,
10 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
I’ve noticed that many people compete in games they don’t understand because they are modeling the behavior of people around them. Most common is the competition for wealth as a proxy for happiness.
Prevalent in the valley is the competition for rev/valuation/users as a proxy for impact/making the world a better place.
Successful tech founders would have far better lives and legacies if they competed for happiness and impact instead of wealth and users/revenue.
I’m waiting for the day that the top 25 tech CEOs start competing for impact.
They already have all the money/things they could ever want... if they measured themselves by how much they made the world better every year... watch out! Needless to say these folks are pretty competitive.
We need to change to model from build a big company, get rich, and then starting a foundation...
To build a big company, get rich, and use the company’s reach and power to make the world a better place.
CEOs use their shareholders as an excuse to compete in a meaningless game. Their legacies are sacrificed in the name of creating shareholder economic value. They will not appear in history books.
Imagine being a shareholder of a company because you were proud of the positive force they had on society. You’d probably be the type of shareholder every CEO dreams of.
Btw - in my experience wealthy people convert money into happiness extremely inefficiently. It’s actually embarrassing compared to their other obvious talents.
