5 ms·

This is because it takes a lot more than talent to rise to the top. Rising to the top is 99% hard work and 1% talent (being just knowing where to strategically

• mempko 6y ago
  No, it's because it takes more luck, talent isn't enough. Imaging you have a normal distribution on talent, and a uniform distribution on luck. Lets say the ranking process incorporates 95% talent and 5% luck. So you have a final score of 0.95talent+ 0.05luck. In a field with millions of people, to be at the top 100, you not only have to have a lot of talent, but you also have to have a lot of luck. It's not enough to just have talent. Because if you have the top talent but no luck, in a million people you would be ranked at 50,000 because 95% of the selection process considers merit, the other 5% is luck. To be in the top 100, you would need to be very talented and be in the top 1% of lucky people. With different talent/luck ratios the numbers obviously change, but even in a system where you are 95% merit based, luck still plays a HUGE role to be at the very top. It's math. And keep in mind there are billions of people in this world. Programming alone has millions of people.
  • suifbwish 6y ago
    I agree but disagree. A tendency towards strategically placed hard work is a talent of its own and to have that tendency is a form of luck, although there are those who believe they are self made and others are lazy. There really isn’t anything we are capable of doing that can’t be broken down into luck and innate ways of interacting with that luck.