This is what happens when someone gets super rich from a lucky investment, we have to hear their dumb ideas for the next 30 years...
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-rol...
Have you never met anyone who thinks they're "lucky?" Whether they are the big lotto winners or "just missed it" you constantly hear from them how "lucky" they are.
Past performance does not indicate future performance goes several times stronger for luck.
Yeah, I was drunk and bitter about a guy who was at the right place and the right time and sold out and is a bazilionaire. But Netscape's success really was only in making him and others rich. Ning failed too.
No longer drunk and trying to be less bitter but I remain unimpressed.
Thank you for the validation, for what it is ;-)
But also once you've got your first millions and network of investors, entrepreneurs, and talent then starting a new company is now in a pipeline that was predicated on the element of luck of the first success that started the pipeline.
The man pitched NFTs as a worthy investment vehicle, for crying out loud. That is a solid case of him being wrong, ergo, his advice should not be considered indisputable.
I don’t agree with everything in his manifesto, but I think he’s achieved more than enough for people to refrain from painting all of his success as pure luck.
If you disagree, make a counter argument!
It's not that all of it is pure luck -- it's that it was a significant factor. The dotcom bubble was awash with cash and the distribution of same was not exactly merit based. And a fair chunk was being in the right place at the right time and knowing the right people.
Going back to the OP title, perhaps its overly harsh but we can meet in the middle that his success is not a guarantee that he's a savant. The fact that he pushed NFTs tarnishes his reputation in my eyes.
Well if it addressed their fundamental insecurity, it might be an argument with at least some validity. Sadly, I suspect they'll remain insecure irrespective.