思考与写作tim.blog
不要成名的理由
Reasons not to become famous
2020 — 2025，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Tim Ferriss 结合自身多年成名的经历，详细列举了名气带来的种种代价：失去隐私、被骚扰跟踪、遭遇敲诈勒索、精神负担加重等。文章提醒读者成名并非值得追求的目标，并给出了保持低调的实用建议。
为什么经久不衰：它以亲历者视角揭示了名气鲜为人知的阴暗面，在人人渴望曝光的时代提供了难得的清醒视角，多年后仍具参考价值。
HN 评论精选
成名的好处大多可以用财富替代，而名气的代价却难以承受
我只看到成名的三个理由：1. 关注和追捧是你的毒品；2. 把名气转化为原本得不到的机会；3. 把名气转化为金钱。如果你已经很有钱，(3)就无所谓了。在我看来，名气的代价是巨大的。我听说那些如今要求媒体尊重隐私的明星，几年前还在苦苦哀求媒体给他们报道。我也不想成为亿万富翁——到那个程度你几乎脱离了社会，会成为绝望者、罪犯和精神不稳定者的目标。说实话，有2000万美元和有20亿美元，实际区别有多大呢？
cletus查看英文原文
So I only see three reasons to be famous: 1. The attention and adulation is your drug. I think there's no shortage of people who fall into this category. 2. To convert that fame into opportunities you wouldn't otherwise have; and 3. To convert that fame into money. Obviously if you're just plain rich then (3) is moot. If you fall into (1) then money can buy you fame to a degree. So that leaves (2). Wealth will give you many opportunities fame will but certainly not all. Or at least the costs to replicate that are truly ludicrous, like being a star in a Marvel movie, spending a year on the ISS, going to the Moon, that sort of thing. The way I see it the downsides of fame are significant. I've heard tales from people who worked in media years ago that the very stars who now want the media to leave them alone and to respect their privacy would beg them for stories and coverage just a few years earlier. I don't think I'd want to be ultra-wealthy (as in a billionaire+). At that point you're almost removed from society. I imagine you end up moving in circles with other ultra-wealthy people that are actually quite small. You risk being a target of the desperate, the criminally minded (fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, that sort of thing) and the mentally unstable. And really what is the practical difference between having $20m and $2b? Sure you'll have nicer houses and more of them. You may well have a super-yacht at that point. But who cares? I know I don't. You could say "you would if you had $2b" and maybe that's true. I'm sure I'd buy a nicer place but I think I'd still want to keep a relatively low profile.
即使是小有名气的普通人也会遭遇骚扰和威胁，深有共鸣
因为工作关系我公开地与某位名人关系密切，并因此有了约1.5万粉丝的Instagram账号，我不同程度地经历过文中描述的种种行为，完全没心理准备，真的吓到我了。我很喜欢文中那句'你想让所有人知道你的名字，却没人知道你的脸'。我每周都会收到好几条长达五屏的悲惨故事和求助恳求，还有'我知道你干了什么，我会曝光你'之类的威胁。
ruminasean查看英文原文
I am publicly in close proximity to someone famous for my job and with a modest (~15k) Instagram following because of that, I've experienced most of this behavior to one degree or another. I was completely unprepared for it and it really freaked me out. I love the Bill Murray quote, and I've been living by this, also from the article: "You want everyone to know your name and no one to know your face.” It really seems to affect people that I don't post selfies and pics of myself anywhere....second to requests to be put in contact with the famous person to whom I'm obviously connected, people really want to know what I look like. As someone who is fairly private as well as nothing special in the looks dept, I'm in no rush. I'm googleable because of the absurd name under which I started, but most people can't or won't put in the effort. I've definitely concluded that in my particular case, some respectable form of following on IG is necessary (I'm a photographer) and I certainly won't get rich, but damn I was utterly not ready for nor was I expecting 5-screen-long tales of woe and death and disease and pleas for help and mercy along with the same kind of "I know what you did and I'll expose you" shit several times a week.
巨富也可以完全匿名，有钱和有名并非绑定
人们常假设有钱等于有名，但令人惊讶的是，你可以超级富有却依然匿名。我记得福布斯某年的亿万富翁榜单试图为前几百名配上照片，竟有几个人找不到照片。如今福布斯榜单上，最富的500人中有24人（5%）匿名到连专业记者团队都找不到他们的照片。
cantrevealname查看英文原文
A common assumption is rich<=>famous. Obviously, famous doesn't imply rich because someone could be, say, a notorious criminal and be poor. But it's quite amazing the degree to which you can be rich, super rich, but still be anonymous. Even in today's world. I remember reading one of Forbes' annual listings of the world's billionaires in which they tried to include a photo of everyone in the top couple hundred. Astonishingly a few had no photos -- Forbes said that they couldn't find a photo. According to Wikipedia, "Forbes employs a team of more than 50 reporters from a variety of countries to track the activity of the world's wealthiest individuals." So you can absolutely be among the richest people on Earth and not have a publicly available photo. On the current Forbes list the following have no photos: #23, #36, #61, #122, #153, #167, #191, #198, #215, #233, #244, #272 (two people at this rank), #290 (also two), #343, #355, #365, #379 (two again), #394, #413, #452 (two again), #504 (four people), etc. That means that 5% of the richest people in the world (24 of the richest 500) are so anonymous that there isn't a photo that even a dedicated team of reporters can find. Current list: https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/
即使中等程度的网络名气也会招来长期跟踪骚扰
跟踪骚扰这事儿是真的——直到我一位朋友（75万订阅的YouTuber）亲身经历我才意识到。有个孩子十年来每天给他打电话，从不间断，留下语音留言聊自己的日常。十年就是3600多通电话。想象一下同样偏执的行为但没那么良性，太可怕了。
nlh查看英文原文
The stalker thing is real - and I didn’t realize how real until a buddy who’s a moderately-successful YouTuber (750k subs) got his very own. Thankfully it’s a relatively benign case, but man, it’s real. There’s a kid who, for the past ~10 years, calls him Every. Single. Day. Without fail. For 10 years (that’s 3600+ phone calls). He leaves a voicemail and just talks about his day - what video games he’s playing, etc. I think his mom once called and apologized (although she doesn’t seem to try and stop the behavior, which is also odd, but who knows). Now imagine the same kind of obsessive behavior, but...less benign. Scary.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
保持你的身份认同足够小
Keep Your Identity Small (2009)
Paul Graham 2009 年的一篇短文：人一旦把某个话题当成自己身份的一部分（宗教、政治、编程语言皆然），讨论就会退化成站队和争吵，因为此时争论的不再是事实，而是"我是谁…
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选苏格拉底式教学法：通过提问而非讲授来教学
The Socratic Method: Teaching by Asking Instead of by Telling
记录了作者用纯提问的方式，引导一群小学生从零推导出二进制计数法的课堂实验，展示了苏格拉底式教学法的惊人效果。
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022garlikov.com你不能说的话
What You Can't Say (2004)
Paul Graham 2004 年的经典文章，探讨那些因道德时尚而不能公开说出的观点。
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2014–2022paulgraham.com编辑精选龙暴君的寓言（2005）
The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant (2005)
哲学家 Nick Bostrom 于 2005 年写的一则寓言：一条每天吞噬数千人的巨龙（隐喻死亡与衰老）长期被人类当作不可抗拒的自然规律接受，直到有人提出并最终用导弹将其杀死，…
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021nickbostrom.com编辑精选现实有着惊人的细节量
Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)
2017 年的博文指出，现实远比我们以为的充满细节：我们习惯用简化的心智模型看世界，直到真正动手做事（比如作者举的造楼梯例子）才发现处处是未曾预料的细节。
思考与写作上首页 4 次 · 2018–2025johnsalvatier.org编辑精选