#22 Tim Ferriss

Tim Ferriss joined James Altucher to talk about self-experimentation, asking the difficult questions, and what the heck happened to his television show. If you don’t know, Ferriss is a blogger, author of books like The 4-Hour Workweek, and online maven.

James begins their interview by telling Ferriss he had a hard time coming up with a single word to describe him and settled on possible in that Ferriss believes so many things are just that. “Some of the impossibles are negotiable.” Ferriss tells James. For example, learning how to speak a language isn’t as hard as people make it out to be. What you need to do, Ferriss suggests, is find people that are succeeding in that thing, that shouldn’t be. Take past guest Nassim Taleb as an example and his career as a writer. Taleb’s books are hard to get through, laborious tomes that include references to Lebanese wine, Greek Gods, and obscure financial products. He covers the same general areas of finance as someone like Michael Lewis, but Lewis’s books are like cotton candy to the the hard tack that Taleb packs. But, Taleb is a successful author. Ferriss would ask, why is that? Why in a field of business books that are short and light, does someone who writes long and dense succeed?

If you find an outlier like this, Ferriss says, you should try to be around them. For Ferriss this meant getting involved in Silicon Valley. There he was able to “learn before you earn.” It wasn’t about moving west (young man) and starting a startup at the start. It was about going west to slowly build up the skills he needed. This is a good attitude, James says, because “incremental things compound.”

Once Ferriss moved he began to develop loose ties. Adam Grant (episode #73) told James that these are the best types of ties for our careers. Loose ties are broad, close ties are deep, and it’s the former that can help us connect to new areas for work and friendship. One of the connections Ferriss made was with Jack Canfield (episode #90) who helped mentor him and help with his books.

Ferriss tells James that he’s used an experimental model for learning anything; deconstruction, selection, sequencing, and stakes.

Ferriss DSSS

Deconstruction. Take something large and break it down into its smallest parts. Stephen Dubner (episode #20)  advocated this too because small problem have smaller answers and often fit better. Gretchen Rubin (episode #97) told James about her friend that hated her job and couldn’t be happy while working there. After a few conversations with Rubin, she realized it wasn’t her job she hated, it was her commute, and by adding an audiobook as the soundtrack to her drive home she was a lot happier.

Ferriss uses the internet and interviews to collect all the data he needs, looking for anomalies. If Sherlock Holmes was a lifehacker, he would be Tim Ferriss. There are two interesting tips that Ferriss gives here, first you don’t need to find the best expert to talk to, any expert would do. In the interview he says that talking to a gold medalist after the most recent olympics would be difficult. However, a silver medalist from ten years ago would be much easier to track down. Second, find an outlet to write for. Pitch a story to a newspaper or popular blog and see if someone there will let you write it under their direction. Then you can include your own questions about the thing you are trying to discover and address what the outlet needs. “It’s about a foot in the door” Ferriss says to find the anomalies. You don’t want the geniuses, because as Austin Kleon (episode #19) “Genius can’t teach you anything.”

You can also deconstruct ways you might fail. For example, if you want to learn the guitar, think about how you might fail to practice. Want to be kind to someone, how might you get around it when they push your buttons. One way to do is this to conduct a “premortem”:

“When the organization has almost come to an important decision but has not formally committed itself, Gary Klein proposes gathering for a brief session a group of individuals who are knowledgeable about the decision. The premise of the session is a short speech: ‘Imagine that we are a year into the future. We implemented the plan as it now exists. The outcome was a disaster. Please take 5 to 10 minutes to write a brief history of that disaster.’”

Selection. “If you’re trying to learn anything, you have to test assumptions and the way you test the obvious is by asking seemingly absurd questions” Ferriss says. It’s closely related to what Peter Thiel (episode #43) notes about finding secrets. Thiel wrote, “the best place to look for secrets is where no one else is looking” and “every great business is built around a secret that’s hidden from the outside.” Note Sam Shank (episode #78) as an example. Getting a hotel room wasn’t considered a problem with the plethora of travel sites available, but hidden in that ease was a complex condition, getting a hotel tonight. That’s the secret that Shank found.

Sequencing. Ferriss says this is the “secret sauce” to learning anything new. Ask yourself, what if I did these things in a new order? He gives the example of chess player Josh Waitzkin learning chess closings before using chess openings. About this Waitzkin says that he became more comfortable in the chaos of a chessboard rather than the structure. If he opponents were focused on getting an opening right, and didn’t, they fell into a position where they didn’t know what to do. This happened – albeit accidentally – to Scott Adams (episode #47) who learned formal drawing much later in his career than other artists. Instead, Adams built up his material banks by working in corporations.

Stakes. People have to build consequences into their life, Ferris says, but not unrealistic ones. “People have a nebulous fear of a worst case scenario.” Ferriss tells James, and we don’t need to have that. He suggests instead that people take a three step approach to solve this problem.

FearresettingFerriss1. What are the worst things, however absurd that can happen?

  1. How can I minimize those each thing from happening?

  2. What can I do to get back to where I am now?

There are a spectrum of options, Ferriss tells James, not just success and failure. Mark Ford (episode #102) mentioned the same thing in regards to negotiations. Often there is an overlap in positions between two parties, find those overlaps he says. We tend to quantify things in listicles or charts but life is more like the broad strokes of a paint brush that colors a canvas but doesn’t stay in the lines.

Long before Ferriss was making television shows or writing books, he started a company called BrainQUICKEN but even this wasn’t all that risky. The stakes for it were low because “I did not just leap into the ether and cross my fingers” he tells James. Rather he was figuring things out for himself, taking the supplements he thought about selling and getting good results. When the product it wasn’t selling, Ferriss shifted the focus of it to a pre-workout aid rather than cognitive enhancement.

The conversation then turned to talking about writing a book and began with an interesting idea, testing your title. Both James and Ferriss mention that they tested multiple titles of their books and it speaks to their openness to getting things right rather than being right. A lot of times we think we know what’s best but many times we at the very least, overestimate the scope of our conclusions. In one example, a military official was asked to gauge the leadership credentials of a soldiers in training after an hour of observation. To an outsider like you and me, we might roll our eyes at how much one can really understand about that, but insiders tend not to. In fact, if you were the insider you would probably overweight your observations and their validity.

It’s been shown time and again that this doesn’t work for things like stocks. In one study, the correlation between the success of wealth advisors was zero. That is, if you took someone that made 15% returns in year one, you should not expect them to make similar returns in any other year. But if you talked to those stock pickers, they would spin great tales about why they were successful or not.

This relates to book titles in this way. In both the example of choosing army leaders or picking winning stocks, we think we have good intuition but we probably don’t. We think we know what a book title should look like, but we probably don’t. If we at least open to the idea that others may know better, we’ll gather valuable information.

Actually writing the book took a lot of work. Ferriss started by taking notes. He tested material in a class he spoke with. He continued his relationship with Jack Canfield and eventually The 4-Hour Workweek was published.

The core message to all of his books, Ferriss tells James, is to “take a completely lateral move” ask “have you ever tested this” and don’t believe any answer that sounds like well, we’ve always done it that way.

If you do create things, Ferriss advices, “focus on the people who get it, not the people who don’t get it.” He suggests watching this clip, from the end of Ratatouille.

In many ways the work of a critic is easy, we risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgement. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.”

Ferriss has also spoken about how to deal with haters. It can be hard though. Amanda Palmer (episode #82) and James both said that a negative comment or review can stick with them for days. In his interviews, Brian Koppelman made it sound like an actual metamorphosis to go from a creative place and vulnerable place, to one where he could be strong and handle the critics (kind or not).

Ferriss’s criticisms birthed from the land of maligned mathematicians who said that Ferriss didn’t actually work four hours each week, he worked much more than that. “The point of the book,” he tells James, “is to maximize your per hour output” and then do what you want with that extra time.

It reminds of Mr. Money Mustache, an early retiree who focuses on living a life of “badassity.” Part of MMM’s ethos is to do stuff he likes, like building houses and writing on his blog. For each of these things he earns money from it and the critics like collectively shout “Ah Ha! Gotcha! You aren’t really retired.”

But even in these challenges we can find some good, Ferriss says, because they expand our sphere of comfort. Even starting his podcast was a derivative of a challenge. He filmed the Tim Ferriss Experiment but the show was stuck in television limbo while the teams at Discovery Channel and Ferriss figured out the final details. Rather than dawdle, Ferriss started hosting podcasts and he’s had some good ones. His advice is to “focus on the content first and foremost.” Check out Kevin Kelly’s (episode #96) 1,000 True Fans post, Ferriss suggests as a way to get an idea. Gabriel Weinberg (episode #54) told James that this influenced him as he was building DuckDuckGo.

It’s these small pieces, the essential parts of learning, the 1,000 true fans, and a “handful of posts have made my blog.” Ferriss says but he never knows which ones will resonate the most. Jairek Robinson (episode #96) told James the same thing Ferriss mentions, noting that it’s hard to figure out exactly what pieces will matter the most to people.

Ferriss hopes that his television show will feature some things that inspire, but admits to James that “if you’re going to question the impossible, you’re not always gonna come out looking like a superhero.”

The podcasting suites Ferriss he says, because it matches what he wants; digital and on-demand content. Plus, “it feels good to have complete dictatorial control.”

Besides podcasting and book writing, Ferriss also advises companies and tells an interesting story about getting in. He was living out west when an opportunity to invest in Twitter became available. He did, but not just for financial fortunes, but for the uncommon connections. Being at Twitter gave him access and relationships.

Ferriss wanted more, so he reached out to his blog audience to ask for advice on other companies that might be worth investing in. There he found Spotifiy and Evernote and this is the key to having a great blog. Taking time to connect with people is how blogs become business. About monetizing, James says, “the worse answer is advertising” and Ferriss follows up with, “if you’re in a rush to do it, it’s not going to work.”

And maybe it’s not the money that you need.

“Money is an intermediate, it is wampum. It is something that you trade for possession, experiences, access to interesting people, resources. You don’t need to have money as that intermediate necessarily.”

A.J. Jacobs is doing this (accidentally or not) is his great family reunion project. He couldn’t buy a picture with a former president, but, when he’s your cousin anything goes.

The interview ends with Ferriss telling James about his investing advice, and relaying heuristic he learned from Chris Sacca. Does the person you are about to partner with pass the beer test and mall test? That is, would you have a beer with this person for fun and would you talk to this person if you were passing them in the mall? These answers don’t have to be yes, but it helps when they are.

Thanks for reading. If I took something the wrong way, transcribed something incorrectly, or tested the wrong axiom let me know. @MikeDariano.


#102 Mark Ford

Update: January 2016. I don’t trust this post. When I first wrote it up I had a doubt that everything was legitimate, but reasoned with myself that even if it wasn’t,  everyone could teach us something. Well, I still doubt most of what Ford said and don’t think that what he has to teach is worth learning. I could be wrong, but don’t think I am. 

Mark Ford joined James Altucher to talk about working, finding your passion, and what exactly “intrapreneur” means. Ford is the author of a number of books under the pen name Michael Masterson.

Right off the bat James asks Ford about his failure rate and Ford notes that “it doesn’t seem like I’ve had a lot of failures,” but in retrospect knows he’s probably biased. Being aware of his own biases puts him in unique company. Peter Thiel (episode #43) talked about the “investor class” biases against Facebook – and maybe AirBnB – and says he figures this in to his evaluations. Another past guest, Nassim Taleb wrote about biases in his book, Fooled by Randomness.

Ford says that when he has lost money, it’s been in areas he hasn’t understood, like investing. About money, T. Harv Eker (episode #100) told James, “Earning it and keeping it in your business are two different things.” To which James responded, “A lot of people are good at what they do, but when they first have money, they’re not good at having money.” In his book, Money, Tony Robbins (episode #62) wrote, “the most important piece of advice every investor I talked to echoed was, ‘Don’t lose money!'”

To really make money, Ford tells James, “Is to avoid risky things.” He says that becoming a doctor would be a good way to make money because of the low risk. Taleb also writes about this, when he encourages people to think about average lives. Taleb’s train of thought is that rare events are hard to figure out so we should not try to predict them, but avoid the worst of them. Consider two paths, the career truck driver who wins the lottery and the career dentist who does not. For each of them their average career earnings are the same. If you played out their lives one thousand times, the dentist would have an average income of 150K. If you take the lottery winning truck driver though, his average income over those lives would also be 150K but in only one of his thousand lives would he have an income over 50K. Taleb’s conclusion (and I think Ford’s too) is that we should be cognizant of the areas of randomness and luck and do our best to guard against building successes on those grounds.

Take James Altucher as another example. In any given life if he’s a web developer and investor he’ll probably do okay if you played out his life over and over. If however, he was a web developer and investor who was hooked on cocaine then there would be some lives where things don’t work out for him and some that do. In the cocaine filled life he gets fewer “successes.”

Ford tells James that very few of the businesses he’s been in follow any sort of passion he’s had, “Generally, I think if you turn your passion into a business, you’re going to lose the bet.” Austin Kleon (episode #19) told James that every job is a job, meaning that no job is perfect. I was reminded of this while reading Maria Popova’s (episode #89) Brain Pickings one day and thought how nice it must be to read and muse and write. But Maria has a huge website to manage and has to understand the technical parts of it. She has to post on days she doesn’t feel like posting. She has to depend on that site to put food on her table. She may be writing about Walden Pond, but she’s certainly not living there.

One problem we have, Ford says, is that when we follow our passion, we start to see the warts that our passion has. This is one of the topics in our current book club, so I won’t spoil the surprise, but will share this story from Time.com where another person tries (and fails) to start a yoga business. Following your passion is perilous. (You can join the book club for free until April 5th).

Then Ford tells James that an intrapreneur is someone within a company who pushes inventive ideas. It can sometimes be  better to be an intrapreneur of a big organization than the entrepreneur of a non-existent one. One advantages to this include, that it’s easier to become wealthy in a smaller company.

Part of this realization, Ford tells James, came during a Dale Carniege course. Ford had to list his ten goals for live, then whittle the list down to a single one. “If I chose one it felt like I was giving up another.” Ford tells James. But then he realized that if he chose one and didn’t like it, he could always give it up. Adam Carolla (episode #25) likes to joke about when they do this in films and they can’t go back. “Yes you can!” Carolla will muse in his Carolla-road-rage, you just turn the car around and let the bad guys win, go back, go back. Nothing’s final and nothing’s your one thing. As my daughters are singing at the moment, “The sun will come out tomorrow, So you gotta hang on, ’til tomorrow, come what may! Tomorrow, tomorrow, I love ya, tomorrow, You’re always a day away!”

I digress, back to our other car-themed-last-name-guest.

So Ford goes back to work, thinking about how to get rich (his goal of choice) and realizes that the time he’s spent working hasn’t produced much of anything. He was spending half his time on creating a style manual for the company he was working for to us, when in fact, it didn’t really matter. That’s when he switched to a Pareto Principle of thinking.

Once he focused on his specific skills and effort, Ford turned his attention to the newsletter company in general. It wasn’t “how respectable they (the newsletters) are from a literary point-of-view or a technical point-of-view, but were they answering questions that were solving problems for people in the industry.” Ford told James.

One of the newsletters he worked on had some aggressive marking using direct mail. One example of this, though not from Ford, is that 100 houses in a neighborhood each get a mailer suggesting they buy a “hot stock.” Only the con is this, House 1 gets a letter suggesting Company A, House 2 gets a letter promoting Company B, and so on down the street. Now, after one month half the companies go down in value, but half go up. In month two it happens again. After six months of mailings you’ll have two houses that have received letters about a stock for companies K and Y that have gone up each month, just as the letter said! Well, you think, maybe there’s something to this. There is, it’s a con math who knows his math.

Ford didn’t admit to this, but does say they were “looking at what was working” and there is a tone of remorse about some of the things he did in business.

Around the twenty-seven minute mark Ford tells James the “greatest negotiation story” which includes his boss’s father-in-law and a final negotiation twist.

It doesn’t sound like Ford has engaged in any business like this as of late, angling instead to be a “cool old person” who is “relaxed” and “everyone loves.” I couldn’t’ quite congeal my thoughts on this, but there’s certainly a shift in mindset as one ages. It’s been mentioned by James and others to focus less on money and accomplishments and more on the people around you, your health, and your peace with life. I wonder if we could just jump straight to this without going through the crazier parts of life. If you’ve figured this out, let me know.

James rounds out the interview asking Ford what he would suggest someone in a cubicle might do to change their life. Before Ford’s advice, we have to flashback to the interview with T. Harv Eker.  Ford says that we need to think in terms of having multiple incomes for life rather than just one. We don’t have those, Eker argues, because of the invisible scripts in our lives. We are never taught to think in this way, instead choosing the safety of a single job. (If you want to read more on this, Thou Shall Prosper was the first book that opened my eyes to this idea.) Tucker Max mentions this in episode #80.

Ford then gives two pieces of advice.

  1. Figure out how to become the most valuable employee in your area of work.
  2. Decide if your business is one where an entrepreneur can thrive.

Each of these areas falls directly into themes for our book club book of April. In that book, Cal Newport, writes about how important “career capital” is, how to figure out what type of capital is valuable to you, and how to invest that capital. For an immediate mindset change, T. Harv Eker suggested that people who hate their jobs, think of their jobs as training for the next one, a paid opportunity to begin building skills they can use to start out on their own.

If you decide to do this, Ford suggests looking at what area of a business you are in. There are three groups he tells James, “sales and marketing, product production, and management.” Only in that first group will you build the skills that really matter. “What you need to understand,” Ford says, “is how your business makes money.” Just being the best person you can be won’t work. It would like being a soccer or hockey player and deciding that you want to be goalie and trying your hardest to do that. The problem is, there’s only one goalie on each team. Instead you need to find the skills that get you on the field/ice.

Thanks a lot for reading. If I skipped, snarked, or simply overstated something, do let me know. @MikeDariano

Four extra notes.

  • James said “Everybody needs to express their ideas.” and that really stuck with me. This is why starting a blog is such common advice, because it’s an easy chance for us to practice expressing our ideas.
  • I relaunched my 21 Days to a Stronger Idea Muscle Program. Rather than a single pdf (which you still get, and with added images) there is a daily email drip. Each drop into your inbox gives you a prompt and explains the value of idea lists using research on habits, cognition, and neurosciences. It’s a pay-what-you-want option that I would love some feedback on. Find out more here, Gum.co/ideamuscle.
  • Finally, I went back and forth on including this, but it’s my blog and it’s what I feel, be wary of the advice of some guests. The Oxford Club that Ford mentions doesn’t smell right and if a flier for this arrived at my Grandmother’s house I would immediately throw it away. I don’t know if the current form of The Oxford Club reflects what Ford started but his marketing seemed to range from aggressive to malicious. I would guess from the interview that he regrets some of this, but it left me with a cautious feeling.
  • Again, the book club details are here.

#47 Scott Adams

One my favorite books of the last two years was How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big: Kind of the Story of My Life by Scott Adams. I even linked to the story about Dilbert not succeeding until the death of a regional salesman in my notes from the Chris Guillebeau interview. Adams is on the podcast to promote his new book, Go Add Value Someplace Else, which comes out October 28th, and gives you just enough time to read How to Fail first.

To start the interview Altucher and Adams dive into why self-help books don’t work. People are comfortable in their habits and if a self-help book requires changing those, then that’s a much harder thing. Habits are a great evolutionary advantage that lets us give attention to things that are more important. Unless we get into the wrong ones. If you want to change habits two good places are The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg or the free Tiny Habits course by Dr. BJ Fogg.

When talking about the advice he gave in How to Fail Adams says, “I tried to make a big point in mine that I wasn’t giving you a recipe, because everybody’s case is different, but rather I was giving you an example—a template, if you will—that if I did this and this was what turned out, that maybe you could compare that to what you’re doing and what other people are doing and find something that works for you.” This is the same structure that Melissa and Dallas Hartwig give in It Starts With Food, an introduction to paleo-like eating and #2 nutrition cookbook on Amazon.

After this the two dive into system versus goal thinking. Altucher says, “So what I really liked in this book—and I really subscribe to this as well, this idea that goals are bullshit. And you say live by systems; I call it something similar. I say live by themes.” Adams says much the same, in How to Fail he writes: “To put it bluntly, goals are for losers. That’s literally true most of the time. For example, if your goal is to lose ten pounds, you will spend every moment until you reach the goal.” And when you do, then what? “If you achieve your goal, you celebrate and feel terrific, but only until you realize you just lost the thing that gave you purpose and direction.”
For more on the book How to Fail, check out the writings that Shane Parrish has done at Farnam Street.

Adams also talks about his system for each morning, one he’s able to do while still wearing pajamas. Like the stories of other writers in Daily Rituals, he does his most challenging work in the mornings. “I get up around 6:00, get my coffee, and then I usually either read my e-mail or maybe write a blog post on Dilbert.com or do something. Then I kind of get into my cartooning, usually do about two comics on a typical weekday in rough form—I write them and I draw them in rough form. And then sometime later at night or the afternoon when there’s some slow time, I do the finished art, when I don’t have to use the brainpower.” Researcher Daniel Levitin might applaud the use of brain power, because that implies it will run out and need recharged.

Before Adams was able to doodle in his pajamas, he did it at 4:30am before leaving for his job at Pacific Bell. While there he twice got passed over for promotions because he wasn’t a woman and that led him to think, “Well, what could I do that’s not in corporate America where I could do something where my talent alone makes a difference, or better yet move to somewhere where being who I am is an advantage instead of a disadvantage?”

Adams settled on pursuing cartooning. He saw an ad on TV and wrote the the promoter Jack Cassidy, who suggested some resources. Adams tried to write cartoons for magazines and failed. Upon this gave up, having given it a good shot. Then a year later he got another letter from Cassidy telling him not to give up. This reminded me of the letter Carl Sagan wrote to a young Neil deGrasse Tyson encouraging him to study astronomy and even inviting him to his lab. It’s amazing the power little words of encouragement can have. Adams tried his hand at cartooning again, and failed again, only better.“I I got rejected” he reasoned, “I would be rejected at a higher level, which would feel like progress in a way.”

One thing Adams rejects is the idea to follow your passion. Cal Newport is on the same page, suggesting you just get good at something. For Adams “getting good” meant redefining the pool of talent. He wasn’t great in business, but was decent was someone who could draw. Beyond that, he was a funny business man who could draw and understood a nascent internet. That specialization meant that there were very few – maybe no – people like him, and consequently made him the best. And cartooning was only one of many good ideas. “I like to think of life as like a—kind of a strange kind of a casino with a slot machine. Instead of a slot machine that takes your money every time you lose, it’s free. You just pull all day long. So in that sense you can’t control when the luck happens, but you can guarantee that you’ll get a payoff, because you just keep pulling.”

In his book How to Fail, Adams also talks about the energy that people bring into each day, something that generated a lot of feedback. “The two criticisms I got in the book were opposites. One was, ‘Don’t include that stuff about diet and exercise and energy in a book about success,’ and another group saying, ‘You’re saying things that are too obvious; we already know this.’” Sleep for example is really important. In a study reported by Jennifer Senior, parents who got more than 7 hours compared with those who got less than 6 hours had the same difference in well-being compared to those who made $90,000 and those who made $30,000.

Altucher and Adams move the conversation to what Twitter might have looked like an investment pitch, and both agree it would have been awful. Twitter has worked out so far, and reminded me of what Nassim Taleb talked about with Altucher. Taleb was marveling at the book publishing and movie industries, where the companies have realized they can’t predict what will be successful, and instead aim for a long tail approach, cashing in on one or two blockbusters.

As evidence to keep trying other things, Adams explains what Calendar Tree is. It’s hard to remember a time when times weren’t a clickable link that automatically populated in your calendar. But at one time they didn’t. David Pogue was marveling at similar calendar features in an episode of the Cool Tools podcast earlier this year.

A little later in the interview, Adams compliments Altucher about his writing, saying “the only reason that I agreed to this podcast is because I’ve read your writing. So I’m here because I’m a fan of your writing; otherwise I wouldn’t be here.” This situation is what Adam Grant would describe as a pair of Givers helping each other. In his book, Give and Take, Grant recognizes three hats people can wear; giver, matcher, or taker and he makes the case that givers ultimately succeed the most. For Adams and Altucher the explanation might be that because Altucher gives away so much of his writing without asking for anything in return, Adams is happy to help out.

Altucher goes on to praise Adams for his article, How to Get a Real Education, saying it was “hanging up near my desk because it’s so in line with how I think about education.”

The pair propose different overalls of government, most of which sound nice – and wishful. For more of this check out President Me by Adam Carolla.

The resume Scott Adams had to get to where he is is complex and varied and one of a kind. A bit like his popular character. If you enjoyed this interview I can’t recommend his book How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big: Kind of the Story of My Life enough.

#101 Dr. Moises Naim

Dr. Moises Naim joined James Altucher to talk about the end of power, what that means for individuals, and how you can get a seat at the table. Naim’s book is The End of Power: From Boardrooms to Battlefields and Churches to States, Why Being In Charge Isn’t What It Used to Be. The central idea to the book and interview is that the established players in any area, from entertainment to politics, have a much harder time holding their relative position.

The list of fans beyond James is quite a group. Mark Zuckerberg made it the first book in his 2015 book club. Bill Clinton too has recommended it.

Naim tells James that “power has become easier to acquire, harder to use, and easier to lose.” Look at Vladimir Putin, Naim says. A few years ago he was considered the most powerful man in the world. Now, he’s dealing with economic restlessness, brittle relations with Germany, and he disappears for a week while the world wonders where he is.

I’ll throw another example into the mix, Funny or Die. In 2007 the website released “Pearl the Landlord.” Adam McKay’s young daughter plays the landlord that Will Ferrell needs to ask for a rent extension. It cost nothing but time and went on to become one of the most popular videos of the year and launched the company. Now they share an office building with Oprah.

Or consider Google, a force that seems so dominant its power will never decay. But, if you look back in history, Naim says, you see that the same thing would be said about Microsoft. There’s always been a technology company that’s ruled until they haven’t. Looking back to look forward is one of The 5 Elements of Effective Thinking.

“Whenever you face an issue—whether an area of study or a decision about a future path—consider what came before. Wonder how the issue at hand landed in front of you. Ask where and what it was yesterday, a month ago, a year ago, and so forth. Everything, everyone has a history and evolves.”

This, and challenging our assumptions are two mental models that Kevin Kelly (episode #96) applies. “What if” he asked Tim Ferriss, “the things we assume to be true, won’t be.” Kelly specifically cites Moore’s Law, what if for some crazy reason, the raw materials that we use in computers don’t work anymore, then what?

The new key in thinking isn’t power, Naim says, it’s that “you have to have something special. You have to have a special attribute.” Peter Thiel (episode #43) might call this finding a secret and he writes, “every great business is built around a secret that’s hidden from the outside.”

Naim says that there is a movement in part from the growing middle class worldwide. Billions of people are moving from a class of poverty to a class of spending in places like Thailand, Peru, and China and “when this happens there are profound changes in their aspirations, expectations, and motivations” he tells James.

There are three revolutions at work, more, mobility, and mentality.

  • More. “We live in a world in which there is more of everything.” Naim tells James. There are more options, diseases, places to eat, and things to do. Like a chemistry experiment that’s stable when you add elements becomes less stable when you add more, so goes the world.
  • Mobility. It’s not just people that are moving to more urban areas, but information is moving too. This works against those in power because Naim says, “power needs a captive audience.”
  • Mentality. A change in values – going from a lower class to an upper one – is a factor that can drive change in people.

These changes will made things better though. Naim notes that thanks to something like Facebook – or even a WordPress blog, 🙂 – we all can tell a story. This bright future echoes what Peter Diamandis and Steven Kotler (episode #93) told James, “The day before something’s a breakthrough it’s a crazy idea.” You almost have to be small to have crazy ideas that can change the world. Kodak can’t make a filtered photo app. Some has speculated that this vein of thinking is the reason behind Facebook’s acquisitions of companies like WhatsApp, Oculus VR, and Quickfire.

“Here’s to the crazy ones.”

“People have a better shot than ever before to have a seat at the table.” Naim says, but too much fragmentation can hurt a democracy. This is why parents around the country tell their children this isn’t a democracy each night at the dinner table when requests for pizza are denied. Vetocracy has it’s advantages and disadvantages though. It often means that at the governmental level, nothing gets done, good or bad.

In the end, Naim says we live in “a world that has more opportunities and offers more possibilities to the average human being than ever before in history.”

Thanks for reading. If I reduced, removed, or reviewed something wrongly – let me know, @mikedariano. If you are interested, our own book club starts next week.

#43 Peter Thiel

Peter Thiel joined James Altucher to talk about startups, the PayPal mafia, and his book Zero to One. James tells Thiel that the book “blew my mind” in part because of the angle that Thiel approaches the aspect of creation.

“One of the critical things in starting businesses is the need to do something new, fresh, strange. This is the Zero to One ethos.” – Peter Thiel

This means you don’t want to be the 100th online pet food company or the 5,000th restaurant in San Francisco because those are incredibly crowded places to be. And if it’s a crowded place, it’s a place with competition and placed of competition don’t offer much capitalism. Thiel calls competition and capitalism antonyms because a business can’t accumulate capital while it competes. Instead Thiel suggests that we look at new things that haven’t been discovered yet. For example, “we’ve been in a world where there’s innovation in bits but not atoms” he tells James. “If you think of a cell as a computer that could be programmed” he goes on, you can begin to think about new areas of development.

This sort of out-of-the-box thinking is hard though because we’re humans. “Imitation is very endemic to the human condition” Thiel tells James and he mentions that there’s probably a reason that there is a non-insignificant number of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who have Aspergers.

zigzagThiel also advocates that people develop a contrarian mindset, that they zig when other zag. He gives the example in the book that most people think more good minds will make better decisions, but sometimes that’s not the case.

“If you look at a company with a large board, don’t think, ‘Look how many great people are committed this organization. It must be extremely well run.’ Actually, a huge board will exercise no effective oversight at all.” – Peter Thiel

Thiel hasn’t always thought this way. He tells James he had a quarter-life crises when he was working at  New York law firm but quit after less than a year there. “From the outside everyone wanted to get in” Thiel says, “but from the insides people wanted to get out.” He left and in 1998 co-founded PayPal. “The lesson at PayPal was that you can build a great company, but it’s hard. It is not easy. It is not impossible.” Thiel tells James, “I think when people come out of super successful companies like a Google or a Microsoft, they’ve often experienced business as too easy.” Some discomfort can be a good thing for us. Mirny Kinrys (episode #48) told James that this exists in the world of dating too, calling it “pretty boy syndrome. ”You know, when you are pretty when you’re younger, you never really have to think about having a personality because things just came to you really easily.”  Kevin Kelly (episode #96) told James the same thing, but about money rather than looks, “The lack of money is often an asset because it forces you to innovate. People with money will try to buy a solution, but because you don’t have money, you are forced to invent a solution.”

zero to onePayPal was in part successful because of the pre-history, most notably, the number of early employees that built bombs. Not malicious bombs, but experimental ones. PayPal was like the Lost Boys of Peter Pan arriving in London, only they’re really smart and want to do something their way – a better way. To Thiel this mattered a lot because the pre-history people have together is important. In Zero to One he writes, “everyone at your company should be different in the same way.” You want it to be like an ecosystem, closer to cult than consultant.

There were all people Thiel wanted to spend time with and James Manos (episode #39) told James much the same thing, arguing that if you’re going to spend 8, 10, 12 hours a day with these people and collaborate to create something – you should enjoy their company.

Toward the middle of the interview James asks about Facebook and Thiel says that the company fit a profile he likes, companies undervalued because they are underused by the investor class. Facebook was to investors like microbrews were to wine collectors – quaint and irrelevant. It fit the Zero to One ethos, something new. But! You say. Weren’t there other social networks. Yes, Thiel says, but Facebook was the first one tied to your real identity. It was so much better than anything else out there, it had major stage one rockets.

Let’s make this analogy more fitting and call them “Falcon Heavy Stage One Rockets” like the SpaceX team does (Thiel invested in them). Just like a spacecraft needs stage one rockets to escape gravity, our ideas need stage one capabilities to be successful. James terms this 10X thinking, saying that things need to be ten-times better than what currently exists. There’s a good reason for this analogy, we are bad at thinking the validity of something once we get in that thing. Stephen Dubner (episode #20) calls this ‘Go Fever’ in honor of NASA, an organization that can’t reel in a new project when maybe it should be.

As Daniel Kahneman found out, we are quite bad at predicting how our group will fare, even if we have a pair of world famous psychologists who study this kind of thing in our group. As it goes, Kahneman and his partner, Amos Tversky began to develop a new curriculum for judgement and decision making to be taught in high school. How hard could this be? One day while working on the project, Kahneman thought he should test out the group’s judgement and decision making  as it related to their task at hand, creating the curriculum. He told everyone to estimate how long they thought the project would take and the estimates were “narrowly centered around two years.” Okay, this still sounds good. But (and you knew there was a but coming), Kahneman was doing research about decision making and our biases towards it. He wondered, was his own group biased as to how well they worked?

He turned to a senior member of the group and asked how long these sorts of projects usually took, “I cannot think of any group that finished in less than seven years” the man said. Seven? And about 40% fail. And their group was slightly below average when it came to overall skills and resources. This planning fallacy means that we tend to be most excited at the start, think of things in rosy terms, and overestimate how much we can do and underestimate the work to be done. If though, we think in 10X terms, then we can escape some of that. Creating a project that is 10X better means that we’ll only begin things that can sustain us through those challenges.

Facebook didn’t have this problem because Zuckerberg had built a good set of stage one ideas but had more to come. Thiel tells James of the story of the board meeting to discuss Yahoo!’s $1B offer. “I really don’t know what I’d do with the money. I’d probably start another social networking site, but I kind of like the one I have.” Thiel recounts Zuckerberg as saying. Sam Shank (episode #78)  mentions the same thing in his interview with James, saying that he would turn down the money too because he likes what he’s got.

Another thing in Facebook’s favor was that it satisfied Thiel’s Monopoly Rules. Going back to his competition and capitalism dichotomy, you want a monopoly. Thiel writes, “All happy companies are different: each on earns a monopoly by solving a unique problem. All failed companies are the same: they failed to escape competition.”

PayPal started small by focusing on eBay power-sellers, Amazon focused on books, Facebook was only at Harvard. Thiel tells James that “if you just have one of these you can have a great business.”

James chimes in with a good name for this rule, the “Chinese refrigerator rule.”

The pair briefly talk about Uber, which Thiel says may be overvalued for the same reason Facebook was undervalued – “the investor class is likely to overvalue Uber.” But that’s not to say that because it’s current valuation (as of this draft in March of 2015) $41B is wrong.

The situation with Uber is tricky because it’s a place in the Land of Small Numbers. When we travel from place to place there, we can’t be sure of the local rules until we arrive and spend some time there. We factor in ideas like, tech startups sometimes go bust, and didn’t I hear a negative news story about Uber. Then we look at relative anchors. Tesla is valued at $26B, and Michelin $17B. Does Uber seem that valuable? What if we compare a different set of market caps, like Facebook at $263B? We factor all this in, but almost none of it matters. Uber depends on these anchors as much as a family in Chicago depends on business Miami. Both are companies/cities but their relation is almost none. Thiel cautions us to not think Uber is overvalued because it’s worth more than other companies but because it’s overvalued because of what it’s future potential really is.

The next fifteen minutes of the interview dive into Thiel’s specific thoughts on a handful of ideas.

  • He thinks there’s still a hangover from the 1990’s technology bubble.
  • He likes investing in venture capital because it’s not cash or credit.
  • Regulatory headwinds are not something you should underestimate.
  • Moore’s Law is real (except when it isn’t*).
  • Opaque companies are better because they might have a good secret.

And here we jump right back into a rich idea – secrets. In the book Thiel writes, “every great business is built around a secret that’s hidden from the outside.” But being open to finding secrets is hard now.

In Thunderstruck, Erik Larson writes about the Society for Psychical Research. Established in 1882, the group aimed:

“to bring scientific scrutiny to ghosts, séances, telepathy, and other paranormal events, or as the society stated in each issue of its Journal, “to examine without prejudice or prepossession and in a scientific spirit, those faculties of man, real or supposed, which appear to be inexplicable on any generally recognized hypothesis.” The society’s constitution stated that membership did not imply belief in “physical forces other than those recognized by Physical Science.” That the SPR had a Committee on Haunted Houses deterred no one. Its membership expanded quickly to include sixty university dons and some of the brightest lights of the era, among them John Ruskin, H. G. Wells, William E. Gladstone, Samuel Clemens (better known as Mark Twain), and the Rev. C. L. Dodgson (with the equally prominent pen name Lewis Carroll). The roster also listed Arthur Balfour, a future prime minister of England, and William James, a pioneer in psychology, who by the summer of 1894 had been named the society’s president.”

thatsinterestinAnd Thiel tells James that finding secretes is a self fulling prophecy, “if you believe there are secrets to find, then you will work at them and be someone who finds them.” You have to be open to finding them, look for them, and – as Dr. Atul Gawande said in his 2005 commencement speech to Harvard Medical School students –  “count something.”

“No matter what you ultimately do in medicine— whether you go into purely clinical practice or work in research or business and never touch a patient again—a doctor should be a scientist in his or her world…It doesn’t really matter what you count. You don’t need a research grant. The only requirement is that what you count should be interesting to you…If you count something interesting to you, I tell you: you will find something interesting.”

What you need, Thiel suggests, is something measurable, with a close frontier, and not too conventional. Ask yourself if many people are looking at a single area and not another.

The interview concludes with Thiel telling James that “anything interdisciplinary in our society is quite underrated” and that education pushes us towards “arcane specializations.” But the good part to all this is that “it’s always possible to do something new in our society.”

Thanks for reading. One of those new things is joining our book club. We’re reading So Good They Can’t Ignore You and you can sign up here.  The book is about dispelling the myth to follow your passion and instead suggests you “build rare and valuable skills” so that you can find a job with “rare and valuable” features. It’s a good book, a free club, and it starts in April of 2015. If you stumbled onto this post well after than, you can buy that information here.

If I quipped wrongly, quickly edited, or quietly overlooked something, please let me know. @mikedariano.

*Kevin Kelly talked to Tim Ferriss about this idea and had some interesting ideas about what if the things we take for granted as being true, won’t be. Included it that group was Moore’s Law.

#100 T. Harv Eker

Harv Eker (@T Harv Eker) joined James Altucher to talk about better training, persistence, and as the AC/DC song goes, “Who made who, who made you – If you made them and they made you – Who pick up the bill and who made who?” The rock song is asking who made you and then who made that person and so on. Eker’s angle is that we should ask who made the thoughts that come into our head. Ask why they are there, and then apply the four magic words.

Eker is on the podcast to talk about his latest offering, the T Harv Eker Life Makeover System. Besides being a mouthful to say, is “A Simple 7 Step System To Design And Create Your Ultimate Life…One That’s Filled With Happiness, Balance And Fulfillment!”

Before Eker created this though, wrote wrote, Secrets of the Millionaire Mind. This book had a strong affect on James, he told Eker, “What affected me about the book was that you could have these pre-programmed beliefs about wealth from tragic things that happened from your parents or childhood.” And many times, Eker says, “we don’t even recognize the program running us.”

This echoes what Daniel Kahenman writes in Thinking Fast and Slow, “A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth.”  The more often we hear something, the more likely we will believe it to be true.

Eker had to work his way through a variety of thought systems before arriving at this point, some of which were in business. He tells James that he had 14 jobs in 12 business in 11 years. “I had a belief that if you get in the right thing at the right time, you’re going to become successful.” Eker was trying to incrementally improve on the ideas that other people had, figuring that if it worked for them, and he worked hard enough, it would work for him too. Peter Thiel writes that these sorts of pursuits don’t work out because it’s too crowded when you are trying to go from 1-2. For example, if you want to open a pizza restaurant in your city, that’s going to be hard to do. And this is the equivalent of what Eker did, 14 jobs delivering pizza in 12 pizza shops in 11 years. Unlike a pizza delivery person, he was well paid, but like a delivery person, there wasn’t the success, skills, and growth he was hoping for.

Instead he should – and eventually did – go from 0 to 1. This is a lot harder. Rather than deliver pizzas, our enterprising pizza delivery person opens a make-your-own-pizza-bar; where customers come in, choose from organic and fresh ingredients, assemble the pizza in the right ratios, have them partly baked, and then frozen for their home freezer. Now that business may not work, but that’s the kind of business that has opportunities for great success if it does work. This is what Eker was searching for.

How do you get there? Eker suggests that the person sitting in their cubicle right now to reframe how they view their job. Instead of it being your job, think of it like a paid internship for your next venture. Eker says that “67% of entrepreneurs” end up in the same industry they had previously worked in. In his book, Zero to One, Peter Thiel writes that a key component of their success was figuring out how to have computers and humans work together to detect fraud. In 2002 – after the sale of PayPal – Thiel continued to wonder, “if humans and computers together could achieve dramatically better results than either could attain alone, what other valuable businesses could be built on this core principle?” The next year he pitched Palantir to some former classmates and the company was formed. In 2013, the WSJ estimated its value at $9B.

smokingnursesSo Eker did this. Eker knew about fitness and began selling fitness products and beginning the Peak Potentials Training company. Eventually he sold that fitness company but lost a lot of the money he made “A lot of people are good at what they do, but when they first have money, they’re not good at having money.” James says. Money management it turns out, is domain dependent. We’ll call this the smoking nurses phenomenon.

Eker realized that he needed to take a low risk approach to investing money and that’s something past guest Tony Robbins (episode #62) and Nassim Taleb both suggest. In his book  Tony Robbins wrote, “The most important piece of advice every investor I talked to echoed was, ‘Don’t lose money!’”

Taleb echoes those thoughts, writing, that he never invests his own money in his own portfolio, instead choosing a conservative mix.

After his financial transformation Eker began to work on a spiritual one. “My self worth was wrapped up in my net worth,” he tells James, and that was “another big mistake.” He’s not the only one. Seth Godin (episode #27) told James “ones identity as an entrepreneur is really tied up in what you do all day” and after Godin sold his company to Yahoo!, “that identity was stripped.”

Eker says that after blowing up he got in Zen Buddhism, but there he wasn’t happy being zen. So what was it? If he wasn’t the cutthroat businessman or the Zen Buddhist, what was he? It turns out, he was both. “Embrace both sides of your self.” Eker tells James. “What I teach is that you can be kind, generous, loving, balanced, spiritual, and really freaking rich.” When he learned this, Eker says, it “changed everything.”

How can you change, Eker says that first you have to be aware that certain beliefs are “not supportive of success or happiness.” To those beliefs you need to identify where they came from, why they exist in your life, and why they matter so much. My maternal grandfather lived through the great depression. The specific details of his experience I don’t know, but later in his life I noticed he would crumble saltine crackers in his coffee. When I asked him why he did this, he said that crackers and coffee were the two things he loved but could never afford, so now he enjoys them together. It would be somewhat foolish of me to expect that his experiences of having so little were not transferred to my own experiences.

Another thought that many people have is that you must work. Why hasn’t anyone suggested we find passive income as a means of work? Eker asks James. In another podcast – Tropical MBA – the guys there talk about this idea as it relates to Alex Blumberg’s (episode #70) podcast StartUp. They use an alternative universe theory to think about what if instead of going for venture capital, Blumberg bootstrapped his company. They also talk about episode #14 when Chris Sacca said that he hasn’t invested in a lifestyle business. But what if that’s what Blumberg had done? Eker doesn’t explicitly address any of this in his conversation with James, but in the ideas he does. He wants people to ask themselves why they think about things the way they do.

Ultimately to start any business, you will “get rich by solving a problem for somebody.” Eker says. Sam Shank said in (episode #78) that, “It boils down to saving time and saving money. I think all consumer products need to deliver on one, ideally both.”

Then Ecker shares a nice little suggestion for thinking in a healthier way. ”Thank you for sharing” are the four magic words we can tell ourself when we start to have thoughts about something that isn’t helpful. Dan Harris said that he developed a similar perspective by asking, “is this useful”?. Rather than worry about whether or not he would be late for his plane, Harris began to ask if the thoughts he was having were useful.

In that interview, James said he does this too:

“for instance, rather than worrying, oh my gosh, I went down in rankings today or what’s my number, what’s my ranking system, becoming more creative about right now what can I do, making a list for what can I do to market better, and that’s something – so I’m in control of what I can do right now, and as you said, I can’t control the future.  So I can say, okay, well, on Twitter, I’m gonna market a little better or I’m gonna build a Facebook page.”

Eker tells James, “Any thought you think that is not supportive to your happiness or success you immediately come back with ‘thank you for sharing’ and you move to a more empowering thought.” It’s an idea from the stoics that Ryan Holiday (episode #18) writes about in The Obstacle is The Way, “They can throw us in jail, label us, deprive us of our possessions, but they’ll never control our thoughts, our beliefs, our reactions.” He goes on:

In fact, if we have our wits fully about us, we can step back and remember that situations, by themselves , cannot be good or bad. This is something— a judgment—that we, as human beings, bring to them with our perceptions. To one person a situation may be negative. To another, that same situation may be positive.

At the end of the interview Eker shares three of the seven steps in his new system:

  1. Ask what do you really want.
  2. Ask why don’t you already have it.
  3. Ask what do you need to do to get what you want.

He tells James that people can go to his site to find out more details.

Thanks for reading. If I was pompous, pessimistic, or too pseudo-scientific in this post, do let me know @mikedariano.

Every tenth one of these I put a link here for readers to donate if they’d like. Each one of these posts takes 3-5 hours to write and if you are a regular reader who would like to say thanks financially, here you go. To those that have supported this site already. Thank you. It doesn’t matter how much, each email I get saying that someone took time to read the entire article, follow the link to PayPal and send me money means a lot. Thank you.

Matt Stone

On October 3rd, 2014, James Altucher interviewed Matt Stone (@180degreehealth) about goals, getting unstuck, and how long side projects really take.
Stone’s latest book is Goals Suck: Why the Obsession with Goal-Setting is a Flawed Approach to Productivity and Life in General. The book description on Amazon has quite the hook, “When you have sex, do you take a timer and a legal pad into the bedroom to log the number of hip thrusts and grunts? Do you compile all of your data at the end of the week and plot it into a graph?” Well, no. Should I be?
Kidding aside, Stone’s suggestion in the book is to follow your passions and let them fuel the pursuit rather than goals, to-do list, or rewards. This isn’t  to say your passion will only lead you in one direction. Stone says, “your passions are not life-long and consistent; they do jump around, and it’s important to kind of go with the flow, and if you’re in the flow of what you’re really interested in doing right now, you’re gonna be more productive, and you’re also gonna be a lot more focused, and everything that you do is gonna be higher quality because in a different zone when you’re doing something that you’re really engaged in.”
David Heinemeier Hansson thinks much the same way, in a 2011 interview at Mixergy he talks about passion rather than goals: “I think all those things are infinitely more important than this notion of the goal. I think the notion of the goal, perhaps work, if you’re doing something shitty, if you hate what you’re doing, you hate getting up in the morning to work on it and you generally are not passionate or interested in the work itself and the problems themselves and you’re just in it for the goal, you’re just in it for the flip or the payout or the reward at the end of the road, then sure, having something big and extravagant, a carrot up there might work for you. But I’d say that you’re doing it wrong because the chances are you’re not going to reach your goal”
Stone mentions a Daniel Pink TED talk, which Pink shares, that he too is critical of the carrot and stick system: “I spent the last couple of years looking at the science of human motivation, particularly the dynamics of extrinsic motivators and intrinsic motivators. And I’m telling you, it’s not even close. If you look at the science, there is a mismatch between what science knows and what business does. And what’s alarming here is that our business operating system — think of the set of assumptions and protocols beneath our businesses, how we motivate people, how we apply our human resources — it’s built entirely around these extrinsic motivators, around carrots and sticks.”
What do you do then? Don’t you need the to-do app with geolocation and cloud syncing to keep you on track?  No, Stone suggests you “do the shit out of” what you’re passionate about, and gives a lot of suggestions to find out what that is if you don’t already know. It could be looking at the things you enjoy doing or “will keep you up at night if you think about it right before you try to go to sleep.”
Stone got started by starting a blog, and just writing down his thoughts. After two years he realized he could gather up some of the knowledge he had been sharing and sell it to others because it was valuable. Mason Curry wrote the Daily Rituals book after following the same blog to book path.
Unlike some other e-book authors, Stone says it’s not about being productive, it’s about living the life you want. When he speaks to Altucher about living on the beach in Maui, or being a ski-bum, I couldn’t help but think he’s found what Greg McKeown would call essential. McKeown’s book suggests that to find the essential we; examine and explore and discern and subtract so that we can add.
These self pursuits are also a form a selfishness, which Scott Adams (a previous Altucher guest) writes is good: “If you do selfishness right, you automatically become a net benefit to society. Successful people generally don’t burden the world.” For Adams “The most important form of selfishness involves spending time on your fitness, eating right, pursuing your career, and still spending quality time with your family and friends.”
Adams might have chimed in with some choice thoughts on goals too – he’s with Altucher and Stone saying they suck. In the same book he writes that goals lead you to a perpetually bad place. You’ve either not accomplished them yet and have failed so far, or you conquer them and no longer have the thing that gave your life so much meaning.  
Stone also dispels the myth of the overnight success.  “I don’t recommend just completely quitting your job and putting your back against the wall….you’re probably not gonna be able to cultivate the skills and knowledge and expertise to monetize it successfully in a month or two months or three months or however much money you saved up that you can live on after you’ve quit your job.” Passion then isn’t the sole ingredient to this great life, there is some skill and knowledge required too. Cal Newport writes that these things – at best – go hand in hand, and that sometimes skill may actually precede our passions.
The interview ends with Claudia posing a question about creating a “Paleo, vegan, gluten-free, and no allergy cookbook” which turns out, already exists, Paleo Vegan Sweets & Treats.
If you like these notes let me know on Twitter, @mikedariano.