3 ms·

I think the point is just that more often than not, the kid is only where they are because they happen to have someone else taking care of the bigger challenges

I think the point is just that more often than not, the kid is only where they are because they happen to have someone else taking care of the bigger challenges that end up being the barriers for most other would-be young innovators. Kind of like how especially well done science fair projects or reports for very young kids are often the result of parents handling most of the intricate work or otherwise being engineers/scientists in the field themselves, thus being able to get them access to things typical kids don't have. Eg 12 year old me could only throw together a solar powered buzzer through trial and error with electronics as I had no one who could do anything beyond resistor networks, but my kids would be able to do much more advanced things because I would be able to handle/simplify the complex stuff for them. Another glaring example would probably be Sam-Bankman Fried. No way would any person without the connections offered by his parents have been able to get praised and handed billions of dollars by investors for playing video games while pitching to them.

anon291 3y ago
> I think the point is just that more often than not, the kid is only where they are because they happen to have someone else taking care of the bigger challenges that end up being the barriers for most other would-be young innovators. So what? If the child did nothing, nothing would have happened. He did something. It might be worthwhile. That should be celebrated. > Eg 12 year old me could only throw together a solar powered buzzer through trial and error with electronics as I had no one who could do anything beyond resistor networks, but my kids would be able to do much more advanced things because I would be able to handle/simplify the complex stuff for them. Which is why our emphasis on social mobility ought be at the family level. Families move socioeconomically. Individuals are just brownian motion.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  > So what? If the child did nothing, nothing would have happened. He did something. It might be worthwhile. That should be celebrated. That's the thing though. The kid could've done anything between something and approximately nothing, and you wouldn't be able to tell. It's just like with the science fairs - the especially well done projects sometimes are just 100% done by parents.
- dotnet00 3y ago
  It just makes the "18 year old does X" thing a lot less impressive compared to how it's presented.

anon291 3y ago

> I think the point is just that more often than not, the kid is only where they are because they happen to have someone else taking care of the bigger challenges that end up being the barriers for most other would-be young innovators. So what? If the child did nothing, nothing would have happened. He did something. It might be worthwhile. That should be celebrated. > Eg 12 year old me could only throw together a solar powered buzzer through trial and error with electronics as I had no one who could do anything beyond resistor networks, but my kids would be able to do much more advanced things because I would be able to handle/simplify the complex stuff for them. Which is why our emphasis on social mobility ought be at the family level. Families move socioeconomically. Individuals are just brownian motion.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
> So what? If the child did nothing, nothing would have happened. He did something. It might be worthwhile. That should be celebrated. That's the thing though. The kid could've done anything between something and approximately nothing, and you wouldn't be able to tell. It's just like with the science fairs - the especially well done projects sometimes are just 100% done by parents.
dotnet00 3y ago
It just makes the "18 year old does X" thing a lot less impressive compared to how it's presented.