I worked with Bryan through the transition you describe and it’s not quite right. His script was more Step 1: get rich. Step 2: do the most impactful thing possible with the money Step 1 was really sublimated Mormonism as he’s openly talked about. Step 2 initially landed on launching kernel. All the longtermism came out of thinking he did circa 2017-18, including with me. Iirc the “remembered in 2500” possibly came up in one of our chats as a test of impactfulness more than longtermism for its own sake. The way you might measure the size of a nuclear explosion by how far away the shock wave can be felt. It’s been a while but I think our biggest frame for all this was James Carse infinite game. I haven’t really worked with him since he got on the blueprint thing, since that’s way out of my interest and wheelhouse, but from occasional casual check-ins I gather he’s still thinking about the philosophy in similar ways. Our views on AI and death have… diverged let’s say 😂
Loved this one Paul. Really great push-back on Naval's long-term games chatter. I think you are right that now it feels that almost everybody is in an 'exit economy' even when they are kind of larping about long-term games (which I fully understand).
What you call a "medium-term mediocre game (MTMG): playing a game simply to keep playing, hopefully for a few more years each time" doesn't sound mediocre at all! It sounds an awful lot like whatever game hunter-gatherers played (and millions are still playing). Which "worked" (so much better than most people think) for 200,000+ years...
I have a theory that personal struggles to find sustainable games are just reflections of the fact that we haven't found a sustainable way to live as a species after making the transition to agriculture.
Even when individuals find a way to get all their physical and psychological needs met (no small feat!), it's a private and privileged experience; the systems remain unsustainable. I wonder if that contributes to the hopelessness that can come with success. It's just a blip.
Lol yes, I got that! Just thought it was funny that a game that might well be associated with "mediocrity" in that frame is something effectively employed for 95% of human history.
What if it’s not about playing a long game, but living a long story?
But how to craft a cohesive narrative in an unpredictable world? Focus your story on what doesn't change - your nature. Like you write, "the only thing that will be sustainable (for you) over the long term is a game fundamentally aligned with your nature," and, "you must design a strategy around your unique advantages and disadvantages."
Medium-term games are delaying comparison but not gratification while experimenting to collect clues to decode your nature (confluence of your personality, strengths, passions, values/principles) and how to unleash it usefully upon the world.
Challenge to you, Paul: What's stopping you from quitting your MTMG and committing? I'd bet you my left pinkie - eff it, even my right pinkie - that you've collected enough clues to be able to stop playing around and to start aligning your "innate edge" as the narrative engine for your long-term story.
Totally. Committing to writing is huge, and I’m all for radically moderate pacing.
Reading your post, I couldn’t help but wonder: are you using the MTMG / stubbornness / patience mindset to orbit your unique gift instead of channeling it directly? Because when you’re truly aligned, even “slow” looks fast from the outside. That’s the game (and the long story) I’m talking about.
Apologies for being unclear. (Clearly writing engaging comments isn't my forte, appreciate the feedback!). I really admire the MTMG's prioritization of energy: i.e., sustainability, enjoying the process, playing your own game.
My question, put differently: As your MTMG continues and evolves, do you find yourself noticing deeper patterns in the kinds of work that generate the most positive energy or feel particularly resonant?
And if so, just curious what you think about consciously and intentionally tuning into that specific 'feel' more often. Could that be a way to make your MTMG even more robust or enjoyable, maybe crystalizing into its own kind of long game over time? This is something I've been exploring for years as part of my own MTMG and would love your thoughts.
I'm interested in people who "secure the bag" (play short-term game) then use that as leverage to play a new, longer-term game:
- early retiree exploring art or spirituality
- exited founder now on a truly pure social mission
- etc.
That's why Bryan Johnson is quite unique (beyond his general weirdness) because most of his peers either just exit the game entirely (e.g. play golf) or feel the need to continually secure more bags (e.g. most repeat founders, VCs, finance types, etc.). His approach is not for me, but his commitment to it is respectable.
Yeah. Agreed. The lack of imagination of some of these people that become self employed is sad. I think for many it’s just a way to get even more of what they want on the regular path
Great piece! I love this idea of avoiding comparison. I hadn’t considered that in this context, but it makes sense. Being properly differentiated also tends to give you an advantage in the short term game as well.
In my experience, one of the biggest tests of whether someone is playing a short/long game is how high integrity they are.
The shortest game players are literally scammers. They will not be around a minute from now so they don’t care if you know they ripped you off.
The longest game players value relationships over other short term wins bc they know that reputation matters and relationships tend to come back around (for better and worse).
So maybe one of the clearest measures of whether someone is playing short or long is how willing they are to prioritize that short term win over doing right by people. In other words, how willing they are to prioritize relationships over money now.
That isn’t to say money is bad, but there are situations in business where you can prioritize money at the expense of a relationship. Like exercising maximum leverage in a deal, instead of making it more fair for both parties.
enjoyed this Paul :) I’ve written a principle with myself of wanting to devote energy to long term games in my life like sticking to writing and creating and sharing.
I love how you defined it here “But what I think makes this a long-term game is no desire to exit.”
I think that people with real long-term plans that actually panned out are the extreme rarity. The famous stories we read over and over again are an extreme case of survivorship bias, because we never learn about the people who started into life with grand plans and then either failed or changed their mind, once presented with the reality of the situation.
If you read biographies of famous people, it's mostly the case that they moved from situation to situation and rarely would have been able to imagine where life would take them in advance. They might have a grand idea that propels them forward, but the way that idea becomes reality really is unknown to them before it happens.
So it's ultimately hard to talk about real long-term games, because it's hard to predict what will happen in the future.
Very interesting and all lines up with my experience. I’ll never forget when I interviewed for a Silicon Valley job and all they talked about was getting to the exit. I should really have a more long term strategy with my career aspirations.
I just think we're getting into semantics here. Like Venketesh seemed to allude to in his comment, the experiences you're deeming "long-term games" (i.e. Bryan Johnson's goal to never die) is more like an "infinite game" a la James Carse. I would even characterize your work as more of an infinite game, too. But maybe because you're leaving open the possibility of a life without writing online and being a "creator", you don't see your way as "infinite".
Interesting discussion, Paul. This reminds me of something a good friend of mine told me she learned as a lawyer-in-training, about negotiation. The first thing you need to ask yourself in a negotiation is: Is the other party someone I will never see again after this transaction? Or is it someone who we will continue doing business with, or might interact with again in the future?
If it's the former, then your negotiation strategy is to get everything you can and don't worry at all about the other party's interest.
If it's the latter, your strategy should include cultivation of the relationship - which means ensuring that both of you get something that you want.
Haha! Well, yes... But also, by treating people with respect and care, over the course of a 30-year career in and around Silicon Valley, I have seen again and again how long term thinking and behavior pay off, for both me and my friends.
I worked with Bryan through the transition you describe and it’s not quite right. His script was more Step 1: get rich. Step 2: do the most impactful thing possible with the money Step 1 was really sublimated Mormonism as he’s openly talked about. Step 2 initially landed on launching kernel. All the longtermism came out of thinking he did circa 2017-18, including with me. Iirc the “remembered in 2500” possibly came up in one of our chats as a test of impactfulness more than longtermism for its own sake. The way you might measure the size of a nuclear explosion by how far away the shock wave can be felt. It’s been a while but I think our biggest frame for all this was James Carse infinite game. I haven’t really worked with him since he got on the blueprint thing, since that’s way out of my interest and wheelhouse, but from occasional casual check-ins I gather he’s still thinking about the philosophy in similar ways. Our views on AI and death have… diverged let’s say 😂
Ah this is great context. Have either of you written about this anywhere else?
He’s said most of it in interviews and speeches, which is why I’m comfortable sharing. But he doesn’t really like writing up this sort of thing.
I’ll dig around
Deep research time. lol deep
I like the quote, "Comparison is the thief of joy."
That sucker has a bit to answer for!
Loved this one Paul. Really great push-back on Naval's long-term games chatter. I think you are right that now it feels that almost everybody is in an 'exit economy' even when they are kind of larping about long-term games (which I fully understand).
yeah its a lot of nihilism and cynicism
A securing-the-bag economy
Well said. Atypical perspective to what can be stated as the instantial pablum pushed out the past 5-15 years.
What you call a "medium-term mediocre game (MTMG): playing a game simply to keep playing, hopefully for a few more years each time" doesn't sound mediocre at all! It sounds an awful lot like whatever game hunter-gatherers played (and millions are still playing). Which "worked" (so much better than most people think) for 200,000+ years...
I have a theory that personal struggles to find sustainable games are just reflections of the fact that we haven't found a sustainable way to live as a species after making the transition to agriculture.
Even when individuals find a way to get all their physical and psychological needs met (no small feat!), it's a private and privileged experience; the systems remain unsustainable. I wonder if that contributes to the hopelessness that can come with success. It's just a blip.
It’s sort of a play off of the hustle mindset - where people always claim to be playing long term games and striving for perfection / excellence.
Lol yes, I got that! Just thought it was funny that a game that might well be associated with "mediocrity" in that frame is something effectively employed for 95% of human history.
What if it’s not about playing a long game, but living a long story?
But how to craft a cohesive narrative in an unpredictable world? Focus your story on what doesn't change - your nature. Like you write, "the only thing that will be sustainable (for you) over the long term is a game fundamentally aligned with your nature," and, "you must design a strategy around your unique advantages and disadvantages."
Medium-term games are delaying comparison but not gratification while experimenting to collect clues to decode your nature (confluence of your personality, strengths, passions, values/principles) and how to unleash it usefully upon the world.
Challenge to you, Paul: What's stopping you from quitting your MTMG and committing? I'd bet you my left pinkie - eff it, even my right pinkie - that you've collected enough clues to be able to stop playing around and to start aligning your "innate edge" as the narrative engine for your long-term story.
i am committed - I'm going to keep writing - just at a slower pace work-wise than others
Totally. Committing to writing is huge, and I’m all for radically moderate pacing.
Reading your post, I couldn’t help but wonder: are you using the MTMG / stubbornness / patience mindset to orbit your unique gift instead of channeling it directly? Because when you’re truly aligned, even “slow” looks fast from the outside. That’s the game (and the long story) I’m talking about.
I don’t really get the difference.
Apologies for being unclear. (Clearly writing engaging comments isn't my forte, appreciate the feedback!). I really admire the MTMG's prioritization of energy: i.e., sustainability, enjoying the process, playing your own game.
My question, put differently: As your MTMG continues and evolves, do you find yourself noticing deeper patterns in the kinds of work that generate the most positive energy or feel particularly resonant?
And if so, just curious what you think about consciously and intentionally tuning into that specific 'feel' more often. Could that be a way to make your MTMG even more robust or enjoyable, maybe crystalizing into its own kind of long game over time? This is something I've been exploring for years as part of my own MTMG and would love your thoughts.
Yeah the energy is changing all the time - this is a big topic in my new book
It’s sort of how I’ve been approaching everything for years. I don’t really do anything except follow the energy.
I just don’t care about goals or outcomes them
I'm interested in people who "secure the bag" (play short-term game) then use that as leverage to play a new, longer-term game:
- early retiree exploring art or spirituality
- exited founder now on a truly pure social mission
- etc.
That's why Bryan Johnson is quite unique (beyond his general weirdness) because most of his peers either just exit the game entirely (e.g. play golf) or feel the need to continually secure more bags (e.g. most repeat founders, VCs, finance types, etc.). His approach is not for me, but his commitment to it is respectable.
Yeah. Agreed. The lack of imagination of some of these people that become self employed is sad. I think for many it’s just a way to get even more of what they want on the regular path
So true...
Now: "Wow, I can do anything I want!"
Later: "I'm just going to go back to the one narrow thing I've been doing my whole life."
Great piece! I love this idea of avoiding comparison. I hadn’t considered that in this context, but it makes sense. Being properly differentiated also tends to give you an advantage in the short term game as well.
In my experience, one of the biggest tests of whether someone is playing a short/long game is how high integrity they are.
The shortest game players are literally scammers. They will not be around a minute from now so they don’t care if you know they ripped you off.
The longest game players value relationships over other short term wins bc they know that reputation matters and relationships tend to come back around (for better and worse).
So maybe one of the clearest measures of whether someone is playing short or long is how willing they are to prioritize that short term win over doing right by people. In other words, how willing they are to prioritize relationships over money now.
That isn’t to say money is bad, but there are situations in business where you can prioritize money at the expense of a relationship. Like exercising maximum leverage in a deal, instead of making it more fair for both parties.
good stuff. I think the stubbornness part might resonate with @positive_loop
enjoyed this Paul :) I’ve written a principle with myself of wanting to devote energy to long term games in my life like sticking to writing and creating and sharing.
I love how you defined it here “But what I think makes this a long-term game is no desire to exit.”
I think that people with real long-term plans that actually panned out are the extreme rarity. The famous stories we read over and over again are an extreme case of survivorship bias, because we never learn about the people who started into life with grand plans and then either failed or changed their mind, once presented with the reality of the situation.
If you read biographies of famous people, it's mostly the case that they moved from situation to situation and rarely would have been able to imagine where life would take them in advance. They might have a grand idea that propels them forward, but the way that idea becomes reality really is unknown to them before it happens.
So it's ultimately hard to talk about real long-term games, because it's hard to predict what will happen in the future.
Very interesting and all lines up with my experience. I’ll never forget when I interviewed for a Silicon Valley job and all they talked about was getting to the exit. I should really have a more long term strategy with my career aspirations.
I just think we're getting into semantics here. Like Venketesh seemed to allude to in his comment, the experiences you're deeming "long-term games" (i.e. Bryan Johnson's goal to never die) is more like an "infinite game" a la James Carse. I would even characterize your work as more of an infinite game, too. But maybe because you're leaving open the possibility of a life without writing online and being a "creator", you don't see your way as "infinite".
i still dont think most people are living that way
I like the idea of "infinite games" as well. Where the ultimate goal is to keep the game going and I think that jives well with a Pathless Path.
Interesting discussion, Paul. This reminds me of something a good friend of mine told me she learned as a lawyer-in-training, about negotiation. The first thing you need to ask yourself in a negotiation is: Is the other party someone I will never see again after this transaction? Or is it someone who we will continue doing business with, or might interact with again in the future?
If it's the former, then your negotiation strategy is to get everything you can and don't worry at all about the other party's interest.
If it's the latter, your strategy should include cultivation of the relationship - which means ensuring that both of you get something that you want.
The latter is a long-term game.
A reminder to be wary of lawyers too
Haha! Well, yes... But also, by treating people with respect and care, over the course of a 30-year career in and around Silicon Valley, I have seen again and again how long term thinking and behavior pay off, for both me and my friends.
I suspect the more interesting frame is long term practices vs. long term games with outcomes
There may not be an 'exit' to go to.
If you start investing in your 20s, you'll achieve huge returns!
What most such people don't realize is that it works the same way for books, art, and culture, the kinds of things you'll *actually* need if you FIRE.