[bmitc]

> What I’m afraid of is that he and Ilya are not as good and smart as they paint themselves.

This describes almost any venture capitalist or high-profile startup founders, as far as I can tell. Most don't realize their either privileged path or lucky path or both had more to do with it than their smarts.

I really like James Simons as he mostly attributes his success to luck and being able to hire and organize smart people and give them the tools they need to work. He basically describes it as luck and taste, despite his actual smarts and his enormous impact on the world.

[Mistletoe]

I don’t know everything about him but from what I do know, I would put Bezos in the “not just luck” very lonely camp. I think his Day 1 work and iterate every day idea is just that powerful and real and he really did it instead of talking about it. Even though he says he won several lotteries to get where he is, I’m not so sure.

[saghm]

> I really like James Simons as he mostly attributes his success to luck and being able to hire and organize smart people and give them the tools they need to work. He basically describes it as luck and taste, despite his actual smarts and his enormous impact on the world.

Plenty of really smart people don't end up having a big impact on the world, and it's possible to make a difference without being an outlier in terms of intelligence. Everyone who has made an impact has benefited to some degree by circumstances beyond their control though, so even if someone is genuinely smarter than anyone else, it's a fallacy for them to assume that it was the determining factor in their success and a guarantee of future success.

[iibarea]

... and Simons would maybe be the most justified in overlooking luck, but he's smart enough to realize how random the world is. Peter Norvig also emphasizes the role of luck in his life. It's honestly a very good test of self-awareness and empathy, though there's def some negative selection against those traits in sv.