
Reasons not to become famous - imgabe
https://tim.blog/2020/02/02/reasons-to-not-become-famous/
======
cletus
So I only see three reasons to be famous:

1\. The attention and adulation is your drug. I think there's no shortage of
people who fall into this category.

2\. To convert that fame into opportunities you wouldn't otherwise have; and

3\. To convert that fame into money.

Obviously if you're just plain rich then (3) is moot. If you fall into (1)
then money can buy you fame to a degree.

So that leaves (2). Wealth will give you many opportunities fame will but
certainly not all. Or at least the costs to replicate that are truly
ludicrous, like being a star in a Marvel movie, spending a year on the ISS,
going to the Moon, that sort of thing.

The way I see it the downsides of fame are significant. I've heard tales from
people who worked in media years ago that the very stars who now want the
media to leave them alone and to respect their privacy would beg them for
stories and coverage just a few years earlier.

I don't think I'd want to be ultra-wealthy (as in a billionaire+). At that
point you're almost removed from society. I imagine you end up moving in
circles with other ultra-wealthy people that are actually quite small. You
risk being a target of the desperate, the criminally minded (fraud,
kidnapping, blackmail, that sort of thing) and the mentally unstable.

And really what is the practical difference between having $20m and $2b? Sure
you'll have nicer houses and more of them. You may well have a super-yacht at
that point. But who cares? I know I don't.

You could say "you would if you had $2b" and maybe that's true. I'm sure I'd
buy a nicer place but I think I'd still want to keep a relatively low profile.

~~~
throw18374
Isn’t it possible to become a billionaire without anyone knowing?

What if you just get there quietly through private investment?

Not a billion, but I’ve built up a decent chunk myself and nobody seems to
know or even suspect that about me. Nobody begs me for anything more than
spare change, no sycophants, nobody trying to impress me. Marketing for luxury
goods doesn’t even reach me.

I could easily see myself reaching a billion in a few decades just through
private investment, and there must be thousands of people doing the same. I
imagine there are many more who have earned millions publicly, then sold their
stake and went to a billion privately.

So how does everyone find out about them?

~~~
anonu
The Bloomberg billionaires index does exactly this... Out private
billionaires.

First off it's hard being a billionaire and people not knowing. You're going
to make a splash somehow. But there's still plenty of billionaires, especially
in emerging market countries, that have still to be uncovered.

~~~
themeiguoren
I find it pretty funny that Bloomberg himself is hidden on that list.

------
ruminasean
I am publicly in close proximity to someone famous for my job and with a
modest (~15k) Instagram following because of that, I've experienced most of
this behavior to one degree or another. I was completely unprepared for it and
it really freaked me out.

I love the Bill Murray quote, and I've been living by this, also from the
article: "You want everyone to know your name and no one to know your face.”
It really seems to affect people that I don't post selfies and pics of myself
anywhere....second to requests to be put in contact with the famous person to
whom I'm obviously connected, people really want to know what I look like. As
someone who is fairly private as well as nothing special in the looks dept,
I'm in no rush. I'm googleable because of the absurd name under which I
started, but most people can't or won't put in the effort.

I've definitely concluded that in my particular case, some respectable form of
following on IG is necessary (I'm a photographer) and I certainly won't get
rich, but damn I was utterly not ready for nor was I expecting 5-screen-long
tales of woe and death and disease and pleas for help and mercy along with the
same kind of "I know what you did and I'll expose you" shit several times a
week.

~~~
rootusrootus
I'm surprised a photographer would be such a target, even if they identify
themselves with a well-known (and somewhat controversial, I suppose) figure.
TIL!

Reading stories like this just makes me that more determined to never be well-
known. Not that I'm in any particular danger of that, mind you, but still...

~~~
ruminasean
I was surprised too. It's a variety of "I need X to speak at my charity
event," "hey can you give X my contact info," "here's my nude selfie and my
number, please tell X," to "X is impersonating himself on social media and
swindled me out of thousands of dollars, I'm going to report you and everyone
else."

Ironically, being relatively faceless has burned me as well. I have a fairly
common name, so when someone else with the same name made a shitty comment on
some board on Facebook, I had days of being attacked, getting DMd to kill
myself, brutal comments on all my posts...it was hours and days of cleanup and
banning people.

~~~
ghaff
The worst is probably having a _somewhat_ unusual name that overlaps with a
notorious person who could at least plausibly (especially to somewhat off-
kilter randos) possibly be you.

I went to school with someone who shared a name with an individual who is in a
high-profile public legal spat in NY involving another high-profile NY
personality. (Not going to say who or you can figure out the name with modest
Google-fu.) My classmate got various death threats etc.

~~~
brisavion
Ever seen The Big Lebowski?

------
cantrevealname
A common assumption is rich<=>famous. Obviously, famous doesn't imply rich
because someone could be, say, a notorious criminal and be poor. But it's
quite amazing the degree to which you can be rich, _super rich_ , but still be
anonymous. Even in today's world.

I remember reading one of Forbes' annual listings of the world's billionaires
in which they tried to include a photo of everyone in the top couple hundred.
Astonishingly a few had no photos -- Forbes said that they _couldn 't find a
photo_. According to Wikipedia, "Forbes employs a team of more than 50
reporters from a variety of countries to track the activity of the world's
wealthiest individuals." So you can absolutely be among the richest people on
Earth and not have a publicly available photo.

On the current Forbes list the following have _no photos_ : #23, #36, #61,
#122, #153, #167, #191, #198, #215, #233, #244, #272 (two people at this
rank), #290 (also two), #343, #355, #365, #379 (two again), #394, #413, #452
(two again), #504 (four people), etc.

That means that 5% of the richest people in the world (24 of the richest 500)
are so anonymous that there isn't a photo that even a dedicated team of
reporters can find.

Current list:
[https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/](https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/)

~~~
accidentalrebel
That is very interesting.

> That means that 5% of the richest people in the world (24 of the richest
> 500) are so anonymous that there isn't a photo that even a dedicated team of
> reporters can find.

Either they can't find it or they were asked not to put it up? They have
lawyers after all and might prefer to be anonymous.

~~~
ronyfadel
Nitpick: They’re not anonymous since they’re identified by name :)

~~~
accidentalrebel
Good point. :)

------
nlh
The stalker thing is real - and I didn’t realize how real until a buddy who’s
a moderately-successful YouTuber (750k subs) got his very own.

Thankfully it’s a relatively benign case, but man, it’s real. There’s a kid
who, for the past ~10 years, calls him Every. Single. Day. Without fail. For
10 years (that’s 3600+ phone calls). He leaves a voicemail and just talks
about his day - what video games he’s playing, etc. I think his mom once
called and apologized (although she doesn’t seem to try and stop the behavior,
which is also odd, but who knows).

Now imagine the same kind of obsessive behavior, but...less benign. Scary.

~~~
mprev
Could he change his number?

~~~
Spooky23
That can trigger the stalker to escalate.

~~~
prepend
It could also result in the stalker never calling again. I guess it’s
important to understand the probability of outcomes before just listing
negatives.

~~~
joshspankit
Personally if it’s something potentially harmful, I’d rather have it where I
can see it.

------
keiferski
I’ve always thought being famous with a pseudonymous name but an anonymous
appearance and legal name is the best of both scenarios.

Someone like Bansky or Daft Punk, for example. Everyone knows your artist name
and your work, but virtually no one recognizes you on the street and you can
check into hotels or use your real name without most people noticing.

~~~
nefitty
Is the point that you get your work recognized, instead of your “self”?

~~~
keiferski
Depends on where you draw the line between work and self, I guess.

------
ak39
What can you achieve with fame that you cannot achieve with money alone? What
is this need for wanting others to know that you exist at all?

Jobs that demand "fame" of some sorts will always take an emotional toll on
personalities that are never comfortable with fame, limelight and podiums.

I have been an introvert my whole life but only recently realised this about
myself at the tender age of 40! It was a cold slap for me to accept it. I have
always imagined myself gregarious and outgoing and friendly - wanting to speak
to strangers, breaking silence in a lift - but these have never really sat
comfortably with me afterwards. I'll be chewing and ruminating about the
imagined mistimed comments or miscued lines for ages. I have bruised myself
emotionally believing that I needed to be an extrovert to be successful when
in fact I was only demanding too much of myself. Fame, and outrageous fame
will likely kill me too.

~~~
econcon
I made lots of money but always felt rejected/ignored by society. So I ended
up lonely.

I was sold a dream that become financially well off and affluent and women
will flock to you - it never happened!

I stayed a non smoker, non drinker because I consider these uncessary risks. I
don't see any upside Aced the classes, did good in sports but still become Mr.
Noone.

But lately, I got into body building and started using steroids (I know they
are harmful) but I've decided that with all the money - I don't wanna live a
long life, just wanna be famous and be desired by opposite sex and if it comes
at a price of dying after few years - it meets my risk profile.

So, yes validation, being desired and getting sexual opportunities and so
people feel intimidated in my presence is all I want.

Money helps you buy expert supervision, time and quality drugs and outfits and
also being able to afford a nice car all helps. But money can't directly help
you buy the attraction.

I've been getting lots of attention lately from opposite sex since I've got
Greek physique dialed in, so anyone who thinks it doesn't matter and all you
need is money - I am just a millionaire, there are many like me. I don't want
to become a huge man, I just do minimum required to build a physique that
opposite sex finds attractive.

~~~
keiferski
The majority of the most "desirable" men in the world have lean, muscular
physiques, not bodybuilder physiques. Think Brad Pitt in _Fight Club._

So, if your main reason for using steroids is to attract women - seriously
reconsider, as your premises are wrong.

~~~
econcon
I never said I am after bodybuilder physique, I mentioned I am after "fight
club" look only but little more defined I'd say. (think Henry Cavil in
superman)

I've done enough research to know women find huge body a turn off.

I trained 6 years in a local gym without ever achieving that fight club look
and within 3 months after steroid use, I reached there and surpassed my
expectations.

When I started - I had patchy beard and face with no well defined jaw. After
steroid use - I've now full beard and square jaw (I chew chewing in gym which
I copied from Arnold) but not sure if chewing made my jaw bigger or steroid.

Achieving low body fat without losing your muscle on calorie restricted diet
is hard as you end up losing some muscles and some fat - steroid makes it
easier to put on muscles and get low body fat.

Ofc, there are side effects but imho they are worth it for me.

My HDL levels went down and LDL went up and arterial plaque might build up and
I might die from stroke. My heart might become large and weak. But there is
also a chance that I might not have any problem at all - here I am gambling
with my life. Skin have got thinner but no difference in hair, not gone bald
so far others might not be this lucky but who knows.

Also, there are things I am curious about, if you guys know please answer:

If steroid mimicks testosterone. How is using steroid different than a man
having naturally high testosterone level which produces androgenic and
anabolic effects?

~~~
christiansakai
So I started doing Karate since 5 years ago. Before that I was not chubby but
not fit either. I have cheek fat and my arms, chest and belly have some fat as
well.

I started doing Karate and my weight went down quick and I notice my face gets
leaner and now I have a defined jaw line. I’m not sure maybe just my genetics
but maybe you got your jawline from losing weight.

3 years ago met a girl online, dated her and she is my wife now. When saw my
previous photos she was quite shocked at the difference.

Fast forward now, I don’t have a body builder physique or male mode physique
but I do have physique that most contact martial artist have, still have some
belly fat but my chest, arm, thigh and belly muscles are thicker without using
steroids.

I’m 33 now so I already past my growth rate as a man even 5 years ago, but
still managed to change drastically.

~~~
econcon
>I started doing Karate and my weight went down quick and I notice my face
gets leaner and now I have a defined jaw line. I’m not sure maybe just my
genetics but maybe you got your jawline from losing weight.

I was skinny and atheletic type with super low body fat then I didn't have
visible square jaw.

After that I started eating lot more and training hard, so I did gain some
muscle (early newbie gains) but gained fat also. So now my muscles while I
could feel them, got burried under layer of fat.

People in my tribe don't have strong jaw. It's hard to find them even in the
village I hail from, you can find strong built bulky men and women but no
strong jaws.

~~~
christiansakai
I see. So do you think steroids contribute to it? It is amazing how hormones
can actually change your physical appearance drastically even after someone is
past beyond their growth phase.

You mentioned chewing gum. I saw these videos about mewing but don’t actually
believe that would work.

~~~
mrkstu
Look at Barry Bonds before and after- definite jaw/skull effects from the
steroids and HGH.

------
afpx
Regarding the stalking ...

Reminds me of a recent "Hidden Brain" episode - about "Secret Friends" \-
people of whom others believe to be friends but aren't. The show implied it's
fairly easy for the Human Brain to develop a belief those whom are seen or
heard often are friends, even if not known personally.

Tim mentions feeling that he is a tribal leader of millions of people. And, he
definitely has the attention of those people. People who trust him. And, from
an anthropological (and perhaps biological) perspective, I wonder if people
stalk him because they really believe him to be their tribal leader Maybe
those people really do look at him like he's a friend.

I know our Westernized cultures cherish individuality and independence, but I
also wonder if people who decide to enter (and stay within) the limelight have
a Human responsibility to be a leader and friend. I know, that's a crazy
thought.

~~~
opportune
I've heard of podcasts being described as "friend simulators" because of this
phenomenon

~~~
accidentalrebel
That is very interesting. I follow a number of "Just Talking" podcasts and I
have come to consider the members as my friends. Some of them really are, but
others are just purely because I listen to their podcast.

Feels weird to realize this.

------
scottlocklin
Funny I'm just a sometime blogger and I used to get weirdos finding my house
and sending me handwritten letters. At one point I was tied up with one of
Steven Spielberg's schizophrenic stalkers because of some dipshit I argued
with on Usenet to pass time in grad school. Now I got my face on a fairly well
known startup, which means various 3rd world places I enjoy are non-starters
without having actual security precautions in place (which defeats the purpose
of going to such places in the first place: freedom).

Being even slightly famous is shit. I quite enjoy writing and would take it to
the next level, but I'd rather not be any more famous. The culture of
narcissism which encourages people to seek fame is ridiculous: it's all the
downsides of being surveilled except its eyes the size of your audience
instead of a couple of creepy (but probably mostly law abiding) policeman at a
terminal.

~~~
Zenbit_UX
I've always been curious about traveling while famous. You generally have to
show a passport at airports, hotels, etc.. So I always wondered how famous
people moved around with any kind of annonimity.

Surely a fake passport is far too risky for legal reasons? Yet it would solve
a lot of their problems when combined with sunglasses and a cap...

I guess what I'm asking is, what would be the "riskiest" country that you
would actually entertain the possibility of visiting without serious
precautions?

~~~
scottlocklin
Fancy hotels have decent security and will meet you at the airport (I mean
some of the people we're talking about have private jets and own hotels
-though they have security teams to take care of matters). They're probably
also used to "Harrison Ford" tier famous people showing up. California allows
for pseudonyms on government documents and credit cards, basically because of
Hollywood.

------
DenisM
If the problem is so widespread I imagine that all the really rich and famous
have A few people on staff to filter incoming correspondence, triage and
follow up on credible threats, check with police as needed etc.

What of the modestly famous and not that rich? There ought to be an agency
where one could outsource this sort of work for a fraction of the in-house
cost. The agency would accumulate experience and might even keep the database
of known crazies which gives it economy of scale.

~~~
Zenbit_UX
Well, that's definitely where I'd want to work if I was a crazy. Imagine the
access! Thousands of wealthy and famous clients contact information and in
some cases direct access to their correspondences for filtering purposes...
The potential for extortion, bribery and worse would be unprecedented.

~~~
imgabe
I'm sure there's a screening process that could be employed. After all talent
agencies, movie studios, and other fame adjacent companies must do something
to prevent stalkers from getting jobs there. I also suspect that stalkers
don't usually have the qualifications and experience that make them attractive
candidates.

------
tazjin
I opened this on a computer without an adblocker installed (yeah, my mistake),
and a minute or so into reading the article it suddenly pops up a full-screen
ad to buy this guy's book. That's on the same level of annoying as autoplaying
videos imo.

~~~
simonebrunozzi
Yes. Sometimes I like what Tim writes, but his marketing tactics on the
website and elsewhere are really bad and annoying.

Tim, if you're reading this: please consider a different approach. You're rich
and famous, you don't need the extra $$ of a slightly better conversion rate.

~~~
hycaria
What if it's the team working on this that's looking for a better conversion
rate ?

------
Expez
The post has a good quote from Bill Murray:

> I always want to say to people who want to be rich and famous: ‘try being
> rich first.’ See if that doesn’t cover most of it. There’s not much downside
> to being rich, other than paying taxes and having your relatives ask you for
> money. But when you become famous, you end up with a 24-hour job. . . . The
> only good thing about fame is that I’ve gotten out of a couple of speeding
> tickets. I’ve gotten into a restaurant when I didn’t have a suit and tie on.
> That’s really about it.

~~~
speedgoose
Why trying to become rich? Once you have enough money to have a great quality
of life without stress, having more money isn't improving much your happiness.
Sometimes it makes it worse. However trying to become rich can be very
difficult, tiresome, and disappointing.

~~~
richthegeek
"have enough money to have a great quality of life without stress" is how many
people define "rich".

~~~
onetimemanytime
>> _" have enough money to have a great quality of life without stress" is how
many people define "rich". _

sure, but "great" is not easily defined. A new car or a jet? A $500K home or a
$15M one to host parties with rich and famous. But people usually like to show
off, one way or another.

If you hit it big with a company, and have, say, $10 Million you can live
extremely stress free everywhere in the world. And very few would know, at
least no one in your town or extended family. But quite a few hint at their
wealth, political donations, charity (announce it publicly) etc etc. It's
tempting, but once you hit the news is over.

In USA people might sue you for one thing or another, but in banana republic
countries you can "taxed" by criminals: Give us $1 Million or your child is...

~~~
lonelappde
It's very hard to find a life partner who is willing to live merely
comfortably knowing they can draw more blood from you, and had to resign your
children to mere comfort, knowing they'll have to compete for ever scarcer
living-wage-paying jobs.

~~~
mrep
Merly comfortably? At 10 million dollars, you can live off of 4% of that for
the rest of your life. After 15% cap gains, that gives you $340,000 to spend a
year. Outside of the bay area, you can easily afford a 5000 square foot house
in a top school district, own multiple cars, take lavish vacations, own a
second vacation home, pay for your kids college education and more.

What additional benefits are you imagining in which having more money would
not "resign your children to mere comfort"?

------
MayeulC
I think I do not want fame, but it's obviously easier to navigate some circles
if your name is known: you don't have to introduce yourself, nor prove other
people what you are worth.

This works on many scales: from a small team at work, where it's much easier
to co-ordinate if everyone knows each other's strong points. It's also great
for arguments: if you know that a person is very knowledgeable on a topic, you
won't ask them to substantiate their claims, which speeds up the process.

I've been toying with the idea of creating multiple identities for multiple
areas I'm engaging in: use my real name for socializing in real life with
close acquaintances as well as paperwork, but maybe use a pseudonym for
publishing papers, another for engaging in open-source communities, and online
in general. I'm happy to say it's quite hard to find pictures of myself
online, but it would be even better if they didn't come attached to a
meaningful name.

I'm about to submit a paper with my real name this evening, and I am a bit
unsure about this. Any experience on using pen names in that domain
specifically?

The issue I have is that the longer you wait, the harder it is to change
(which can also be a good thing: to change names is to get a fresh start).

It all boils down to reputation and identity somehow, two hot (and hard)
topics in (distributed) social networks.

~~~
graeme
There’s a big difference between being known in your field and being generally
famous as Tim Ferriss is talking about.

I am well known in my field and it has all the benefits you speak of. But it’s
not a large field. So I have none of the negatives that the article speaks of.

~~~
accidentalrebel
> There’s a big difference between being known in your field and being
> generally famous as Tim Ferriss is talking about.

Thanks for actually making me realize this distinction.

Kinda like being known for something instead of being famous for something.
Does that make sense?

~~~
graeme
Possibly. Do you mean that in the sense on the article where a producer said
it’s best if: “people know your face but not your name”?

That’s definitely a distinction.

But I actually meant it in the sense that most fields and sub fields are so
small that you can be legit famous within them but have no problems of fame
because the number of people involved is tiny.

But if the field grew 100-1000x, you would then have problems of fame with the
sheer numbers.

Think of whatever speciality you’re in, then consider you probably know what
1-5 notable people in the field look or sound like, without knowing them
personally. That’s essentially what fame is: the effects only get odd when the
field is so generally that much larger numbers will recognize that same
person. Some portion of any sufficiently large group will be over enthusiastic
or malevolent.

------
joshspankit
One person who has talked about another benefit is Dan Harmon:

(apologies as I don’t remember where or the exact quote)

In an interview he mentioned that his [particular] fame meant that he no
longer had to go through the superficial conversations when meeting someone
new, that everyone knew enough of his authentic self that they could just jump
straight in to meaningful conversation.

I remember this because, for me, that would be the only compelling reason to
become famous.

~~~
wyxuan
That’s only assuming that, that particular celebrity is known to pour their
thoughts out to the world. That same thing couldn’t happen to Leonardo do
caprio for instance

~~~
joshspankit
Yes exactly. That’s what I meant to say with the word “particular” there.
Thank you for making that clear.

------
Mountain_Skies
Tim's post reminds me of a video the 8-Bit Guy did a while back about how many
people contact him, both to try to strike up a conversation and to offer him
their old 8-bit treasures. He sounded rather annoyed by the whole thing but he
is a big star in the 8-bit pond so it comes with the territory. For his area
of coverage, there is lots of childhood nostalgia involved so this might make
his viewer connected with the channel (and him) to a greater extent than you'd
otherwise think. Likewise in Tim's area of personal development, he makes an
emotional impact on a large crowd. Strength of emotional connection times
crowd size is going to be the big factors here.

~~~
varjag
The 8-Bit Guy is fascinating persona, because he manages to maintain two
segregated public personalities, both with heavy YouTube presence.

(The other one is a 2A NRA gun touter, the kind who takes their rifle to a
restaurant and films it)

~~~
Mountain_Skies
Wow, didn't know about his other persona. I knew he has a channel named 8bit
Keys but since I'm not musically inclined, haven't watched it much. Maybe his
gun channel helps keep the types of fans Tim complains about away.

~~~
varjag
Wonder how effective is that though! I've been watching his 8-bit side for
years. Had no idea until I started with competition shooting and YT
recommendation engine decided it's my cup of tea.

------
PragmaticPulp
The last time I wrote a mild critique about Tim Ferriss online, someone
scoured the internet to reverse engineer _my_ personal identity and sent an
e-mail to my personal e-mail account to debate with me. (I have since switched
to anonymous handles). I can only imagine what it's like for Tim Ferriss
himself.

If you're not familiar with Tim Ferriss, there are several reasons why he's
more attractive to dangerous followers than the average influencer:

\- He was among the first to crack the "influencer" code, gaining fame and
popularity through book publishing and early social media websites (pre-
Instagram). Back then, there weren't nearly as many influencers to know about,
let alone follow.

\- He rose to fame via punchy self-help books like "The Four Hour Workweek"
and "The Four Hour Body". He talks about having chosen those topics to give
solutions to the average problems faced by modern people. He makes calculated
moves to target the widest range of people who are looking for answers to
life's basic challenges.

\- He has moved toward more respectable topics over time, but his early work
tended toward fantastical claims and unrealistic promises. It was more fantasy
than practical, but always grounded in an inspiring shroud of "What if he's
right?" This leaves the hopeful readers hooked while filtering out the
rational skeptics. I joke that he applied the Nigerian prince scam filtering
mechanism to self-help books.

\- In the past, he dabbled in pure clickbait that wasn't grounded in reality.
For example, consider his famous blog post about gaining 34 lbs of muscle in
28 days with only 4 hours of total gym time using secret techniques of the
"little-known Colorado Experiment": [https://tim.blog/2007/04/29/from-geek-to-
freak-how-i-gained-...](https://tim.blog/2007/04/29/from-geek-to-freak-how-i-
gained-34-lbs-of-muscle-in-4-weeks/) If you're at all familiar with
weightlifting or exercise science you'll understand how impossible this is,
yet it circulated for years on message boards from beginners who were
convinced that Tim Ferriss was a guru who could help them achieve the
impossible.

\- One of Tim's books has a section about contacting famous people who you
wouldn't normally expect to respond to you. He encourages readers to contact
famous people as an example of achieving what you previously thought was
impossible. This is intertwined with his stories about life hacking or using
clever tricks to achieve impossible goals. It's not surprising that his fans
have chosen to apply those techniques to Tim Ferriss himself, by following his
social media and calling around at hotels to find him. He all but encouraged
this behavior in his first book.

\- Recently, Tim has been pushing Psychedelic medicine as a miracle cure for
depression, anxiety, and PTSD. He has made some very respectable and noble
efforts to raise money for proper scientific research. He also gives pseudo-
warnings on his podcasts to not attempt DIY psychedelic treatment for
psychiatric issues, but his disclaimers have a very "wink, wink" after we've
received fantastical advice about getting rich, traveling the world, getting
fit, and so on from Tim over the years. I have no doubt that many of his fans
have begun experimenting with psychedelics to treat their severe depression
and anxiety without the help of psychiatrists, which is not a recipe for
healthy outcomes.

In other words, Tim Ferriss almost defines the modern "Guru" archetype. Fame
and publicity always come with a risk of stalkers and negative attention, but
I believe Tim's position as a self-help guru and psychedelic medicine pusher
has amplified uniquely amplified his reach among the most vulnerable
individuals. I feel truly sorry for him, of course, but it's helpful to
understand the larger context of how he arrived in this position if you're
wondering how this could apply to other internet-famous people.

~~~
mordymoop
Ferriss also frequently gives instructions on how to send cold emails or make
cold calls to influential people for personal advantage. He’s strongly
selecting for and maybe even actively creating the kind of person who will be
predisposed to harass him.

~~~
SyneRyder
I remember that chapter of Four Hour Work Week. I just found it again:

 _" Find Yoda: Call at least one potential superstar mentor per day for three
days. E-mail only after attempting a phone call. I recommend calling before
8:30am or after 6pm to reduce run-ins with secretaries and other gatekeepers.
Shoot for A players - CEOs, ultrasuccessful entrepreneurs, famous authors etc.
Don't aim low to make it less frightening. Use [specific website for finding
contact details of celebrities omitted here] if need be. Base your script on
the following..."_

The thing is, as annoying as that sounds, that chapter was actually really
useful to me as an extremely shy guy who was too intimidated to even contact
the 'CEO' of a shareware company. I never phoned & only emailed once, but
having a template script for how to succinctly ask a question of a busy person
I felt intimidated by was very helpful to me then.

------
okareaman
The irony of this blog entry is that Tim Ferris is a relentless self-promoter
who continues that practice for the entire first half of this essay before
finally getting to the drawbacks of being a successful self-promoter. I
appreciate the thought, but I question the motives of the author.

~~~
accidentalrebel
Whatever the motive I'm glad that he still eventually got to the point. I
don't think you can fault him for that, that's what he's good at, I guess.

~~~
okareaman
He is really good at it and does good with it, so I don't fault him. Not my
cup of tea though. I tried to listen to his podcast, but for the first 8
minutes he talked about himself and his accomplishments. That's a bit much
self-regard for me.

------
maze-le
Wow that was... unexpectedly intense. Like a microcosm of everything that is
wrong with cults of personality.

~~~
bartread
I thought the same thing. That escalated really quickly, and it's certainly
given me pause about having any online presence (despite not being at all
famous). Bookmarked to reread later.

------
JKCalhoun
Counterpoint: You want to help people, educate people, lift people up — and
your only talent best suited for this is your writing skills, your speaking
skills, your musical abilities or your acting skills.

Fame is how you reach a larger audience.

My high school teacher may have inspired a number of his students to love and
pursue astronomy, but Carl Sagan inspired orders of magnitudes more.

~~~
Perseids
Counter-counterpoint: If you are not too picky about the type of good you want
to do, money can buy you an astonishing amount of it. See the effective
altruism movement, e.g. [https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/impact-
calculator/](https://www.thelifeyoucansave.org/impact-calculator/) . For a
thousand dollars you can provide 781 person-years of save drinking water or
purchase 500 bednets to protect against malaria.

Unless you are over-proportionally suited or talented at being famous, you can
basically always do more good by earning and donating as much money as you
can.

(Note, though, that it requires more reflection and conceptualization to _feel
as good_ by giving remotely than by giving to people locally or in your
community.)

~~~
unreal37
I think an argument can be made that, if an artist doesn't create their art
because they figure they can earn more money as an investment banker and
donate money to causes they care about instead, the world is actually worse
off as a result.

------
gherkinnn
I never wanted to be famous. Now I feel confirmed. Jesus. There’s liberty in
being a nobody.

> _Suffice to say, I didn’t realize that this type of thing was part of the
> Faustian fame-seeking bargain._

Again, reading classics holds more weight than 90% of current self help and
motivational books. Goethe was on point.

After having mastered all the sciences and still unfulfilled, Faust seeks
Mephisto to know “was die Welt in ihrem Innersten zusammen hält” (What binds
the essence of the world). And enters a pact with the Devil. Of course it all
goes to shit.

~~~
kaybe
It's fun to summarize Faust II for those who haven't read it. Faust I is so
commonly read in school here, and so earnest and serious that the time-
traveling madness of the second part comes at a surprise.

------
dropoutcoder
An unfortunate consequence of fame is that celebrities are sometimes forced to
take counter surveillance matters into their own hands.

As it’s difficult for a celebrity to accept new people into their inner circle
without knowing their motives, pre-emptive measures can be used to vet
outsiders. The unfortunate consequence of this is the application of
questionable methods by shady security forces. Celebrities don’t have their
own Secret Service detail so they end up relying upon their peers to perform
investigations of outsiders entering their fold. This can be disastrous all
around, particularly when there exists political and cultural disparities
amongst involved parties. Speaking from experience.

~~~
yaitsyaboi
This reminds me of Ana Delvey, the fake NYC socialite scammer of a few years
ago. I originally thought it was funny that she had ripped all these ultra-
wealthy people off, but the sad fact was that she scammed a lot of people who
were wealthy enough to have a high limit on their credit cards (~50k), but not
wealthy enough to have this kind of social sophisticated social infrastructure
in place. She got by into the circles my making various friends that all
suggested influence separately (investment banker, editor at Vogue, etc), and
together gave her the appearance of legitimacy to all the other friends.

------
sdan
This was a pretty heavy piece. Further reinforces Naval’s quote about being
rich and anonymous is far better than being poor and famous.

~~~
pferde
Yep, I thought so. It very much reinforces the gut feeling I've always had -
to avoid fame (not that I am in any danger of being famous myself :) ).

On that note, that is what has always bugged me about the traitor guy in The
Matrix movie, when he negotiated with the agents, and wanted to be reinserted
into matrix as someone famous. But I guess wanting to be famous said something
about his character. :)

------
woofie11
Law suits. The big one missing is law suits. That's a higher level of fame
than this blogger has hit. That includes:

1) Nuts and idiots. For example, people who genuinely believe what you're
doing is out to get them.

2) Jackals and vultures. People want what you've built, and see the legal
system as a good way of extorting you to get it.

I hit this level of fame, and quickly backed down from anything which might
give me more visibility.

I also stopped believing random accusations of famous people until there's
proof or unless the accusers are really close. If someone is CEO of a 20,000
person company, and their closest associates accuse them of sexual harassment,
exploitation, fraud, or otherwise? That's a plausible accusation. If someone
runs a 20,000 person company, and 20 seemingly random people do? Well, that's
almost guaranteed by statistics.

~~~
sneak
One of the mitigating strategies here is to have a liability waiver that
people sign to enter your office or home. Mine also has an NDA with a
nondisparagement provision.

It has been useful for dating, too.

~~~
grawprog
Personally, the only time i've had to sign a waiver is right before i've been
doing something dangerous or life threatening. If a date made me sign a waiver
before entering their home I'd be wondering what kind of fucked up things
they've got planned and probably turn around and leave right there.

~~~
sneak
I have yet to encounter anyone who had any issue with it. Personally, I work
at home and wouldn’t want anyone in the building who potentially had access to
my office (it’s locked, but still) to not be under NDA at the very least.
Opportunistic lawsuits make the liability waiver part important.

Hurt feelings when dating necessitates the non-disparagement clause. Several
times I’ve had people I’ve politely rejected say all manner of false things
about me, sometimes years after the fact.

I make it clear to anyone who participates in my life in any meaningful social
capacity that they do so only on the condition of privacy and discretion.
Those are the terms made plain up front. No one is required to participate.

Really though it comes down to physical safety. If someone doxes me, I incur
approximately $40k in instantaneous expenses because I suddenly have to move,
injunctions on posting or no, thanks to the internet. Having a document in
place to be able to (somewhat) protect against or recover from that is a
little bit of peace of mind.

~~~
orasis
Creepy AF

~~~
sneak
Why do you feel that way?

------
throw18374
This is tangential to the article, but James being “a frequent commenter on
his blog and a huge help to other readers” was my first sign that he was not
mentally well. Immediately knew things would not go well for him in this
story.

People often say this as a joke, but I think it’s 100% accurate: Internet
comment sections have a strong self-selection bias for the mentally unwell.

I’ll include Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, HN to some extent, etc.

Not exact numbers, but the math goes something like 100% of comments are
written by 10% of readers. Of those that do bother to comment, the less
utilized and less psychology stable and healthy they are, the greater their
commenting volume is.

Healthy happy people simply do not spend much of their time that way.

(I’m including myself in that btw.)

The world treats these comment sections as if they represent a perfect cross-
section of the general population, and the result is all the insane cultural
rambling and nonsense you hear and read about in media and blogs, all the way
up to Fox News and NYT. They think these insane ramblings are what represent
the people and what the people want.

Then the population adjusts to some extent to match those insane ramblings,
because they think that’s how other people must feel.

It’s a global feedback loop of political and cultural madness and hysteria.

~~~
gist
> Healthy happy people simply do not spend much of their time that way.

But what if making comments makes you happy?

While I don't disagree with the premises of what you are saying I think you
are not considering that for some people saying something makes them feel good
and they are perfectly mentally sane.

I could also say that 'healthy happy people do not spend their time
socializing with others at parties' but we know people do that because 'it
makes them happy'.

~~~
paganel
For what it's worth "mentally sane" and "healthy happy people" can be a little
boring in real life, that's why lots of people like myself have decided to
spend time arguing with people from the other side of the world on websites
like this one or on reddit just because the subjects being argued about are
interesting and there's no way you could find a person in your real life that
could be interested in said subjects.

~~~
gist
Very true. Also words vs. conversation tends to be very efficient although
often lacking cues that come with voice or visually. No wasted time and much
less boredom from feeling trapped.

------
sillysaurusx
Hypothesis: On twitter, when your follower count exceeds the number you're
following, you become a little nutty.

I've noticed this odd trend where if people gain a lot of twitter followers,
then often their views become reinforced to the point that outsiders look at
their tweets and wonder what happened to make them express such ideas.

But there's bias here: for tweets like these to be noticed, they need to be
seen. Only those with followers are in that position. It makes sense that
wacky tweets we notice tend to come from people with lots of followers. So I'm
not sure if it's true, or if there are just a lot of odd people on twitter.

My own experiences indicate that the sweet spot is around 1k followers. More
than that, you attract a lot of noise. Less than that, and it's hard to get
noticed. But perhaps this is just personal taste.

The reason I mentioned this is that I'm in the fortunate position of having
attracted a lot of followers recently (for whatever reason), but I'm concerned
that things will turn sour. I _like_ twitter right now. There are cool people
on there, and I've met friends through the platform. But will it still feel
like that at 5k followers? 10k? 50k? I feel like I should stop whatever is
accelerating the follower count before it reaches an inflection point. So the
article resonated with me.

If you're ever jealous of people with lots of followers (or fame in general,
for that matter), just tune in to
[https://twitter.com/paulg](https://twitter.com/paulg) and see the way people
respond to pretty much anything he says. What's the point of being famous if
you can't express an idea without being beset by thoughtless people?

~~~
coffeefirst
Alternately, everyone has dumb thoughts from time to time, and the bigger and
more tempting your megaphone, the more you risk shouting it out before having
the chance to wake up 3 days later thinking "wow, that's completely insane."

This is also one of the reasons I abhor twitter. Everything is RIGHT NOW.
Really, nobody should send a message to 1000+ people without sleeping on it or
getting a second opinion.

~~~
JohnStrangeII
Most people are also easily flattered and everybody is naturally opinionated.
It's hard to keep your ego in check.

For example, you see respectable scientists and artists write a popular book,
then the next one (because their publisher nags them), then a third one that
is borderline unprofessional (no time, publisher send ghostwriter), and so on.
Maybe some of them realize that a best seller can yield a lot of money and in
no time time they appear in talk shows talking about topics they couldn't
possibly know anything about (alien invasions, politics, the future of
mankind). Finally, they appear to be nuts and everybody is angry about how
"fake" they are and speculates about their mental problems.

If I would get book proposals and interview requests every day, I'd probably
end up the same way.

~~~
DantesKite
Tucker Carlson once said it was hard to see his flaws after success because
“everything about the experience reinforces what you’re doing.”[1]

Fame can be a funny teacher in that respect. The feedback you’d normally get
after making a mistake can be smothered by all the praise and money that still
pours in, irrespective of the decisions you make (at least in the short-term).

After a while, you can end up being this cartoonish version of yourself,
trained by the preferences of other people and what they like and don’t like
about you.

I think it’s how celebrities end up in situations where they’re blindly
unaware of things that seem obvious to most people or act out in strange ways
(like Bill Cosby making a distasteful Fat Albert joke before he goes to court,
Kevin Spacey making videos in the persona of Francis Underwood, Britney Spears
shaving off her hair, Dave Chapelle’s self-induced “exile”, OJ Simpson posting
Twitter videos, and of course Kanye West’s song “I Love Kanye” where he
sardonically talks about all the different things people want from him).

[1]
[https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/12/tucker-...](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/12/tucker-
carlson-fox-news/603595/)

------
ericmcer
Does anyone else feel like he really misinterpreted the parable of the blind
men and the elephant?

Jim Carrey’s quote also seems out of context, given that Carrey is talking
about the philosophical nature of fame as a goal. How striving for it could
become a part of your identity and then actually achieving it and finding your
problems still exist would lead to a loss of identity, disillusionment and
other existential stuff. Ferriss is dealing more with the practical realities
of being famous on a day to day basis.

------
reidjs
My advice (not famous person):

If you want to “try before you buy” the famous lifestyle perhaps try to get
comfortable at night clubs and festivals. Once you kind of learn how that
dynamic works and you can get the most attractive people there to pay
attention/dance/party with you, you will see a lot of the positives and
negatives that come with the territory.

Beautiful, heartless women. Jealousy. Needless power positioning. Regretful
spending. But also fun and memorable experiences. YMMV

~~~
scep12
This seems mostly unrelated to the meat of the article. I'm not sure that your
suggestion results in a productive sample of anything other than spending time
in nightclubs.

------
amelius
I think it highly depends on the kind of fame. If you connect emotionally with
your audience, then sure. But if, say, you are a famous researcher then I
suspect you are facing far less of these problems.

~~~
Jarwain
I think his tribe-village-city analogy plays a big part in that, though.

A famous researcher probably wouldn't have as large an audience, and that
audience would most likely consist of other researchers in similar or adjacent
fields of research

~~~
arexxbifs
I’m pretty sure someone like Katie Bouman has a lot of horror stories to tell
about the downside of fame.

Reading this article makes me very happy about being more or less completely
unknown and unremarkable enough to not become an overnight sensation.

------
eb3c90
I'd rather not be rich or famous. If I happened to become either I'd try and
leverage them in some way to help or form organisations that can navigate the
hot mess of our societies next few decades.

------
perseusprime11
Becoming famous requires a lot of good luck and not just hard work. You have
to be the right person at the right time kind of thing. I feel extreme good
luck invites bad luck because of the negative energy surrounding the famous
person. This has very interesting side affects on how famous people look at
risk and make their decisions. But thinking of famous personalities like
Gandhi, MLK, Kobe, MJ, Bruce Lee, I wonder what would have happened if they
were not famous. Would their destinies be any different?

~~~
AnimalMuppet
You wouldn't know if their destinies were any different, because if they were
not famous, you'd never have heard of them.

------
gist
This was a surprisingly good article and I had not even really (odd actually)
heard of Tim until literally the other day. Maybe I came across his name
somewhere in the past but thought "he's a self help type author no interest".
That said the thing that surprised me is the fact that he is doing the least
likely things to make himself less of a target. You go to the blog there's a
big picture of him on display and not exactly understated. So sure he could
write his books and provide information and make it less likely that people
would get mental over what he has and his success (because they would be less
likely to focus on him and be jealous). After all something sparks the person
who stalks him and I don't think a large part of that is words. Yes writers
and others (w/o pictures) get stalked but for whatever reason my guess is it's
much less.

Let's look at it this way. Not saying it would be possible to be famous w/o
displaying yourself personally in a prominent way but what if he provided his
helpful info and never had a picture of himself and/or used a pseudonym for
his name?

------
graeme
Can anyone comment on his statement that having mail delivered to your house
puts you on searchable commercial lists?

I’m wondering if it’s actually physical mail that’s at issue, or rather having
your home address as say a billing address on a site you buy something from.

This one seemed fairly tough to avoid 100%, so I want to know more about the
plausibility.

~~~
prepend
I worked for a company that bought mailing lists and linked them to public
records. We didn’t sell to marketers but it did open my eyes that anyone who
isn’t prohibited will sell info.

Some industries (utilities, banking) are prohibited from selling customer
info. But most aren’t. If you ever subscribe to a magazine, donate to a
charity, enter a sweepstakes, etc your info goes into commercial lists.

~~~
graeme
Gotcha. So not just physical mail: _anything_ with your physical address on it
that isn't prohibited from selling it may do so.

~~~
prepend
Cynically, that’s how I operate. A friend donated to Southern Poverty Law
Center and never ordered anything. They entered their address on the credit
card form and now gets mail from dozens of orgs including about a piece per
week from SPLC.

------
dannyw
Anecdotal, but have known someone who because famous. They like getting their
emails responded to; but they'd rather not get the publicity.

This was cemented when I was walking with them had to take a detour to avoid a
news crew that was looking for them.

------
sifar
Lathe Biosas. [1]

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus#Politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus#Politics)

------
beastman82
Classic Tim Ferriss BS where you can't back out of the site without seeing an
ad for his stuff. This guy is a con artist

------
tempsy
I think the only way to be rich and anonymous is wealth building through
stocks, real estate, etc. No one outside of your broker, yourself, and the
government knows about that in the case of stocks, and you can buy real estate
through an LLC if you want to be extra anonymous.

------
yason
This question must be for stage II; so far I can't think of a reason I'd like
to become famous in the first place...

------
m3kw9
I think life has more reasons than be: I can survive in luxury.

I think once you have enough, your purpose is to help others. Choose something

------
jcoffland
By definition, most people don't need to worry about becoming famous and its
consequences.

------
z3t4
Just assume that whatever you say to anyone will end up in the news next
morning.

~~~
majos
But this is a terrible way to live. You’ll never be vulnerable with anybody,
and vulnerability is a big component of close relationships.

------
dot1x
Never liked Tim. He always seemed to outsource his brain.

------
jslove
Helps a lot of you want to have one night stands.

------
marc_io
The brighter the light, the darker the shadow.

------
H8crilA
Perhaps I'm missing something, but what's good about being famous? I.e. what
are the reasons _to become_ famous?

~~~
jamesrcole
The article covers that, near the start.

------
yters
Good thing I chose not to be famous.

------
molteanu
I honestly thought this is bad writing. It jumps from one idea to the next
without bringing any of them to the conclusion. One quote too many, maybe? And
too many paragraphs that are meant to catch and arounse the reader's interest?

I guess this is the style of writing needed to catch the attention of millions
of followers. Am I mistaken?

I've stopped reading this after 5 minutes. I've reallly tried, though.

Edit: Downvotes expected for an honest opinion. That's fine :)

~~~
PudgePacket
You're probably getting voted down because you're not really adding anything
valuable to the discussion.

If you think the submitted article is bad just vote it down and move on.

~~~
marktangotango
Huh? Are you able to downvote articles at your current level of karma? I
cannot and I have than you (ie immediate parent to this comment).

~~~
molteanu
Nope, I cannot.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Neither can I, at my level. I don't think anyone can. (Of course, there are
those with a lot more than me. Maybe they can... but I doubt it. So far as I
know, the only real level in karma is at 500, when you can downvote comments.)

