3 ms·
It seems to me you are overgeneralizing from your own case and understating the effects of your choices on the outcome in characterizing success as random. But
by seti0Cha 4y ago
It seems to me you are overgeneralizing from your own case and understating the effects of your choices on the outcome in characterizing success as random. But even if it is random, you should hold out for demonstrably better alternative before giving up on preserving the existing one. There are worse outcomes than randomly distributed success.
- orthecreedence 4y ago> It seems to me you are overgeneralizing from your own case and understating the effects of your choices on the outcome in characterizing success as random. You think my only point of observation is myself? I even said in my original comment that I compare myself to others. > you should hold out for demonstrably better alternative Or work toward creating a better alternative, driven by my radical ideas for how things need to change. Why wait around for everyone else to fix things (or, more likely, sit around on their asses waiting for other people to change things)? > There are worse outcomes than randomly distributed success. Like I said, my analysis does not stop at myself or just at "success" as the main factor to optimize for. There are other reasons for changing the overall organization of the economic system. The current system demonstrably does not scale.