3 ms·

Surely this shows that even in a scenario where everyone is equal there will be people who succeed or fail purely by chance. The obvious takeaway should be tha

by ginko 4y ago

Surely this shows that even in a scenario where everyone is equal there will be people who succeed or fail purely by chance. The obvious takeaway should be that there needs to be a mechanism for wealth redistribution.

chii 4y ago
> The obvious takeaway should be that there needs to be a mechanism for wealth redistribution. it doesn't sound obvious to me - esp. if the starting point was equal. Luck is also a skill. It is only obvious, if the starting point was unequal.
- ginko 4y ago
  >Luck is also a skill No it's not.
  - once_inc 4y ago
    It sort of is. Given a game of chance, yes: luck is uniform. But people are people. Smart people don't waste their time/money on games where they don't have a significant chance to win. Lottery, sweepstakes, etc are all generally played by poorer people, and often in ways that aren't sustainable (gambling with borrowed money, for instance). Smart people invest their money wisely, which leads to 'lucky' breaks which compound over time.
    - hhmc 4y ago
      Unfortunately, due to luck, you were born as a subsistance farmer in the Central African Republic. 'Smart investments' are no option to you. Better luck next life.
- francisofascii 4y ago
  Well, the first starting point was equal, but the subsequent starting points were unequal. To use a sports team analogy, when a team wins a game, the next game should start at 0-0. That team keeps the win, but that winning team should not be allowed to get a head start in the next game.
  - chii 4y ago
    the game is played for life - so you only get 1 game. I suppose if you believe in reincarnation, may be multiple games. In this simulation, they still start at equal (aka, the page refreshes).
- circlefavshape 4y ago
  Do you understand what "luck" means? It is literally the opposite of a skill
Applejinx 4y ago
It shows specifically that a power-law distribution arises (which can be exploited, or taken as a sign of value or merit) in the COMPLETE ABSENCE of value or merit. When you then exploit the resources that have randomly piled up, turbo boost kicks in and exacerbates the condition as the wealthy throw their weight around to increase their weight and influence (as all classes will do within the context of what they're able to do) I've been aware of this simulation (or earlier, simpler simulations) for some time, and consider it significant. Even in the total absence of merit, properties will emerge that will look like merit when they're not. Confirmation bias does the rest. The take-away would appear to be 'eat the rich, but only when they insist they earned it out of their own obvious personal value'. The ones that are like 'lol, that's weird, how did this happen to me?' are probably okay ;)
- guerrilla 4y ago
  > turbo boost kicks in and exacerbates the condition as the wealthy throw their weight around to increase their weight and influence (as all classes will do within the context of what they're able to do) Can I suggest you call this what it is: a set of positive feedback loops.
  - Applejinx 4y ago
    But the underlying experiment shows the effect in the complete absence of positive feedback, and that's the most important thing about it.
    - guerrilla 4y ago
      Yes, and then you said "[w]hen you then exploit the resources that have randomly piled up". This is where the positive feedback begins. The final graph in the simulation represents people who just sat around and did nothing with their money. In real life, they would use their resources to accelerate their accumulation of resources.
      - Applejinx 4y ago

by ginko 4y ago

chii 4y ago

> The obvious takeaway should be that there needs to be a mechanism for wealth redistribution. it doesn't sound obvious to me - esp. if the starting point was equal. Luck is also a skill. It is only obvious, if the starting point was unequal.

ginko 4y ago
>Luck is also a skill No it's not.
- once_inc 4y ago
  It sort of is. Given a game of chance, yes: luck is uniform. But people are people. Smart people don't waste their time/money on games where they don't have a significant chance to win. Lottery, sweepstakes, etc are all generally played by poorer people, and often in ways that aren't sustainable (gambling with borrowed money, for instance). Smart people invest their money wisely, which leads to 'lucky' breaks which compound over time.
  - hhmc 4y ago
    Unfortunately, due to luck, you were born as a subsistance farmer in the Central African Republic. 'Smart investments' are no option to you. Better luck next life.
francisofascii 4y ago
Well, the first starting point was equal, but the subsequent starting points were unequal. To use a sports team analogy, when a team wins a game, the next game should start at 0-0. That team keeps the win, but that winning team should not be allowed to get a head start in the next game.
- chii 4y ago
  the game is played for life - so you only get 1 game. I suppose if you believe in reincarnation, may be multiple games. In this simulation, they still start at equal (aka, the page refreshes).
circlefavshape 4y ago
Do you understand what "luck" means? It is literally the opposite of a skill

Applejinx 4y ago

It shows specifically that a power-law distribution arises (which can be exploited, or taken as a sign of value or merit) in the COMPLETE ABSENCE of value or merit. When you then exploit the resources that have randomly piled up, turbo boost kicks in and exacerbates the condition as the wealthy throw their weight around to increase their weight and influence (as all classes will do within the context of what they're able to do) I've been aware of this simulation (or earlier, simpler simulations) for some time, and consider it significant. Even in the total absence of merit, properties will emerge that will look like merit when they're not. Confirmation bias does the rest. The take-away would appear to be 'eat the rich, but only when they insist they earned it out of their own obvious personal value'. The ones that are like 'lol, that's weird, how did this happen to me?' are probably okay ;)

guerrilla 4y ago
> turbo boost kicks in and exacerbates the condition as the wealthy throw their weight around to increase their weight and influence (as all classes will do within the context of what they're able to do) Can I suggest you call this what it is: a set of positive feedback loops.
- Applejinx 4y ago
  But the underlying experiment shows the effect in the complete absence of positive feedback, and that's the most important thing about it.
  - guerrilla 4y ago
    Yes, and then you said "[w]hen you then exploit the resources that have randomly piled up". This is where the positive feedback begins. The final graph in the simulation represents people who just sat around and did nothing with their money. In real life, they would use their resources to accelerate their accumulation of resources.
    - Applejinx 4y ago