I reject the addenda and friendly advice shared by candide's shared essay dropping out of society. There is no merit to grinning and bearing it while learning financial responsibility. I've known people from rich families. Many were deep devotees of Rich Dad Poor Dad The Boardgame *I imagine the author I'm reponding to also rejects this. The moral of that board game is that if you loyally support incumbent big businesses with the daily milling of your soul, you will graduate from the rat race and become a rent seeker (just a few more years) (just a few more!). In that game, people who are janitors or other low class jobs are lucky, because they can become rent seekers faster due to lower keeping-up-with-the-Jones social expectations. I've been thinking about the problems with software. Software is in great shape, fantastic really. OpenBSD, even some GNU (or even nonGNU), if you can stomach some Google, 9front... There is everything you could want ready for you, and it is awesome. The government here spills money into financial speculators advertising that their recently hired medium.com parrot arby's employees will educate the lazy and stupid poor people into Rich Dad Poor Dad The Boardgame janitors through a government certificate in Microsoft Powershell. Didn't work, they're still morally bad and unmotivated, but the government issued an endorsement to the financial venture, well there will need to be a business that trains the trainers in a government accredited training course... This seems paradoxical. Why when things are- magnificent, is this training pyramid-of-garbage scheme (sorry, multilevel marketing-of-garbage scheme backed by government endorsed loans to the victims) happening? And I think the answer is that software is like food. To put two halves into this metaphor McDonalds sells a lot of burgers, and they are surprisingly not cheap. The deeply evil and lazy people two paragraphs above in general are fantastic at making food compared to McDonalds. But people buy McDonalds instead of paying the unmotivated and stupid good and local cooks the same damn amount for obviously better food. At least where I write this, for one it would be deeply illegal to either pay one of the poor people, or for the poor person to sell a food product or service, or for the food to be called food in the protected legal sense which is really the second half of the metaphor. At least here it is not explicitly illegal to privately prepare and eat food yourself in many cases, analogous to how we are on a ~, and generally have some version of nicely set up, powerful, inexpensive boxen. This was by way of saying that grin-and-bear-it, live-for-the-weekends, don't-be-an-activist are solutions that are not for our state of affairs. Shit is real.