23 ms·

How celebrities stay famous regardless of talent

43 points by robg 17y ago

tokenadult 17y ago
"'The very experts who could kind of inform everyone else don't. They actually keep feeding them the information they already know because that helps establish a connection,' Fast says." This is a very good description of a lot of online communication, including many HN discussion threads. But I don't have to tell you that, because you already know it. I guess this generalizes to saying that it feels like swimming upstream sometimes to add significant amounts of new information to an online discussion among casual participants who may not know one another in real life. I find it easier to dig out my references and really lay out a lot of new information in some online networks I participate in with other members of a membership organization. Many of us have met one another in real life, and have already established emotional bonds over a meal or a beer, so on those networks I feel more comfortable challenging conventional wisdom. That CAN happen here on HN, of course, but it feels considerably less natural.
- Radix 17y ago
  FWIW, you're one of my favorite posters and commenters. Your posts often feel as a new idea. Perhaps your beliefs and views are different enough enough from the established practice (of education or other) that what is old information to you sounds like new information to others (me). You may feel as though you're swimming upstream, but I simply find a new idea to play with. I really do enjoy your posts.
- jlees 17y ago
  I actually find it interesting that among geek circles, invoking obscure knowledge, including obscure 'celebrities', can build one's credibility. Hence, aren't you more likely to encounter stuff (and people) you didn't know beforehand when talking to hackers - and pretend you knew it all along? It's also a meritocracy, generally smart hackers get famous because they do smart things, not because they release a sex tape.
wallflower 17y ago
On a boat ride in Bruges, Belgium, I heard a boat operator/philosopher expound on why it was so that teachers were paid so little, rockstars like Ozzy Osbourne were rich, and famous composers like Mozart died broke. He said it was a question of network effects and impact. Mozart died broke because of poor money management and the inability to reach a worldwide audience. An elementary school teacher is only paid a small amount relative to most celebrities because their impact is small. They cannot reach more 10-30 students at a time. A baseball player is paid millions because he (through cable TV) can impact/entertain many more anonymous people indirectly. Is it fair? Probably not but there aren't incentive systems in place to pay good teachers according to their impact. Clive James had a fascinating BBC documentary a while back, a multi-part series "Fame in the 20th Century". It's pre-Internet but I believe still very relevant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fame_in_the_20th_Century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fame_in_the_20th_Century
- amichail 17y ago
  Teachers can have a huge impact with online education.
  - tvon 17y ago
    Not really, to have an impact a teacher needs 1-on-1 time with a student, otherwise the kid might as well use electronic material without any teacher at all.
    - amichail 17y ago
      What about online university lectures? Isn't there potential for some of those professors to have a huge impact?
      - lief79 17y ago
        Sure, but the bigger differences are usually made while people are younger. It gives them more time to take advantage of them and grow with them. *addendum: In short, if they can appreciate the university lecture, odds are they've already had some good teachers, and/or managed to work around the poor ones.
edw519 17y ago
When Einstein asked Chaplin under the glare of klieg lights what it all meant, Chaplin replied, "Nothing, absolutely nothing."
frossie 17y ago
Makes sense. This is why Michael Jackson's death practically brought down the Internet, right? Irrespective of how many people actually cared about the man or his music, he was somebody that everybody knew of. Similar with Princess Diana's death - even people who didn't care about her rang around their friends saying "Did you hear... ?"
known 17y ago
http://twittercelebrities.org/ http://twittercelebrities.org/

43 points by robg 17y ago

"'The very experts who could kind of inform everyone else don't. They actually keep feeding them the information they already know because that helps establish a connection,' Fast says." This is a very good description of a lot of online communication, including many HN discussion threads. But I don't have to tell you that, because you already know it. I guess this generalizes to saying that it feels like swimming upstream sometimes to add significant amounts of new information to an online discussion among casual participants who may not know one another in real life. I find it easier to dig out my references and really lay out a lot of new information in some online networks I participate in with other members of a membership organization. Many of us have met one another in real life, and have already established emotional bonds over a meal or a beer, so on those networks I feel more comfortable challenging conventional wisdom. That CAN happen here on HN, of course, but it feels considerably less natural.

Radix 17y ago
FWIW, you're one of my favorite posters and commenters. Your posts often feel as a new idea. Perhaps your beliefs and views are different enough enough from the established practice (of education or other) that what is old information to you sounds like new information to others (me). You may feel as though you're swimming upstream, but I simply find a new idea to play with. I really do enjoy your posts.
jlees 17y ago
I actually find it interesting that among geek circles, invoking obscure knowledge, including obscure 'celebrities', can build one's credibility. Hence, aren't you more likely to encounter stuff (and people) you didn't know beforehand when talking to hackers - and pretend you knew it all along? It's also a meritocracy, generally smart hackers get famous because they do smart things, not because they release a sex tape.

wallflower 17y ago

On a boat ride in Bruges, Belgium, I heard a boat operator/philosopher expound on why it was so that teachers were paid so little, rockstars like Ozzy Osbourne were rich, and famous composers like Mozart died broke. He said it was a question of network effects and impact. Mozart died broke because of poor money management and the inability to reach a worldwide audience. An elementary school teacher is only paid a small amount relative to most celebrities because their impact is small. They cannot reach more 10-30 students at a time. A baseball player is paid millions because he (through cable TV) can impact/entertain many more anonymous people indirectly. Is it fair? Probably not but there aren't incentive systems in place to pay good teachers according to their impact. Clive James had a fascinating BBC documentary a while back, a multi-part series "Fame in the 20th Century". It's pre-Internet but I believe still very relevant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fame_in_the_20th_Century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fame_in_the_20th_Century

amichail 17y ago
Teachers can have a huge impact with online education.
- tvon 17y ago
  Not really, to have an impact a teacher needs 1-on-1 time with a student, otherwise the kid might as well use electronic material without any teacher at all.
  - amichail 17y ago
    What about online university lectures? Isn't there potential for some of those professors to have a huge impact?
    - lief79 17y ago
      Sure, but the bigger differences are usually made while people are younger. It gives them more time to take advantage of them and grow with them. *addendum: In short, if they can appreciate the university lecture, odds are they've already had some good teachers, and/or managed to work around the poor ones.

edw519 17y ago

When Einstein asked Chaplin under the glare of klieg lights what it all meant, Chaplin replied, "Nothing, absolutely nothing."

frossie 17y ago

Makes sense. This is why Michael Jackson's death practically brought down the Internet, right? Irrespective of how many people actually cared about the man or his music, he was somebody that everybody knew of. Similar with Princess Diana's death - even people who didn't care about her rang around their friends saying "Did you hear... ?"

known 17y ago

http://twittercelebrities.org/ http://twittercelebrities.org/