run businesses in a general sense. That's why I simply can't believe that he (or anyone for that matter) writes these things for a purpose other than to express their occupational superiority and financial success to everyone else.

patio11 14y ago
Very few people are ever going to achieve the success that Patrick has. Is that critique equally applicable to the 2006 version of this post, which you can find linked? (It is the first one?) Spoiler: that shows ~$1,000 in profits on ~$2,000 in sales. That does not sound like a towering and insurmountable barrier to me. (Neither do my 2012 results, since I know how I got them and none of it involves being the Dark Lord Of Software Optimization. Plus, they're fairly modest if your reference set includes larger firms in the software industry, from publicly traded titans like Google down to the businesses of many other HNers, which would lose my entire business in the petty cash drawer.)
- ruswick 14y ago
  I would not include those businesses because they do not exemplify what makes your position unique: that you're self employed. For an individual running several smaller businesses, you are in a remarkable position. Just because you are smaller than Google does not mean that you are not incredibly fortunate and successful.
  - roel_v 14y ago
    You're deliberately avoiding addressing his point, which is that in his 2006 overview, he wasn't making much at all, yet he still did the same overviews.
tptacek 14y ago
If you've convinced yourself that you're never going to achieve the success of a modestly successful consultant with a sideline business in bingo card software, then you're right.
- ruswick 14y ago
  200k in income puts him in the top 3% of earners in the US. If the 97th percentile is "moderate," then I guess few people will ever achieve anything close to "moderate success." (Myself included.)
  - tptacek 14y ago
    You are comparing Patrick's income to those of auto mechanics and custodians as if that could be instructive.
    - ruswick 14y ago
      Success is not relative. 200k to a mechanic is just as valuable as 200k to a consultant. What is your point?
      - larrys 14y ago
        Forgetting for a second what work someone finds more valuable (or the potential to increase your income or other benefits (social status perhaps) there is one big difference. A consultant has to constantly come up with new business. Patrick's skills may be in demand now and not in demand 5 years from now (unless he morphs into something else valuable). One thing I've never liked about consulting (that I like about BCC and AR, in general) is that you are constantly on the hunt for new consulting business. Even if the pipeline is full now you only have so many hours. A missed opportunity to consult (because you don't have the time) can't be fulfilled in the future. It's perishable. Using the example of a mechanic that earns 200k in which the experience matters and the thing he is useful at doesn't go out of style (2 "ifs") the mechanic doesn't have to wake up in the morning and wonder where the next gig is going to come from.
jere 14y ago
>That's why I simply can't believe that he (or anyone for that matter) writes these things for a purpose other than to express their occupational superiority and financial success to everyone else. You're telling me Patrick published his 2006, 2007, and 2008 reviews to boast about making a minimum wage income? >Stories like Patrick's usually involve a rare amount of luck and certain intangibles that most people don't possess (things like a large network, notoriety, etc.) If you want to call six years of work luck, sure. Or as Jefferson said, "I'm a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it." The same argument in video form: http://unicornfree.com/stacking-the-bricks/ http://unicornfree.com/stacking-the-bricks/
- ruswick 14y ago
  I'm really bemused as to why anyone would blog about making minimum wage. At this point, though, he wouldn't be publishing his income unless it was something noteworthy that he wanted to express to everyone. Also, your post rests on false assertion that he succeeded based only on work, which is not the case. Plenty of people work tirelessly for years only to fail miserably or never advance in a meaningful way. In success, intangibles always come into play. Any assertion otherwise is indefensible.
  - jere 14y ago
    You don't want people to blog about failure. You don't want people to blog about success. You don't want people to blog about any endeavors which could be tainted by luck (all of them). I'm not sure where your extreme negativity stems from, but reading things doesn't seem to be something you enjoy. Maybe pick up a different hobby?
    - ruswick 14y ago
      I just don't like people flaunting their success. Even if other do enjoy it as some sort of aspirational motivation, the sentiment is understandable, I think. The sardonicism and patronization isn't necessary.
davidw 14y ago
I upvoted you for expressing a contrarian point of view and because I think posts should gravitate to 0 or 1 if they are not really rude. If you've followed "The Patio11 Story" (soon to be a motion picture at a major Hollywood studio), I think one of the key things that sticks out is "Bingo Card Creator". The first time I read that, I thought "that's f'ing ridiculous". And then I read he was making money at it. But not millions or anything absurd, rather, a number that would not really be a respectable salary for a Bay Area based software guy, but just the same was something you could live off of in many places. I think that's what grabbed so many people's attention... this software business that was not "cool" (a Haskell-based file sharing social network!) or innovative (based on 5 years of graduate studies of network optimization algorithms!) or based on a brilliant hack, but on something that sounds, frankly, kind of silly, but opened a lot of people's eyes to the value of making stuff that helps out "regular people". The story to that point really does engender a feeling of "well... ok, if he can sell bingo card stuff... maybe I can make something that makes money, even if it's not quite the next Facebook", which I think is something more people ought to explore, really. I get a very non-zero-sum-game feeling from BCC. OTOH, the consulting stuff is based on patio11 being "internet famous", or at least famous in one corner of a part of the internet, and feels a lot more like something that is... not zero-sum (he provides real value, IMO), but more along the lines of "anyone can do it as long as they're internet famous or have some other significant advantage", which actually does exclude many of us, something that bingo cards manifestly do not. I hope that was somewhat coherent and in no way construed as a slight to patio11, who deserves a lot of respect and gratitude for sharing a lot of ideas.
- steveklabnik 14y ago
  > this software business that was not "cool" or innovative or based on a brilliant hack, but on something that sounds, frankly, kind of silly, but opened a lot of people's eyes to the value of making stuff that helps out "regular people". This is it right here. There are so many opportunities for software to help out so many industries, but everyone is so focused on the valley that they miss many, many, many businesses. From http://www.inc.com/profile/daysmart-software http://www.inc.com/profile/daysmart-software : > Designs and sells cloud-based, PC, and mobile business management software for salons, spas, pet groomers, and tattoo shops. Revenues? $4.6 million in 2011.

by ruswick 14y ago

patio11 14y ago

Very few people are ever going to achieve the success that Patrick has. Is that critique equally applicable to the 2006 version of this post, which you can find linked? (It is the first one?) Spoiler: that shows ~$1,000 in profits on ~$2,000 in sales. That does not sound like a towering and insurmountable barrier to me. (Neither do my 2012 results, since I know how I got them and none of it involves being the Dark Lord Of Software Optimization. Plus, they're fairly modest if your reference set includes larger firms in the software industry, from publicly traded titans like Google down to the businesses of many other HNers, which would lose my entire business in the petty cash drawer.)

ruswick 14y ago
I would not include those businesses because they do not exemplify what makes your position unique: that you're self employed. For an individual running several smaller businesses, you are in a remarkable position. Just because you are smaller than Google does not mean that you are not incredibly fortunate and successful.
- roel_v 14y ago
  You're deliberately avoiding addressing his point, which is that in his 2006 overview, he wasn't making much at all, yet he still did the same overviews.

tptacek 14y ago

If you've convinced yourself that you're never going to achieve the success of a modestly successful consultant with a sideline business in bingo card software, then you're right.

ruswick 14y ago
200k in income puts him in the top 3% of earners in the US. If the 97th percentile is "moderate," then I guess few people will ever achieve anything close to "moderate success." (Myself included.)
- tptacek 14y ago
  You are comparing Patrick's income to those of auto mechanics and custodians as if that could be instructive.
  - ruswick 14y ago
    Success is not relative. 200k to a mechanic is just as valuable as 200k to a consultant. What is your point?
    - larrys 14y ago
      Forgetting for a second what work someone finds more valuable (or the potential to increase your income or other benefits (social status perhaps) there is one big difference. A consultant has to constantly come up with new business. Patrick's skills may be in demand now and not in demand 5 years from now (unless he morphs into something else valuable). One thing I've never liked about consulting (that I like about BCC and AR, in general) is that you are constantly on the hunt for new consulting business. Even if the pipeline is full now you only have so many hours. A missed opportunity to consult (because you don't have the time) can't be fulfilled in the future. It's perishable. Using the example of a mechanic that earns 200k in which the experience matters and the thing he is useful at doesn't go out of style (2 "ifs") the mechanic doesn't have to wake up in the morning and wonder where the next gig is going to come from.

jere 14y ago

>That's why I simply can't believe that he (or anyone for that matter) writes these things for a purpose other than to express their occupational superiority and financial success to everyone else. You're telling me Patrick published his 2006, 2007, and 2008 reviews to boast about making a minimum wage income? >Stories like Patrick's usually involve a rare amount of luck and certain intangibles that most people don't possess (things like a large network, notoriety, etc.) If you want to call six years of work luck, sure. Or as Jefferson said, "I'm a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it." The same argument in video form: http://unicornfree.com/stacking-the-bricks/ http://unicornfree.com/stacking-the-bricks/

ruswick 14y ago
I'm really bemused as to why anyone would blog about making minimum wage. At this point, though, he wouldn't be publishing his income unless it was something noteworthy that he wanted to express to everyone. Also, your post rests on false assertion that he succeeded based only on work, which is not the case. Plenty of people work tirelessly for years only to fail miserably or never advance in a meaningful way. In success, intangibles always come into play. Any assertion otherwise is indefensible.
- jere 14y ago
  You don't want people to blog about failure. You don't want people to blog about success. You don't want people to blog about any endeavors which could be tainted by luck (all of them). I'm not sure where your extreme negativity stems from, but reading things doesn't seem to be something you enjoy. Maybe pick up a different hobby?
  - ruswick 14y ago
    I just don't like people flaunting their success. Even if other do enjoy it as some sort of aspirational motivation, the sentiment is understandable, I think. The sardonicism and patronization isn't necessary.

davidw 14y ago

I upvoted you for expressing a contrarian point of view and because I think posts should gravitate to 0 or 1 if they are not really rude. If you've followed "The Patio11 Story" (soon to be a motion picture at a major Hollywood studio), I think one of the key things that sticks out is "Bingo Card Creator". The first time I read that, I thought "that's f'ing ridiculous". And then I read he was making money at it. But not millions or anything absurd, rather, a number that would not really be a respectable salary for a Bay Area based software guy, but just the same was something you could live off of in many places. I think that's what grabbed so many people's attention... this software business that was not "cool" (a Haskell-based file sharing social network!) or innovative (based on 5 years of graduate studies of network optimization algorithms!) or based on a brilliant hack, but on something that sounds, frankly, kind of silly, but opened a lot of people's eyes to the value of making stuff that helps out "regular people". The story to that point really does engender a feeling of "well... ok, if he can sell bingo card stuff... maybe I can make something that makes money, even if it's not quite the next Facebook", which I think is something more people ought to explore, really. I get a very non-zero-sum-game feeling from BCC. OTOH, the consulting stuff is based on patio11 being "internet famous", or at least famous in one corner of a part of the internet, and feels a lot more like something that is... not zero-sum (he provides real value, IMO), but more along the lines of "anyone can do it as long as they're internet famous or have some other significant advantage", which actually does exclude many of us, something that bingo cards manifestly do not. I hope that was somewhat coherent and in no way construed as a slight to patio11, who deserves a lot of respect and gratitude for sharing a lot of ideas.

steveklabnik 14y ago
> this software business that was not "cool" or innovative or based on a brilliant hack, but on something that sounds, frankly, kind of silly, but opened a lot of people's eyes to the value of making stuff that helps out "regular people". This is it right here. There are so many opportunities for software to help out so many industries, but everyone is so focused on the valley that they miss many, many, many businesses. From http://www.inc.com/profile/daysmart-software http://www.inc.com/profile/daysmart-software : > Designs and sells cloud-based, PC, and mobile business management software for salons, spas, pet groomers, and tattoo shops. Revenues? $4.6 million in 2011.