Avatar
The Bitcoin Vandal
e27e4933ddba1e18b4935698b567206903d21bbae6500e2fc2fbc59ec69cf909
Proud Bitcoin Maxi

Been trying to do this for a year. Withdrawal is hard, but since most of the Bitcoiners I follow are ditching it, I think I may be able to pill it off. Remember Elonia Muskrat said it would be for “free speech”? What a croc o’ schitt.

Replying to Avatar Contra

Don’t forget the power of lobbyists, whereby the corporations bribe the pols for subsidies and barriers to entry

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

I hear this a lot, but one of the ways I gained this skill was by being a generalist in a room full of specialists. A systems engineer. The dumbest person in a room of specialists.

I previously ran the engineering and finances of an aircraft simulation facility. I had a lead computer scientist, a lead IT manager, a lead mechanical engineer, a lead electronic engineer (which was initially my area), a lead aeronautics engineer, a lead graphics engineer, and various juniors, and together we had to1) build and maintain a set of aircraft simulators and 2) repeatedly customize those aircraft simulators for individual clients and then I 3) had to oversee the finances of this. And we'd have upper-management requirements (fiscal goals and limits, broader strategic priorities, etc).

I started as a junior electrical engineer, became the senior electrical engineer, and then moved into that more broad-based tech leader role.

In that role, I had to balance all of those things. I would run meetings, but talk the least. It would be 70% initial questions or letting others speak freely, 20% follow-up questions or purposeful counter-points to sort out the differences between competent people, and then 10% declarations or decisions from me. And even when I made those, I would go to each senior party privately and gather their opinions to look for critical flaws to see if an error correction was needed somewhere along the way after that.

Several of my senior engineers who reported to me were older and more experienced than me, so rather than acting the hot-shot, I would talk to each humbly and view my role as like, "someone has to do this whole organization thing, so please help me maximize your input to that."

Someone had to be the person who was the second best at each of the disciplines, and read people and technicals enough to know who should be promoted to lead each of those disciplines and when they were speaking out of competence vs out of pride or other human details. That was my job. I had to make all the separate engineering disciplines clear enough, and agree enough, to chart a single path forward, and then agreed to by upper management who had way less technical details.

And that came down to what is known by systems engineers as the "critical path". In other words, the critical path is the hardest or most expensive or most contested thing of a given project, so you can focus on solving that as the core, so that the periphery would follow.

That role sounds cool, but there's another side of the coin. I realized early I'd never be focused enough to dominate a specialty as some of the hyper-focused specialists I knew could. I could nail an individual project at like a B+ or A- level, but not an A+ level. I was more drawn to the broader picture from the start. I could be a B or B+ at everything, and an A- in my speciality, but I couldn't care enough even about my specialty to bring it to an A+ level. I wanted to be someone who helped all the A+ specialists come together.

I've since applied this systems engineering mindset to analyzing global macro flows, but also to analyze things like bitcoin or major tech themes like energy or AI. Some of it is instinctual or experienced, but other parts are easily teachable.

And the most easily teachable concept is to always think of the critical path. Picture multiple parallel things that all have to go right to get to the goal, and then imagine the hardest of those paths. That's the path to then focus on in terms of realizing how time consuming or expensive it'll be to solve, and how it might be accelerated.

Lots of other things are easily solvable with some resources, but the critical path is the real project-maker or project-killer. Across discliplines, formally or informally, try to be able to identify it, or identity the right people and ask/watch them enough to help you identify it.

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqm9xan7hhmnqhku2wq35tyau3wme3dmkxyt2hlxu7tdjppnr3slvqqsfqk6tdqgmavkrpzmswzzhcza0mxhzn82z6yxkfl83e4vqs7kecgcjjc8dz

Damn honey, you are quite transparent, brilliant, loving, and lovable. 💯👏👏👏👏💋

Everyone trying to nickel and dime everyone else. Gonna get worse when inflation destroys everyone except for the elites.

I agree, but I surmise at least 75% of people who have Bitcoin don’t know or care about where the keys are. They’re used to custodians because they’re still in fiat-thinking mode where they trust so-called custodians

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

A lot of people look down on blue collar work, which I think is misguided. Especially for skilled blue collar work (and most type of work does benefit from skill/experience).

Basically, there’s a popular notion that it’s objectively better to be a CEO than a plumber, or an engineer than a barber, and that’s pretty off base. So it’s not that they criticize blue collar work in any overt way; it’s that they assume that that people in “lower” jobs would all want to be in “higher” roles if they had the choice. A technician would want to be an engineer. A janitor would want to be a CEO.

There are a lot of studies on job happiness and one of the most consistent correlations is that people are happier when they get more immediate feedback. Like if you cut people’s hair or fix mechanical issues or wire up electronic boxes, you often resolve things in minutes, hours, days, or weeks depending the specific task, and with progress along the way, so you get that quick feedback loop where you see the positive results of your work quickly and tangibly. Nothing lingers, unclear and vague.

And for those jobs, often when you’re outside of work hours, you’re truly out. You don’t have to think about it. You can fully devote your focus elsewhere. There’s not some major thing hanging over your head, other than sometimes financial stress or indirect things.

Now, obviously jobs with more complexity and compensation and scale give people other benefits. More material comfort and safety, more power to impact the world at scale, more public prestige, etc. and for some people that’s important for happiness, and for others it is not. And the cost is that it’s generally highly competitive, rarely if ever turns off, and usually comes with much slower and more vague feedback loops in terms of seeing or feeling whether your work is making things better or not.

There was a time in my life where wiring up electronic boxes was really satisfying. Each project had a practical purpose but then also was kind of an artform since I wanted it to look neat for aesthetic and maintainability purposes. I would work on these things like a bonsai enthusiast would sculpt bonsai. And then eventually I would design larger systems and have technicians wire them instead, but for some of the foundational starting points I’d still set up the initial core pieces to get it started right. I wasn’t thrilled when I realistically had to give that up when I moved into management for a while.

I have a housekeeper clean my house every couple weeks. She’s a true pro; she used to clean high-end hotels for years and now works for herself cleaning houses. When we travel, she can let herself in and clean our place, since we trust her.

She doesn’t speak much English, but her daughter does, and that daughter recently graduated college.

Notably, she consistently sings while she cleans. She could listen to music or podcasts but doesn’t. She just sings every time she cleans. I can tell she’s generally in a state of flow while cleaning. She’s good at what she does, and it’s kind of a meditative experience involving repetition but also experience to do it properly and efficiently and then a satisfying conclusion of leaving things better than how they were found. Turning chaos to order.

Last year she was hit by a truck while driving, and had to be out of work for a few months to recover. When she came back, we just back-paid her the normal rate for those few months as though she cleaned on schedule, so she wouldn’t have any income gap from us. Full pay despite a work gap. She was shocked when we did that. We weren’t sure her financial situation (I assume it’s pretty good actually based on her rate), but basically we just treated the situation as though she were salaried with benefits even though she works on a per-job basis. Because skilled, trustworthy, and happy people are hard to come by and worth helping and maintaining connections with.

If I were to guess, I honestly think she is a happier person than I am on a day to day basis. It’s not that I’m unhappy; it’s that I think whatever percentage I might be on the subjective mood scale, she is visibly higher. I experience a state of flow in my work, and my type of work gives me a more frequent state of flow than other work I could do, but I think her work gives her an even higher ratio of flow.

Anyway, my point is that optionality is important. While it’s true that some jobs suck and some jobs are awesome, and financial security matters a lot, for the most part it’s more about how suited you are for a particular type of work at a particular phase in your life. And you’re not defined by your work; it’s just one facet of who you are among several facets.

Find what gives you a good state of flow, pays your bills, lets you save a surplus, and lets you express yourself in one way or another.

Wow! As always, great work from the QoM 💯👏👏👏👏💪🔥

Only if cap gains tax for each xfer is revoked

But if I don’t then I’ll have multiple accounts, won’t I?