I find it fascinating that that the consensus among the responses in this thread seems to be somewhere between Li Ka-Shing being a hypocrite, that buying food for people richer than you is crazy, that his advice is useless, etc.
Sure, there are cultural incongruities. Americans don't understand buying lunch for your superiors, and the advice to beat yourself up if you fail to see progress is directly opposed to the "do your best" attitude that lives on this side of the Pacific, but the lessons are the same.
In the end, the moral is simple: wheeling and dealing. Being crafty. Placing yourself in a situation where opportunities find you, not vice versa. Focusing your personal development on becoming competent enough to act on your opportunities.
What bugs me is that this sort of hustling is necessary to thrive in any business, not just software. I suspect HN's criticism of this advice might be a sign of wantrepreneurship rather entrepreneurship.
You completely misunderstand the "Curse of the Gifted".
The point of that article was that hustle will only take you so far, and after that point real engineering projects require design and process, least of all because you need to interact with other people. Write software on a team, work on a large project, and you'll understand this better.
The things espoused by this guy are more a function of good luck and parasitism than hustle--do not mistake one for the other.
>Americans don't understand buying lunch for your superiors.
More wealthy/higher ranking/socially powerful/popular/lucky != superior.
I occasionally buy lunch for my friends and co-workers out of mutual respect and a genuine desire to show them that the relationships we share are appreciated. If one of them happens to be my supervisor, so be it. But there has to be a mutually respectful relationship between us.
I'd also have to seriously question the character of anyone who, being aware of the fact that they make multiple times your income, would still allow you to buy them lunch (Unless it was a trivial amount).
Richer obviously != better. But being richer === being richer. He's saying if you want more money, hang out with richer people, and you'll pick up some tips. And a good way to get time with someone is to buy them lunch.
You're right that the entire theme of the article sort-of implies richer is better, but a plain reading of it just says: here's how to own a car and a house. It makes no promises about being a nice person.
I wasn't criticizing the entire article. I was disagreeing with a single person's claim that disagreeing with a cultural norm is the same thing as failing to understand it.
Most of the advice in the original article was pretty good. I just happen to prefer meeting people in a more natural manner. I just wouldn't feel right spending my free time trying to manipulate my way into a rich person's life with the hope that I might somehow benefit from it in the long run.
I'm rather a fan of getting work done ahead of schedule, presenting me with interesting problems, learning new technologies, and presenting sound arguments why my idea is bad/could be improved.
That's because your premise is that good conduct will be rewarded. Depending with whom you work with it also puts you in a good position to being exploited.
Sure, there are cultural incongruities. Americans don't understand buying lunch for your superiors, and the advice to beat yourself up if you fail to see progress is directly opposed to the "do your best" attitude that lives on this side of the Pacific, but the lessons are the same.
In the end, the moral is simple: wheeling and dealing. Being crafty. Placing yourself in a situation where opportunities find you, not vice versa. Focusing your personal development on becoming competent enough to act on your opportunities.
What bugs me is that this sort of hustling is necessary to thrive in any business, not just software. I suspect HN's criticism of this advice might be a sign of wantrepreneurship rather entrepreneurship.