
Ask PG: Can you do it again? - kuasha
I have done nothing significant in life yet. Have not helped anyone or improved the world at all in almost any sense. But still it took me a lot of practice to get to where I am now. I am confident I can do it again and again given same amount of time and same attitude to life from same or little more limits I had and starting from any timeline from 1980 to 2014. Only thing it takes is same amount of practice. This is probably true for 99% people living today.<p>I am curious if you feel the same way. If you are given back your time and energy but taken back everything else, can you repeat what have you done? Say, starting today? If yes, how much more limits can you overcome?<p>I have a lot of admiration for you. I consider you my mentor (book, article and other works). This is not to challenge you or anyone- just trying to understand what successful people think about luck, environment and timeline.
======
visakanv
You are confident that you can repeat "doing nothing significant in life"
again and again? Whoa, you're really setting the bar high, aren't you? :P

~~~
kuasha
I have not improved the world, but I still consider myself successful in
personal life.

~~~
derekp7
Don't be so hard on yourself about not improving the world. I'm sure that
you've positively affected someone. Even if it is a side-effect of your
personal success, that allows you, for example, to leave a decent tip at a bar
or restaurant. That decent sized tip helped the waitress make rent that month,
and not get kicked out to the curb. Which kept her kids in a decent school
district, where they learned a lot and will someday cure cancer. (Just an
example).

~~~
soggypopsicle
By that reasoning nearly everyone has improved the world. Considering the
negative impact we all have just existing in our society I'm sure his stance
is more accurate.

~~~
throwaway344
In general, I think the average human being provides some good for the world.
If nothing else, the average person in most[1] of the world can vote,
hopefully on average stabilizing the political system. [2] They also act as an
allocator for the market, enabling capital to go where needed. Each actor in
the market acts as part of Adam Smith's invisible hand, helping decide where
resources go. At the same time, most are parents to children enabling the
whole thing to happen again.

Is your belief based on human impact on the environment, or is it something
else?

[1] Better resources a Google away but this is something at least.
[http://www.economist.com/node/8908438](http://www.economist.com/node/8908438)
[2]
[http://www.stier.net/writing/demstab/demstab.htm#_Toc5203975...](http://www.stier.net/writing/demstab/demstab.htm#_Toc520397588)

~~~
soggypopsicle
You could say that my views are based on the environment but I would describe
it as being on the world on a whole. All your benefits are to our societies
and other related tribes. In that regard I agree that the average person
provides some good but at a world level that includes the environment, other
species, resources, etc I think the in most cases we are a negative force.

------
brudgers
[I am not PG]

In the 1980's PG got a phd from Harvard - rumors that he also helped create
the internet DoS attack are however unsubstantiated. In the 1990's PG wrote
two books, and started a successful web company. In the 2000's PG wrote
another book and started a successful company that launched successful
companies. There's fighting email spam, creating a new programming language,
developing research on continuation servers, advancing our understanding of
the dynamics of online communities and their discourse, and a personal life.

Two thoughts come to mind: Chance favors the prepared. If you want something
to get done, give it to someone who is busy.

PG seems like the sort of person who is busy. Do you think this thread rises
to the level of priority? Should he take time away from his family to
participate?

My take is that PG has largely moved on from HN. In part, that's probably just
his change. But in no small part I expect it has to do with the changing
nature of HN - an HN that Reg Braithwaite abandoned. An HN where fluff like
this question gets double digit points - do you have any idea how hard it is
to write a 44 point comment?

~~~
kuasha
Forums on Internet should balance things automatically. PG (or anyone) has no
obligation to reply any question on any forum. Should someone ask a personal
question? I don't know. Celebrities are always asked such question- I would
not ask same question to someone like me.

~~~
brudgers
Acting as if HN was just another forum is a behavior PG spent years trying to
curtail.

------
wellboy
The whole point of entrepreneurship is persistence, you don't need anything
else. If you have persistence, then IQ, upbringing, social environment,
education dwarf in importance.

If you simply never stop, try things that no one else has tried before, it's
impossible to not become successful. :)

~~~
adotjdotr
"If you have persistence, then IQ, upbringing, social environment, education
dwarf in importance."

Politely disagree here. Most people who succeed in business are usually (but
not in all cases) brought up in good homes, in stable social environments and
receive good educations. Pull beneath the curtain and even the 'high
school/college drop out' is usually from a middle class home or has received
private education. There are many other things that play a role as well
including race. Remember all the kerfuffle a year or two ago about the lack of
entrepreneurs from ethnic minority groups namely black groups who weren't
being funded. Its not part of the 'VC Pattern Recognition'. Believe me it also
pained me to write about race because I've v low tolerance for it.

Furthermore, there is clear evidence across the most wildly successful
companies you will see many entrepreneurs do look very similar. Many have
similar upbringings, many have good educations/come from good homes, many are
from specific sections in the class hierarchy and many are from specific
races. Just look at most of the top venture investors most are white or
jewish.

Persistence yes i agree is unbelievably important. By default telling many
people you'll start a business will likely result in a mix bag of congrats but
many people telling you why it is a bad idea or why it won't work.

However, please do not be so dismissive of IQ or social environment or
education. All of these things play a key role.

Look at the S&P 500. The CEOs education is as follows 97% have a college
degree and 67% have a further degree. Most common degrees are engineering.
Stanford and Harvard have 4% of the CEO population in the 500. I will also
include Zuckerburg/Gates in this stat even if he dropped out he still went!

Please do not be so dismissive of other factors it is just myopic and
extremely ignorant.

~~~
mindcrime
_Look at the S &P 500. The CEOs education is as follows 97% have a college
degree and 67% have a further degree. Most common degrees are engineering.
Stanford and Harvard have 4% of the CEO population in the 500. I will also
include Zuckerburg/Gates in this stat even if he dropped out he still went!_

There's a lot to be said about what the makeup of the S&P 500 CEO pool
represents, and what it means to look at their educational background, etc.

BUT... It's also important to remember that setting the bar for "success as an
entrepreneur" at anything involving the S&P 500 may be a bit excessive. Oh,
don't get me wrong... many entrepreneurs (especially _tech_ entrepreneurs,
which probably includes a lot of the population here) may have goals to build
a publicly traded company, be a member of the S&P 500, or the DJIA or
whatever. But not all entrepreneurs fit that mold.

Depending on where you start out and what your goals are, building a company
that brings in just enough income to pay you and your employees, while
allowing you to avoid being outdoors doing backbreaking manual labor in 95
degree heat, may qualify as "success". Heck, for a tradesman of some sort
(plumber, electrician, etc.) it may be enough to have a business that just
keeps the lights on for him and his family, while leaving enough to put some
money in a college fund for the kids.

 _However, please do not be so dismissive of IQ or social environment or
education. All of these things play a key role._

They can, but don't overstate their importance either. I've seen with my own
eyes the value of sheer perseverance, coupled with great work ethic, and how
that allowed a man with almost no formal education, and a poor, rural, "lower
class" upbringing to become what I consider a "successful entrepreneur". I
don't know my dad's IQ though, so I won't comment on that bit.

------
pearjuice
Sorry, but what kind of fluff question is this? Have you even thought about
your own question? Your question implies time travel and it comes with all
sorts of paradoxes. It's like asking "Can you rewind the tape?". Yes, you can.
_But_ , can you watch the movie again in the _exact same manner_ you did
earlier?

Given he gets warped back in time and he looses all awareness of his
situation, he will probably do it again (there is no "can" because he didn't
do it in the future, yet). If he's warped back in time with his knowledge
right now, he cannot possibly relive his same life because his state will not
be the same as it was back then.

Which brings me to my question and remark: what exactly is the point of this
question other than pg-backpatting?

~~~
devnonymous
I think you misunderstood the question:

    
    
      >  If you are given back your time and energy but taken back everything else,
      >  can you repeat what have you done? Say, starting today? 
    

What's being asked is basically, starting today, if everything was taken away
from PG (or any successful person) and instead he (or the person) was given
the same amount of time (20 odd years ?) and energy, would they achieve the
same level of success, 20 years hence.

My own take on this is, yes - Most successful people would become successful
irrespective of starting conditions. Of course the level of success might
differ since things like luck come into play but most successful people tend
to 'build' their luck (ref: every self-help book ever).

~~~
pearjuice
It will be pure speculation/imagination and no-one will able to confirm/deny
the bias. Hence the question is fluff. It's like asking a highly imaginative
question and trying to translate it to real world. It's nothing more than
luring into something which will never happen. It's not bad that you think
about these things, but don't waste your time with it.

"Most successful people would become successful irrespective of starting
conditions." \- again bias and imagination/speculation. Success is not
something you are born with. You "get" it. Just because you got it once
doesn't mean you are entitled to it for the rest of your life. Successful
people getting more success have much more means to become more successful so
it looks like they would have been successful anyway.

------
jamielee
I think that Paul Graham has great powers of observation. He seems to know
what makes businesses successful and what problems in the world need to be
solved. I am sure he spends a lot of time thinking and analyzing (whether
consciously or unconsciously, I do not know). It is apparent in his essays
that he is a brilliant person who enjoys making observations (and he is an
artist, which involves like 99% observation).

Paul Graham is really great at what he does. I am sure that you have personal
qualities that are great as well. You should try to leverage those. It is good
to admire others, but you must forge your own path to success. Words of wisdom
can only do so much. In the end, it is the effort and strengths of the
individual that matters.

I don't think that you should care so much about helping people. Before you
label me as a bad person, I think that if you think too much about helping
people, if you believe that you have a social obligation to do so, it can be
very exhausting to the heart. Doctors sometimes face "compassion exhaustion."
You should strive to be a good person, give when you can, but to over-exert
yourself by making yourself feel guilty for not having helped people or
improved the world is counter-productive. I say this because I went through
the same thing. There are many small ways you can help people and have a big
impact on their lives.

I strive to make myself into a person that I would admire.

------
svisser
Taking back everything else? Does that include knowledge, experience and
lessons learned? Because that greatly affects what pg would start doing today.

~~~
kuasha
If you have all the knowledge and experience, you are who you are already.

~~~
svisser
Isn't your question then the same as: did you think you got lucky?

~~~
kuasha
Luck could one factor yes- but its mostly a question about with enough work
can everything man has done be repeated?

------
general_failure
Success and significance is relative and it is important that you see why it
is so. I don't know where you are from but opportunity is a big part of the
story. A majority of the world does not have the same level of opportunity as
the western world. Being in the bay area, being born with the right passport,
being around with the right people, right education etc are really big
influencers of success and have nothing to do with individual itself.

This is not to take away anything from what many people like PG have done, but
it is for you to realize that sometimes lots of energy is spent by other
people just trying to achieve basic things which are usually taken for
granted.

As an example, I wanted to travel on a business trip to this country. My
partner could go immediately because he didn't need a visa. My visa processing
is still stuck and it's been a week now. Lost opportunity and no amount of
hardwork and perseverance from my side can fix it. yeah, this is part of the
reason that I am writing this comment. I feel terrible about my passport :)

~~~
battani
Jan Koum, founder of WhatsApp, was born in a tiny village in Ukraine, grew up
without a father, worked as a cleaner in a grocery, and was almost homeless.
Today he is worth $6.3 billion.

You'll find a way if it's important enough to you.

~~~
dllthomas
That's not well reasoned. A world in which there is always a way available is
certainly consistent with the anecdote, but so is one where there generally is
_not_ a way except awarded at random to one otherwise hopeless person in ten
million. You need to explain why this isn't isomorphic to "just keep buying
those lottery tickets".

