Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work? • Hacker News Board

pg wrote: post #7

Luck is a multiplier of work. It's exceptionally rare to benefit from pure luck-- to find buried treasure, or something like that. Usually you have to be working on something to give luck room to strike. Luck can also set you up in a better position initially. E.g. you could be lucky enough to be born in a country not run by kleptocratic dictators, or to have a received a good education, or to have good health. But y…

I certainly agree that "tinkering around" can lead to amazing discoveries (e.g., penicillin, chemotheraphy) and/or great timing (e.g., pets.com)...

The reason why I posted the thread is because I've come across a lot of brilliant people who just so happen to be very "self-righteous." They assume that their intellect and sheer willpower will translate into entrepreneurial success...

Re: Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work?

#15

Post by cmos » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 4:49 AM UTC

every time my company has almost gone out of business, something has happenend to keep it around. Sometimes it's a spike in sales, other times a last minute investment.

I consider myself the hardest working luckiest guy in the world.

Re: Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work?

#16

Post by pasbesoin » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 5:39 PM UTC

At the level of anecdote, the misfortune that many lottery winners eventually encounter (lose it all, and/or enter social isolation) makes me think that luck is not sufficient. Without work and preparation, you will not be able to capitalize on luck when it does occur.

Now, if someone wants to prove the contrary, feel free to give me a bunch of money I wasn't expecting.

Re: Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work?

#17

Post by sho » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 6:05 PM UTC

The question is bad, the binary options are false.

Imagine I build and launch twitter2.com. I put a lot of hard work into it. It fails, of course. Was I unlucky?

Obviously there is (at least) a 3rd dynamic at work. It's hard to nail it down, but let's called it insight.

When I first saw twitter, soon after it was launched, I thought it was stupid. Actually, I still think that. But obviously they were onto something. Obviously the market for that kind of service is much larger than I would have imagined.

They worked hard, no doubt. They had luck, I suppose, that the idea first occurred to them, that they had the skills necessary to pursue it, that they were born into a rich society with the leeway available to pursue speculative opportunities, etc. You can go as far as you like with that kind of digging.

But without insight, that people would want such a thing, they'd have nothing. "Luck OR hard work" is meaningless. It removes any kind of decision-making from the equation. That decision, of what to work hard on, in which arena luck might have the opportunity to shine on you, is critical. Anyone can work hard. Anyone can experience a little bit of random luck. Insight is what ties it together, turns good into great, turns mere effort into rousing success.

Re: Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work?

#18

Post by zdmc23 » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 6:37 PM UTC

sho wrote: post #17

The question is bad, the binary options are false. Imagine I build and launch twitter2.com. I put a lot of hard work into it. It fails, of course. Was I unlucky? Obviously there is (at least) a 3rd dynamic at work. It's hard to nail it down, but let's called it insight. When I first saw twitter, soon after it was launched, I thought it was stupid. Actually, I still think that. But obviously they were onto something.…

Bah! There are plenty of people who think they have insight into a particular market when they release their product. Some of those people show "insight" in hindsight, but what about the others? Were they less insightful?

If twitter2.com takes off: you look like a genius; but if it flops, you just lacked insight?

Re: Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work?

#19

Post by zdmc23 » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 6:38 PM UTC

pasbesoin wrote: post #16

At the level of anecdote, the misfortune that many lottery winners eventually encounter (lose it all, and/or enter social isolation) makes me think that luck is not sufficient. Without work and preparation, you will not be able to capitalize on luck when it does occur. Now, if someone wants to prove the contrary, feel free to give me a bunch of money I wasn't expecting.

"Now, if someone wants to prove the contrary, feel free to give me a bunch of money I wasn't expecting."

Sorry, you're just not that lucky!

Re: Ask HN: Luck or Hard Work?

#20

Post by sho » Fri, Mar 13, 2009, 6:58 PM UTC

zdmc23 wrote: post #18

sho wrote: post #17

The question is bad, the binary options are false. Imagine I build and launch twitter2.com. I put a lot of hard work into it. It fails, of course. Was I unlucky? Obviously there is (at least) a 3rd dynamic at work. It's hard to nail it down, but let's called it insight. When I first saw twitter, soon after it was launched, I thought it was stupid. Actually, I still think that. But obviously they were onto something.…

Bah! There are plenty of people who think they have insight into a particular market when they release their product. Some of those people show "insight" in hindsight, but what about the others? Were they less insightful? If twitter2.com takes off: you look like a genius; but if it flops, you just lacked insight?

"Some of those people show "insight" in hindsight, but what about the others? Were they less insightful?"

Well obviously?

"If twitter2.com takes off: you look like a genius; but if it flops, you just lacked insight?"

Sure, more than you lacked "hard work" or "luck".

I was presenting "twitter2.com" as an extreme example. Of course, it will never succeed. We can recognise that because it takes just a minimal amount of insight to predict it. What I'm trying to demonstrate, through this contrived example, is that luck won't save you if you worked hard on something dumb.

Insight! Decisions! What to do, what to make! These are key; why bother arguing?

The question presumes that there are just two factors to success: hard work and luck. I'm trying to say that there is at least one more critically important factor, which I loosely labelled "insight", with a disclaimer no less! I don't see why this is controversial, it seems self-evident.