4 ms·
Boah... fallacies everywhere in this piece. Let's start: > Picasso, Jeff Bezos, Mozart, Steve Jobs, Nikola Tesla, Elon Musk, Robert Oppenheimer, Peter Thiel, L
by jsdwarf 3y ago
Boah... fallacies everywhere in this piece. Let's start:
> Picasso, Jeff Bezos, Mozart, Steve Jobs, Nikola Tesla, Elon Musk, Robert Oppenheimer, Peter Thiel, Leonardo [... would be amazing PMs]
I beg to differ. Mozart died at 35, completely indebted after years of excess drinking. Jobs ousted from his own company after poor strategic decisions and intolerable behaviour. Picasso / Leonardo were geniuses of their own without need for co-workers.
> None of them [geniuses mentioned before] were motivated by OKRs, KPIs, data, or other people’s opinion.
Wrong. We know from another genius, Kurt Gödel, that even intellectually brilliant people struggle with procrastination. In Gödel's notebooks we find a multidimensional planning system (goals for the day, week, quarter, next year) and clear OKRs ("finish preparation of Princeton lecture until end of this month").
> The enormous mistake you can make is to adopt a model that requires tremendous people, without having these tremendous people.
Again wrong. Great discoveries are made by employing great discipline over a long time, not by hiring some rock stars. Why else would Elon Musk call one of his most ambitious ventures "the boring company"? Why else was Katalin Kariko, who "invented" the Covid-19-vaccine and received the nobel prize for Medicine in 2023 ousted twice from Penn University, because her research was deemed "not sexy enough" for grants?
- chrisoverzero 3y ago> Great discoveries are made by employing great discipline over a long time, not by hiring some rock stars. Why else would Elon Musk call one of his most ambitious ventures "the boring company"? Because it’s a company that makes tunnels. They bore holes in rock. It’s a company that bores – a boring company. It’s nothing more than a stupid pun.
- Lambdork 3y ago100 percent agree. Humans love giving credit to individuals for the achievements of a community. It's not that individual leaders aren't important, it's that we give them the lion's share of the credit. My org is full of people who were promoted because they can talk clearly and authoritatively about the project they botched the implementation of. But then they spent 10 people's time "influencing the team" to fix. But hey, they're loud, sure of themselves, and willing to break things so they must be good