[jmclean]

I think part of the reason this conversation is valuable, though, is that the inverse omission is far more dominant in the cultural conversation right now. It's certainly mostly true that hard work plays an important part in fantastic success. But it's equally true that even in those cases, the majority enjoyed advantages that are often invisible even to them.

So to be sure, the opposite extreme is just as ridiculous as suggesting that every person exists in a bubble where their effort correlates exactly with outcome. But when the awareness of systemic advantage is absent (as it certainly is), I see staking out a far extreme opinion like this as a challenge to find a more reasonable center.

[TheOtherHobbes]

The work ethic narrative is immensely useful to employers, but in too many situations it's almost totally disconnected from real opportunity and reward.

Ultimately it's a political problem - but not necessarily in the obvious sense.

The most successful and fun cultures reward inventiveness and positive social contributions, and include some element of challenge and competition.

But using money and markets to make decisions about the kinds of activities that are rewarded turns out to be an inefficient, short-sighted and often surreal way to manage what does and doesn't get valued.

[TheOtherHobbes]

And I'd appreciate it if downvoters justified their downvotes.

I'm quite happy with the idea that an economy where it's possible to raise $1 million in funding for an app like Yo! while the many apps that do something with longer term benefits struggle for commercial support has some issues with rational resource allocation.

Not to mention the outrageous bubbles and the epic acquisition disasters that litter the Internet ruins.

If you believe otherwise I'd like to see you argue why.