[bradlys]

Main thing I see people attacking this guy over is the “I did it and so can you” mentality more than anything. It’s survivorship bias at its strongest. No different than the FIRE post trending here as well. Dude literally saw his NW double in a year and income go up 50% cause of stock appreciation. Along with incredible starting salary and overall close to top tier comp the entire way - and no kids or what not.

I think people just really hate these “stories” because it’s not realistically repeatable. Someone will make it happen but it’ll be based off luck and nothing else. Even the dude in the fire thing wishes he did startups for 6 years. Mindlessly ignoring he’d get paid way less but oh wait - of course his story would only be posted if he joined a company that IPO’d and he got 8 figures out of it.

It’s just so annoying to see this shit on HN all the time. It’s some weird capitalism fetishism porn.

[aww_dang]

>"I did it and so can you"

What is the antithesis here? "You won't succeed, so don't bother trying. Become an employee, rail against capitalism and wage slavery."

Dismissing it as luck can only work if the author succeeded on the first try. Did everyone succeed on the first try? Before it can be called "survivor's bias", you need to survive. If you croak at the first unforeseen and perhaps unfair hardship...

What is missing from many of these stories are the concepts and ideas which were eliminated by failure or analysis. It would be unusual for the first idea that pops into someone's head to come to successful fruition.

Maybe it would be illustrative if the author listed all of his failed endeavors and how he reasoned his way through them. Undoubtedly, it would make for much longer-form content and perhaps ramble off-track from his chosen subject.

Persistence is an unspoken companion to what you flippantly dismiss as luck. Trial and error, iterative improvements and self-sacrifice are also key ingredients.

Of course, you don't need to listen to that. It is much easier to lay blame than manifest the change you wish to see.

[camgunz]

Not everyone can or wants to be persistent enough to do this kind of thing. In isolation these stories are interesting. As policy, these stories argue against changes to housing and zoning in the US, which are obviously needed. Like, "live in and remodel a shed and wait to capitalize on a historically bad housing market wipeout" isn't useful advice, much less a housing policy.

[more_corn]

That was your takeaway? Mine was entirely different. Here are some things I took away: ADUs and in-law units are great. It’s too hard for a group of friends to buy an apartment building. They had to masquerade as a slumlord to do it. That’s probably a failing in laws and policies. Buying property is a viable strategy to rise in this society. Buying land and building a house is possible, but harder than it should be. It’s possible to buy damaged property, make it livable and rent it to people who want it without selling your soul.

I’ve got some money in the stock market that would probably serve humanity better if I bought some unlivable property and spent the time and money to make it livable. Not sure if I want to be a landlord, but the first part appeals to me. We need more housing and I’d love to put my resources behind that effort. Yes, we need sweeping policy changes too. Link me your proposal and I’ll give it a read.

[camgunz]

I'm not saying those things aren't in there, but they're pretty niche. Like, how often is a group of friends trying to buy a multi-unit building?

The big bad here is lack of housing supply brought on by NIMBY-ism and a shortage of tradespeople (maybe this also speaks to our inability to evolve housing construction as well), and the danger is more or less that policymakers and voters will read this story and think "see, all you have to do is <list of ridiculous and lucky things> and you too can own a home in one of the most expensive places on Earth."

For policy and such, the problem is complicated. Going to housing site:vox.com in DDG isn't a bad idea. But secondarily, I'm interested in prefab and modular housing. A lot of it is better suited to modern housing needs (more efficient--not just 2x4s, fiberglass and Tyvek, cheaper, less construction waste, way less build time on site, smaller and thus higher density, etc).

[aww_dang]

Agreed. I'm not advocating for a housing policy in this observation.

Waiting for housing policy to fit with your ideal of a just world isn't reasonable advice for everyone. There are things which for practical intents and purposes, are beyond our control. If you are looking for change, it is better to focus on the things within immediate control.

[camgunz]

Super agree, but I will say I have a hard time ignoring the feeling that more and more things that used to be in my control are now beyond it.

[aww_dang]

Isn't that one of the problems with the pessimistic lament at the top of this thread?

Conditions are rarely if ever static for extended periods of time. The entrepreneur must adapt to the opportunities presented. The popular idiom is, "Where one door closes, another opens".

The observation about 2008 housing prices was telling. A market can stay depressed for extended periods of time. Pessimists could have experienced that same market and missed the opportunity. When evaluating in hindsight the uncertainty of imperfect information inside the moment can be overlooked.

Not only are opportunities constantly changing, but each individual brings unique knowledge to any given situation. Therefore the opportunities in a given situation are differ from one individual to the next. From this point it is easy to see to the value of adaptation and innovation. The man in the article didn't just accept the world as it is, he thought out of the box and created solutions where others saw problems.

I agree that things have changed and that doors have been closed. Some of them may never open again in our lifetimes. Yet at the same time I feel optimistic. There are incredible opportunities all across the Internet. Many here have the technical skills to realize them, but they lack the entrepreneurial vision.

[camgunz]

I mean, we can keep restating our positions here:

aww_dang: there's always an opportunity somewhere

camgunz: that may be true, but it can also be true there are fewer opportunities, which I find worrying

aww_dang: but what does that matter if there's always one

camgunz: I think the total number of opportunities matters

aww_dang: I don't

[sangnoir]

> Dismissing it as luck can only work if the author succeeded on the first try.

This is wrong, or your definition of "luck" is different to mine and most other people, I assume.

[aww_dang]

Winning 50 coin flips in a row is lucky. Winning 50 coin flips out of 100 is persistence.

Quitting after 3 coin flips because the flipper sneered at you is called being a quitter. Maybe it was unfair and unlucky that he sneered, but the reason you didn't get 50 wins isn't because the world is unfair or that you are unlucky. It is because you didn't flip a coin 100 times.

Certain ideologies empower you for success. Others turn you into a victim.

[jfengel]

HN is part of a Silicon Valley venture capital incubator. It exists to be capitalism fetish porn.

[more_corn]

Living below your means is repeatable (and desirable). Riding a bike instead of driving a car is repeatable (and beneficial). Buying land and building a house, buying distressed property and carefully investing time and money to rehab it… all repeatable. All things that benefit society.

This isn’t capitalist fetish porn.