> So no, I wouldn't say the conclusion is foregone. With the distribution of people and events over space and the distribution of talent the end result was a g

> So no, I wouldn't say the conclusion is foregone. With the distribution of people and events over space and the distribution of talent the end result was a given because its more likely for an arbitrary person to trigger multiple good events than for very specific "talented" people to trigger multiple good events even if their factor means they don't need as many good events to be "even". Same way that if you had more events then people then the outcome would completely change because then "talent" would become a bigger factor than "finding an event". Its just about what they decided to make scarce (events) in the model.