[Aliblahba]

I don't think guys like Zuckerberg thinks about sex much. Look at Jobs, Gates, ect. Non physical, low testosterone, slow social growth early on. Their "thrill" is building tech stuff, not getting laid. They truly are on a different level.

[Samseau]

(04-25-2013 04:52 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

I don't think guys like Zuckerberg thinks about sex much. Look at Jobs, Gates, ect. Non physical, low testosterone, slow social growth early on. Their "thrill" is building tech stuff, not getting laid. They truly are on a different level.

Pretty sure Gates was a player

[MikeCF]

(04-25-2013 04:41 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Personally, I still think it's too high right now. A sane world would have facebook around 10 bucks a share. What does facebook actually do for the world?

At least the dumb-ox day laborer provides people with items necessary to survival.

I don't give a shit about the stock price.

Facebook keeps me in touch with a lot of my friends, who are scattered across the world. I've met up with good friends on more than one occasion after seeing they/I was in their/my neck of the woods.

Still, running a huge company is a lot harder than mining for coal.

I've worked at a scrap yard in 100 degree heat (and sub-zero weather) stripping down junk cars that had accumulated on a farm and melted down old suspension bridges with a blow torch.

I've run my own (one man) professional business.

Running my own solo dolo company is much harder than busting my ass in the heat and cold.

If you're mining coal, you just show up, do your job, and money appears. It's intense but the stress is different.

I have to hustle for every dollar. I have to network. I have to put my ass on the line with every project. Since I'm not an employee, a fuck-up means I lose a gig.

I don't just have a paycheck direct deposited into my account. I might not earn any money one month and a lot the next. I have to manage cash flow.

And I'm just my own tiny little small business.

If what Zuckerberg did had been so easy, others would have done it.

He labored in obscurity when people said it was a dumb idea. He put in long hours when only earning a 60K salary. He turned down offers to buy his company because he knew it'd be bigger.

I personally know people who turned down jobs at Facebook. Most programmers/people are too risk averse and they kept their cushy jobs at stable companies.

I know a guy who quit his job at Google to take a job at Facebook. Nearly everyone said he was crazy. NOw the guy is worth 100 million. Some hater out there is saying, "He got lucky," or, "He was at the right place at the right time."

So all of these thousands of engineers you claim could have built Facebook didn't even have the vision to join the company at the right time.

Your argument falls apart and reveals that you've never run a business or done anything high stakes. You're a regular employee collecting a paycheck. (Nothing wrong with that, but if you start your own gig you'll find out right away how stressful is can be to not have money magically appear in your account every two weeks.)

You're an awesome writer, good thinker, and cool guy. Like a lot of guys in the manosphere, though, you're into doomsday porn and prone to hating on economically more successful men.

In fact, that's one of my major issues with the 'sphere.

I've watched way too many of you guys say the world is going to end and the economy is going to collapse and that, "Everything is a scam." Stock up on canned goods and shotgun shells! Meanwhile people like Zuckerberg have built fortunes in the same economy that is a "fraud," a "scam," and "doomed to fail."

Zuckerberg may be an android and really weird and he's not something I'd want to "kick it with," but there's simply no way to hate on what he accomplished.

[speakeasy]

(04-25-2013 05:01 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

I know a guy who quit his job at Google to take a job at Facebook. Nearly everyone said he was crazy. NOw the guy is worth 100 million. Some hater out there is saying, "He got lucky," or, "He was at the right place at the right time."

So all of these thousands of engineers you claim could have built Facebook didn't even have the vision to join the company at the right time.

He did get lucky. How many other start-up tech companies failed around the turn of the century? For every guy that left a stable job to join a startup and became rich, I'm sure there were vastly many more that either made a lateral move or ended up regretting it. Pointing to one guy who is worth 100 million now doesn't mean it's possible for everyone to do the same. The math of that wouldn't even make sense.

[Aliblahba]

I got fired from Google for being on Facebook all day at work.

[MikeCF]

(04-25-2013 05:08 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 05:01 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

I know a guy who quit his job at Google to take a job at Facebook. Nearly everyone said he was crazy. NOw the guy is worth 100 million. Some hater out there is saying, "He got lucky," or, "He was at the right place at the right time."

So all of these thousands of engineers you claim could have built Facebook didn't even have the vision to join the company at the right time.

He did get lucky. How many other start-up tech companies failed around the turn of the century? For every guy that left a stable job to join a startup and became rich, I'm sure there were vastly many more that either made a lateral move or ended up regretting it. Pointing to one guy who is worth 100 million now doesn't mean it's possible for everyone to do the same. The math of that wouldn't even make sense.

Arnold got lucky. He was a big guy at a time when bodybuilding was about to explode.

That, or he was a big guy with big vision who made bodybuilding explode.

Stallone was lucky. He had an Italian brawler look at time when Rocky was about to explode.

That, or he made Rocky happy.

It all depends on how you wanna look at things.

However you look at things, one thing is certain: If you don't take big risks you won't get big rewards.

Zuckerberg was at Harvard. He could have stayed, got his degree, and got a 150K a year job at Google.

Yet he didn't. He took a chance.

So did he get lucky? Or did he make his own luck?

[Samseau]

1. I'm not hating on Zuck. I'm hating on Facebook. Big difference. Facebook is gay. Zuck is a hustler who got an insane lucky streak.

2. I'm also insanely lucky as well. I went through a car crash that would have killed almost anyone, and I came out with scratches. 70 MPH, hit the guardrail, came out with scratches.

I know I'm a lucky guy and I do not think I got here purely by effort. I think the idea that we control our destiny is a result of our democratic culture that inculcates us to believe in such nonsense.

3. I'm glad you like my writing. Took a lot of effort to get here. I would buy you a beer anytime, Mike.

4. I'm not saying Facebook has zero value. I just don't think it deserves billions. Millions, not billions.

Everyone says Facebook keeps people in touch. So does myspace or gmail. Facebook only keeps people in touch because it's popular. Saying Facebook is good because it is popular is a tautology. It's popular because it's popular? I don't give a shit, still sucks.

5.

Quote:

Your argument falls apart and reveals that you've never run a business or done anything high stakes.

I've done both. I currently live off my own biz (how else can I have so much time on the net?) and I gambled 4 years of my life on a shitty law school career which didn't pay off. The legal economy fell apart right as I entered law school. Shit luck. I went to the same law school that two different recent Mass senators did. Had I been in school during their time I'd have made a good living like everyone else in their generation.

I base my business worldview off Machiavelli. If that's doomsday, then so be it. He said luck is 50% of everything and I accept that.

I'm currently writing articles for RoK which take somewhere between 2-6 hours each, with basically little to no compensation, in the hopes that someday RoK becomes bigger. How's that for a gamble?

[MikeCF]

Zuckerberg is a lot like Roosh.

A lot of guys here can write as well or better than Roosh. Putting in work writing isn't why Roosh is now sitting on passive income. Lots of guys work harder at writing.

He took a chance and entered a field when there wasn't a guaranteed paycheck. He was broke. He plugged away in obscurity when no one was reading his blog. He started this forum when there were only a few posts a day.

Now the guy has a nice little fiefdom and is collecting checks all month. His income hasn't even peaked.

Some call that luck. I call it vision.

It's easier to say a man with more money or success than you is lucky. Easier on the ego. In the long run that view will lead to failure and bitterness.

I'll bet if you stop calling guys lucky or naturals (which is what game denialists call us) and start thinking of people as visionaries, your own eyes will be open to new opportunities and bigger possibilities.

[Samseau]

And his taste in women is repulsive. But in a way, I am jealous. If that ugly troll passes his boner test, then I can only conclude he lives a happier life than I do.

[Samseau]

(04-25-2013 05:26 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

Zuckerberg is a lot like Roosh.

A lot of guys here can write as well or better than Roosh. Putting in work writing isn't why Roosh is now sitting on passive income. Lots of guys work harder at writing.

He took a chance and entered a field when there wasn't a guaranteed paycheck. He was broke. He plugged away in obscurity when no one was reading his blog. He started this forum when there were only a few posts a day.

Now the guy has a nice little fiefdom and is collecting checks all month. His income hasn't even peaked.

Some call that luck. I call it vision.

It's easier to say a man with more money or success than you is lucky. Easier on the ego. In the long run that view will lead to failure and bitterness.

I'll bet if you stop calling guys lucky or naturals (which is what game denialists call us) and start thinking of people as visionaries, your own eyes will be open to new opportunities and bigger possibilities.

Around 50% of my class in law school does not have a job right now. It's a bloodbath.

Had they gone to the same school in the 1960's they'd have a job upon graduation and well on their way to a prestigious life.

How can you say there is no luck?

[MikeCF]

(04-25-2013 05:24 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

<snip>

Depends on how you define luck.

Something like a car crash or getting certain forms of cancer...sure, bad luck.

But what if you frequent a cigar shop where you know a lot of ballers go... One day you're there and bump into somehow who has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for you.

Luck?

What if you didn't have the skills he needed?

If you were at the "right place, right time," but with the wrong skills, what happens? Nothing. You get nothing.

I say you made your own luck. Luck is the intersection of preparation and opportunity.

Mark Cuban is someone else who got "lucky." He built a huge company and sold it off to some suckers.

But if he had had no company, lacked the vision to build a company during the tech bubble, or hadn't sold it...He wouldn't be so lucky, would he?

[MikeCF]

(04-25-2013 05:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Around 50% of my class in law school does not have a job right now. It's a bloodbath.

Had they gone to the same school in the 1960's they'd have a job upon graduation and well on their way to a prestigious life.

How can you say there is no luck?

If I'm reading you correctly, you consider "forces outside of one's control" to be bad luck. Is that how you define luck?

In the 1960s they wouldn't have gotten into law school, as the law school industrial complex didn't exist.

What you're calling "luck" is what Sun Tzu and other military writers call the background or battlefield.

You can't control the background circumstance, but you can control how you respond to the circumstances.

The economy wasn't exactly booming when I graduated. But I was networking with men 10-20 years older than me. Because of that, bad career luck never hit me.

As the I Ching notes, "Be prepared, and you will be lucky," and, "When you have means but are not getting anywhere, seek appropriate associates, and you will be lucky."

There's a reason I tell guys that they should have male friends 10, 20, and 30 years older than they are. If you're friends are already established, the "bad luck" of the economy is less likely to impact you.

Someday I'll fully explain these points.

[MidniteSpecial]

(04-25-2013 05:46 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 05:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Around 50% of my class in law school does not have a job right now. It's a bloodbath.

Had they gone to the same school in the 1960's they'd have a job upon graduation and well on their way to a prestigious life.

How can you say there is no luck?

If I'm reading you correctly, you consider "forces outside of one's control" to be bad luck. Is that how you define luck?

In the 1960s they wouldn't have gotten into law school, as the law school industrial complex didn't exist.

What you're calling "luck" is what Sun Tzu and other military writers call the background or battlefield.

You can't control the background circumstance, but you can control how you respond to the circumstances.

The economy wasn't exactly booming when I graduated. But I was networking with men 10-20 years older than me. Because of that, bad career luck never hit me.

As the I Ching notes, "Be prepared, and you will be lucky," and, "When you have means but are not getting anywhere, seek appropriate associates, and you will be lucky."

There's a reason I tell guys that they should have male friends 10, 20, and 30 years older than they are. If you're friends are already established, the "bad luck" of the economy is less likely to impact you.

Someday I'll fully explain these points.

Word. That's the problem. These people go to these schools get these degrees and they think they are entitled to something. When all they leave with is massive debt from student loans they start complaining and picketing on wall st. No one is owed shit.

Harvard didn't give Fuckerherb facebook he gave it to himself.

[speakeasy]

(04-25-2013 12:20 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

Always been a fan of Elon Musk.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/...el_air.php

[AlbertoDelMuerto]

Suckerburg should have married a Russian supermodel, instead he chose a Chinese girl, shame on him!!

[Pacific]

If he married a Russian supermodel, he would be half as rich as he is now.

(04-25-2013 09:00 PM)AlbertoDelMuerto Wrote:  

Suckerburg should have married a Russian supermodel, instead he chose a Chinese girl, shame on him!!

[Samseau]

(04-25-2013 05:46 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 05:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Around 50% of my class in law school does not have a job right now. It's a bloodbath.

Had they gone to the same school in the 1960's they'd have a job upon graduation and well on their way to a prestigious life.

How can you say there is no luck?

If I'm reading you correctly, you consider "forces outside of one's control" to be bad luck. Is that how you define luck?

You are not reading me correctly.

Luck = forces outside of one's control


your race
your sex
your family
your genetics
your culture
your economy

Like Machiavelli says... 50% luck, 50% skill. This seems to me the fairest assessment of life.

[guerrilla]

Zucks is a smart guy. Very fucking smart. He hire the best and works so fucking hard. Thinks outside the box.

He just don't go for chasing tail. That's OK. Who cares.

[guerrilla]

(04-25-2013 05:33 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 05:24 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

<snip>

Depends on how you define luck.

Something like a car crash or getting certain forms of cancer...sure, bad luck.

But what if you frequent a cigar shop where you know a lot of ballers go... One day you're there and bump into somehow who has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for you.

Luck?

What if you didn't have the skills he needed?

If you were at the "right place, right time," but with the wrong skills, what happens? Nothing. You get nothing.

I say you made your own luck. Luck is the intersection of preparation and opportunity.

Mark Cuban is someone else who got "lucky." He built a huge company and sold it off to some suckers.

But if he had had no company, lacked the vision to build a company during the tech bubble, or hadn't sold it...He wouldn't be so lucky, would he?

I Ching FTW

[renotime]

(04-25-2013 05:31 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-25-2013 05:26 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

Zuckerberg is a lot like Roosh.

A lot of guys here can write as well or better than Roosh. Putting in work writing isn't why Roosh is now sitting on passive income. Lots of guys work harder at writing.

He took a chance and entered a field when there wasn't a guaranteed paycheck. He was broke. He plugged away in obscurity when no one was reading his blog. He started this forum when there were only a few posts a day.

Now the guy has a nice little fiefdom and is collecting checks all month. His income hasn't even peaked.

Some call that luck. I call it vision.

It's easier to say a man with more money or success than you is lucky. Easier on the ego. In the long run that view will lead to failure and bitterness.

I'll bet if you stop calling guys lucky or naturals (which is what game denialists call us) and start thinking of people as visionaries, your own eyes will be open to new opportunities and bigger possibilities.

Around 50% of my class in law school does not have a job right now. It's a bloodbath.

Had they gone to the same school in the 1960's they'd have a job upon graduation and well on their way to a prestigious life.

How can you say there is no luck?

I'm a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it.
Thomas Jefferson

[MrXY]

Look at her legs-I bet she can squat 350 ATG

[ghostdog]

(04-25-2013 04:52 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

I don't think guys like Zuckerberg thinks about sex much. Look at Jobs, Gates, ect. Non physical, low testosterone, slow social growth early on. Their "thrill" is building tech stuff, not getting laid. They truly are on a different level.

Yeah and a guy like him needs someone on his intellectual level. I don't know exactly how smart she is but that's likely the connection there.

[xsplat]

(04-24-2013 07:47 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

I think if American women weren't so fucked in the head Facebook or Myspace wouldn't have grown past the $100 million mark.

95% of all posts that refer to "American women" would be equally accurate just referring to "women".

Facebook is hugely popular in SE Asia.

[worldwidetraveler]

Sometimes I think the people who claim luck do so because it gives them a reason not to try.

[ghostdog]

Asian women have the biggest calves.