> Why does it always have to be this binary choice (Hence the "everything" qualifier I guess)? My theory: the mind works in binary by default - it is a quick a

> Why does it always have to be this binary choice (Hence the "everything" qualifier I guess)? My theory: the mind works in binary by default - it is a quick and dirty (and low energy) heuristic to make predictions, and reality/causality/etc from the perspective of an observer is fundamentally prediction based. If you think that's weird, you should see all the other sub-perceptual weirdness going on in this thread. > You can certainly work hard to succeed and also realize that a lot of your successes are just that, attributed to "luck" or things out of your control. This isn't to take anything anyway from hard work. Technically, it does kinda/plausibly take something away from hard work in that you are attributing the causality of outcomes to luck vs hard work, based on unacknowledged speculation. > Hard workers tend to succeed because they get more pulls at the slot machine. Just because you "win" doesn't change the fact that you're still playing the percentages. Technically, you are necessarily speculating here, perhaps while criticizing the speculations of others for being speculative? > I think the type of person who is probably more likely to succeed is one that doesn't believe in luck (i.e. not willing to just accept the lot that was given to them). And not only that, there are other approaches available to humans, like cooperation, which has a dependency on communication and other things. Unfortunately, there seems to be more than a few unrealized bugs in the stack so outcomes are (presumably) less optimal than is possible. My hope is that we try to change this some day, but I do not anticipate this happening.