Oh, so you think the founder of a huge company might know something? Their success was survivorship bias. Dumb luck! As we all know, Zuck just flipped a coin and this datacenter appeared. 
This is in response to the common trope that successful entrepreneurs were just "lucky". There are so many micro-decisions involved in building a company that it'd be quite a trick to simply random walk your way to infinity.
Chance certainly plays a role in many contests, and to a greater degree in investing than entrepreneurship, but to even be in the game in the first place requires some skill.
Put another way: missing one shot is luck, being in the NBA after making many shots is skill.
Put another way: missing one shot is luck, being in the NBA after making many shots is skill.
Yes. There are a series of embedded issues here (management is hard, recruiting talent is hard, raising capital is hard, allocating capital even harder, etc).
But they can only be resolved by making the fallacy utterer into a founder. Try for themselves!
But they can only be resolved by making the fallacy utterer into a founder. Try for themselves!
https://twitter.com/Tsutsaev_Ruslan/status/1459243710802272265
Management of humans is hard to value. How to apportion credit between, say, a factory owner providing instructions, and a factory worker carrying them out?
However, once that owner is scripting robots, the value of management is more clear. It's code.
However, once that owner is scripting robots, the value of management is more clear. It's code.
https://twitter.com/MurrayBauman3/status/1459242575454523393
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
