7 ms·

We Need Young People To Take Risks And Build Inspiring Things

34 points by henryaj 13y ago

a3voices 13y ago
>> What would the ideal be? There’s a renewable energy startup in Providence, Rhode Island, called VCharge that probably could have used Cole too. Its chief science officer, Jessica Millar, has a PhD in math from MIT. VCharge is trying to make our energy grid more efficient using energy storage and transmission algorithms. It’s not a sure thing, but if it succeeds we’ll all be better off for it. How is a more efficient energy grid the ideal? It sounds very status quo to me. The ideal would be doubling human life expectancy, building massive Elysium-like space stations that orbit the Earth, a guaranteed minimum income for everyone, and stuff like that. It seems like everyone lacks an imagination nowadays. Where are the people who used to invent things like airplanes and such?
- nswanberg 13y ago
  They are mostly the ones getting laughed at and dismissed. Which means there are probably as many or more as there have ever been, but they are not recognized until well after the fact, once it is no longer a risk to laud them.
- ForHackernews 13y ago
  Transmission and storage are really big barriers to widespread renewable energy. Solar and wind only work in certain geographic areas and times of day, unlike coal/oil plants which can be built anywhere. Solving those problems is potentially a game changer for carbon emissions, and (if you accept the more dire predictions) the future of humanity.
- moron4hire 13y ago
  They work as quantitative trading engineers at giganto investment banks. Or they are underprivileged people who have the potential to do more, but are placated by the soma of social media. Or they're somewhere in the middle, aspiring to develop better soma. It is a rare combination to find the ability and the ambition (for something other than just economic gain) to make new, exciting things of real value. You have to have all three. Drive, intellectual and economic means, and vision. With the growing gap between rich and poor (or, in other words, the evaporation of the middle class), it's probably not getting better anytime soon, either.
  - mkaziz 13y ago
    Intellectual and economic means aren't hard to come across - it's mostly a genetic lottery. Drive? Vision? They're far harder to have.
HowDroll 13y ago
It's hard for educated young people to feel like they can take risks when many of them are shackled by five or six figures of student loan debt. When you know you have a $500-$1000 minimum loan payment ahead of you every month for the next 10-25 years, it's hard to feel like you can fight a dragon when selling a sword is a sure thing.
- normloman 13y ago
  This goes to the root of the problem, which the linked article ignores.
mgkimsal 13y ago
I'm not sure why it has to be 'young people'. Don't we need people in general to build inspiring things?
- tachyonbeam 13y ago
  Older people tend to be more conservative. They tend to have less energy/motivation and more to lose (partner, children, career, friends, house). Younger people are more likely to take risks such as relocating or invest money and time in something that might well fail. This of course doesn't mean that you have to be conservative and unmotivated when you're older, but it's the trajectory the large majority take.
  - mgkimsal 13y ago
    That's describing what is, not what the title claimed is needed. We need people to build inspiring things and take risks. The fact that many older people aren't in positions where's comfortable or easy to do doesn't mean that it's not needed. One could also make the argument that many 'older' people also tend have have more disposable income and savings to bootstrap their own ideas, have larger networks of people reach out to for connections, etc, and often may have many of their life stuff behind them (kids, house, etc). Therefore there's many older people who are in a better position to be risky than a young person. The 'risk' factor is all relative, of course, with people at different stages of life.
    - a3voices 13y ago
      Maybe older people don't fit into the rockstar image as well.
  - thrush 13y ago
    Perhaps you're right, but it is not the rule. Benjamin Franklin took risks and made positive contributions throughout his entire life.
    - mgkimsal 13y ago
Qworg 13y ago
The core idea in this article is that it is possible to convince Cole, a 24 year old making mid 6 figures in finance, that he should have instead taken a job making mid 5 figures (maybe) at an energy startup. I don't see how you can make that happen. His entire trajectory was "making the correct choice" - in which that correct choice was future potential maximizing. Why would he suddenly abandon that track? In many ways, people in high finance have already "won" in real terms. If he really wants to try his hand at startups, why can't he just jump in as a VC?
- a3voices 13y ago
  I don't think people in high finance have "won". I view winning on a logarithmic scale, and they're somewhere in the middle. At the top would be someone like Augustus Caesar. Below that is Bill Gates, Elon Musk, etc. At the third rung maybe you have multi-millionaires, and below that maybe typical high finance types. So they are at least 4 rungs down.
  - Qworg 13y ago
    Except by dint of cash, they can participate in the potential of startups without the risks of actually participating in the startup. Also, consumption as a portion of income decreases as income increases. Their choice is not $150k/year or "never work again". Their choice is close to $Xmil/year or "never work again". $Xmil is far closer to never work again than $150k.
  - michaelochurch 13y ago
    At some point you stop caring about whether people on the Internet care whether you've "won" and just want a high probability of a good life. Finance will get you there, the engineer position at the typical VC-funded startup won't. Most of these startups won't even introduce you to investors these days! So what is the point if you're not being set up to found later on?
gdne 13y ago
Why "young" people specifically? Seems extremely limiting. There are a lot of talented people out there of every age and we should be encouraging of anyone building the next innovation.
- matteotom 13y ago
  Why "young" people? They don't have families, mortgages, car loans, etc that require consistent income, giving them the freedom to make low-mid 5 figures now, with the possibility of making more later. Unfortunately, the problem with this is that many young people now are stuck with large amounts of student debt, so they have to take the highest paying job they can find right out of college. So the theory is in my first paragraph, while the reality is much different, in my second paragraph.
  - mjn 13y ago
    Re: the first paragraph, I think that's often true comparing people in their 20s vs 40s, but many people in their 50s and 60s (especially in engineering) have considerably more financial freedom than those in their 20s. They have somewhat more obligations, but many more resources. With a paid-off house, kids through college, paid-off cars, well-funded 401(k), 30 years of savings from a six-figure engineering job, etc., they have an ability to self-fund that most 25-year-olds don't (and often, a stronger network). I think there might be more conservatism in that someone who's had a successful 35-year career as an engineer and is used to a regular six-figure income may not be particularly inclined to quit his or her job now and start something else. But I think in terms of resources they're often actually less tied down than a 25-year-old who has no savings cushion and has to pay rent— even if the 25-year-old didn't have student debt.
    - matteotom 13y ago
      You have a good point, but I don't think it really stands up. By the time somebody's 50 or 60, they are looking toward retirement, not trying to start the next huge product. I look at my dad as an example. He's not an engineer, but he makes a 6 figure salary. Once his last kid is out of the house, he'll be 60. Even looking at him now, at 50, I don't think he has the energy to take the risk and start a company. While there may be a few 50-60 year olds with everything needed to start something else, I think the norm goes in the exact opposite direction.
namelezz 13y ago
I wonder if the writer is going to inspire his own children.
michaelochurch 13y ago
First of all, the VC-funded startup scene is not an antidote. I heard people, in 2008, expressing hope that the financial meltdown (at the time, it was not clear that the financial industry wouldn't contract to 1/20 of its pre-2008 size) would push smart people into Silicon Valley. That wouldn't do much good. The VC-funded world has a corporate ladder that is even more dysfunctional, packing more downside and less upside. Second, this person ("Cole") is right to take the hedge fund job because it has a far higher chance of making him a founder or VC, in the future, than an engineer position at a startup ever will. When finance people (after a few years) enter the VC-funded tech world, they come in at the top. Seems like a good deal to me. Silicon Valley doesn't respect its own people. It doesn't respect the people making things. Because of that, it's dead as far as innovation goes, and the death of Silicon Valley has done a lot more damage to society than the mere existence of finance.
mkaziz 13y ago
> What’s interesting is that many of the people I meet who are young, highly educated, and from good families are among the most risk-averse I would think that because these people are risk-averse, is why they have the stability that can help form a bedrock for "success". (Disclaimer- I'm biased because I'm risk-averse)
FD3SA 13y ago
Though the author has good intentions, I fear he has very little understanding of the reality for today's young graduates. Let's look at a smart young grad's options: 1) Academia - Potentially interesting work. However, grad students are underpaid, overworked indentured servants in a vicious dictatorial status hierarchy (do what the PI says or you're out). Very poor career prospects, guaranteed negative return on time invested. The road to PI is sure to destroy your love of research. 2) Industry - Decent pay but work is extremely mundane. Very few "unicorn" positions which allow freedom for creative roles. No control of hours. Promotion becomes a very serious game of office politics, which can get very nasty. 3) Professions (Law, Med) - Enter at your own risk. Savagely competitive and draconian entrance requirements, incredibly expensive education, inhuman hours, constant stress at every milestone, and a never-ending barrage of standardized tests. However, if you endure, you can start your own practice and potentially have a comfortable life. 4) Entrepreneur - By far the riskiest option. Due to the get rich quick mantra of current investors, social/web/photo apps are the name of the game. Have an idea for a radical new research project with a long term focus? Forget about it. Build and flip is the only game in town. Build an app, get acquired or go go public, make your billions and get out. If it fails, try again, and again, and again.... So, now that we have looked at our options, can we really blame someone for going to work at a hedge fund? I can't. Especially if one is burdened with massive student debt. Ironically, hedge funds and investment banks pay employees much more fairly than any other industry, due to their profit sharing systems (bonuses). Meanwhile, tech industry execs are screaming over how high (!!) engineer salaries are, and are going across the globe to find H1-Bs and changing legislation to push those salaries back down. If we want everyone to work on world changing projects, we have to set proper incentives. That requires a radically different setup than we have now. TL;DR: Go to the hedge funds young man. Don't look back. Nothing else makes sense.
- Fomite 13y ago
  These two particularly resonate: > 1) Academia - Potentially interesting work. However, grad students are underpaid, overworked indentured servant in a vicious dictatorial status hierarchy (do what the PI says or you're out). Very poor career prospects, guaranteed negative return on time invested. The road to PI is guaranteed to destroy your love of research. Potentially interesting work, massive opportunity cost, and starting at the bottom of a ruthlessly competitive advancement pyramid. I love academia, and very much intend to stay in it, but it's not exactly a rational choice. > 3) Professions (Law, Med) - Enter at your own risk. Savagely competitive and draconian entrance requirements, incredibly expensive education, inhuman hours, constant stress at every milestone, and a never-ending barrage of standardized tests. However, if you endure, you can start your own practice and potentially have a comfortable life. Bimodal incomes that mean mainly these jobs come with a huge amount of debt for what is, for many people, a comfortable upper middle class lifestyle, but no more than that. You're not going to get rich doing either of these, because your income is capped by the hours you can work. A hedge fund on the other hand, if you're doing your job, is making money all the time.
hiphopyo 13y ago
TLDR -- People need to build things. Also, here's a story about some kid who got rich.
rottyguy 13y ago
Young people are one segment. Those hitting a wall in their late 30's/40's are another. Just need folks with an itch to scratch young or old(er)
Fomite 13y ago
I have a really hard time taking this seriously from Fast Company of all places.
Beasting247 13y ago
Finance and consulting are the biggest brain drains and it's a huge impediment to society. But until someone starts leveling the playing field compensation-wise, our brightest graduates will continue to flock to finance/consulting.
bishopknight 13y ago
I was just reading the other day how a kid build a brail writing machine out of Legos. Google it. Afterwards, tons of people are contacting him with opportunities. He smartly found a niche where brail machines were highly expensive and produced a low cost alternative with free plans distributed. On the flip side is he undercutting the makers of the brail machines? Perhaps, but hes helping the "greater good". So what are the projects and ideas we can tackle? I myself am in a unique position where I have the time to develop such a project. I'm an experienced J2EE developer with Web Design skills. I'd even be willing to work with others on a worthy project.
- hershel 13y ago
  You could find a few ideas here: http://www.reddit.com/r/realproblemsolvers http://www.reddit.com/r/realproblemsolvers
- gbasin 13y ago
  where's a good place to reach you?
zxcvvcxz 13y ago
It's a very idealistic message, but I think it's worth thinking about from time to time. I used to (still sorta do) think that entrepreneurship for people in my age range (20s) was a potential answer. But oftentimes the urge to run a startup outweights the urge to create something of greater value. I'm not saying a lot of startups shouldn't exist, but I find it kind of ridiculous that I know aerospace engineers making shopping apps. A bit of this is fine, if you have some special domain knowledge / experience / insight that can really change this space. Oftentimes though, people just do what's fashionable or safe.
Dewie 13y ago
The author complains that the success story does not make for a good story. But this is a person's life, not a novel. That people can take predictable and incremental steps towards leading a good life is a good thing. But maybe that is exactly why we tend to glamorize struggle, risk and unpredictable adventures - because our lives in these relatively streamlined, modern societies are so boring?
henryaj 13y ago
Glad this article made the front page. I like the author's message, and while there are a lot of comments here about how US college students graduate with colossal amounts of debt, that isn't true everywhere -- like over here in the UK, where student debt are fairly reasonable and paid back in proportion to your income. I found the article hauntingly accurate, at least for me: a child of well-off parents, not left wanting for anything and with every possibility open to me, but fundamentally risk-averse because of some misplaced sense of responsibility and duty.
owenjones 13y ago
Don't worry about the "real-world consequences [of] fail[ure]" because the author sure doesn't seem to either. For the risk-averse out there, don't you have some family to "fall back on so [you] will be unlikely to starve"? I think the headline should be: We Need To Lower The Consequences of Failure

34 points by henryaj 13y ago

>> What would the ideal be? There’s a renewable energy startup in Providence, Rhode Island, called VCharge that probably could have used Cole too. Its chief science officer, Jessica Millar, has a PhD in math from MIT. VCharge is trying to make our energy grid more efficient using energy storage and transmission algorithms. It’s not a sure thing, but if it succeeds we’ll all be better off for it. How is a more efficient energy grid the ideal? It sounds very status quo to me. The ideal would be doubling human life expectancy, building massive Elysium-like space stations that orbit the Earth, a guaranteed minimum income for everyone, and stuff like that. It seems like everyone lacks an imagination nowadays. Where are the people who used to invent things like airplanes and such?

nswanberg 13y ago
They are mostly the ones getting laughed at and dismissed. Which means there are probably as many or more as there have ever been, but they are not recognized until well after the fact, once it is no longer a risk to laud them.
ForHackernews 13y ago
Transmission and storage are really big barriers to widespread renewable energy. Solar and wind only work in certain geographic areas and times of day, unlike coal/oil plants which can be built anywhere. Solving those problems is potentially a game changer for carbon emissions, and (if you accept the more dire predictions) the future of humanity.
moron4hire 13y ago
They work as quantitative trading engineers at giganto investment banks. Or they are underprivileged people who have the potential to do more, but are placated by the soma of social media. Or they're somewhere in the middle, aspiring to develop better soma. It is a rare combination to find the ability and the ambition (for something other than just economic gain) to make new, exciting things of real value. You have to have all three. Drive, intellectual and economic means, and vision. With the growing gap between rich and poor (or, in other words, the evaporation of the middle class), it's probably not getting better anytime soon, either.
- mkaziz 13y ago
  Intellectual and economic means aren't hard to come across - it's mostly a genetic lottery. Drive? Vision? They're far harder to have.

HowDroll 13y ago

It's hard for educated young people to feel like they can take risks when many of them are shackled by five or six figures of student loan debt. When you know you have a $500-$1000 minimum loan payment ahead of you every month for the next 10-25 years, it's hard to feel like you can fight a dragon when selling a sword is a sure thing.

normloman 13y ago
This goes to the root of the problem, which the linked article ignores.

mgkimsal 13y ago

I'm not sure why it has to be 'young people'. Don't we need people in general to build inspiring things?

tachyonbeam 13y ago
Older people tend to be more conservative. They tend to have less energy/motivation and more to lose (partner, children, career, friends, house). Younger people are more likely to take risks such as relocating or invest money and time in something that might well fail. This of course doesn't mean that you have to be conservative and unmotivated when you're older, but it's the trajectory the large majority take.
- mgkimsal 13y ago
  That's describing what is, not what the title claimed is needed. We need people to build inspiring things and take risks. The fact that many older people aren't in positions where's comfortable or easy to do doesn't mean that it's not needed. One could also make the argument that many 'older' people also tend have have more disposable income and savings to bootstrap their own ideas, have larger networks of people reach out to for connections, etc, and often may have many of their life stuff behind them (kids, house, etc). Therefore there's many older people who are in a better position to be risky than a young person. The 'risk' factor is all relative, of course, with people at different stages of life.
  - a3voices 13y ago
    Maybe older people don't fit into the rockstar image as well.
- thrush 13y ago
  Perhaps you're right, but it is not the rule. Benjamin Franklin took risks and made positive contributions throughout his entire life.
  - mgkimsal 13y ago

Qworg 13y ago

The core idea in this article is that it is possible to convince Cole, a 24 year old making mid 6 figures in finance, that he should have instead taken a job making mid 5 figures (maybe) at an energy startup. I don't see how you can make that happen. His entire trajectory was "making the correct choice" - in which that correct choice was future potential maximizing. Why would he suddenly abandon that track? In many ways, people in high finance have already "won" in real terms. If he really wants to try his hand at startups, why can't he just jump in as a VC?

a3voices 13y ago
I don't think people in high finance have "won". I view winning on a logarithmic scale, and they're somewhere in the middle. At the top would be someone like Augustus Caesar. Below that is Bill Gates, Elon Musk, etc. At the third rung maybe you have multi-millionaires, and below that maybe typical high finance types. So they are at least 4 rungs down.
- Qworg 13y ago
  Except by dint of cash, they can participate in the potential of startups without the risks of actually participating in the startup. Also, consumption as a portion of income decreases as income increases. Their choice is not $150k/year or "never work again". Their choice is close to $Xmil/year or "never work again". $Xmil is far closer to never work again than $150k.
- michaelochurch 13y ago
  At some point you stop caring about whether people on the Internet care whether you've "won" and just want a high probability of a good life. Finance will get you there, the engineer position at the typical VC-funded startup won't. Most of these startups won't even introduce you to investors these days! So what is the point if you're not being set up to found later on?

gdne 13y ago

Why "young" people specifically? Seems extremely limiting. There are a lot of talented people out there of every age and we should be encouraging of anyone building the next innovation.

matteotom 13y ago
Why "young" people? They don't have families, mortgages, car loans, etc that require consistent income, giving them the freedom to make low-mid 5 figures now, with the possibility of making more later. Unfortunately, the problem with this is that many young people now are stuck with large amounts of student debt, so they have to take the highest paying job they can find right out of college. So the theory is in my first paragraph, while the reality is much different, in my second paragraph.
- mjn 13y ago
  Re: the first paragraph, I think that's often true comparing people in their 20s vs 40s, but many people in their 50s and 60s (especially in engineering) have considerably more financial freedom than those in their 20s. They have somewhat more obligations, but many more resources. With a paid-off house, kids through college, paid-off cars, well-funded 401(k), 30 years of savings from a six-figure engineering job, etc., they have an ability to self-fund that most 25-year-olds don't (and often, a stronger network). I think there might be more conservatism in that someone who's had a successful 35-year career as an engineer and is used to a regular six-figure income may not be particularly inclined to quit his or her job now and start something else. But I think in terms of resources they're often actually less tied down than a 25-year-old who has no savings cushion and has to pay rent— even if the 25-year-old didn't have student debt.
  - matteotom 13y ago
    You have a good point, but I don't think it really stands up. By the time somebody's 50 or 60, they are looking toward retirement, not trying to start the next huge product. I look at my dad as an example. He's not an engineer, but he makes a 6 figure salary. Once his last kid is out of the house, he'll be 60. Even looking at him now, at 50, I don't think he has the energy to take the risk and start a company. While there may be a few 50-60 year olds with everything needed to start something else, I think the norm goes in the exact opposite direction.

namelezz 13y ago

I wonder if the writer is going to inspire his own children.

michaelochurch 13y ago

First of all, the VC-funded startup scene is not an antidote. I heard people, in 2008, expressing hope that the financial meltdown (at the time, it was not clear that the financial industry wouldn't contract to 1/20 of its pre-2008 size) would push smart people into Silicon Valley. That wouldn't do much good. The VC-funded world has a corporate ladder that is even more dysfunctional, packing more downside and less upside. Second, this person ("Cole") is right to take the hedge fund job because it has a far higher chance of making him a founder or VC, in the future, than an engineer position at a startup ever will. When finance people (after a few years) enter the VC-funded tech world, they come in at the top. Seems like a good deal to me. Silicon Valley doesn't respect its own people. It doesn't respect the people making things. Because of that, it's dead as far as innovation goes, and the death of Silicon Valley has done a lot more damage to society than the mere existence of finance.

mkaziz 13y ago

> What’s interesting is that many of the people I meet who are young, highly educated, and from good families are among the most risk-averse I would think that because these people are risk-averse, is why they have the stability that can help form a bedrock for "success". (Disclaimer- I'm biased because I'm risk-averse)

FD3SA 13y ago

Though the author has good intentions, I fear he has very little understanding of the reality for today's young graduates. Let's look at a smart young grad's options: 1) Academia - Potentially interesting work. However, grad students are underpaid, overworked indentured servants in a vicious dictatorial status hierarchy (do what the PI says or you're out). Very poor career prospects, guaranteed negative return on time invested. The road to PI is sure to destroy your love of research. 2) Industry - Decent pay but work is extremely mundane. Very few "unicorn" positions which allow freedom for creative roles. No control of hours. Promotion becomes a very serious game of office politics, which can get very nasty. 3) Professions (Law, Med) - Enter at your own risk. Savagely competitive and draconian entrance requirements, incredibly expensive education, inhuman hours, constant stress at every milestone, and a never-ending barrage of standardized tests. However, if you endure, you can start your own practice and potentially have a comfortable life. 4) Entrepreneur - By far the riskiest option. Due to the get rich quick mantra of current investors, social/web/photo apps are the name of the game. Have an idea for a radical new research project with a long term focus? Forget about it. Build and flip is the only game in town. Build an app, get acquired or go go public, make your billions and get out. If it fails, try again, and again, and again.... So, now that we have looked at our options, can we really blame someone for going to work at a hedge fund? I can't. Especially if one is burdened with massive student debt. Ironically, hedge funds and investment banks pay employees much more fairly than any other industry, due to their profit sharing systems (bonuses). Meanwhile, tech industry execs are screaming over how high (!!) engineer salaries are, and are going across the globe to find H1-Bs and changing legislation to push those salaries back down. If we want everyone to work on world changing projects, we have to set proper incentives. That requires a radically different setup than we have now. TL;DR: Go to the hedge funds young man. Don't look back. Nothing else makes sense.

Fomite 13y ago
These two particularly resonate: > 1) Academia - Potentially interesting work. However, grad students are underpaid, overworked indentured servant in a vicious dictatorial status hierarchy (do what the PI says or you're out). Very poor career prospects, guaranteed negative return on time invested. The road to PI is guaranteed to destroy your love of research. Potentially interesting work, massive opportunity cost, and starting at the bottom of a ruthlessly competitive advancement pyramid. I love academia, and very much intend to stay in it, but it's not exactly a rational choice. > 3) Professions (Law, Med) - Enter at your own risk. Savagely competitive and draconian entrance requirements, incredibly expensive education, inhuman hours, constant stress at every milestone, and a never-ending barrage of standardized tests. However, if you endure, you can start your own practice and potentially have a comfortable life. Bimodal incomes that mean mainly these jobs come with a huge amount of debt for what is, for many people, a comfortable upper middle class lifestyle, but no more than that. You're not going to get rich doing either of these, because your income is capped by the hours you can work. A hedge fund on the other hand, if you're doing your job, is making money all the time.

hiphopyo 13y ago

TLDR -- People need to build things. Also, here's a story about some kid who got rich.

rottyguy 13y ago

Young people are one segment. Those hitting a wall in their late 30's/40's are another. Just need folks with an itch to scratch young or old(er)

Fomite 13y ago

I have a really hard time taking this seriously from Fast Company of all places.

Beasting247 13y ago

Finance and consulting are the biggest brain drains and it's a huge impediment to society. But until someone starts leveling the playing field compensation-wise, our brightest graduates will continue to flock to finance/consulting.

bishopknight 13y ago

I was just reading the other day how a kid build a brail writing machine out of Legos. Google it. Afterwards, tons of people are contacting him with opportunities. He smartly found a niche where brail machines were highly expensive and produced a low cost alternative with free plans distributed. On the flip side is he undercutting the makers of the brail machines? Perhaps, but hes helping the "greater good". So what are the projects and ideas we can tackle? I myself am in a unique position where I have the time to develop such a project. I'm an experienced J2EE developer with Web Design skills. I'd even be willing to work with others on a worthy project.

hershel 13y ago
You could find a few ideas here: http://www.reddit.com/r/realproblemsolvers http://www.reddit.com/r/realproblemsolvers
gbasin 13y ago
where's a good place to reach you?

zxcvvcxz 13y ago

It's a very idealistic message, but I think it's worth thinking about from time to time. I used to (still sorta do) think that entrepreneurship for people in my age range (20s) was a potential answer. But oftentimes the urge to run a startup outweights the urge to create something of greater value. I'm not saying a lot of startups shouldn't exist, but I find it kind of ridiculous that I know aerospace engineers making shopping apps. A bit of this is fine, if you have some special domain knowledge / experience / insight that can really change this space. Oftentimes though, people just do what's fashionable or safe.

Dewie 13y ago

The author complains that the success story does not make for a good story. But this is a person's life, not a novel. That people can take predictable and incremental steps towards leading a good life is a good thing. But maybe that is exactly why we tend to glamorize struggle, risk and unpredictable adventures - because our lives in these relatively streamlined, modern societies are so boring?

henryaj 13y ago

Glad this article made the front page. I like the author's message, and while there are a lot of comments here about how US college students graduate with colossal amounts of debt, that isn't true everywhere -- like over here in the UK, where student debt are fairly reasonable and paid back in proportion to your income. I found the article hauntingly accurate, at least for me: a child of well-off parents, not left wanting for anything and with every possibility open to me, but fundamentally risk-averse because of some misplaced sense of responsibility and duty.

owenjones 13y ago

Don't worry about the "real-world consequences [of] fail[ure]" because the author sure doesn't seem to either. For the risk-averse out there, don't you have some family to "fall back on so [you] will be unlikely to starve"? I think the headline should be: We Need To Lower The Consequences of Failure