Genius or just lucky?
After the note , I want to develop a slightly different idea: a place of good luck in life.
I must say: I do not deny the existence of geniuses. They are. If people have a brain, then someone has to work very well. Someone has to work poorly (clinical idiots), and the overwhelming majority - just work normally.
Also, I do not in any way deny the enormous influence of labor on the inclination of the balance in the direction of a favorable outcome (“the more I train, the more I get luckier” and about the probabilistic side.
')
Let's take a microscope of people from one social. layer, with the same level of intelligence and health.
After all, the graphs in the previous article can be viewed as a person’s life path, each point on the chart is a decision: to go / not to go, to buy / not to buy, to marry / not to marry, to enter the mat or philology, etc.
What will we do? Due to the fact that a lot of people we get a lot of different graphs. Someone in + that -. And someone (minority) only in - or +. And the funny thing is that all these people in our experiment are the same. Just someone lucky. And no one.
Those who are in + are starting to really think that they are geniuses. They begin to write books about their life path, not realizing that they are just fluctuations. That they just have to be according to the laws of probability theory.
This is especially clearly seen on large leaders. They usually make only a few major decisions for their professional life. And it may well be that these 5-6 decisions turned out to be correct only by chance. The probability of 5 times guessing ~ 3%. How many brilliant executives do we have? Maybe so much to eat?
It's more annoying when such a lucky one dies young, without waiting for the bad luck. Luck is perpetuated under the sign of genius.
Similar reasoning can be superimposed on brilliant commanders, investors, etc. (By the way, hence the recommendations of the type “only long-term trading is profitable”, of course, making only a few decisions in a few years, the probability of being burned down is less than trading intensively)
Undoubtedly, many people make the right decisions, i.e. expecting a positive outcome higher than 50 to 50. But even this does not guarantee that several decisions will be unsuccessful at first. And it will make a person doubt himself. Will make change their views. And it’s completely in vain, because it was just a losing streak. (Generate a random variable in Excel with a positive expectation mat, build a graph of amounts, make sure that you can easily get into minus at first)
Summary: The task of identifying a “genius / lucky guy” is actually very difficult. And it requires at least 2 things: availability of results from a large number of decisions (to exclude "50 to 50") and a long period of time (for changes in the environment to occur, and we could be sure that the system of decision making of a genius adapts to them and still gives results higher than 50 to 50.
Examples: a super profitable investor who has only bought gold for the last five years is hardly a genius.
The man who invested in tablet computers 10 years ago, and the man who did it 2 years ago. Both of them used the same reasoning. But the first has burned out, and the second fancies himself “foreseeing the future”
PS Is it possible to influence the probability side? How to increase your luck? I am pleased to hear your comments.
I must say: I do not deny the existence of geniuses. They are. If people have a brain, then someone has to work very well. Someone has to work poorly (clinical idiots), and the overwhelming majority - just work normally.
Also, I do not in any way deny the enormous influence of labor on the inclination of the balance in the direction of a favorable outcome (“the more I train, the more I get luckier” and about the probabilistic side.
')
Let's take a microscope of people from one social. layer, with the same level of intelligence and health.
After all, the graphs in the previous article can be viewed as a person’s life path, each point on the chart is a decision: to go / not to go, to buy / not to buy, to marry / not to marry, to enter the mat or philology, etc.
What will we do? Due to the fact that a lot of people we get a lot of different graphs. Someone in + that -. And someone (minority) only in - or +. And the funny thing is that all these people in our experiment are the same. Just someone lucky. And no one.
Those who are in + are starting to really think that they are geniuses. They begin to write books about their life path, not realizing that they are just fluctuations. That they just have to be according to the laws of probability theory.
This is especially clearly seen on large leaders. They usually make only a few major decisions for their professional life. And it may well be that these 5-6 decisions turned out to be correct only by chance. The probability of 5 times guessing ~ 3%. How many brilliant executives do we have? Maybe so much to eat?
It's more annoying when such a lucky one dies young, without waiting for the bad luck. Luck is perpetuated under the sign of genius.
Similar reasoning can be superimposed on brilliant commanders, investors, etc. (By the way, hence the recommendations of the type “only long-term trading is profitable”, of course, making only a few decisions in a few years, the probability of being burned down is less than trading intensively)
Undoubtedly, many people make the right decisions, i.e. expecting a positive outcome higher than 50 to 50. But even this does not guarantee that several decisions will be unsuccessful at first. And it will make a person doubt himself. Will make change their views. And it’s completely in vain, because it was just a losing streak. (Generate a random variable in Excel with a positive expectation mat, build a graph of amounts, make sure that you can easily get into minus at first)
Summary: The task of identifying a “genius / lucky guy” is actually very difficult. And it requires at least 2 things: availability of results from a large number of decisions (to exclude "50 to 50") and a long period of time (for changes in the environment to occur, and we could be sure that the system of decision making of a genius adapts to them and still gives results higher than 50 to 50.
Examples: a super profitable investor who has only bought gold for the last five years is hardly a genius.
The man who invested in tablet computers 10 years ago, and the man who did it 2 years ago. Both of them used the same reasoning. But the first has burned out, and the second fancies himself “foreseeing the future”
PS Is it possible to influence the probability side? How to increase your luck? I am pleased to hear your comments.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/126632/
All Articles