3 ms·

I'm going to disagree; it is like going to the race track (I assume you mean horses). You might just be lucky, period, and still succeed. (Lightning does strik

I'm going to disagree; it is like going to the race track (I assume you mean horses). You might just be lucky, period, and still succeed. (Lightning does strike. ha, great name for a horse.) But your chances are FAR better if you are well prepared, know the stats, know the jockeys, have inside info on what a horse has been fed, maybe even that morning, and so on. You might be able to rig things in your favor via inside connections. But even with all your "skills" lined up, you still need luck and lots of it. I think what I'm taking issue with is your statement that winning at the race track is _mere_ luck. No, like being a successful entrepeneur, it also requires lots of preparation. Twitter by its nature is reductive. The position of the author here should really be read as: I know the other 5 lotto numbers. (baseline for a chance at success.) Now here is the 6th number, the random and lucky part that I'm taking credit for and that won't be reproducible by you.

chmod600 4y ago
"But your chances are FAR better if you are well prepared, know the stats..." Gambling is zero sum. Businesses, even failed ones, generally do some positive things along the way. Learning to do things that are useful and getting paid for them is really different from learning some useless information that happens to help you win at the expense of others.
- jiveturkey 4y ago
  I generally have to agree with you, except for your denigration of betting. If it sharpens your analytical skills it isn't useless. And besides that, there is entertainment value. The "expense" comes against other willing bettors (addicted ones excepted perhaps -- but then lets also exclude negative value businesses like juicero, or basic supply hoarders during covid). Your characterization seems a bit extreme. Anyway, to be clear, this isn't the point I was arguing. Whether zero sum vs positive sum, where any benefit might lie (value to society, or to anyone at all) is not my point. It's that skill is clearly involved in both activities, as well as a large luck factor. Not only did I not like the race track analogy, I found the critical reading of the tweet to be too narrow to be useful. For the record and again, I generally agree with your comment. But as a reply to my own, I think you went off base from my argument.

chmod600 4y ago

"But your chances are FAR better if you are well prepared, know the stats..." Gambling is zero sum. Businesses, even failed ones, generally do some positive things along the way. Learning to do things that are useful and getting paid for them is really different from learning some useless information that happens to help you win at the expense of others.

jiveturkey 4y ago
I generally have to agree with you, except for your denigration of betting. If it sharpens your analytical skills it isn't useless. And besides that, there is entertainment value. The "expense" comes against other willing bettors (addicted ones excepted perhaps -- but then lets also exclude negative value businesses like juicero, or basic supply hoarders during covid). Your characterization seems a bit extreme. Anyway, to be clear, this isn't the point I was arguing. Whether zero sum vs positive sum, where any benefit might lie (value to society, or to anyone at all) is not my point. It's that skill is clearly involved in both activities, as well as a large luck factor. Not only did I not like the race track analogy, I found the critical reading of the tweet to be too narrow to be useful. For the record and again, I generally agree with your comment. But as a reply to my own, I think you went off base from my argument.