1) Because getting rich is pretty hard. 2) Because we haven’t been trying all that hard.
Most people who get rich probably got there in one of three ways:
1) Be born with rich parents (or other relatives) 2) Marry someone who’s already rich 3) Enter a career path in which it is possible to make lots of money, then be successful enough in that career path to become rich.
My brother did #3 - he won the Goldman Sachs internship lottery, got hired into a permanent position, then, a few years later, jumped ship to a hedge fund that offered him more money than his boss was making. (He even took every one of his co-workers at his trading desk with him, much to the dismay of both his boss and his boss’s boss.)
I’ve not made the attempt. My brother worked his ass off in a way I don’t want to duplicate, and it’s perfectly rational to decide that there are more important things in life than the expected size of one’s paycheck. ;)
Hmmm… so if akrasia/laziness is the only problem, then Modafinil solves everything?
In all seriousness and gullibility, I would expect that even a minor effort into rationality would have a large financial effect, even if you only exert it for five minutes a year when you’re programming your IRA/40 whatever.
Does modafinal literally eliminate akrasia for you? I need to get me some of that.
I think that was one factor Yvain mentioned. The other two I think are more damning to the whole idea of rationality as winning.
One is that most people who are successful are rational when they need to be in their field, without having to make a formal study and be rational all the time.
The other idea is that rationality is only a small small slice of what makes you successful, and that there are probably a ton of other factors that help even more.
One idea that Yvain didn’t mention (and actually wrote a blog post arguing against) is that maybe rationality is a red queen game. The more you study it, the more tricky your mind gets at rationalizing it’s irrationalities. That view is explored here: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2014/06/bias-is-a-red-queen-game.html
Speaking only from personal experience, it reduces akrasia rather than eliminates it.
An odd factor is an inability to engage in pure entertainment, but I wonder if this is merely a latent psychological issue specific to me that only surfaces when taking modafinil. This seems like it’s a benefit, but it can be an annoyance in regards to social interaction, almost like a classic djinn wish. Since it only lasts half a day (for me) after the first week, this isn’t really a problem, though.
I recommend never taking anything with caffeine in it while on modafinil, but you might not respond as strongly to it as I do.
The most easily observed benefit for me has been not falling asleep while driving, watching movies, sitting, standing idly, etc.
Yeah, that makes sense… I certainly know people that have spent a LOT of effort maintaining their randomly chosen viewpoint. Goes back to meme theory, memes are selected for ability to stick in the mind and remove other memes.
(I’ve never taken Modafinil, just thinking that there might be some chemical help for hunter-gatherer laziness).
I agree with everyone else: LW skews young (also researchy; not many PhD students are rich) and many LWers care more about other things than about getting rich, and in fact the LW population is wealthier than you would expect from age alone (though I don’t know how it compares with what you’d get if you looked at, say, age, family’s socioeconomic status, and IQ).
I’d add: getting substantially rich takes luck as well as skill and hard work (some rich people will claim otherwise—but they would, wouldn’t they?).
As an off-the-cuff thought, much LW-content is useful for determining values and bringing strategies in alignment with those values. (I think of a hierarchy: values->strategies->campaigns->goals->actions.) It’s also useful for some bug-catching and as some general tools of thought, but amassing lots of wealth is a convergent instrumental goal of many, many value setups. So value-discrimination may not really affect that, since either set of values would lead you to amass wealth.
The above isn’t really something that I’m confident of, and belongs in the “only posted because the alternative is not posting” bucket.
If we’re so rational why aren’t we rich?
Mostly because “we” are young—the median LWer aged between 25 and 34 makes more money than the median American in that age range, and the median American LWer in that age range makes even more, but only 50% of LWers are older than 26 and only 25% are older than 31.
I think you may have flipped this one, (so it’s actually 75%). Median is something like 26 or 28.
Yes. Thanks. Fixed.
Ah, I didn’t know that. I’m telomere-challenged myself (Unless astragalosides actually work, in which case I now have some other problem).
Hurry up and billionairize yourselves.… and stop believing your elders, you morons.
1) Because getting rich is pretty hard.
2) Because we haven’t been trying all that hard.
Most people who get rich probably got there in one of three ways:
1) Be born with rich parents (or other relatives)
2) Marry someone who’s already rich
3) Enter a career path in which it is possible to make lots of money, then be successful enough in that career path to become rich.
My brother did #3 - he won the Goldman Sachs internship lottery, got hired into a permanent position, then, a few years later, jumped ship to a hedge fund that offered him more money than his boss was making. (He even took every one of his co-workers at his trading desk with him, much to the dismay of both his boss and his boss’s boss.)
I’ve not made the attempt. My brother worked his ass off in a way I don’t want to duplicate, and it’s perfectly rational to decide that there are more important things in life than the expected size of one’s paycheck. ;)
What do you mean ‘we,’ Paleface?
Ah, an Amerind AND a billionaire! So you must be… no one on this timeline ;)
Yvain wrote an article on this: http://lesswrong.com/lw/9p/extreme_rationality_its_not_that_great/
Hmmm… so if akrasia/laziness is the only problem, then Modafinil solves everything?
In all seriousness and gullibility, I would expect that even a minor effort into rationality would have a large financial effect, even if you only exert it for five minutes a year when you’re programming your IRA/40 whatever.
Does modafinal literally eliminate akrasia for you? I need to get me some of that.
I think that was one factor Yvain mentioned. The other two I think are more damning to the whole idea of rationality as winning.
One is that most people who are successful are rational when they need to be in their field, without having to make a formal study and be rational all the time.
The other idea is that rationality is only a small small slice of what makes you successful, and that there are probably a ton of other factors that help even more.
One idea that Yvain didn’t mention (and actually wrote a blog post arguing against) is that maybe rationality is a red queen game. The more you study it, the more tricky your mind gets at rationalizing it’s irrationalities. That view is explored here: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2014/06/bias-is-a-red-queen-game.html
Speaking only from personal experience, it reduces akrasia rather than eliminates it.
An odd factor is an inability to engage in pure entertainment, but I wonder if this is merely a latent psychological issue specific to me that only surfaces when taking modafinil. This seems like it’s a benefit, but it can be an annoyance in regards to social interaction, almost like a classic djinn wish. Since it only lasts half a day (for me) after the first week, this isn’t really a problem, though.
I recommend never taking anything with caffeine in it while on modafinil, but you might not respond as strongly to it as I do.
The most easily observed benefit for me has been not falling asleep while driving, watching movies, sitting, standing idly, etc.
Yeah, that makes sense… I certainly know people that have spent a LOT of effort maintaining their randomly chosen viewpoint. Goes back to meme theory, memes are selected for ability to stick in the mind and remove other memes.
(I’ve never taken Modafinil, just thinking that there might be some chemical help for hunter-gatherer laziness).
I agree with everyone else: LW skews young (also researchy; not many PhD students are rich) and many LWers care more about other things than about getting rich, and in fact the LW population is wealthier than you would expect from age alone (though I don’t know how it compares with what you’d get if you looked at, say, age, family’s socioeconomic status, and IQ).
I’d add: getting substantially rich takes luck as well as skill and hard work (some rich people will claim otherwise—but they would, wouldn’t they?).
Becoming rich is a matter of:
caring about money enough to devote a substantial amount of time to the task;
a specific financial education;
discovering a profitable career / market niche.
I’ve listed those in the order I think they pose an obstacle to LWers.
As an off-the-cuff thought, much LW-content is useful for determining values and bringing strategies in alignment with those values. (I think of a hierarchy: values->strategies->campaigns->goals->actions.) It’s also useful for some bug-catching and as some general tools of thought, but amassing lots of wealth is a convergent instrumental goal of many, many value setups. So value-discrimination may not really affect that, since either set of values would lead you to amass wealth.
The above isn’t really something that I’m confident of, and belongs in the “only posted because the alternative is not posting” bucket.