Lots of people I admire have made the case that most people can do more good by being extremely ambitious. The argument is this: a bet on an outcome with a very small probability of occurring can still do a huge amount of good if the upside (the outcome if things go
not sarcastic. but as I was thinking of a title for my new Substack, I remembered I'm employed in a cancellable position, and my opinions are often heterodox. Using a nomme de plume ended up working out for Scott Alexander I suppose, but only after a lot of hardship. Hmmm
I use a pseudonym. Not quite for the same reason, I don't think I have any views that would ever lead to losing job opportunities (I hope!), but I just prefer the idea that if I meet someone new and they Google met, they aren't immediately met with a ton of stories about my personal life or my views on things. It's been plain sailing so far, and I'm free to tell close friends about my pseudonymous blog if I want to.
Two articles (and a small comment reference) that extends on the idea:
It is better to have some high-ambition dense-control smart gambles and large amount of low-ambition sparse-control "routine work", but never mid-ambition and insufficient-control projects https://swellandcut.com/2018/09/26/in-plain-sight/
It is always best to find ways to mix asymmetric gambles with hyper-conservative minimal footprint habits, but not some feel-good "self-help" behaviors that leaves people vulnerable https://dwarkeshpatel.com/barbell-strategies/
There is extreme "exception to the rule" and "cognitive dissidence" at play for those have ambition but don't listen, also a lot of intellectual dark matter (unspoken rules) to observe. https://luttig.substack.com/p/timeful-advice/comment/6924003
ok Im inspired.
If you're not being sarcastic, thank you!
not sarcastic. but as I was thinking of a title for my new Substack, I remembered I'm employed in a cancellable position, and my opinions are often heterodox. Using a nomme de plume ended up working out for Scott Alexander I suppose, but only after a lot of hardship. Hmmm
I use a pseudonym. Not quite for the same reason, I don't think I have any views that would ever lead to losing job opportunities (I hope!), but I just prefer the idea that if I meet someone new and they Google met, they aren't immediately met with a ton of stories about my personal life or my views on things. It's been plain sailing so far, and I'm free to tell close friends about my pseudonymous blog if I want to.
Two articles (and a small comment reference) that extends on the idea:
It is better to have some high-ambition dense-control smart gambles and large amount of low-ambition sparse-control "routine work", but never mid-ambition and insufficient-control projects https://swellandcut.com/2018/09/26/in-plain-sight/
It is always best to find ways to mix asymmetric gambles with hyper-conservative minimal footprint habits, but not some feel-good "self-help" behaviors that leaves people vulnerable https://dwarkeshpatel.com/barbell-strategies/
There is extreme "exception to the rule" and "cognitive dissidence" at play for those have ambition but don't listen, also a lot of intellectual dark matter (unspoken rules) to observe. https://luttig.substack.com/p/timeful-advice/comment/6924003
Question 1: how does one visualize the ambition-control matrix? https://www.thecuriosityvine.com/post/our-investment-barbell-strategy
Question 2: Is the ambition-control matrix congruent to the reward-risk (or RR-complexity) matrix? https://www.bill4time.com/blog/ultimate-guide-virtual-assistants-law-firm/ https://expertprogrammanagement.com/2011/07/risk-and-reward-analysis/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/12/16/crypto-is-a-low-risk-high-reward-career-move-these-days/
Thanks, these look great!
Just read this when clearing email backlog.
Thought you might be interested in reading this piece: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1frIDWDYBbMQybvEZAtXmcFC_lBpvzrNV/view