3 ms·

If being rich counts a already having had several lucky breaks, aren't they just presenting a circular conclusion? In the real world, opportunities can also be

• TuringTest 5y ago
  "Being rich" doesn't appear as an input factor on the model, that's my interpretation. The paper describes how, assuming a meritocratic setup where everyone starts out the same, wealth accumulates as a function of repeated lucky events, largely unaffected by the particular talents of the individual. We all know that money makes money and the wealthy have a lot more ways of seizing opportunities than those without resources, using wealth as a leverage way more powerful than personal talent. Nevertheless, the model works as a thought experiment showing what would happen if everyone began from the same starting point; even in that case, talent would have little weight in how wealth accumulation would evolve.
  • kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
    There was another experiment a while ago about songs becoming hits. Iirc they started with presenting random songs to users, but their "likes" could affect further suggestions. Then it also was random which songs ended up becoming hits. That seems like a much more interesting experiment, and in the real world, too. Also the "Matthew Effect" is well known. I find it very dangerous to latch onto such an experiment because it "feels right", though.