gwern comments on Why would we think artists perform better on drugs ? - Less Wrong

13 Post author: kilobug 30 October 2011 02:01PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (35)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: gwern 30 October 2011 04:21:58PM 0 points [-]

When looking at arts, we don't regard the average. Countless people write books or paint. Almost everyone at least tried once. What history remembers are the few best of their time. Not those who did better in average, but those who manage to do better than most of their peers. Those to the left of the picture, in which the amplitude of the green curve is nearly void, but the red curve still exists.

I think the red curve picture may be incomplete; it doesn't look like it yields a Lotka curve.

Comment author: kilobug 30 October 2011 05:39:28PM 1 point [-]

The red curve/green curve used the very simple model of 20d10 vs 2d100, it doesn't claim to reflect precisely the process of art creation.

Comment author: Vaniver 30 October 2011 05:34:15PM 1 point [-]

The red curve does correctly depict 2d100, his model of creative risk-taking. I agree with you that 2d100 seems like a worse model to use than a power law or exponential.