Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010) • Hacker News Board

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#121

Post by mtdewcmu » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 6:36 PM UTC

michaelochurch wrote: post #114

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key element is motivation. Good managers are about getting the job done. Bad managers are all about abusing the people under them to make themselves feel more important. These are not compatible goals. One of the tragedies of MBA culture is that it teaches businesses to screw over employees, customers, and often shareholders too. There's no sense of making a contribution - it's all about being the criminal with t…

Good managers are about getting the job done. Bad managers are all about abusing the people under them to make themselves feel more important. I agree but it's not that simple. Most bad managers (the garden variety bad ones, not the psychopaths) aren't trying to abuse the people under them, but are trying to make themselves look good at any cost. They often look like they're making "hard choices" (i.e. choices agains…

I agree that most managers, even if they are bad, would not abuse people under them just because it feels gratifying. That kind of behavior would be a really strong indicator of a serious mental problem. Most of the time the abuse pattern would be more about neglect or a failure of empathy. The abuse might be in plain sight and look calculated to inflict pain, but the manager would either be oblivious or practicing denial. Their attention would be on some other priority, like pleasing their own superior.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#122

Post by mtdewcmu » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 7:04 PM UTC

mtdewcmu wrote: post #109

michaelochurch wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know this person, but did you ever think that his obnoxiousness is the result of a broken culture of anti-intellecutalism, recklessness, and machismo that emerges naturally in a world where programmers are business subordinates, as opposed to one in which we are autonomous professionals who are sponsored rather than traditionally employed or managed? It's not like obnoxious bosses have a tribal affiliation to…

The boss I'm talking about is a special case and one-of-a-kind as far as I know. He also happens to be foreign-born and from a country that I don't know much about. But he admitted once that his friends had nick-named him Eeyore on account of his not-so-sunny disposition, so I think being obnoxious was/is a cross he has to bear alone. I'm too far removed from corporate culture right now to really feel what you're say…

I wonder if my comment was downvoted because I made him sound as if he was cursed with some condition outside of his control and that's all. I feel sorry for people who have self-defeating patterns of behavior that cause them problems -- even if I, myself, could not stand to be around them, because I don't believe anyone would willingly choose to have problems. This boss may well have even been in that category. Who knows. But in point of fact, his behavior was frankly abusive, vindictive, and bullying toward me, and he would throw demonstrative fits of temper and behave in ways that I've never thought possible to get away with in a workplace, all the while being very personal and spewing pure hate. When this type of person is your boss, it only makes it so much harder to deal with.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#123

Post by dwaltrip » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 7:34 PM UTC

mtdewcmu wrote: post #119

dwaltrip wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are over analyzing this. The author isn't deriding those with intelligence, he simply said it can sometimes provide a false sense of assurance. He also implied that in a start up, hard work matters more than raw intelligence, but intelligence can provide some advantage.

I'm not sure if I'm reading too much in, or if most people miss what it actually said and mentally insert platitudes. Even if it hedges all of its statements at some point and ends on a perfectly nonoffensive note, it still seems like a mediocre essay, because then it has absolutely nothing to say and uses a lot of words to say nothing. "Your IQ will kill your Startup" sounds like bold language to me. At the very lea…

I definitely agree with you that the title is over the top (a little click-baity). I think the tone of the actual essay is more reasonable.

While it may a somewhat mediocre piece, I didn't see anything to indicate anti-intellectualism. However un-original, the main idea is important and worth being reminded of (at least, I enjoyed the reminder). I think the last two paragraphs sum it up well.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#124

Post by agent00f » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 7:39 PM UTC

PeterGriffin wrote: post #63

The point the article makes is well understood and valid: even if you have the potential, if you don't work hard to use it, you won't develop the skills and discipline for success. All right. But we don't need to cast failures and flaws as the result of "high intelligence". Just a few days ago we had an article about the "curse of smart people". It feels like a bunch of people patting themselves on the back and telli…

> Being good at school is not a sure sign of high intelligence - school is an artificial environment that values short-term memorizing of facts, over critical analysis and independent decision-making.

This is a common but mislead read of the situation. "Intelligence" (per IQ) as typically defined is abstraction/calculation ability. This is very useful in highly rational environments where being correct matters, such as academic ones.

OTOH, in "life", it's _far_ more important to succeed in social environments where being analytically correct is largely irrelevant and thus those abilities have limited direct value. For example, it doesn't necessarily "make sense" on the surface to simply support a direct manager regardless their arguments' quality; yet that may be the socially optimal course of action. IOW, it should come as no surprise there's limited correlation when using an orthogonal metric. Some have even introduce separate metrics ("EQ") to account for such discrepancies.

The societal problem here is that we often expect those well-training and successful mostly in the former environment to thrive in the latter. Whether the issues is in preparing them for the wrong place or society doesn't live up to what we believe how students will live is another discussion.

> Can't we agree "intelligent" is the skill of setting good goals, achieving them, and making good decisions in light of limited facts, limited time...

The reality is that traditionally intelligent people are good at these things, esp when their talents are specifically applied. For example, they can be good at figuring out their shortcomings at overemphasizing risk when it's explained.

However it's unrealistic to assume those prepped all their life only for one enviro will adapt autodidactically.

Also, I don't think just redefining words like what success/intelligence means is an adequate resolution.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#125

Post by agent00f » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 7:55 PM UTC

bocalogic wrote: post #93

Years ago I was traveling to Oakland for business. My flight was delayed so I hit the magazine store. Bought some gaming magazines, business magazines and one copy of Havard Business Review. There was an article in it that caught my eye, "Why do dumb people succeed more in business than smart people." I dont remember exactly the title but it was an 8 to 10 page article that went into detail comparing high IQ people t…

I wonder if such studies are susceptible to bad stats of confirmation bias as many business studies are.

What I mean is whether they had proper controls to assess whether each average person is more likely to succeed than each "smart" person given the same scenario.

If they instead took a bunch of successful people, figured out that a lot of them weren't that "smart", then it could be the product of there being a lot more average than smart folk. In other words, "smart" doesn't guarantee business success such that all successful businesspeople are IQ gods, but we all knew that.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#126

Post by nostrademons » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 8:06 PM UTC

bestdaytostart wrote: post #31

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being poor completely sucks. Watching your cat die from cancer that you can't afford to treat sucks. The point of getting rich is so that your life doesn't suck. Not to compare yourself to others. Getting rich is necessarily hard, otherwise everyone would be on the road to becoming rich. People are unlikely to get rich by doing work which satisfies. But if they make it, then at least life won't suck anymore.

Being poor does suck. However, being rich does not prevent your life from sucking. All the money in the world won't prevent you or a loved one from passing due to an untreatable illness. All the money in the world won't buy you friends or genuine respect. It can't buy you love (though it can buy you sex). Furthermore, you don't need to be rich to avoid the hardship of being poor, you just have to make a sufficient am…

I've sometimes heard this put as "Money can't buy happiness...but it helps!"

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#127

Post by mtdewcmu » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 8:46 PM UTC

dwaltrip wrote: post #123

mtdewcmu wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if I'm reading too much in, or if most people miss what it actually said and mentally insert platitudes. Even if it hedges all of its statements at some point and ends on a perfectly nonoffensive note, it still seems like a mediocre essay, because then it has absolutely nothing to say and uses a lot of words to say nothing. "Your IQ will kill your Startup" sounds like bold language to me. At the very lea…

I definitely agree with you that the title is over the top (a little click-baity). I think the tone of the actual essay is more reasonable. While it may a somewhat mediocre piece, I didn't see anything to indicate anti-intellectualism. However un-original, the main idea is important and worth being reminded of (at least, I enjoyed the reminder). I think the last two paragraphs sum it up well.

I guess you have to read between the lines just a tad to see it the way I do. In fact, you have to do it rather literally, because some of the irritating message that I read into it I'm basing on the fact that certain things were left out that I think virtually any other author would have included. There are at least two ways to read something like this: 1. You could look exclusively at the words that are written and attempt to take them entirely at face value. I say attempt, because I'm not sure there necessarily always is a face value: sometimes the writer just can't figure out what he actually wants to say, and when you read the piece, it's nothing but a disconnected jumble of sentences. Some sentences seem to be going somewhere, but different sentences are in conflict with each other about where to go, and the piece ends up going nowhere. So what's the face value? I think most people are charitable and will insert their own message when there isn't really one there, and they actually seem to do it unconsciously without being aware that they made up their own message. I think that's what most people do with something like this. 2. You could, instead, read it as if you were standing directly behind the person as they were writing the essay, looking over their shoulder, trying to figure out what's going on in their head. For better or for worse, I'm inclined to go to #2. At least, I will go there at times when what I'm reading seems incoherent, and I find myself more interested in the person writing than with the message they want me to hear.

I could go on and dissect the whole essay, paragraph by paragraph, reporting what the motivation seems to be there, and I wouldn't necessarily mind. But HN comment threads have a way of trailing off, and sometimes you end up talking to yourself... so I try to cut my comments off ahead of that.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#128

Post by nmrm » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 9:32 PM UTC

vomitcuddle wrote: post #18

Not everyone has a "I just moved to a foreign country and have to make a living somehow" moment. Any specific advice for a person who found school easy and now has problems challenging themselves further in live?

Move to a foreign country without much cash for a summer or so. Hopefully your employer is accommodating; if not, find a good story or line-up a new job. It's an incredibly liberating experience. Puts a lot into perspective.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#129

Post by jonmb » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 9:41 PM UTC

tluyben2 wrote: post #54

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being poor completely sucks. Watching your cat die from cancer that you can't afford to treat sucks. The point of getting rich is so that your life doesn't suck. Not to compare yourself to others. Getting rich is necessarily hard, otherwise everyone would be on the road to becoming rich. People are unlikely to get rich by doing work which satisfies. But if they make it, then at least life won't suck anymore.

Yes, but fighting your whole life to get rich at stuff that sucks is not worth it. Yes, it sucks to have your cat die, it sucks more to have you die wishing you did something more interesting than sit in board meetings and think about gathering mo money most of your waking life. There is a balance and that balance is not as hard as 'getting rich'; you don't need to 'get rich' to make your life not suck and get your c…

Indeed. A lot more people could be happy if they didn't believe in the lie that says you must be super rich to be happy. Lottery winners have already proven that a ton of money doesn't guarantee anything. Rich celebrities deal with depression.

Going from poverty to middle class is definitely an improvement, but there comes a point where more money doesn't help. Diminishing returns.

Re: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)

#130

Post by dang » Sat, Jul 05, 2014, 11:05 PM UTC

graycat wrote: post #112

The title of this post > Your high IQ will kill your startup is too strong to be correct: The claim of "will kill" is claiming too much; 'might kill' is closer to being correct. In more detail, the OP essentially assumes that an intelligent person will try to 'coast' or 'relax' and depend just on their intelligence instead of working hard, learning more that is important, and doing the actual work needed for success.…

> The claim of "will kill" is claiming too much; 'might kill' is closer to being correct

You're right, and we applied your edit. That was a bit of linkbait that snuck through. So is "your" in the title, for that matter, but we'll leave that.