4 ms·
I find the mentions of Messi, Newton, Mozart and Wodehouse bizarre. The essay is similar to Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 hour theory, whether you agree or not, at
by edderly 5y ago
I find the mentions of Messi, Newton, Mozart and Wodehouse bizarre. The essay is similar to Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 hour theory, whether you agree or not, at worst Gladwell is writing a journalistic think piece.
Here though, is Graham credibly putting himself in the same category as Mozart? Dropping a reference to Patrick Collison, who no one outside of tech would have a clue who that is in the same breath as you namedrop Newton?
- renewiltord 5y agoThe better interpretation is: “I’m a successful businessman. This is how I acted. So did these other successful business people. And as a matter of fact, some of the greats of history in other fields also acted like this. Put together, I think that this behavior is conducive to success (in the way I define it).” Personally, I find it much more useful to go into each of these reads to find some piece of something I can incorporate into my life. I don’t think it’s particularly useful to disparage the author. In this case, I don’t think he has a megalomaniacal belief in his legacy as a luminary, but even if he did, I trust my ability to extract information from what he writes. There’s also a meta-discussion here. In human speech a common technique is to use X_j (j=1..n) diverse objects that each have k (k=1..m) characteristics Y={Y_jk} where for each j, there exists some k such that you can form a subset Z of Y which has the property that for any y_1, y_2 in Z, |m(y_1)-m(y_2)|<d, for some interesting measure of the characteristic m, and some small number d to illustrate an idea. Usually, the idea is that the diversity in X_j resulting in this form of Z points to some commonality among the elements of Z. The idea is usually not that all Y_jk are in an equivalence class but that the subset Z is in a single equivalence class. To put it more plainly through illustration: Messi, the fifty year old drunk Sunday leaguer, and I all choose to warm up before games to avoid injuries. This indicates that perhaps the warming up is a good idea. What it does not indicate is whether Messi, dad, and I are equivalent across all our characteristics. In fact, the interesting part is that we aren’t but that we share this.
- pcbro141 5y ago> There’s also a meta-discussion here. In human speech a common technique is to use X_j (j=1..n) diverse objects that each have k (k=1..m) characteristics Y={Y_jk} where for each j, there exists some k such that you can form a subset Z of Y which has the property that for any y_1, y_2 in Z, |m(y_1)-m(y_2)|<d, for some interesting measure of the characteristic m, and some small number d to illustrate an idea. > Usually, the idea is that the diversity in X_j resulting in this form of Z points to some commonality among the elements of Z. The idea is usually not that all Y_jk are in an equivalence class but that the subset Z is in a single equivalence class. Never change, HN. Lol.
- edderly 5y agoUnfortunately Graham provides no data or references to back up his claims that the iconic figures I mentioned worked hard or whether that was a factor. My criticism is that there is a risk about putting yourself or your buddies (I assume Collison is one) in the same frame as people who are exceptionally notable. Hence I will give Gladwell a break as a journalist just bombastically making claims to entertain people because he is talking about other people.
- MetaWhirledPeas 5y agoThere's nothing wrong with drawing comparisons at different scales. If you're talking about how to accomplish something it's fine to talk about famous works as well as mundane works and everything in between. If you're seeing it as a measuring contest you're missing the point.
- edderly 5y agoSure, but I would expect enough self reflection to indicate a logarithmic scale is being used.