Forum
»
Can you be “successful” without significant levels of luck?
10-11-2020, 11:18 AM
-
#31
Originally Posted By BetaAsPhuck⏩
I'd like to think that my charisma, energy, personality, enabled me to build and keep some of the connections that helped me enter the work force, and that these qualities/actions were brought about from my own innate effort to be a somewhat likeable person. If folks from your major/industry like you as a person, they'll extend a helping hand. I'd say I agree I'm lucky that I found some of the right helpful people at the right times, in fact if it wasn't for them I might have a (likely) way worse/different income and work experience by now, but in my perspective it was my willfulness and desire for personal development that got me here.However...
Would you agree that it's lucky you had connections who had the means and opportunity to help you get that job? Purely through your own effort, maybe you wouldn't have.
Would you agree that it's lucky you had connections who had the means and opportunity to help you get that job? Purely through your own effort, maybe you wouldn't have.
10-11-2020, 11:30 AM
-
#32
- Shortfuze
- "Your one f*ck fantasy"
-
- Shortfuze
- "Your one f*ck fantasy"
- Join Date: Feb 2004
- Location: United States
- Posts: 31,897
- Rep Power: 179945
-
-
I guess it depends on your definition of "successful". It can mean something as basic as being able to provide the basic necessities of life to oneself or one's family members without being deprived all the way to owning mansions, luxury cars, being famous, being recognized etc.
*Simplicity is the key to life*
Thanks ZBlacktt for the mod rep!
Thanks ForumSentinel for the admin rep!
Thanks Gxp23 for the mod rep!
Thanks 400LB Gorilla for the mod rep!
Thanks CountryMike for admin rep!
Thanks Nics1246 for mod rep!
I got married on August 24, 2013!!
ლ(╹◡╹ლ)
10-11-2020, 11:34 AM
-
#33
- Mike1991
- Registered User
-
- Mike1991
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2008
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Age: 35
- Posts: 12,244
- Rep Power: 13897
-
-
Intelligence creates luck
If you can envision what scenarios will give you 'luck' you can be in the right place at the right time. Not always, but more times then not.
If you can envision what scenarios will give you 'luck' you can be in the right place at the right time. Not always, but more times then not.
RON PAUL 2012
10-11-2020, 11:42 AM
-
#34
- FAPhaggot
- Hawaiian shirt hoarder
-
- FAPhaggot
- Hawaiian shirt hoarder
- Join Date: Nov 2015
- Posts: 24,226
- Rep Power: 185354
-
-
It really does just come down to luck.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tec...st-chance/amp/
Cliffs:
-Researchers model individuals on a bell curve of talent, then give them opportunities to make money that talented people are more likely to seize.
-Their end result models IRL wealth outcomes very closely (80:20 rule)
-There is absolutely no connection between talent and wealth at the end of the experiment, for either the rich or the poor. It's just who got the luckiest and unluckiest with the dice rolls.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tec...st-chance/amp/
Cliffs:
-Researchers model individuals on a bell curve of talent, then give them opportunities to make money that talented people are more likely to seize.
-Their end result models IRL wealth outcomes very closely (80:20 rule)
-There is absolutely no connection between talent and wealth at the end of the experiment, for either the rich or the poor. It's just who got the luckiest and unluckiest with the dice rolls.
The distribution of wealth follows a well-known pattern sometimes called an 80:20 rule: 80 percent of the wealth is owned by 20 percent of the people. Indeed, a report last year concluded that just eight men had a total wealth equivalent to that of the world’s poorest 3.8 billion people.
...
But there is a problem with this idea: while wealth distribution follows a power law, the distribution of human skills generally follows a normal distribution that is symmetric about an average value. For example, intelligence, as measured by IQ tests, follows this pattern. Average IQ is 100, but nobody has an IQ of 1,000 or 10,000.
The same is true of effort, as measured by hours worked. Some people work more hours than average and some work less, but nobody works a billion times more hours than anybody else.
...
But there is a problem with this idea: while wealth distribution follows a power law, the distribution of human skills generally follows a normal distribution that is symmetric about an average value. For example, intelligence, as measured by IQ tests, follows this pattern. Average IQ is 100, but nobody has an IQ of 1,000 or 10,000.
The same is true of effort, as measured by hours worked. Some people work more hours than average and some work less, but nobody works a billion times more hours than anybody else.
Today we get an answer thanks to the work of Alessandro Pluchino at the University of Catania in Italy and a couple of colleagues. These guys have created a computer model of human talent and the way people use it to exploit opportunities in life. The model allows the team to study the role of chance in this process.
...
Pluchino and co’s model is straightforward. It consists of N people, each with a certain level of talent (skill, intelligence, ability, and so on). This talent is distributed normally around some average level, with some standard deviation. So some people are more talented than average and some are less so, but nobody is orders of magnitude more talented than anybody else.
This is the same kind of distribution seen for various human skills, or even characteristics like height or weight. Some people are taller or smaller than average, but nobody is the size of an ant or a skyscraper. Indeed, we are all quite similar.
The computer model charts each individual through a working life of 40 years. During this time, the individuals experience lucky events that they can exploit to increase their wealth if they are talented enough.
However, they also experience unlucky events that reduce their wealth. These events occur at random.
At the end of the 40 years, Pluchino and co rank the individuals by wealth and study the characteristics of the most successful. They also calculate the wealth distribution. They then repeat the simulation many times to check the robustness of the outcome.
...
Pluchino and co’s model is straightforward. It consists of N people, each with a certain level of talent (skill, intelligence, ability, and so on). This talent is distributed normally around some average level, with some standard deviation. So some people are more talented than average and some are less so, but nobody is orders of magnitude more talented than anybody else.
This is the same kind of distribution seen for various human skills, or even characteristics like height or weight. Some people are taller or smaller than average, but nobody is the size of an ant or a skyscraper. Indeed, we are all quite similar.
The computer model charts each individual through a working life of 40 years. During this time, the individuals experience lucky events that they can exploit to increase their wealth if they are talented enough.
However, they also experience unlucky events that reduce their wealth. These events occur at random.
At the end of the 40 years, Pluchino and co rank the individuals by wealth and study the characteristics of the most successful. They also calculate the wealth distribution. They then repeat the simulation many times to check the robustness of the outcome.
When the team rank individuals by wealth, the distribution is exactly like that seen in real-world societies.“The ‘80-20’ rule is respected, since 80 percent of the population owns only 20 percent of the total capital, while the remaining 20 percent owns 80 percent of the same capital,” report Pluchino and co.
That may not be surprising or unfair if the wealthiest 20 percent turn out to be the most talented. But that isn’t what happens.The wealthiest individuals are typically not the most talented or anywhere near it. “The maximum success never coincides with the maximum talent, and vice-versa,” say the researchers.
So if not talent, what other factor causes this skewed wealth distribution?“Our simulation clearly shows that such a factor is just pure luck,” say Pluchino and co.
That may not be surprising or unfair if the wealthiest 20 percent turn out to be the most talented. But that isn’t what happens.The wealthiest individuals are typically not the most talented or anywhere near it. “The maximum success never coincides with the maximum talent, and vice-versa,” say the researchers.
So if not talent, what other factor causes this skewed wealth distribution?“Our simulation clearly shows that such a factor is just pure luck,” say Pluchino and co.
FA Crew
Always Pick 1 Crew
"Experience is something you get right after you need it."
10-11-2020, 11:44 AM
-
#35
10-11-2020, 11:55 AM
-
#36
- propreffered7
- Registered User
-
- propreffered7
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Posts: 36,839
- Rep Power: 86393
-
-
"Luck" is hard to define
But yea.. i remember working for 7.25 an hour 40 hours a week, and i was technically working hard with very little to show for it. Same thing with most of those employees
Provided its not super difficult work i think id dip down to those people that show up week in, week out for minimum wage than others. Srs
I do think they may be a bit more frivolous with their money to try to counteract the depression. So thats another thing too
But yea.. i remember working for 7.25 an hour 40 hours a week, and i was technically working hard with very little to show for it. Same thing with most of those employees
Provided its not super difficult work i think id dip down to those people that show up week in, week out for minimum wage than others. Srs
I do think they may be a bit more frivolous with their money to try to counteract the depression. So thats another thing too
10-11-2020, 11:56 AM
-
#37
- ltsOgre
- I hate capitalism srs
-
- ltsOgre
- I hate capitalism srs
- Join Date: Feb 2020
- Posts: 5,313
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Back when boomers were growing up, skill played a bigger role since class mobility was more common. Now with extreme inequality, it's mostly luck, in particular who your parents are.
I hate capitalism srs
10-11-2020, 12:23 PM
-
#38
- Ironmanlet
- Adamantium User
-
- Ironmanlet
- Adamantium User
- Join Date: Aug 2009
- Location: Cajun Country
- Age: 40
- Height: 5'7"
- Weight: 185 lbs
- Posts: 52,454
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 417657
-
-
Originally Posted By Mike1991⏩
Where does the intelligence come from?Intelligence creates luck
If you can envision what scenarios will give you 'luck' you can be in the right place at the right time. Not always, but more times then not.
If you can envision what scenarios will give you 'luck' you can be in the right place at the right time. Not always, but more times then not.
“The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.“
PS: Don't eat poop, just don't let the idea of it stop you from living life to its fullest.
10-11-2020, 12:46 PM
-
#39
- imbeingcereal
- Registered User
-
- imbeingcereal
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2009
- Age: 36
- Posts: 3,914
- Rep Power: 26058
-
-
I think reaching the right tail of outcomes definitely requires luck. To be the best in the world, you need to have some sort of natural ability (i.e. pro athletes/people with godly intellects) to beat out the competition because everybody works really hard at that level. The reason why I err more on the side of life's outcomes being more due to "skill" than "luck", however, is that I don't think it's that hard to have a successful, say upper-middle class, life in a first world country like America. The playbook is simple:
-Get good enough grades/test scores to get into a decent university
-Major in STEM/Finance/Accounting or other degree that teaches you marketable skill-sets
-Get a job, live below your means, and save for the future
That's pretty much it. People aren't willing to sacrifice the present for the future or try to take the easy path out, which is where they get into trouble though and ask for the government to bail them out or take down the people who made better decisions.
-Get good enough grades/test scores to get into a decent university
-Major in STEM/Finance/Accounting or other degree that teaches you marketable skill-sets
-Get a job, live below your means, and save for the future
That's pretty much it. People aren't willing to sacrifice the present for the future or try to take the easy path out, which is where they get into trouble though and ask for the government to bail them out or take down the people who made better decisions.
10-11-2020, 12:51 PM
-
#40
- propreffered7
- Registered User
-
- propreffered7
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Posts: 36,839
- Rep Power: 86393
-
-
Originally Posted By imbeingcereal⏩
Yea but of the 3 things you listed the 1st one is actually troublesome. My parents lost a chitload of money right before i graduated high schoolI think reaching the right tail of outcomes definitely requires luck. To be the best in the world, you need to have some sort of natural ability (i.e. pro athletes/people with godly intellects) to beat out the competition because everybody works really hard at that level. The reason why I err more on the side of life's outcomes being more due to "skill" than "luck", however, is that I don't think it's that hard to have a successful, say upper-middle class, life in a first world country like America. The playbook is simple:
-Get good enough grades/test scores to get into a decent university
-Major in STEM/Finance/Accounting or other degree that teaches you marketable skill-sets
-Get a job, live below your means, and save for the future
That's pretty much it. People aren't willing to sacrifice the present for the future or try to take the easy path out, which is where they get into trouble though and ask for the government to bail them out or take down the people who made better decisions.
-Get good enough grades/test scores to get into a decent university
-Major in STEM/Finance/Accounting or other degree that teaches you marketable skill-sets
-Get a job, live below your means, and save for the future
That's pretty much it. People aren't willing to sacrifice the present for the future or try to take the easy path out, which is where they get into trouble though and ask for the government to bail them out or take down the people who made better decisions.
As a result the environment became very tumultuous. Its hard to study and focus when your environment is chaotic around you. For the people who are even lower class its prob gangs and chit
Similarly, those with nice pads are prob less stressed and can focus solely on grades
I think it can be done in theory, its just different in practice.
Similarly to op's question id say you "can" be successful without luck, but its not likely
10-11-2020, 12:53 PM
-
#41
10-11-2020, 12:55 PM
-
#42
- KirkMcquest
- Registered User
-
- KirkMcquest
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2008
- Age: 54
- Posts: 4,851
- Rep Power: 25289
-
-
I think the harder you work the luckier you get. Its funny but people who take chances and put themselves out there tend to get "lucky" and those who don't never get lucky.
You have to put your pole in the water to catch a fish.
You have to put your pole in the water to catch a fish.
"I yam what I yam" - Popeye the sailor
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-

- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts