Hacker News Reader

Comment by Gatsky | Hacker News Reader

Note that everyone on this forum is prima facie remarkably privileged compared to someone in this world. 'We' all went to some kind of school as opposed to no school. 'We' all have amazing technology at our finger tips, as opposed to lacking basic nutrition and sanitation and personal safety.

The difference between 'us' and the abject poor is much greater than the difference between 'us' and PG or Bill Gates. The abject poor can't even post on here to point this out.

My point is that privilege tagging is hypocritical, and not useful. As such, I simply read this essay calmly for what it is, knowing that I too was born with more than enough luck. Yet I constantly fail to honour that most essential fact about my life.

View on HN

It's an article called "How to Work Hard" that doesn't once mention luck, psychology, or basic human needs.

What do you get from the success how-tos of multi-millionares? Do you really not see it as self-serving? Disclose survivorship bias, incredible privilege, and impossible odds and I'm in... I think? At that point I'm still unclear why the rich have something useful to say here that Maslow or other academics don't.

I've lost track of what your critique actually is. Anyway, I didn't read this essay because PG is rich. I do not in fact know if he is rich or not. His wealth neither increases nor decreases the likelihood that the essay is worthwile. I starting reading PG's essays because he made HN, which I find valuable, his net worth is irrelevant to me. I know about him because of HN, because of something he created, and for no other reason.

I am able to contextualise his essay myself. It is not necessary for him to start the essay with a laundry list of disclaimers (eg I'm a neurotypical rich white guy with good parents, no major medical conditions, good teeth, 4 limbs etc).

You have just become lucky because you stumbled upon the article and can act on it. So it is not necessary to mention luck, because the readership of the article is already selected for luck.

The article also mentions the necessity of talent.

It also doesn't say everybody can become a billionaire by simply working hard.

Also even if you are born in Africa with no access to schools (or in some US ghetto were everything is sooo horrible), you can probably set yourself apart from your peers.

A lot us are able to take pleasure in other people's success and try to learn from them. It isn't very useful to assume the worst about people. The generalizations you are making here about rich people, etc. etc. are honestly ridiculous. Some of the most generous people I've met were filthy rich.

What are those assumptions?

That rich people are different than other people.

I appreciate others success. I generally really like Graham's essays.

I don't believe wealthy people are different, just under extraordinary circumstances.

Here are some assumptions I'm holding:

- I don't believe the wealthy have any secrets on virtue that anyone else doesn't.

- I believe power messes with people's sense of reality.

- I believe we're poor judges of our own intentions.

- I believe we tend to more generously assign intent to the wealthy.

- I believe success can give us false confidence in unrelated disciplines.

- I believe generosity is a form of communication for the wealthy.

- I don't believe the wealthy often become poor from their generosity.

- I believe wealth inequity is the third worst problem facing the world today.

For who?

if that is the 3rd worst problem, I guess life is pretty darn easy

Reply on news.ycombinator.com