[e63f67dd-065b]

> But consider e.g. the distribution of scores on the Putnam: top scores are around 125, and most years the median is zero(!). Those with a zero score do not in general lack education.

This is a bad example; the Putnam is designed as a competition and scored in a way to distinguish the 90th percentile from the 99th, not the 40th from the 50th. The median = 0 just means that the scoring system throws away everything below the median to better score everything above it.

Skilled craftsmen exist because there are things that require a combination of capital in the form of tools and knowledge in the form of training on a small scale. Think about an electronics repair shop: they will pretty much always exist (and should) because as sophistication increases in electronics, when they break they always result in a unique snowflake of a situation that is basically impossible to automate the repair thereof. Repair also requires spare parts and tools that they buy one time and use many times.

In a dynamic economy both will exist, but it doesn't render the argument that we should want more Nvidias and fewer Subways any less valid.

[bjornsing]

> This is a bad example; the Putnam is designed as a competition and scored in a way to distinguish the 90th percentile from the 99th, not the 40th from the 50th. The median = 0 just means that the scoring system throws away everything below the median to better score everything above it.

Another example of such a competition is the global innovation economy. If you’re in the 50th percentile of GPU companies then you’re not nVidia, and economically speaking you can just go home.

I understand it sounds harsh, and it is. But it’s the truth.