So what you're saying is you basically have to give. This is what I find real life is like. Unless I'm giving something, like a ride to some interesting place, people are not interested in me at all. They just want to get something from me, that's it.
A lot of people are more comfortable with a shared experience objective. This provides a means to do something and a reason behind meeting.
If you are always in the mindset that you are giving and everyone else is taking that can really impact how you perceive everyone. And 9/10 most people over estimate how much they give and under-estimate how much they take.
There is also something powerful with "I _get_ to take my new friend to a place I find cool" rather than "My new friend is using me to go to my cool place". Changing the way you internally frame things drastically helps.
I know it sounds absolutely stupid hogwash but it helps.
It's not a "mindset" to notice that people only reach out to you when they want something. You notice that they reach out to others who aren't you and don't include you, They reserve you for favors only. If you find out about something and ask to be included they'll say "sure," but it doesn't feel great to feel like you have to beg.
That's not a "mindset," dude.
It's really hard to try to make that relationship more reciprocal and it really sours you on trying to create other relationships. You wonder if there's something inherently wrong with you. If your lot in life is always to be an outsider.
There's also the second type of person one can get caught up with, the narcissist. They think that the world owes them everything and they will take, take, take and never give anything. This one is a typically bit easier to deal with and do a little less damage to your mental health. Though they can sometimes be charismatic, so difficult to spot early if you aren't used to dealing with that type of person. The charismatic ones don't demand anything, especially not right off the bad. They make you feel like it's your choice to do them favors.
It's easier to notice if you have exceptionally "wanty" people in your life. But can happen regardless.
Some relationships are dysfunctional. Some people are toxic. That's not a "mindset" problem. It's clear you're not familiar with dysfunctional relationships, which is great, so don't accuse others of having the wrong "mindset" when you don't know.
I've felt this way for a while, that the give/take in my relationships is imbalanced, and that I'm not receiving what I need.
But then I tried to imagine receiving what I thought I wanted, and whether it would truly make me happy. The answer is almost always no.
The few times the answer was yes, I traced down why within myself, and found that, honestly, I just wanted people to care about me.
Then I realized that they have already shown ways that they care about me, just not the ways I was wanting or expecting, or found as meaningful.
Or I realized that I was not believing that they cared about me, and that it was merely a performance, but that I had no good reason for doubting it, and was just being overly demanding of a sign. (Not always, though. With some people, there were clear signs they were faking it.)
Or I realized that there was no context in which those things could come up, so the genuine love from the other person might actually be present, it's just that there's no opportunity for them to express it, until a scenario is created where it makes sense for them to do so in some way.
And other similar thought experiments within myself. This has led to me (a) realizing that a good number of people do actually care about me to a significant and meaningful degree, and (b) I need to take the initiative more often to create situations where they can express it, even if it's something as simple as asking them to have coffee with me.
I think of this all the time. What is the relationship between value and relationships? And what is the value of such a relationship?
It seems to me that every relationship is value oriented, even ones we consider absolutely perfect and pure.
Take for instance a mother's undying love for her newborn. She values that newborn for a few reasons. She sees herself in it. She sees pure innocence in it that needs to be protected and nourished. She sees all the potential good (i.e. value) this little child may one day bring to society. She sees her own personal fulfillment in the act of bringing this to fruition, which brings her joy, even amidst all the sacrifices she may have to make for it.
Is any of this selfish or bad? Does it in any way devalue her relationship to the child?
Extrapolate this to other relationships. A perfect friendship, where two people meet together regularly to find out about each other's recent activities, and encourage each other in life's difficulties, and foster one another's growth and good. They each care about the other, ask how the other is doing and what they're thinking and feeling, offer each other consolation, comfort, and help in times of distress or difficulty. Each gets this from the other, mutually beneficial. One may offer it exclusively at one time, the other reciprocates later, not out of obligation, but gratitude and personal desire.
Many years ago I read the classic 'How to win friends and influence people' and I was just hit with, according to that book, how little people actually care about other people and how fundamentally lonely our existence is.
I don't think that was the message the book was trying to give, but that's what I got out of it.
So yes, people will wonder, subconsciously or not, what's in it for them. If you can give status or if you are naturally entertaining, this might all seem a little less obvious.
I'm happy to hire juniors but they must still have relevant skills. One question I ask is "how does one build a coding agent" - if a junior is unable to outline the ideas around building and expanding coding agents, it indicates they are not aware of what industry they work in.
In all honesty this is how a typical developer experience has been for a long time in a number of systems. Expecting someone to pre-chew your programming food is silly.
I imagine they do not see it as a level playing field. If OpenCode can draw on Claude Code credits but cannot draw on Codex ones (we've just had a tweet promising to fix this, more or less), then it can be construed as an advantage on the part of OpenAI. Personally I think it's idiotic and companies should stop penny-pinching in situations where people are already paying $200, there can be no more value extraction at this price point.
Please stop with this 'subsidising' nonsense. It is nobody's business whether anybody is subsidizing anything. I couldn't care less what the internal financial mechanics of Anthropic is. Even if they are losing money on every single paying user, I DO NOT CARE, it's their problem, not mine.
Yep. That was definitely a major mistake. They could have secured an epic W by letting Claude Code hang as a consumable endpoint. Trying to protect it behind their own, Anthropic-based tools, is asinine and serves absolutely no-one.
