Why Being Delusional is a Superpower

Stats measure our shared experience. Is there something better for this? The human spirit isn't unconquerable. Believing it is has the side effect that you write off others because, "try harder." Vertasium did a fairly convincing bit on the zip code thing, which is -- I think -- why it's top of mind: ▶ this video I encourage you to dig into economic data and not use your experience as a frame of reference for the economic reality of others.

in “How to Work Hard” · View on HN

Ah, success, luck and skill. A really interesting topic. There is also a very good Veritasium Video about that: ▶ this video

in “Six Figures in 6 days” · View on HN

this is an interesting view: ▶ this video how luck plays a role to your success but also how you perceive your success which will change your behavior

in “I thought I would have accomplished a lot more today and also before I was 35” · View on HN

The myth is not in second chances or our ability to adapt, this is sometimes extremely hard but doable - ex: 1st time immigrants. The myth is in our ability to make "choices" which shifts the narrative to "hard work" rather than luck, perpetuated by the elite or those "who have made it". [1] [link] [2] ▶ this video

in “The Myth of the Second Chance” · View on HN

I am willing to provide a short communication some times providing information but the reality is usually a lot less interesting than people think. Reality: I want to hire 1 person, we get say 5 past all the stuff before me, we interview all 5, and then we choose the one that we think fits the best culturally, personality wise, skill wise, etc. So our reply is usually "hey you were great, we wouldn't interview you if you weren't, we just found someone we liked a little bit more". Which isn't very satisfying but you have to think about it from my perspective too. How do you choose between 5 great candidates? Ultimately, luck is playing a massive role here ▶ this video

in “Ask HN: Is the market bad, or am I having the worst luck job hunting?” · View on HN

I saw a video explaining where if you attribute just 5% of outcomes to luck, then the people who have the best outcomes are among the luckiest people. It's hard to define just how much luck would matter in any given situation, but if you consider every aspect of our lives as part of luck, which I think is what people mean when they debate luck vs hard work, then I think it's a lot higher than 5% actually. That is, things like place/time of birth, parents, family, socioeconomic status at birth, schools, friends, teachers, health, timing of things, chance encounters - these things are all mostly outside of your control. Someone on hacker news might be thinking how they worked hard for years to learn software engineering, spent time networking, practiced interview questions, applied to several places, performed well in the interviews, and landed a lucrative job. And that's all part of hard work and it's often a necessary part of success. It doesn't feel like you lucked into anything. But the lucky part was mostly all the stuff I mentioned before - things that happened at birth, or things that happened because of others' actions. If you're born an affluent white American, for example, your luck meter is highly filled from the start. Then maybe at some point you had a teacher that helped you in a meaningful way, or you met a friend that influenced your decision making. And let's not forget there are people who are just as qualified, who study hard, practice, do all the same things

in “I accidentally loaned all my money to the US government” · View on HN

It's a trend that's well supported afaik [1]. Whether or not that trend manifests inside you as a defeatist attitude is a personal choice. But at the same time, whatever attitude you have isn't going to magically get rid of whatever disadvantages you were born into, so simply dismissing it a defeatist attitude is counterproductive. The danger is ignoring the tendency of egocentric bias in these articles[2]. Successful people assume that their values and ethics are what led them to success, when that may not be true. Though that then bears the question: who do we listen to for advice on success? Rich people? Scientific studies [3]? A thread I read on a previous hackernews post (coincidentally about Paul Graham, another founder of ycombinator) perhaps puts these ideas in better words than I [4] [1]: [link] [2]: ▶ this video [3]: [link] [4]: [link]

in “How to Be Successful (2019)” · View on HN

Agreed! Been on a one-man team for many years, and have felt exactly the same. As others stated you are definitely not a loser. I know it because I'm not. :P - Almost every one of us is working on boring CRUD web apps, and that's fine - Work is not the only part of life that is supposed to make you happy (on the contrary) - Try to spend all of your free time off screen. Exercise, meditate, read some books (not coding ones ..) - XP >> LeetCode. A college graduate will definitely beat me at LeetCode, but I have been integrating online payment/banking systems in production web apps which have handled millions of $$ payments. Learn to promote those skills when job hunting, and don't worry about DS and Algos so much. - We all need a bit of luck too : ▶ this video

in “Ask HN: Burnt-out, directionless but want to turn it around” · View on HN

Luck (and nepotism) play far too great a role in success for meritocracy to exist. ▶ this video Then of course there's the whole "the guy who first coined term considered it a joke." Too many people missed the satire and took it way too seriously. [link]

in “Meritocracy Is a Myth” · View on HN

1% of the human population has what, north of 80% of the world's money? If that's not some form of tyranny worthy of criticism, then I don't know what is. Most good fortune in the world comes down to luck and help of literally everyone else. Not wanting to share that wealth comes down to pure greed, ego, and ignorance. Veritasium – Is Success Luck or Hard Work? ▶ this video

in “Gen Z is going to have a hard time getting rich” · View on HN

Said more succinctly, benevolent/inconsequential "lying" for society's or your own improvement can be a very useful modus-operandi. [0] ▶ this video [1] [link]

in “Apple can own I/O to own the universe” · View on HN

> The way most entertainers get known is just through sheer luck or connections. Derek Muller has a couple of videos talking about the success of his Veritasium YouTube channel (and work, luck, and success generally): [link] ▶ this video

in “YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives” · View on HN

Hi guys! I was talking with a friend the other day [1] and he shared this idea, I think it comes from a Veritasium video [2], that if you took 1.000 random people and ranked them by their overall success, the top ones would almost always be extremely lucky (i.e.: you get to the top by being lucky, not by hard work alone) Although the math behind it is extremely simple (just a weighted sum), as well as the code [3], I think the idea that hard work alone doesn't guarantee success is a powerful one. Plus, I think the app is fun to play with. Hope this thought experiment helps reflect about the whole idea of randomness in life, and maybe help spark a few interesting conversations with friends! It'd be great to hear your feedback. [1] [link] [2] ▶ this video [3] [link]

in “Show HN: An interactive simulation to explore the effect of luck in success” · View on HN

> I'm not trying to shame anyone. Yes, you are. “Most mental disorders are not that serious” is passive-aggressively stating that those suffering from something you consider to “not be serious” just aren’t working hard enough ; that they’re lazy, not disabled. The truth is, you can work as hard as you want, but if you’re not lucky as well, that work won’t propel you forward. ▶ this video <- Veritasium on luck vs hard work

in “Low parental income in childhood linked to increased risk of mental disorders” · View on HN