Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
My chess wins are funded by other people's losses. Every rating point I take comes off someone else's number, and the same is true of status: rank in a crowd has to be taken from someone. Some goals charge the iron price. Others charge gold. Know which one your goal charges before you chase it.
Show Notes
My chess wins are funded by other people's losses. Every rating point I take comes off someone else's number, and the same is true of status: rank in a crowd has to be taken from someone. Some goals charge the iron price. Others charge gold. Know which one your goal charges before you chase it.
Featuring: Naval Ravikant, Adam Smith, Warren Buffett, Leon Trotsky, Lewis Carroll
Brought to you by:
Trends.vc: Discover new markets and opportunities.
HeadsUp: Know when your competitors move. Before your customers do.
Multi: Turn any content into a YouTube video.
Where to find Dru:
I write an essay daily. Get them free
Follow me on X
Watch my video essays on YouTube
Follow Dru's Notes on Apple Podcasts or Spotify
Subscribe to Dru's Notes for a new episode every day.
Creators and Guests
What is Dru's Notes?
One mental model each day in a few minutes. Habits, business, building products and thinking clearly. From Dru Riley, founder of Trends.vc.
"Did you pay the iron price for it or the gold?"
Balon Greyjoy
I play rated chess. A win lifts my rating and drops my opponent's. My wins are funded by other people's losses. When I play tired games at 2am, strangers carry my points away.
In Game of Thrones, the Ironborn, a culture of sea raiders, pay the iron price for what they own: they take it from the people they defeat. Buying a thing with gold, the gold price, is shameful to them.
My chess rating is an iron-price goal. So is status. Naval Ravikant calls status games zero-sum: for one person to rank higher, another ranks lower. And the game runs with or without your consent. You are in a status game right now whether you entered or not.
You have a personal brand whether you know it or not.
As Trotsky could have said: you might not be interested in ~~war~~ status, but ~~war~~ status is interested in you.
Each morning I buy a good mood with thirty-four seconds of cold water. That's the gold price: I pay it and take nothing from anyone. My daily essays charge gold too. I pay in hours and the price holds no matter who else is posting.
Warren Buffett talks about two scorecards: the inner scorecard grades you against your own standard, the outer scorecard hands the grading to the crowd. We all keep both. Outer-scorecard goals tend to charge iron: rank in a crowd has to be taken from someone. Inner-scorecard goals charge gold: you set the standard and the price.
But can't you set an inner-scorecard goal for chess? You can: grade yourself on effort, hours studied, games played. That holds, if effort is what you're after. Reality grades on outcomes.
Mercantile empires treated the world's wealth like the Ironborn: fixed, hoardable, winnable only by taking someone else's. Adam Smith buried that belief in 1776 by showing that a fair trade leaves both sides richer. My daily essays work this way. Writing them makes me better and reading them makes you better.
Lewis Carroll's Red Queen tells Alice it takes all the running you can do to keep in the same place. A goal priced in iron runs on her rule: the price rises while you sleep, because the other players set it and they keep playing. A goal priced in gold holds until something inside you moves it: a bigger ambition, expecting more of yourself.
We all pay iron somewhere. Even Buffett and Naval, the guys behind the warnings, curate how they're perceived. Know what a goal charges before you chase it. Then, at least, you're in the game with your eyes open.
Does your most important goal charge you in iron or gold?
First use of a strikethrough substitution. The body carries:
As Trotsky could have said: you might not be interested in ~~war~~ status, but ~~war~~ status is interested in you.
The strikethrough is a joke for the eye. The reader sees "war" crossed out and "status" swapped in, and that swap is what makes the Trotsky allusion land. It is never spoken.
Spoken render (Multi / ElevenLabs): delete each ~~...~~ span entirely, markers AND content, then collapse the double space. The line narrates as:
As Trotsky could have said: you might not be interested in status, but status is interested in you.
"could have said" carries it aloud: no claim that Trotsky said "status," and no crossed-out word to voice.
Do NOT unwrap ~~war~~ to war the way bold and italics get unwrapped. That narrates as "you might not be interested in war status," which is gibberish. Delete the span; don't keep the word.
WordPress: the strikethrough ships. Pandoc renders ~~war~~ as . Confirm it displays struck-through in the live post; if the Gutenberg block eats it, hand-wrap in tags.
Root cause is fixed: strikethrough was missing from the flatten list in publish-daily-post Step 2, rule 6. The delete-the-span rule is written there now, so this handoff is a courtesy, not a dependency.