[abnry]

> Yet he also made contributions larger than anyone will ever do by filling up note-taking apps and tracking how much time they spent on their breakfast with a stopwatch.

Part of the problem is that both the low hanging fruit has already been picked and the competition is steeper due to a wealthier society.

If you can't make a societal impact the magnitude of calculus, why not time your breakfast so that the marginal benefit you provide improves society a little while also increasing your status?

I wouldn't say I agree with the above, but I'd push back against the portrayal of the productivity guru being irrational.

[dasil003]

The idea that only "big" impact is worthwhile is a huge part of the problem. Software and the global internet has made it possible to scale everything at ridiculous speed with tiny overhead. This has set the standard for success very high, but has some perverse effects. For instance, smart people flocking to finance and ad-tech because it's easier to make money there simply by proximity and complexity to mask what you're doing.

I'd argue we need a fundamental shift in our economy and regulation to incentivize diversity.

[adamisom]

Another point overlooked in the implicit “why be 10% more efficient instead of 10x” is that we can’t all be Newtons. There is no advice to turn you into Newton, but that doesn’t make advice useless.

It’s reason to get what you can out of life, not to throw your hands up! And maybe one way to get more from life is to cut down on drudgery or do work faster so as to contribute more.

[Retric]

Math is thousands of years old yet many people have made significant strides in multiple fields in the last 200 years. In 1,000 years even more low hanging fruit will be plucked. Yet, I suspect a few people will be notable for their great strides between now and then.

Everyone can’t be Newton, but perhaps everyone can aim higher than yet another note taking app.

[dexwiz]

You are so far in the trap you cannot imagine a life without it.