I saw the article, but closed it when it started talking about something called “NFTweets”.

As far as I can tell, the lesson is, “I might die, so I should work on NFTweets, which has some shot at giving me financial independence before I die, so I can spend more time on my true passion, which is watching Marvel movies and drinking craft beer.”

I made the last part up… apologies for the cynicism, I just observe that the kind of people who fill up their time with hustle to make money often don’t know what to do with their time once they’ve made enough money to be independent. Retirement takes some people by surprise. No judgment for how people want to live their lives, but if you plan on spending your retirement not working, you should probably get some preview of that beforehand so you know what you like.

A lot of people want to spend more time with others after they retire. It turns out that if you spend all your time at work, and you retire, you don’t have a lot of other people in your social network to spend time with. Hence, Marvel movies and craft beer.

Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here.

Edit: when I replied, the entire text of your comment was:

I saw the article, but closed it when it started talking about something called “NFTweets”.

I appreciate that you expanded it, but please don't do stealth edits that deprive existing replies of their context. That's not fair to other users—not the replier (whose comment's meaning is now lost) nor the readers (who can no longer understand the thread properly). The simple fix is to mark your edit as an edit, like I did here.

I realized it was unsubstantive. Sometimes I delete the comment and rewrite it, sometimes I decide to write in some extra text. It’s a judgment call which one I do. My thought process is, “Oh, that is a bit too unclear, now that I read it, isn’t it?” If I think it just needs a small clarification, I’ll edit in the clarification. If it needs major clarification, I’ll delete and resubmit.

I don’t always make the right call. I know that. Sometimes a minor addition blows up into a massive chunk of text, because I realize the “minor addition” isn’t enough to make the comment stand on its own, so it needs a “minor” addition, and I make another judgment call. Reminds me of “simple” changes at work that balloon into massive, quarter-long projects. It sneaks up on me. Sentences and paragraphs that look great have a way of seeming woefully deficient once you hit that “submit” button.

I firmly believe that the ephemerality of context is inevitable, and live with it. I understand that this is my personal take on context on HN… is context ephemeral? Or should we do what we can to save it? How much effort do we do to save context in the moment so it can be decided?

My personal strategy of dealing with this is on HN to quote the parent comment if I feel the context is important. On my blog, I don’t just link to web pages, but copy in quotes.

If you feel strongly about this, I would love to hear that elaborated, although I know you’re busy.

Brusque is not the same as unsubstantive. I see value in being forewarned that there will be shilling for NFTs, and I'm certain I'm not alone in that. It changes everything about the way you read the article.

From the article - "how many of my remaining days will I wake up and ask, “What do I want to do today?” I had a stretch of almost a year pre-Gusto where I got to ask that question most days. Glorious. I want more of those"

It sounds like the author did, indeed, get a preview of their retirement life and found it fulfilling, and now they're working to get back there.