Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

None of Us Knows What We're Doing

feross.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#31

Post by vannevar »

goo wrote: post #4

I don't usually play the part of armchair psychologist, but this essay appears to me to be an excellent example of projection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_bias The author assumes that because he doesn't know what he's doing, other people also don't. I disagree. Sometimes people can know exactly what they're doing, and be fairly confident about the possible consequences. I made a viral hit similar to the a…

Then I did it again with different code, without leveraging the existing user base, just to see if it was all luck.

Did you post it under a different name and account that none of your friends or contacts knew about? Just curious how you were able to be sure none of the existing user base or any of the notoriety you gained from the first hit contributed to the second.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#32

Post by ctdonath »

nicpottier wrote: post #18

Is it just me or is this perhaps taking the story of YouTube Instant a bit far? I mean ya, I guess it got some press and got him a job offer, but it's not like he invented cold fusion or something. It was a cute idea. Can we really draw any kind of real conclusions from it? Seems like that type of success, of a cute meme taking off is actually rather common, it is the longer term, build a sustainable company, king of…

He's excited about how successful he can be when applying himself to an idea for a few hours.

Scale it to 10,000 hours (Gladwell's Rule for success).

And that to >100,000 hours (lifetime devotion to an idea by the hyper-successful).

The importance of learning enough to recognize an opportunity, searching for it, finding it, then tenaciously applying oneself to it for decades, is something not taught in schools (at least not well) - most have to figure it out or fall into it.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#33

Post by thewisedude »

Your claim that most people who hit success dont have product vision may be true. Even though this might not be quantifiable, I get a similar idea from what I read. But I definitely think that it is not as uncommon as you think among Fortune 500 companies. I would think Bill gates( controversies/ethical questions apart) had a great vision. The reason why I say this is, I could say cancel a trip to Bahamas hoping to build something and see if I make it big. However, I would probably not drop out of a prestigious school to build something unless I am dead sure it will be a success. Obviously I am talking about Bill here.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#34

Post by jeromec »

Alex3917 wrote: post #29
jeromec wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yeah, I might give him some slack if he limited it to entrepreneurial success, although I still wouldn't agree with it. He contends the entrepreneurs behind Club Penguin (sold to Disney) or Mint (sold to Intuit) -- or to go old-school, Berkshire Hathaway -- "winged" their way to success. But he doesn't stop there: Even Fortune 500 CEOs, Nobel Prize winners, and U.S. presidents — all are really good at winging i…

"He contends the entrepreneurs behind Club Penguin (sold to Disney) or Mint (sold to Intuit)" I can't speak for Mint, but Scott Cook (who founded Intuit) was definitely winging it: http://itc.conversationsnetwork.org/shows/detail523.html#

Yes, I didn't say all entrepreneurs have a clear idea of what they want to do, how they will do it, and how it's likely to come out -- many clearly don't. However, that's not always the case. I believe Club Penguin, a site that clearly targeted a demographic of youth, and Mint which targeted personal finance, are examples of companies set up from day one with a clear idea of what they were trying to accomplish.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#35

Post by jeromec »

jeromec wrote: post #26
josiah wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" -- Albert Einstein

Sure, and we still research Gravity today. That doesn't mean we're guessing a ball will drop when released the same as it always has, now does it? At some point you do know what you're talking about, to a degree of certainty beyond "winging it", at any rate.

I find it funny someone downvoted my comment above. They must imagine we really don't know anything about anything. Perhaps we should just throw out all scientific experimentation, proofs, textbooks, etc. ever done and pretend the universe is actually working according to Dr. Seuss type principles. It's just as likely, right?

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#36

Post by hugh3 »

dvdhsu wrote: post #16
premchai21 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure about “none” being singular in that context? I agree that the title is inconsistent, but I'd have written “None of us know what we're doing” (if I couldn't just pick some other phrasing). gcide defines “none” as “No one; not one; not anything; – frequently used also partitively, or as a plural, not any.” and also offers “None of their productions are extant. –Blair”, both purportedly from 1913 Webster. S…

Yep, "none" is not always singular. For example: "None of them are coming today" instead of "none of them is coming today". It is generally considered unidiomatic to use the latter.

No, the former is wrong (and sounds very wrong to me) regardless of how frequently misused it is.

"None" == "Not one", and therefore singular.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#37

Post by vannevar »

jeromec wrote: post #7
goo wrote: post #4

I don't usually play the part of armchair psychologist, but this essay appears to me to be an excellent example of projection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_bias The author assumes that because he doesn't know what he's doing, other people also don't. I disagree. Sometimes people can know exactly what they're doing, and be fairly confident about the possible consequences. I made a viral hit similar to the a…

Yeah, according to the author I guess Einstein was "winging it" too.

I think you're missing the point of his argument. It isn't that we don't know anything, or that we cannot know anything. It is simply that people who are successful do not know how they became successful. Even the work of someone like Einstein is subject to the vagaries of chance; it's entirely possible that had he not been inspired by some trivial incident in his life, he might never have had the insight that led to relativity. The author may overstate the argument, but his fundamental point is sound.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#38

Post by jeromec »

vannevar wrote: post #37
jeromec wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, according to the author I guess Einstein was "winging it" too.

I think you're missing the point of his argument. It isn't that we don't know anything, or that we cannot know anything. It is simply that people who are successful do not know how they became successful . Even the work of someone like Einstein is subject to the vagaries of chance; it's entirely possible that had he not been inspired by some trivial incident in his life, he might never have had the insight that led t…

people who are successful do not know how they became successful.

I'm afraid I don't follow. You're saying Warren Buffet, arguably the greatest investor of all time, doesn't know how he became successful? Or that some random chance gave him his uncanny investment insight? If that's the case why should we bother trying to control our lives at all? Why don't we just walk around with our eyes shut and hope luck drops into our lap?

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#39

Post by vannevar »

jeromec wrote: post #38
vannevar wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the point of his argument. It isn't that we don't know anything, or that we cannot know anything. It is simply that people who are successful do not know how they became successful . Even the work of someone like Einstein is subject to the vagaries of chance; it's entirely possible that had he not been inspired by some trivial incident in his life, he might never have had the insight that led t…

people who are successful do not know how they became successful. I'm afraid I don't follow. You're saying Warren Buffet, arguably the greatest investor of all time, doesn't know how he became successful? Or that some random chance gave him his uncanny investment insight? If that's the case why should we bother trying to control our lives at all? Why don't we just walk around with our eyes shut and hope luck drops in…

You're saying Warren Buffet, arguably the greatest investor of all time, doesn't know how he became successful?

Yes.

Or that some random chance gave him his uncanny investment insight?

Possibly. The point is neither we, nor he, know.

[W]hy should we bother trying to control our lives at all?

A good question. Without getting into philosophical questions of free will, I suspect the pragmatic answer is that there is at least a weak correlation between the publicized 'formula' for success and actual success, for the same reason that most lottery winners are repeat buyers. By doing something, you expose yourself to fate. And generally, any activity we can afford to keep doing will at least permit us to make a living, which is the outcome for most. After all, we can't all be Warren Buffet---not even the Warren Buffets of the world.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#40

Post by spiffytech »

I'm surprised no one's brought up the counterexample of Steve Jobs. He turned Apple from an unknown garage startup to one of the industry's most powerful players in just a few short years.

When Jobs was ousted, Apple went to the dumpster. When he returned, Apple once again rose to great success. Jobs was directly responsible for enough wildly successful products to make probably any other company or inventor in history green with envy.

It would be silly to claim that Apple's success is due to blind luck. Jobs' relationship with Apple and Apple's products appears causal and has been repeated in different market environments with vastly different product lines, which flatly contradicts the idea that _all_ successful people wing it and succeed based on luck.

Sure, some people succeed on accident. Some people succeed because they have real talent and just happen to get publicity at the right time. But some people succeed on purpose.

Post reply on HN