4 ms·

How To Fail At Almost Everything And Still Win Big - Scott Adams (2013) One of my favorite quotes: “I put myself in a position where luck was more likely to ha

How To Fail At Almost Everything And Still Win Big - Scott Adams (2013) One of my favorite quotes: “I put myself in a position where luck was more likely to happen. I tried a lot of different ventures, stayed optimistic, put in the energy, prepared myself by learning as much as I could, and stayed in the game long enough for luck to find me.” pg - 158 My top ten list for the year: https://www.gregkamradt.com/gregkamradt/top-reads-2018 https://www.gregkamradt.com/gregkamradt/top-reads-2018

koolhead17 8y ago
Loved this book, so much wisdom.
henrik_w 8y ago
I really enjoyed it too. My main takeaways: 1. Use systems, not goals. A system lets you feel good every time you follow it, whereas a goal only makes you feel good when you reach it 2. Combination of skills. If you can be good (say top 20%) in more than one domain, then that combination of skills can be enough to make you very sought after. 3. What all adults should know, like public speaking, psychology, business writing, accounting, design, and conversations. 4. Learning from failures. This is a theme throughout the book. Each failure can teach you something. If you attempt something and fail, you at least gained experience. This experience will be useful for your next project.
- coopes 8y ago
  Pretty convincing reply. I'm placing an order for the book right now
- gvand 8y ago
  > Use systems, not goals. This, it could seem something that could have limited effect in real life but it's not. Small daily improvements compound.
- ZoomZoomZoom 8y ago
  Regarding #2: Does the book go into any specifics on how exactly you're going to be sought after or at least how to look for the people who needs generalists? I consider myself a generalist but I never ever see much interest for hiring someone like me. There's always ask for a person who's a focused pro in some niche area AND then possesses a cloud of tangential skills, though.
  - henrik_w 8y ago
    I think the idea is that you are somewhat a specialist in 2 areas (but not a worldclass specialist). As I recall, that advice does not apply to being a generalist.
    - ZoomZoomZoom 8y ago
      This looks more close to reality, but parent said "20%", which doesn't look good enough.
      - ThomPete 8y ago
        Top 20% is definitely good enough, the value having removed the issue with transcendence between two normally unrelated fields will improve your advantage by many factors. Of course, not everything goes.
  - GarrisonPrime 8y ago
    The idea isn't about being a generalist, but rather being valuable because you're like getting two okay guys or gals in one package. Adams' own example is how he's by no means a highly talented artist nor is he a top comedian, but the combination of being halfway decent with a pen and having a better than average sense of humor suddenly puts a person into a much smaller group on the Venn diagram. And adding in just one more thing - his experience in the corporate business world, allowing him to create strips a lot of people could relate to - was enough to catapult Dilbert into a global phenomenon. There are tons of moderately funny people in the world. And many okay line artists. And it's not hard to find someone with experience working in a corporate office. But the number of people who meet all three criteria is incredibly tiny. Heck, just having two of the three is quite rare. The point being, it's far easier to become a big success by being above average in a few things, than it would be to try to be one of the best in a single area. Finding a way to combine yout skills to make that success is the key, of course. And may require learning new skills or improving areas in which you're merely average. One of the big themes of the book is how you shouldn't worry too much about trying new things and failing. For one, humans are terrible at anticipating what sort of work we would truly enjoy or be good at, and the only reliable way to find a true match is to try a lot of things and keep redirecting yourself. And for another thing, any skills you learn along the way only increase the odds of eventually finding a combination of skills that can lead to great success. One thing many people reading the book overlook, I think, is that being mediocre in a lot of skills isn't the point. It can't hurt, of course, but the idea is to be above average in a combination of skills that can be utilized together in an interesting way. Recognizing that combination is more likely to be a process of trial and error rather than high minded planning.
amorphous 8y ago
I thought this book was quite good. I also used to enjoy Scott Adam's blog and ideas, that's why it was quite shocking to me when I revisited his site and found out what he has turned into. I can't take him seriously anymore.
- staktrace 8y ago
  "what he has turned into" is roughly "a Trump fanboy" for those who don't want to go trawling through his blog. I also used to really enjoy his blog for his unconventional but mind-opening ideas before he started blogging about Trump in the pre-election runup.
  - amorphous 8y ago
    it's more than being "trump fanboy". It's his confabulating of abstruse theories like "master puppeteer" and all this gibberish talk. I find it irresponsible the opposite of what he has done before. Is this really the same person who created Dilbert and the above mentioned useful book?
    - victor106 8y ago
      I 100% agree with your opinion. Initially when he was discussing his analysis of Trump it felt like he was doing to tell us about Trump’s skills in persuading etc., but it has just turned into it being a mouthpiece for Trump. It’s so sad that such a talented person can become that. I truly enjoyed the book though
  - rchaud 8y ago
    That Adams would join the Trump train isn't all that surprising when you read the book. Right from the beginning, he mentions that he didn't get a promotion at work because of upper management's 'minority hiring' policies (this was in the '80s, I believe). He doesn't provide much information about this policy, only that he perceived himself to have been left behind because of it.
    - 8y ago

koolhead17 8y ago

Loved this book, so much wisdom.

henrik_w 8y ago

I really enjoyed it too. My main takeaways: 1. Use systems, not goals. A system lets you feel good every time you follow it, whereas a goal only makes you feel good when you reach it 2. Combination of skills. If you can be good (say top 20%) in more than one domain, then that combination of skills can be enough to make you very sought after. 3. What all adults should know, like public speaking, psychology, business writing, accounting, design, and conversations. 4. Learning from failures. This is a theme throughout the book. Each failure can teach you something. If you attempt something and fail, you at least gained experience. This experience will be useful for your next project.

coopes 8y ago
Pretty convincing reply. I'm placing an order for the book right now
gvand 8y ago
> Use systems, not goals. This, it could seem something that could have limited effect in real life but it's not. Small daily improvements compound.
ZoomZoomZoom 8y ago
Regarding #2: Does the book go into any specifics on how exactly you're going to be sought after or at least how to look for the people who needs generalists? I consider myself a generalist but I never ever see much interest for hiring someone like me. There's always ask for a person who's a focused pro in some niche area AND then possesses a cloud of tangential skills, though.
- henrik_w 8y ago
  I think the idea is that you are somewhat a specialist in 2 areas (but not a worldclass specialist). As I recall, that advice does not apply to being a generalist.
  - ZoomZoomZoom 8y ago
    This looks more close to reality, but parent said "20%", which doesn't look good enough.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      Top 20% is definitely good enough, the value having removed the issue with transcendence between two normally unrelated fields will improve your advantage by many factors. Of course, not everything goes.
- GarrisonPrime 8y ago
  The idea isn't about being a generalist, but rather being valuable because you're like getting two okay guys or gals in one package. Adams' own example is how he's by no means a highly talented artist nor is he a top comedian, but the combination of being halfway decent with a pen and having a better than average sense of humor suddenly puts a person into a much smaller group on the Venn diagram. And adding in just one more thing - his experience in the corporate business world, allowing him to create strips a lot of people could relate to - was enough to catapult Dilbert into a global phenomenon. There are tons of moderately funny people in the world. And many okay line artists. And it's not hard to find someone with experience working in a corporate office. But the number of people who meet all three criteria is incredibly tiny. Heck, just having two of the three is quite rare. The point being, it's far easier to become a big success by being above average in a few things, than it would be to try to be one of the best in a single area. Finding a way to combine yout skills to make that success is the key, of course. And may require learning new skills or improving areas in which you're merely average. One of the big themes of the book is how you shouldn't worry too much about trying new things and failing. For one, humans are terrible at anticipating what sort of work we would truly enjoy or be good at, and the only reliable way to find a true match is to try a lot of things and keep redirecting yourself. And for another thing, any skills you learn along the way only increase the odds of eventually finding a combination of skills that can lead to great success. One thing many people reading the book overlook, I think, is that being mediocre in a lot of skills isn't the point. It can't hurt, of course, but the idea is to be above average in a combination of skills that can be utilized together in an interesting way. Recognizing that combination is more likely to be a process of trial and error rather than high minded planning.

amorphous 8y ago

I thought this book was quite good. I also used to enjoy Scott Adam's blog and ideas, that's why it was quite shocking to me when I revisited his site and found out what he has turned into. I can't take him seriously anymore.

staktrace 8y ago
"what he has turned into" is roughly "a Trump fanboy" for those who don't want to go trawling through his blog. I also used to really enjoy his blog for his unconventional but mind-opening ideas before he started blogging about Trump in the pre-election runup.
- amorphous 8y ago
  it's more than being "trump fanboy". It's his confabulating of abstruse theories like "master puppeteer" and all this gibberish talk. I find it irresponsible the opposite of what he has done before. Is this really the same person who created Dilbert and the above mentioned useful book?
  - victor106 8y ago
    I 100% agree with your opinion. Initially when he was discussing his analysis of Trump it felt like he was doing to tell us about Trump’s skills in persuading etc., but it has just turned into it being a mouthpiece for Trump. It’s so sad that such a talented person can become that. I truly enjoyed the book though
- rchaud 8y ago
  That Adams would join the Trump train isn't all that surprising when you read the book. Right from the beginning, he mentions that he didn't get a promotion at work because of upper management's 'minority hiring' policies (this was in the '80s, I believe). He doesn't provide much information about this policy, only that he perceived himself to have been left behind because of it.
  - 8y ago