7 ms·

This is a great elaboration of something I realized in my early adult life, after feeling perpetually unlucky throughout my adolescence. In my youth, I found my

This is a great elaboration of something I realized in my early adult life, after feeling perpetually unlucky throughout my adolescence. In my youth, I found myself frequently disappointed that things didn't happen for me, lamenting my bad luck. The beginning of college coincided with my recovery from an episode of depression, and I guess fueled rebound energy, I started prospecting. I just said yes to as many things as I could. It didn't take long for this to start paying dividends, and I started getting lucky. By the end of college, I could see how luck compounds. I think the world is very random, practically speaking, but that probably distributions are highly mutable. I found that decisions I previously made set me up for higher likelihood of being chosen for subsequent opportunities. I parlayed this into getting a grad school fellowship that took me to an Ivy League university, needless to say, that opens further doors. Suddenly, I was quite lucky, and I've remained lucky for my adult life to this day. This, incidentally, is the problem with meritocracy. Meritocracy showers opportunities on the lucky, rather than the needy or the deserving or even the highest leverage. For the privileged (as I am, in many ways), this starts before birth. Merit is manufactured and compound. Success justifies the perception of merit, but ignores the extent to which successful people are often the beneficiaries of massive overinvestment. Nonetheless, this is the system we live in, and I think it's good for people to know how to navigate it.

DontchaKnowit 4y ago
"For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but frim him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away." Matthew 25:29
musicale 4y ago
> Meritocracy showers opportunities on the lucky, rather than the needy or the deserving or even the highest leverage. Advocates of meritocracy seem to forget that it wasn't coined as a positive term.
aardvarkr 4y ago
I really like the idea that saying yes to everything leads to more luck. When you open yourself up to new opportunities the outcomes will surprise you. It sounds dumb but it really works, and it’s a lesson that I learned from Jim Carrey of all people. The movie yes man may not be a classic but the message stuck with me and has had a profound impact on my “luck”
- samwillis 4y ago
  It's worth reading the book [0] that film was loosely based on. It's a good book and concludes the point of the parent: > Yes Man is a memoir written by Danny Wallace based upon a year of the author's life, in which he chose to say "Yes" to any offers that came his way. > ... furthers his career by saying "yes" in meetings with executives. Also read his other books, they are good. 0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_Man_(book) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_Man_(book)
- swyx 4y ago
  [author here] counter argument: some forms of yes have a "carrying cost". sometimes counterfactual (opportunity cost), sometimes mental, sometimes financial. some yeses are simply not worth it, then you get the counterswing phase where you go "hell yes or no" (aka default no to most things). i recommend figuring out a happy middle between the two rather than swinging thru the extremes. further nuance - keeping the option of saying yes (as opposed to directly saying yes) also has a carrying cost: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/5/25/desai-commencement-ed/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/5/25/desai-commencem...
  - HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
    Perhaps a different phrasing: default to saying 'yes' while keeping in mind that you can always say 'no.'
kostarelo 4y ago
But meritocracy has more to do with capabilities rather than needs. We could argue that you've actually deserved what you got because you've worked for it (by fighting your depression and coming out to say yes to more things). You def proved that you are capable of overcoming it. Btw I'm not arguing against the people that are in need and under-privileged, I totally get your point on that.
- broast 4y ago
  Seems possible that every individual could have similar enough capabilities if they had enough luck to overcome any disadvantage.
- kqr 4y ago
  Meritocracy is based on the appearance of capabilities. This sounds like a nitpick but it's a huge difference. Lucky people often appear very capable (crazy bets that just happen to pay off look like skill to less statistically trained people), as do the politically skilled (if you can convince someone that you're capable, you don't actually have to be).
  - giantg2 4y ago
    All the career advice you see about networking is basically undermining the idea of meritocracy by taking advantage of biases, such as observation bias, to give some members a boost over others.
- acjohnson55 4y ago
  That's what meritocracy tells us. But I think we're actually quite bad at objectively measuring aptitude, which I would say is what we really want. Capability is a today thing, aptitude is capability plus potential. We use apparent "merit" as a proxy for aptitude, and that leads to a rich get richer effect, because merit, at the time of evaluation, is often inflated by overinvestment. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, I think there are a huge number of false negatives in our meritocracy games. As a hiring manager, I've taken advantage of this for years. I look for proxies for potential, rather than present capability. That allows me to acquire underpriced, overlooked talent.
HPsquared 4y ago
It's the "human capital" version of compound interest.
100011_100001 4y ago
Reading your perspective was inspiring. It sounds like you are a more positive nowadays as well, which is great.
cmehdy 4y ago
I would argue the real luck was the depression lifting at a key moment in your life, and perhaps life circumstances that didn't stack up to reinforce it. I had a tough start in mine (likely starting in childhood with trauma), and that issue worsened significantly through formative years of my life. It didn't ease up. As a young adult, being pretty ill and left untreated can reveal formidable powers of self-destruction. Luck was there however, in the form or only succeeding partially through the little talent or brains I had in between depressive oscillations. Eventually with the untreated illness however that too can reach its limits. Eventually I still got lucky again, in the form of meeting a couple people who love unconditionally and a therapist who jumped into the fray and was creative with meds. These days I can almost see what it might be like on the other side of the fog for others, and I agree with your post and attitude overall.. But I'm not surprised. Empathy isn't a muscle we all work reliably, and it can be hard to constantly see it and retain equanimity (especially having some for everybody, in or outgroups, self or others). With meds and therapy and work and time, I do think thatwith or without the depression, I can attempt to create my luck by living through principles that seed it. In my opinion those principles include living moment-to-moment lightly (some stoicism, some absurdist nihilism), and living moments profoundly in their value (anything is an opportunity, most things can be experienced deeply). A bit like a good boxer is light on their feet but heavy on the impacts.
- acjohnson55 4y ago
  Yeah, I was definitely lucky to have recovered from my depression. Or looking back, I may not have exactly recovered, but transitioned to a less totalizing, debilitating phase. But I was lucky for a bunch of other reasons too. Some were manufactured, other the result of privilege and chance. Incidentally, one of the things that helped me climb out of my depression was meeting a couple new friends who were very accepting of me. That happened at an event that I was at through one of the few activities I had chosen for myself to be involved in in high school. So it's actually a good example of opening myself up to the chance of a lucky event working out. I really feel for folks who have had a worse experience of depression than me and I'm happy to hear you have experienced improvement of the worst of your depression.
kamaal 4y ago
>>I think the world is very random, practically speaking, but that probably distributions are highly mutable. I found that decisions I previously made set me up for higher likelihood of being chosen for subsequent opportunities. Indeed. That quote from Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' - Opportunities multiply as they are seized. One the great things about the GTD system is to make you arrive at the exponentially increasing opportunity trees. Once you act on something, think about the next task(s), when you finish them, think about the next- ad infinitum. Prune the tree every weekend based on your larger goals. A few weeks to months of this you will have enough opportunities opening up for you which were previous invisible, and way out of your sight.
- HPsquared 4y ago
  "Start by doing what is necessary, then what is possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible." - St Francis of Assisi That's the underlying philosophy of things like GTD. It's not just about doing what's in front of you, but opening up new possibilities.
kqr 4y ago
> This, incidentally, is the problem with meritocracy. Meritocracy showers opportunities on the lucky Lucky and particularly the politically skilled!
- acjohnson55 4y ago
  These are the same thing! Luck can be manufactured and political skill is one way of doing it.
giantg2 4y ago
The problem isn't meritocracy. The problem is that what we are calling a meritocracy isn't one as it is based on luck and connections. All this "networking" talk that I see on here and any career development site - it's the opposite of a meritocracy and disadvantages anyone not in the "in" group.
- acjohnson55 4y ago
  I thought that too, once. But now I think that the concept of meritocracy is fundamentally flawed. First, it has no ability to differentiate merit manufactured by previous iterations of the meritocracy game from other forms of potential or reasons to invest in a person or reward them. Second, it implicitly devalues people who seem to be lacking in merit, amplifying the effects of any sort of disadvantage. I don't know that a society based on merit can ever truly be humanitarian. This plays out in very visible ways, in America, the most meritocratic of cultures. We tolerate an astounding amount of completely avoidable misery. As an American, steeped in meritocratic thinking from birth, it's frankly scary and disorienting to imagine what things would be like if you took meritocracy off its pedestal. I think you'd see a happier society, but also a loss of the economic competitive edge that is the source of our power in the world. Meritocracy might truly be our state religion and the main thing that binds this country together.
- Loughla 4y ago
  Bingo. If getting the job requires you to know the hiring manager to even know about the opening, it is not a meritocracy. It's a birthright. If you don't know the secret codes or secret power holders, you're just stuck on the outside looking in. And these secret codes have little to nothing to do with actual ability.
- chrisweekly 4y ago
  Sort of. Being effective in nearly any role requires interpersonal skills, and it's not unreasonable for the strength of one's professional network to play a role in landing interviews. Of course at one extreme, pure nepotism does exist as the "opposite of meritocracy" you bemoan -- but that hardly represents the majority case, where human connection and evidence that someone, somewhere, was glad to have worked with you, improves your perceived strength as a candidate. TLDR even if you write code for a living, your career is still all about people.
chamwislothe2nd 4y ago
I did and do the exact same thing! Except it's still a grind and I haven't experienced any compounding luck. Just exercises in endless nail pulling. Is it possible that you just... Got lucky?
HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
> Merit is manufactured and compound So much this! I am the child of a black, single mother who didn't have a High School diploma. Statistically speaking, I shouldn't be where I am (being offered interviews for Director-level positions at software companies). You have to do whatever you can to turn circumstance in your favor. Don't turn down any help anyone wants to offer.

DontchaKnowit 4y ago

"For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but frim him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away." Matthew 25:29

musicale 4y ago

> Meritocracy showers opportunities on the lucky, rather than the needy or the deserving or even the highest leverage. Advocates of meritocracy seem to forget that it wasn't coined as a positive term.

aardvarkr 4y ago

I really like the idea that saying yes to everything leads to more luck. When you open yourself up to new opportunities the outcomes will surprise you. It sounds dumb but it really works, and it’s a lesson that I learned from Jim Carrey of all people. The movie yes man may not be a classic but the message stuck with me and has had a profound impact on my “luck”

samwillis 4y ago
It's worth reading the book [0] that film was loosely based on. It's a good book and concludes the point of the parent: > Yes Man is a memoir written by Danny Wallace based upon a year of the author's life, in which he chose to say "Yes" to any offers that came his way. > ... furthers his career by saying "yes" in meetings with executives. Also read his other books, they are good. 0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_Man_(book) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_Man_(book)
swyx 4y ago
[author here] counter argument: some forms of yes have a "carrying cost". sometimes counterfactual (opportunity cost), sometimes mental, sometimes financial. some yeses are simply not worth it, then you get the counterswing phase where you go "hell yes or no" (aka default no to most things). i recommend figuring out a happy middle between the two rather than swinging thru the extremes. further nuance - keeping the option of saying yes (as opposed to directly saying yes) also has a carrying cost: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/5/25/desai-commencement-ed/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/5/25/desai-commencem...
- HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
  Perhaps a different phrasing: default to saying 'yes' while keeping in mind that you can always say 'no.'

kostarelo 4y ago

But meritocracy has more to do with capabilities rather than needs. We could argue that you've actually deserved what you got because you've worked for it (by fighting your depression and coming out to say yes to more things). You def proved that you are capable of overcoming it. Btw I'm not arguing against the people that are in need and under-privileged, I totally get your point on that.

broast 4y ago
Seems possible that every individual could have similar enough capabilities if they had enough luck to overcome any disadvantage.
kqr 4y ago
Meritocracy is based on the appearance of capabilities. This sounds like a nitpick but it's a huge difference. Lucky people often appear very capable (crazy bets that just happen to pay off look like skill to less statistically trained people), as do the politically skilled (if you can convince someone that you're capable, you don't actually have to be).
- giantg2 4y ago
  All the career advice you see about networking is basically undermining the idea of meritocracy by taking advantage of biases, such as observation bias, to give some members a boost over others.
acjohnson55 4y ago
That's what meritocracy tells us. But I think we're actually quite bad at objectively measuring aptitude, which I would say is what we really want. Capability is a today thing, aptitude is capability plus potential. We use apparent "merit" as a proxy for aptitude, and that leads to a rich get richer effect, because merit, at the time of evaluation, is often inflated by overinvestment. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, I think there are a huge number of false negatives in our meritocracy games. As a hiring manager, I've taken advantage of this for years. I look for proxies for potential, rather than present capability. That allows me to acquire underpriced, overlooked talent.

HPsquared 4y ago

It's the "human capital" version of compound interest.

100011_100001 4y ago

Reading your perspective was inspiring. It sounds like you are a more positive nowadays as well, which is great.

cmehdy 4y ago

I would argue the real luck was the depression lifting at a key moment in your life, and perhaps life circumstances that didn't stack up to reinforce it. I had a tough start in mine (likely starting in childhood with trauma), and that issue worsened significantly through formative years of my life. It didn't ease up. As a young adult, being pretty ill and left untreated can reveal formidable powers of self-destruction. Luck was there however, in the form or only succeeding partially through the little talent or brains I had in between depressive oscillations. Eventually with the untreated illness however that too can reach its limits. Eventually I still got lucky again, in the form of meeting a couple people who love unconditionally and a therapist who jumped into the fray and was creative with meds. These days I can almost see what it might be like on the other side of the fog for others, and I agree with your post and attitude overall.. But I'm not surprised. Empathy isn't a muscle we all work reliably, and it can be hard to constantly see it and retain equanimity (especially having some for everybody, in or outgroups, self or others). With meds and therapy and work and time, I do think thatwith or without the depression, I can attempt to create my luck by living through principles that seed it. In my opinion those principles include living moment-to-moment lightly (some stoicism, some absurdist nihilism), and living moments profoundly in their value (anything is an opportunity, most things can be experienced deeply). A bit like a good boxer is light on their feet but heavy on the impacts.

acjohnson55 4y ago
Yeah, I was definitely lucky to have recovered from my depression. Or looking back, I may not have exactly recovered, but transitioned to a less totalizing, debilitating phase. But I was lucky for a bunch of other reasons too. Some were manufactured, other the result of privilege and chance. Incidentally, one of the things that helped me climb out of my depression was meeting a couple new friends who were very accepting of me. That happened at an event that I was at through one of the few activities I had chosen for myself to be involved in in high school. So it's actually a good example of opening myself up to the chance of a lucky event working out. I really feel for folks who have had a worse experience of depression than me and I'm happy to hear you have experienced improvement of the worst of your depression.

kamaal 4y ago

>>I think the world is very random, practically speaking, but that probably distributions are highly mutable. I found that decisions I previously made set me up for higher likelihood of being chosen for subsequent opportunities. Indeed. That quote from Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' - Opportunities multiply as they are seized. One the great things about the GTD system is to make you arrive at the exponentially increasing opportunity trees. Once you act on something, think about the next task(s), when you finish them, think about the next- ad infinitum. Prune the tree every weekend based on your larger goals. A few weeks to months of this you will have enough opportunities opening up for you which were previous invisible, and way out of your sight.

HPsquared 4y ago
"Start by doing what is necessary, then what is possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible." - St Francis of Assisi That's the underlying philosophy of things like GTD. It's not just about doing what's in front of you, but opening up new possibilities.

kqr 4y ago

> This, incidentally, is the problem with meritocracy. Meritocracy showers opportunities on the lucky Lucky and particularly the politically skilled!

acjohnson55 4y ago
These are the same thing! Luck can be manufactured and political skill is one way of doing it.

giantg2 4y ago

The problem isn't meritocracy. The problem is that what we are calling a meritocracy isn't one as it is based on luck and connections. All this "networking" talk that I see on here and any career development site - it's the opposite of a meritocracy and disadvantages anyone not in the "in" group.

acjohnson55 4y ago
I thought that too, once. But now I think that the concept of meritocracy is fundamentally flawed. First, it has no ability to differentiate merit manufactured by previous iterations of the meritocracy game from other forms of potential or reasons to invest in a person or reward them. Second, it implicitly devalues people who seem to be lacking in merit, amplifying the effects of any sort of disadvantage. I don't know that a society based on merit can ever truly be humanitarian. This plays out in very visible ways, in America, the most meritocratic of cultures. We tolerate an astounding amount of completely avoidable misery. As an American, steeped in meritocratic thinking from birth, it's frankly scary and disorienting to imagine what things would be like if you took meritocracy off its pedestal. I think you'd see a happier society, but also a loss of the economic competitive edge that is the source of our power in the world. Meritocracy might truly be our state religion and the main thing that binds this country together.
Loughla 4y ago
Bingo. If getting the job requires you to know the hiring manager to even know about the opening, it is not a meritocracy. It's a birthright. If you don't know the secret codes or secret power holders, you're just stuck on the outside looking in. And these secret codes have little to nothing to do with actual ability.
chrisweekly 4y ago
Sort of. Being effective in nearly any role requires interpersonal skills, and it's not unreasonable for the strength of one's professional network to play a role in landing interviews. Of course at one extreme, pure nepotism does exist as the "opposite of meritocracy" you bemoan -- but that hardly represents the majority case, where human connection and evidence that someone, somewhere, was glad to have worked with you, improves your perceived strength as a candidate. TLDR even if you write code for a living, your career is still all about people.

chamwislothe2nd 4y ago

I did and do the exact same thing! Except it's still a grind and I haven't experienced any compounding luck. Just exercises in endless nail pulling. Is it possible that you just... Got lucky?

HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago

> Merit is manufactured and compound So much this! I am the child of a black, single mother who didn't have a High School diploma. Statistically speaking, I shouldn't be where I am (being offered interviews for Director-level positions at software companies). You have to do whatever you can to turn circumstance in your favor. Don't turn down any help anyone wants to offer.