[ticmasta]

I believe (as do many others) that they've got the causation backwards; you don't search for work you're already passionate about, you grow passion by doing meaningful work that is deeply rewarding.

I read most of the post with the viewpoint that the author had a vested interest in a very specific interpretation of what's essential the story of the internet: the long tail. I see no evidence that the entire market for any of the examples has exploded in total value, which to me means we're just seeing a shift in delivery channels. Traditionally authors all made very little while a few best sellers took the majority of the money, same with musicians. If the new currency is audience, consumption or some other metric why does that indicate the fundamental distribution has changed?

[pojzon]

If possible I would like to steal that?:

"You don't look for a work you're already passionate about. You grow passion by doing meaningful work that is deeply rewarding."

This is a great advice for many management ppl.

[TeMPOraL]

> you don't search for work you're already passionate about, you grow passion by doing meaningful work that is deeply rewarding.

And how does the work become "meaningful and deeply rewarding"? For some, it may come just from repetition. Others manage to abstract their occupation away and source the meaning and rewards from families and lifestyle their work supports. But there are people for whom this doesn't work, and this is where I believe the "passion" mindset comes from. A lot of jobs are not only not meaningful, they're net harmful to society. And most people don't get to choose what they're working on anyway, economic considerations make the choice for them. So there's a tension.

[bjelkeman-again]

Fortunately, for people like us (i.e readers of HN) there is a possibility of meaningful and deeply rewarding work. I try to create those environments for myself and others to work on. That doesn’t give the opportunity to everyone, but you do what you can.