You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

shminux comments on "Follow your dreams" as a case study in incorrect thinking - Less Wrong Discussion

29 Post author: cousin_it 20 August 2014 01:18PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (52)

Comments (52)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: shminux 20 August 2014 05:01:12PM 2 points [-]

The last sentence of your comment seems to have an implied value judgment, like beating others at a zero-sum game is virtuous, but playing a positive-sum game is "settling".

I must have been unclear, this was not a value judgment, but an estimate of how happy one would feel. Plenty of talented people are not ambitious and perfectly happy to not develop their strengths to the max. I implicitly assumed a certain level of ambition, since a low-ambition person would likely not even concern themselves with "following dreams" and just happily go with the flow.

What do you think of Gwern's argument that we don't need more fiction books?

I am happy to discuss this question, but I don't see how it is relevant to the OP.

Comment author: cousin_it 20 August 2014 05:27:15PM *  3 points [-]

Wait, are you saying that ambition can only be fulfilled by playing zero-sum games? Creating a successful software company can yield more money than playing in the NBA. To me the question is more about which games you should choose, not how hard you should try to succeed. Or maybe I'm just completely misunderstanding your comments...

Comment author: shminux 20 August 2014 06:09:49PM *  1 point [-]

Wait, are you saying that ambition can only be fulfilled by playing zero-sum games?

Yeah, seems like a misunderstanding. Not sure where you inferred the "only" part from. Winning in zero-sum games is harder (but the reward is usually bigger), so no point playing them if you don't care all that much. Anyway, it's best to invent your own games, then they are positive sum for you.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 20 August 2014 08:55:37PM 4 points [-]

Winning in zero-sum games is harder (but the reward is usually bigger)

Really? Business is generally positive sum: you win big by being unique, not by competing head to head. Sports is zero sum. Here are figures I came up with from a quick search.

Total of the 100 highest paid CEOs in the world in 2013: 3.028 billion.

Total of the 100 highest paid athletes in the world in 12 months to June 2014: 2.75 billion

I had actually expected the difference to be larger in that direction, but certainly the athletes are not doing better than the businessmen.

One could think of a lot of other possible measures; that was just one it was easy to find figures for.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit