Hey Yuri, thanks for your comments. I hope you didn't miss the point of my post, which basically gives the same advice your entire post just repeated. Not sure why you seemed to inject a bit of condescension into your last line.
The point of the post was to inform people that these three were possible pitfalls that a new self-employer could fall into, and I gave advice (the same exact advice you listed) on how to avoid them. You clearly have figured it out for yourself and seem to agree with my points, so it sounds like you agree with 3/3 of my assessment and advice. I believe you misjudged the point of my post -- it is to advise newbie self-employers, not ones who've already figured it out like yourself.
Thanks Yuri. I can see how you may have found the post inapplicable to you since you seem to have it all figured out.
That said, if you have any specific feedback or additions to the advice I listed (which sounds very similar to the advice you were trying to give me in your original comment), I'd welcome it from someone with your expertise. I enjoy discussions between entrepreneurs that benefit us by adding to our best practices.
It's sad that our personal info can be used with such malice in this day and age when we're supposed to celebrate the accessibility and transparency of information. That people still cannot be freely outspoken under their real identities because some spiteful person who disagrees with them might call up their bosses to try to get them fired (or worse). When people on the Internet cross the line and make things personal because they feel a sense of power in hiding behind their anonymous computer screen and having someone else's vulnerable and real identity in their hands.
Gwern, thanks for the humble reply and all your writings. Maybe one day we will be able to celebrate your talent as part of your identity.
It's not sad, it was not long ago that everyone used pseudonyms on the internet, with anonymity comes a certain amount of freedom, not just from malice but from perspective. People have a horrible sense of judgment when facing cultural identity, age, authority, etc. Anon posting tears they away so you can concentrate on the subject matter without preconceived baggage.
> Maybe one day we will be able to celebrate your talent as part of your identity
What on earth are you talking about, the content speaks for itself, that is his identity along with his name Gwern, there is nothing stopping your from having a conversation with him. There are no barriers in your way, go ahead and celebrate.
“people still cannot be freely outspoken under their real identities”
Sure they can, and millions of us are. If people couldn’t be, Facebook wouldn’t exist.
”When people on the Internet cross the line”
That’s not a given. I never hide my identity and it has only worked out positive for me. There are assholes online and offline, I sure as hell won’t let any of them limit what I say or do.
People on facebook aren't necessarily outspoken, as they have private profiles limited to only who they decide to add as friends. And usually, people remain "friends" with those who share similar opinions (aka circle jerk) because those who disagree probably have defriended them or have had a flame war over comments which doesn't lead to anything.. Because the "hater's" identity in this situation is not anonymous either.
For most people, posting under their real identity doesn't really get them in trouble. I'm talking about posters who discuss controversial topics publicly- not only is it so easy for someone to send in anonymous hate emails, but now they can anonymously harass the poster in real life by calling up their boss or family members, after a few clicks of research on the Internet.
It makes me wonder in what form this kind of "hateful" harassment (say, one step below actual hate crimes) existed in the days without Internet.
“People on facebook aren't necessarily outspoken, as they have private profiles”
I don’t hide any Facebook content from visitors who aren’t friends, because I don’t trust Facebook to keep my information private anyways. I’m sure I'm not the only one.
“I'm talking about posters who discuss controversial topics publicly”
No, you were generalizing, making it seem that everyone has to hide their real name online.
“makes me wonder in what form this kind of "hateful" harassment [...] existed in the days without Internet”
All the examples you already mentioned (snail mail, phone calls), it’s nothing new. If someone wants to make your life unpleasant, there have always been ways to do so.
> I don’t hide any Facebook content from visitors who aren’t friends, because I don’t trust Facebook to keep my information private anyways. I’m sure I'm not the only one.
You don't trust Facebook to keep your information private, and your response is to share the content you add with the world?
I’ll explain: by posting it for everyone to see, I won’t be tempted to share content that I would mind being leaked. It also keeps me from gossipping and speaking ill of others, and it trains me not to do so AFK either.
On forums as well as on Facebook, I discuss technology preferences, religion, cultural differences, politics, sports, gender roles, dating, and more. I’m plenty outspoken, Posting in public just makes me try a bit harder not to be a dick.
“people still cannot be freely outspoken under their real identities”
I think it's more of where you choose to be outspoken. On Facebook you can post updates on important life things, things no one cares about, or even touchy subjects without much fear of being harassed. On places like Reddit, or deeper down into 4chan, or other sites that are known for their 'lynching' it gets riskier to be so 'outspoken' with your real identity because there are larger quantities of people that you don't know that are way off from your personal network thus making the possibilites well endless.
When it's an accepted peer to peer network it's different from either a 'real' user to anonymous user or anon user to anon user. The more anonymous people are, the more brave they become but as soon as their real identity is attached, things don't get quite so serious, at least not in the main factions of social media. The Wizard in Oz is a good example of how you can hide behind a figure or 'name' but when the curtain is peeled back, it turns out you're not much better or different than anyone else.
edit: added some more to hopefully make my point more clear.
Yes, people are braver under anonymity. Over the Internet there are more anonymous readers who can access a public discussion and a poster's real identity-- thus more chance that one of these anonymous readers are crazy enough to cross the line and exploit their knowledge of the poster's identity to harass them in real life.
Before the Internet it would've been a lot more difficult to read all these dissenting opinions/discussions but also harder for a person to commit harassment. My entire point is that the Internet is a double edged sword (But im sure we all know that already). That said, the pros do outweigh the cons :).
The endorphins from working out really help -- I've gotten back into yoga and even at 20 minutes every morning, I feel like a more productive person, raring to take on the day.
I've found that there are people who just spam-post statuses to show off, garner attention, and/or put on their best face, but never really 'like' other people's posts or pay attention to their news feed. This behavior makes sense, because my FB news feed depresses me and augments any bit of subconscious insecurity I've willed myself to ignore. Except I deal with it by unplugging from FB, whereas the aforementioned type of person would overcompensate by ignoring the news feed, posting about their great life and garnering attention. This would be an interesting psychological study to read about.
Great point - I didn't even think of this. To add, I would reply to them once or twice a day, in one condensed email that addresses all of their emails.
Also - I use Gmail for my business account so I can easily click on the 'Move To.." -> "Label" button, effectively archiving and organizing it at the same time.
Asian immigrant parents produce just as many problematic first-generation asian kids. The middle-upper class asian bubble of a community I grew up in may have seemed affluent, filled with polite and studious kids, but the undercurrents of bored, overachieving, over-pressured teens lost to gangs and drugs are never talked about.
The asian kids that do come out hardworking and studious from our tiger parents are not all rainbows and sprinkles either, as many are stunted in emotional development and social communication due to the extreme discipline and pressure we had to deal with growing up.
Lastly, and most ironically, asian immigrant parents always push their kids to be the best, and being "good enough" is never enough. The pressure to achieve, the detached politeness of the traditional asian culture -- there are plenty of cracks that a misguided teenager could fall into.
"Good enough" can be applied to job, money, work, and any other tangible thing. But humans and emotions make the world go 'round, and when you have the future of an innocent, malleable human being in your hands, there is no such thing as "good enough" parenting. That is the entire dilemma being discussed here for women - compromising to be "good enough" at work so that they can be "good to the best of their ability" for their children. Not the other way around.
The idea that hard-working asians are "maladjusted" is mostly veiled racism. And the idea that there are no diminishing returns to parenting time invested is unsubstantiated hand-waving.
I assume you work in tech? I've encountered many "maladjusted" people in tech--I don't think a disproportionate share of them were asian. The only "maladjustment" I have encountered disproportionately among asians, awkwardness with women, has more to do with conservative cultural attitudes about sex and dating than anything to do with parents spending too much time at work or not giving them enough attention.
Besides that, the other stuff is racism or at least ethnocentrism. Contemporary American culture places a weird value on being "well rounded" that is alien both to asian culture and to American culture of years past. That's where a lot of the pressure on parents to invest time comes from--gotta take little Timmy to soccer practice and school plays so he'll be "well rounded." Gotta invest the time to help him cultivate a wide range of interests and hobbies, get involved in the community, etc. It's an upper-class pretension that harkens back to the days when having a variety of hobbies and interests was the mark of the elite who didn't have to work for a living.
