5 ms·

Half-truths and wishful thinking are the fuel of VC and speculative economics Paul Graham is one in 7 billion who stands out among billions of lesser educated.

Half-truths and wishful thinking are the fuel of VC and speculative economics Paul Graham is one in 7 billion who stands out among billions of lesser educated. He’s not a savant. His biggest success is early mover in a tech enabled society. That’s not visionary, that’s following the social meme and being there at the right time. Visionary in contemporary society means coming up with the next big thing itself; unifying scientific theories. Not seeing half-truths of reality in cherry picked stat bubbles of finance. There’s been no prediction of relevance just repeated habit Billionaires are nothing more than gamblers who are propped up by monopolized politics.

minikites 6y ago
>Billionaires are nothing more than gamblers who are propped up by monopolized politics. But if the success of a billionaire isn't entirely related to their singular genius and effort, what does that mean for me and my chances of success? It's uncomfortable to think about that so instead I'll pretend it really is only about their singular genius and effort and that means I can get there too some day. :)
- socmedia99 6y ago
  Define success? If it’s material wealth from a social stand point look at the decades of math; it’s monopolized. There’s always been a hierarchy; those lead to water are whacked into looking no where else for it. Be pious. Be materially rich. Different words for chemical addiction to aligning with social memes. We’ve seen the brain can rewrite itself to adapt to acquired handicaps. Is it so hard to believe it can’t adapt to a less industrialized pressure on time economy and still feel fulfilled? Map/Reduce, deal with it. Ultimately 1 in 7 billion is a shared identity none of us can escape. New logistics models should not be ignored for old ones.
disown 6y ago
> Billionaires are nothing more than gamblers who are propped up by monopolized politics. Also monopolized capital. Lots of people understood the prospects of the "internet" market. The question is who has access to capital and political protection. Amazon could have been shut down when the dotcom bubble burst like so many other companies. How were they able to maintain funding/capital for nearly 20 years without making a profit? Amazon could have been shut down in the 90s if they were forced to collect taxes. How were they able to ward off paying taxes for so long? Why was amazon afford such capital/political shelter? It's a matter of markets and who gets a share of the markets. Historically, it was people with connections. The right school, right family, right race, right nationality, etc. Now I'd say who has connections to capital though school, family, race, nationality, etc plays a role.

minikites 6y ago

>Billionaires are nothing more than gamblers who are propped up by monopolized politics. But if the success of a billionaire isn't entirely related to their singular genius and effort, what does that mean for me and my chances of success? It's uncomfortable to think about that so instead I'll pretend it really is only about their singular genius and effort and that means I can get there too some day. :)

socmedia99 6y ago
Define success? If it’s material wealth from a social stand point look at the decades of math; it’s monopolized. There’s always been a hierarchy; those lead to water are whacked into looking no where else for it. Be pious. Be materially rich. Different words for chemical addiction to aligning with social memes. We’ve seen the brain can rewrite itself to adapt to acquired handicaps. Is it so hard to believe it can’t adapt to a less industrialized pressure on time economy and still feel fulfilled? Map/Reduce, deal with it. Ultimately 1 in 7 billion is a shared identity none of us can escape. New logistics models should not be ignored for old ones.

disown 6y ago

> Billionaires are nothing more than gamblers who are propped up by monopolized politics. Also monopolized capital. Lots of people understood the prospects of the "internet" market. The question is who has access to capital and political protection. Amazon could have been shut down when the dotcom bubble burst like so many other companies. How were they able to maintain funding/capital for nearly 20 years without making a profit? Amazon could have been shut down in the 90s if they were forced to collect taxes. How were they able to ward off paying taxes for so long? Why was amazon afford such capital/political shelter? It's a matter of markets and who gets a share of the markets. Historically, it was people with connections. The right school, right family, right race, right nationality, etc. Now I'd say who has connections to capital though school, family, race, nationality, etc plays a role.