Did not expect chez cora to make the front page of HN.
I suppose this might work for some, but it comes off as excessively performative and not actually practical.
I agree with you that five years might as well be a lifetime. The point of this exercise is to define how you want that lifetime to end, then step backwards through it until you know what you're doing tomorrow. The plan for five years ("be a CTO") only matters insofar as it tells you your plan in three years ("be in a position where you report to the board"), one year ("be a lead engineer"), one month ("be confident in passing a job interview and be sending my CV out"), and tomorrow ("message Todd and ask if he'll run a mock interview for me, do some leetcode, message the Acme group chat").
You honestly might as well throw out any plans beyond the one year mark. Either they're important and you can recreate them, or they've changed and you should recreate them. The process of planning is more important than its output.
The worst case is when this ritual produces a rigid set of unrealistic goals that the person almost immediately fails to achieve. This new sense of failure is compounded on top of existing anxieties and now they’re making even less progress than before while being even more sad about it.
The real gains at that point are in connections, reputation, and getting into the habit of physical exercise.
I think this is good advice, for nearly anyone.
I’ve stayed prepared for opportunities. But I can’t say I’ve had a plan.
- keeping in mind the direction I want to advance, but
- determining which activities I should repeat every day to move in that direction,
- executing those activities consistently (every day) and regularly (according to rules/principles, as I learn/discover them), and
- gradually refining that execution with practice.
To me, it feels a bit like walking across your house in the dark: you know where you'd like to go, but you can only feel your way there a step at a time, you run into things, but you course-correct and keep moving forward.
Keep it simple.
Some paraphrases:
Tyson: Everybody's got a plan until they get punched in the mouth. (A PERT chart with hundreds of nodes, planned in advance, is almost certain to fall apart.)
Patton: A good plan, violently executed now.
Von Clausewitz: The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.
When that bump comes, people often abandon the whole plan. So the trouble with goals is that the good (getting you motivated to act) is often outweighed by the bad (draining motivation when the arbitrary goal is not met).
What you really want, in hn-friendly language, is not a 2D point on a map, but a vector. You want to know the general direction that you want to move toward in your life, and then start increasing your velocity.
A point is something you have reached or not (hint: it’s not even satisfying when you hit it). But you can change your vector on a dime. Even if you’re nowhere near your dream life, even in terrible times, you can always instantly pivot and vector in the right direction.
If it makes you feel good, make the big plans and be as detailed as you please. But hold them lightly. And just get moving along your vector.
But I don’t get the second part. Do we really need to be so goal oriented in tech specifically? I mean maybe if you wanted to go from being a programmer to a professional wrestler, I could see it. But if you’re just trying to keep your career going, just do what’s useful at work / school right now, and explore what interests you.
I personally only made it about thirty seconds before I had to stop reading the article. The excessive line breaks and paragraphs-that-are-just-run-on-sentences on top of sporadic sentence casing and missing punctuation presents the writer as partly illiterate. I just can't shake the feeling that I'm reading the words of an, for lack of a graceful term, idiot.
My advice to people in this situation varies tremendously given their background and what they're trying to learn, but it tends towards the same general method: start with something ultra simple and achievable, repeat it a bunch of times (perhaps with some minor variations) until you're relatively comfortable doing it on your own, then begin to branch out. If you're stuck for ideas, show it to somebody else and see what they think; having a training partner or mentor can help you feel less overwhelmed.
It's much better to understand your current position and which direction you're heading in than to have a long-term plan. Good questions for juniors to be asking are stuff like, "how can I get my foot in the door," "how can I tell a good offer from a bad offer," "what can I do to stop being a 'junior' (i.e. how can I become an asset instead of a gamble)"?
This is gold. :)
Having said all that, I came to this realization only after ticking a whole bunch of societal and cultural expectation boxes which means I can afford to take my foot off the gas. Trusting your instincts is a much scarier proposition earlier in life, but I still think it's probably the right thing to do.
> Instead I now just trust my instincts and follow what seems interesting or meaningful to me right now
for me that means watching anime, playing video games, reading HN and social media, and maybe writing small programs like solving S.O. questions, And now I look back, have accomplished nothing of significance, and have huge regrets. Regrets that I didn't set goals and work toward them so that I'd be in a better position in my life than I am now.
Not sure the OPs method will change that. In fact the OPs method sounds like using the waterfall method for life planning. That also doesn't sound like it would work for me
It is cliche, but system over goals has helped me.. or I guess you could see it as microgoals one does not need to think about much.
Write code for at least X hours per day, read a book for X amount of time, exercise X days a week.
It gives me a checkbox to tick and no overhead in thinking about what goals are achievable, what are desirable.. etc.
Which I guess is to say that GP's "follow your instincts" can also be as difficult as "set goals and hit them", just in different ways.
The opposite of goal setting is not "doing nothing". And with respect, watching TV, playing games, etc is doing nothing.
Rather you should be _doing_ something, something interesting to you. Create, not Consume.
SO questions is a good start. Meaningful answers take time. You might set a goal of 10 questions a day. Some amount that represents meaningful time.
From there, maybe you notice the kinds of questions you like. Are they leading you to an open source project? Or customer support? (There are _very_ well paid support jobs out there, not FAANG pay, but waaay better than what most people earn.)
The point of goals or interests is the same - finding your journey. Sitting around consuming is not journey time. Use whatever approach works for you to start yourself moving.
You'll find that it doesn't require much thought at decision points to choose the options (in aggregate) that push you in that direction. As they say, it's about the journey, not the destination.
With that said, it's still difficult because you have to learn to forego long term expectations and/or acquire discipline not to just "stay put" lest you fall back into the habit of stressing over end goals or the comfort of a stress coping loop (anime, video games, etc), respectively.
Grass is always greener, I guess.
But I will never pick the fork on the road where I will probably be worse off in 5 years. I won’t take a job where I make good money but sit in a corner doing little, for example. I will regret it.
That’s basically my compromise.
Start at the bottom, at first, say yes to things.
AI cannot say yes to things. It sucks at solving problems. It is good at vomiting up pre-determined solutions
AI cannot smooth over things with customers. AI even if it could, would suck at it.
Get into a support role; it is a fine job and as much as they want to automate it away, they cannot. It often has a path to FTE SWE and the pay is OK.
Semantically, that example "DAG" graph looks like a data flow diagram (not a state diagram, nor a control flowchart), which is more for modeling ongoing processes, often infinite.
The text talking about the "DAG", however, sounds more like it wants a Gantt chart. And a Gantt chart will start with hierarchical decomposition (i.e., starting with a big task, and breaking it down into progressively smaller pieces, recursively). And have interdependencies among those subtasks (e.g., task get-first-job.get-network-engineer-job can't start until task learn-networking.get-network-engineer-certification.take-the-test produces the cert; and that task has a dependency on studying for the exam). This will also show you what can and can't be parallelized. And when you start putting durations and resource allocations on your Gantt, you can even estimate when you'll hit various milestones.
If you made an example diagram for accomplishing life goals, rather than picking a random "DAG", then it would be more clear to the reader.
Wanting things to be true does not make them true.
“Get a promotion this year, be a manager next year, manage the division in three years” is not a plan you can execute.
This is just the old self affirmation stuff you hear all the time: you won't succeed if you want it a bit. You wont succeed if want it and do nothing. You will succeed if you go all in, 100%.
It is BS.
You wont succeed if you go all in, statistically.
You might get a different outcome, but you wont hit your goal.
It is provably false that everyone who goes all succeeds; Not everyone gets to be an astronaut, no matter how hard they work.
The reality is that some people will put a little effort in and succeed, and some people will put a lot in and succeed. Other people will fail.
Your goals are not indicators of future success.
Only actual things that have actually happened are strong signals for future events.
The advice of having goals is helpful, but the much much more important thing to do is measure what actually happens and realistically create goals based on actual reality.
Try things. Measure things. Adopt things that work. Consciously record what you do, how it goes, how long it takes and use that to estimate achievable goals, instead of guessing randomly.
> if you actually do this you get a very stressful side effect:
> there is no one to blame but yourself
Uh no thanks!
Just figure out what you want. That is your "goal". It does not need to be 1,2,5 years - can be anything. Things can change and are always in flux. Be open to changing both your goals and/or your daily habits. Change goals when you achieve or grow out of them, change habits when they aren't getting you closer to your goals or not helping you enjoy the journey.
Work backwards from your goals and break them down into something you can do as daily habits. The daily habits should have very STRICT success metrics in the direction of the goals' success metrics. If you do not have STRICT metrics for both the GOALs and the DAILY ACTIONs, you do not have good FEEDBACK.
If you do not have good FEEDBACK, you can spend a lot of time, even years - which I did, doing things that FEEL like you're working towards something with nothing to show at the end. There HAS to be a way to SHOW to yourself whether you are making progress or not. In too many things in life I have at times felt bad about my life not being a certain way, when I actually look at what I've done - like truly sit down and note things down, I realize my mind has been playing tricks on me - years of a lot of apparent struggle, but not much truly done - perhaps just a bit here and there.
I know there's many counter arguments to the STRICTness and GOAL setting nature of this way of living life. One counter argument is it's too rigid - but I like to think of it as chaos within constraints - btw you can tune the constraints to suit yourself. Another is once you reach a goal then what - I would say then another goal or just improving/maintaining that goal. Another one is Goodhart's Law - to which I say you will slowly learn to set good metrics and to use them as directional measures.
Despite all the problems with metrics and strictness, I think it is still the best way to go. Also I am personally against grandiose systems or too much complexity. I would say the core of it is just being AWARE. As long as you are AWARE of the inputs you're putting in and what outputs you'll get out of em I think it's fine to decide whether to do stuff or not. You can be lazy or free flowing or instinctual or whatever. (Your fast instincts could actually be very well aligned with your slow goals - though those kind of people are super rare I feel).
Also, normally this style of writing would annoy me but I found it very charming and fun, somehow.
These days, I think just visualizing what my "proudest self" in 5 years would be would be enough to help me sort of 'manifest' it without all of the excessive planning bits. The visualizing bit is kind of the hard part.
Given everything happening in the world at the moment the FUD has been strong the last few years making it nerve-racking to plan anything big.
Maintaining a journal that I write into daily is one of the best things I've ever done. It is so easy for me to reflect on why I feel the things I feel, especially when something happens that is significant enough to write about in the moment.
Typically we learn things as we challenge ourselves and grow. Executing your process will bring new information to light. I won't generalize universally, but if your goals or worldview hasn't evolved from age 20 to 30, it may suggest a lack of growth. It is similar to how the problem solving process often draws in concerns you hadn't initially considered. Sometimes you have to build the prototype before you can understand the full scope of the problem you are solving. Frequently you will find a more relevant problem in this stage of exploration.
Individuals are not large institutions. "5 year plans" are famously deployed by central planners in command and control economies. As an individual, you have an advantage in dynamism. Institutions typically have an obligation to provide consistent, predictable forward guidance. This allows the individuals within those institutions to plan their lives accordingly.
For these reasons, I've always found the suggestion of a "5 year plan" to be ridiculous for my usage. Perhaps it makes more sense for individuals who wish to position themselves as employees for life. Even for them, a goal of adding today's hottest buzzwords to a resume doesn't guarantee that those buzzwords will be relevant in 5-10 years. For entrepreneurs and creators, an iterative approach may be more appropriate.
bigyabai•3h ago
senectus1•1h ago