Able to help everyone but yourself

Hmm…

Example: someone with money doesn’t know options exist, that can improve or correct what they feel is wrong. Someone without money, has discovered that it is required, in order to enable the option they need, but cannot avail. They know what this option is, but that they cannot access it. The first person’s mind is full of other things, and hasn’t realized what they could do. The second person knows exactly what they would do, and that they could, if only it were available. Second person says to first person: “you can afford the available option that i cannot, and it can do X, Y, Z!” First person realizes there is an available solution to their problem… /because/ it is not available to the second person, who has spent time analyzing which solution would be required to fix their problem, but is /here/ because they cannot access it.

Because 2nd person cannot access the solution, 1st person is helped by being made aware of the existence of a solution that /is/ available to them.

That’s an example, though probably not the best one, but is likely quite common. There are other instances where simply having experienced something that has left lasting detrimental effects, teaches us how we could have avoided it, what we should have done differently… which we can then express to those who may be in the situation where they are about to make the same mistakes. Sometimes people are able to learn vicariously through accounts of the experiences of others. This is not always the case. Some lessons require experiencing, and cannot be understood by simply having them explained.

The anti-example would be: look around at how often the people who have almost no serious problems, are ever able to help someone who does have serious problems they can’t fix themselves, which the no-problems person cannot understand how to even begin to approach solving.

How can you fix a problem you don’t know about? How can you solve a problem you don’t understand?

It’s rare for people to know what they’re doing, and the extended effects of their actions, if they haven’t been to the source, and stayed long enough to understand how things work.

Some people hack computer programs; i hack life. I am very familiar with the sources of many problems, but no one person can be an expert in everything. My specializations are not always applicable to everyone’s problems, but there’s a reason people often act like they have some sort of contempt for me, and say things like “well you just have an answer for everything, don’t you.” Most things, probably. But everything? Probably not. It’s just that i have an approach to problem solving that almost always works, which is part of my approach to perceiving and understanding my own existence and my environment. Some people want to know how things work; some just assume computers are magic. 😉 (and in one way, you could argue in their favor, because anything that is obfuscated or abstracted away or hidden enough, about how things function to produce their effects, disrupts our ability to discern its functionality; if we don’t know how something works, but we know it does work… that’s pretty much the same thing as “magic,” but not in the supernatural sense.)

Without “restrictions,” a sniper round would barely be a firecracker, with no chance of accuracy or predictable trajectory.

It’s like i need a sniper rifle, but everyone insists on sawed-off shotguns. My aims are not within point-blank range.

Pick the right tool for the job. ^^

Well, as many hackers would likely agree, it’s often best to use and build upon what already exists, rather than “reinventing the wheel” over and over again. Sometimes it’s better to just use “magic,” just because it works, rather than having to figure out how it works, through reverse engineering, then figure out a better solution than the original, which enables a slightly better function, and then build a new slightly different thing.

It’s weird how so much hacker “philosophy” is applicable to life. Or maybe it’s entirely logical, very reasonable, and not weird at all.

Like, if a currently existing CMS (content management system) is sufficiently suitable to your needs, then does it make sense to try to write a brand new one from scratch? Or to attempt to slightly modify the one that already exists, even if you have to use some “magic” (stuff that doesn’t show how it works, but still works anyway) to enable additional functionality? I suppose it depends on what you’re trying to do, and whether it’s possible to gain the desired function through modification, or whether a total rebuild, a complete re-imagining, would be required to make it work how you want.

Unless you’re trying to do something extreme or unheard of, there is probably a way to do it with some combination of what already exists… but while you’ll probably save heaps of time and effort in that way, you probably won’t have your perfect, ideal solution, and may have to slightly compromise your ideal goals, in order to make the most efficient use of your time.

Back to your first question… i feel that i have ideal solutions, but no access to them. Part of the lack of access to those ideal solutions, are events, and non-events, in the past. If things had gone differently, i would have had access to better solutions. But now, i feel stuck in a place where none of the available solutions will accomplish my minimum goals, and i am doubtful about whether i will even be able to gain access to the bare minimum acceptable, realistically assessed, expectations/goals/needs/wants.

Simply put: i need a sniper rifle and lots of practice, but i can only access shotguns.

Most people don’t seem to realize how bad their plans are. I do, because i’ve been there, and it became painfully obvious to me that planning needs to account for lots of different things that most people either ignore, or never even consider. I feel like i literally need to make 2x or 3x whatever dollar amount i think i need for whatever, because “surprise costs” always show up, and are not always revealed in advance. And if i get into my plan, and have already invested lots of myself, and then something goes wrong that i can’t afford, the entire thing becomes a SNAFU, and cannot reach completion, making every moment spent in pursuit, and utter waste… aside from the aspect of learning from the mistakes, and hopefully having another chance to try again, at some point, which may never come.

So, you need more than just “a plan,” you need a holistic approach. You need enough room for error to absorb everything you can’t control or predict. But that buffer can bloat quickly, and so it makes “safe planning” even that much more difficult. It’s hard to make effective plans when you don’t even know what can go wrong. So, spend lots of time thinking about what could go wrong, to make sure your approach can handle it. But that’s stressful as hell. lol.

You can’t just “wing it” and expect to accidentally make a good life. You have to basically become a life-architect. Figure out how to blueprint everything, and then rigidly pursue construction, while leaving enough room for error absorption and flexibility for dodging random projectiles.

When building a program, you have to start with a purpose, figure out what inputs and outputs would be desirable, and then figure out the most efficient or maintainable or secure or speedy or stable (or the best available combination thereof) way to implement them.

And in order to figure out all that, you must first program yourself to be able to learn what you need to learn, so that you can figure out which changes must be made, to enable pursuit of the objective.

Sorry for writing so much. I suck at being concise.

Consider the relation between the concept of “recursion” and the idea of an “upward spiral.”

@embargo:

I’ve always been a sort of accidental philosopher, about pretty much anything i’ve endeavored to learn. And with everything i’ve found intriguing, i’ve either revealed its true nature and lost interest, or reached a point where further progression became prohibitively complex and overwhelming, and either gave up, or had to take breaks, and only sporadically and incrementally advance.

I’m torn about college, because it seems necessary, but also very arbitrary. I’ve also considered that perhaps structured learning environments are better for some things. Plus, there’s so many different things i wish i could pursue, i just don’t know how i’d be able to intensively develop all of them, unless it was in a college type setting. Or, maybe it’s the opposite, and the only way is to find a way to subsist and advance, separately and independently from each other, but that approach has never seemed feasible for me.

Anyway;

I’ve occasionally pondered what i’d do, how life might be, whether i’d be “satisfied” or “content,” if i actually accomplished everything i wanted to attain. And i could totally see myself sitting in a lavish mansion with every “thing” i could want, and still being somehow only just barely content, but not really satisfied. And in that way, i begin to question whether i really want what i think i want, or whether/how-much of it is merely the product of deprivation. How much of my dreams are “me,” and how much of it is “who i think i wish i was?” I honestly don’t know… but i can certainly make some direct comparisons and choose that “having things i want, is better…” even if it doesn’t result in being satisfied or content.

So:

1. What do you want?
2. Why don’t you have it / aren’t you doing it?

These 2/3 questions can be monumentally difficult to answer for yourself… but you do have the advantage of not requiring external validation, which i think is critical in determining what You, Actually value, and why.

I’ve read some articles about programmers and pay scales, and there seems to be a consensus that once someone has “enough,” more doesn’t really matter. When you have what you need and most of what you want, you start to value different things, for different reasons.

The rabbit hole of “self” can be an epic journey.

Somewhere in there, you should be able to figure out… why you are who you are, and what to do with it. If you already know who and why, then maybe some careful introspection and examining of your perspectives and orientation to the world, will yield something that matters enough to you, to generate motivation, or even inspiration.

I wanted to mention something about one of Paul Graham’s essays, where he talks about what it really means to own things, and how owning things requires maintenance, which then translates to being owned by your maintenance-requiring possessions.

Which, ironically (or not) enough, ties into a quote from Fight Club: “things you own, end up owning you.”

Human beings are finite, both in duration of existence, as well as potential for exertion. We can only do so much, for so long, and then it’s over. So we have to be careful to spend our time on the right things/actions/pursuits, in order to maximize the enjoyment or outwardly positive effects we can produce (which ever of those things is personally preferable for each person).

Some like to build fortresses or fortunes or sculptures or music or programs. Some like to spread “good will” among others. It just depends on what your particular circumstances leads you to most genuinely and honestly value.

I like to emphasize the value of the moment as it’s being experienced, rather than the potentially unfeasible end-result, at the cost of the actual moment to moment experiences that form memories of a “lived life.” Not for the purpose of taking them with me past the end; but for having those memories with me in life. I suppose it would be cool to leave a legacy, but it’s probably not worth worrying about what will happen to the world after i’m no longer in it, and no longer able to affect any change.

@PainNlife:

I’ve attempted to think down that path a few times. I was going to say something like “i’ve never figured out how philosophers get paid…” Wouldn’t it be nice to literally get paid to think?

I mean, i suppose it has to be through either teaching or authoring. And i totally just had a little panic tremor thinking of the millions of keystrokes and thousands of hours i’d spend, intensely locked in intense contemplation/verbalization mode. I wonder how many keyboards i’d have to wear out… cherry mx switches are supposedly good for ~40-50 million actuations…

But i wanna make stuff too. I don’t want to spend the rest of my life alone in deep contemplation (even though sometimes that’s exactly what i prefer to do!), and i’m probably not cut out for vocal lectures… but i suppose it’s not entirely out of the question.

Who knows. Maybe i’ll write one amazing book and sell a billion copies. (lol)

And that’s the thing i’m getting at: I need to find a way to integrate “earning a living” with “doing what is fulfilling.”

I could philosophize my days away and never make a dime.

It’s hard to get paid to think, without official credentials.

You could replace the word “think,” in the previous line, with just about anything else legit that anyone gets paid to do.

So, how can i bypass the arbitrary college environment, and go directly to the learning of useful information and cultivating of experience? And how can i get gov’t grants to pay for that? 😛

Or better yet: how do i use what already exists, to make enough money so that i don’t have to worry about having enough money anymore, but still can use all of my time for whatever feels most important? I’m thinking that type of stuff is actually a pretty closely guarded secret. You’ll get bits and pieces of it if you look around, but it’s hard to grasp the whole picture, and turn it into a repeatable process. If it was easy, “everyone would do it.” Lots of people are poor. Ergo: not everyone is doing it, because it is not easy… or because it’s “a secret.”

But if i had all the “things” i wanted, and could afford to manifest any experiences i’d like… would i even care about philosophy? Probably sometimes… but i bet i’d spend most of my time “enjoying life,” rather than alone in deep contemplation.

@embargo:

Heh, cool. I do that often. I probably delete almost as much as i post.

Likewise, when anyone asks my favorite movie, it’s usually a toss-up between Fight Club, or Pulp Fiction.

Have you ever gotten into martial arts? The stuff i learned in a very short time around 19-21, proved quite potent, and certainly qualified as “life enriching.” (and it was of the genuine kung fu tai chi variety) Working out the body’s kinks and having a holistic approach to movement, sure goes a long way toward feeling better. Plus, endorphins and psychological self-control are part of that.

I would necessarily call myself “a big follower” of PG, but certainly a fan. I discovered his existence during my chaotic foray into attempting to self-teach web development. I stumbled onto his essays and read several of them, and realized that he’s not just a programmer venture capitalist guru, but he’s also a somewhat famous essayist. I like the way he writes… and that just so happens to be another overlapping interest of mine. Show me an older, wiser, writer hacker successful businessman, and i probably won’t be able to not pay attention. 😉

You ever do any gaming? (especially of the mmo variety)
The idea of “comfort zones” reminds me of a… series of concepts, i suppose, which comes together to form what is known as “min/maxing.”

Most “pro-gamers” seem to swear by maxing and spikes and bursts. They want to be capable of delivering an outrageous amount of damage, in as few hits as possible, as instantaneously as possible, as reliably as possible.

In order to achieve this, they often must sacrifice their “comfort zone,” or their “minimums.” Typically, building for the highest and most exploitative “spike,” requires giving up a maxed low-end. You might whiff a lot, or have crippled utility value, or be what’s called a “glass cannon.” But when you connect, your target almost always dies. Playing life in such a way would be foolish, because you often leave yourself vulnerable, or have to rely on a critical roll, in order to “shine.”

However, not everyone plays this way. Some people are all about utility, or all about maintained minimums. They’ll max hit chance or penetration ratings, so that they /always/ get at least a certain amount of whatever effect, even if that effect never peaks as high as the maxers. They are more reliable, more dependable, and often more in-tune with the dynamics of game play. They might not top the kill charts or do the most damage, but “those who know their class” are always an asset to a team, and are often able to fit their “hybrid” or utility build into almost every situation (except, of course, the mr. killguy role). I would say that those who raise their minimums, and aim for a more widely useful setup, instead of exploiting for “random” spikes, are the better players. But in most games, the maxed spikers tend to excel… and that’s because everyone who sees anyone “one-shotting,” flips out about how unfair that one moment was, rather than realizing that the character is built to do exactly that, and probably not much else.

Anyway, i was trying to make an analogy and kinda got carried away.

IRL, boosting minimums is better because if we fail, there’s a pretty good risk of actual death, and boosting those maximums at the expense of safety, can seem like too great a risk. So, we tend to just get good enough to get comfortable and maintain it, rather than risking what we’ve invested our entire lives into, for the chance to gain something we really don’t even need.

But that safety gets boring, and starts to sting every time you see someone who took the big risks, reaping big rewards.

Comfort zone won’t provide maximum enjoyment, but it’s sustainable.
In order to make a greater impact, and feel a more intense sense of enjoyment or fulfillment, we have to forgo some safety, accept some risk, and stack the odds in favor of landing the biggest hit, and /hopefully/, without risking so much that it breaks us if we miss.

That said… i haven’t played anything multiplayer in a while. I’ve often pondered where the formerly reliable enjoyment went… and i think my answer is that i figured out that i just don’t seem to “like” people all that much. Either that, or most gamers who like the games i’ve liked, have had personalities that were not quite compatible with mine. lol. Or maybe i just took a step back and realized that gaming isn’t life, and if i’m gaming, i’m not really living, and i don’t really like how it makes me feel to realize that. I would rather be living. But it would seem i need quite a lot of income, in order to do that. And so when i do still game, i can’t help but think of all the money i’m /not/ making. So i think i need to get into the “IRL money game,” or something… even though i’m not currently configured to succeed in that.

And so i keep digging backwards, deeper, trying to find where the most fundamental corrections should be made, so that i can adjust myself to succeed at what i need to do, rather than being content with playing it safe.