We’re all human, and have our issues. But your post does not make you come off as a professional or technically capable or reliable business partner. I don’t mean to be harsh, but just some candid feedback.

My suggestion is to take some time off to assess if you don’t have burnout.

That said, you were smart enough to get into medical school, and are a practicing doctor from what I can tell. My suggestion is to keep the stable income from your current job flowing, while working on your startup as a side project. It would make the most sense to jump over full time when you have something solid.

You can even use part of your current income to hire one full time software developer to work on something for you. Make sure you have a solid NDA or contract so they don’t steal any of your IP.

Sorry if anything I said made you feel bad, that wasn’t my intent.

I don’t disagree with their overall goal of bringing awareness to this issue, but I think they need to focus more on the behavioral science and how it impacts society at large. Trying to insert oneself into places with topics that seem “out of place” seems to indicate that perhaps you’re saying that that organization has an issue.

One more thing to note, people who come in with ideas of “empathy” or “altruism” in unrelated spaces may perhaps be trying to build a following, or recruit others to a cause.

I am not saying this presenter has a cause for which they’re looking for particular personality types, but that’s exactly how cult leaders build a following.

Cult leaders often seek out people sensitive to traumatic events or who’ve been traumatized themselves. Once cult leaders have some recruits, further recruitment is left to the initial people who joined.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kondiaronk

Apologies if I missed these references in the article, I found that the essayist was confused about the actual roots of the myth. Rousseau comes at least 200 years later.

Robber barons without failure will always want to see themselves as bastions of intellectual progress and innovation. I think an objective approach to answer whether such personalities really bring forth what they promise is to look at the overall results of their labor. A very superficial example is that no country with an appreciable influence of such people has ever been voted high in the happiness index: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-...

Perhaps, an interesting experiment would be for such robber barrons to try to utilize their great influence and intellect to teach those poor mongrels in high happiness countries all about innovation and technological progress.

Many such people who are entrepreneurs etc. right now would be in the service industry if not for their luck. That’s the only difference between most people, simply luck. That said, I have such admiration and respect for those who truly overcome odds to slowly or otherwise make it despite their bad luck. It’s hard to stop lying to each other about ideals of meritocracy or whatever because everyone has a self image and narrative they prefer about themselves or society. But do you really think that someone else who had your life wouldn’t have done the same as or better than you? Why do you think they’d be worse if you do? Cognitive biases are tricky, I wish people would stop lying to each other and themselves as that might perhaps make for a social environment which is optimal for most people’s self determination

I also think these self-assessment vs actual performance studies don’t control for post-assessment cognitive stress. Stress almost always impairs judgment, and I wonder if asking for a self-assessment on the day of the exam and sometime after the exam would show a difference. If stress is a factor for self-assessment, then both high and low performers will score themselves more accurately given more time after a test.

Looking at the study design of this paper, I am not sure how the authors themselves would assess its strength for the kind of broad claim they’re making…And we’ve already seen many studies on this type of claim, so I am confused why the authors didn’t ask the “next step” type of question as I mentioned above.

All that said, if you have the time and resources to pour into unabashed and uninterrupted learning, growing and exploring, it seems to help develop above average skill. Secondly, precise and guided attention and mentoring is very effective at reducing knowledge barriers.

There are literal geniuses, like Gauss for example, who can solve something on intuition without being taught, and there are maybe like 2-4 people who are actually like this alive today. The rest are seething and coping and pretending they’re genius, and taking the rage of their insecurities out on everyone else—a genius is the last person to talk about IQ tests, wordcels or shape rotators etc. Memorizing facts is not genius, it’s a memory trick.

Europeans are not stupid, they prioritized different things, including market socialism in different countries. The Americans also need to remove their exceptionalism glasses and take a long hard look at their own selves—the average American citizen (digital or otherwise) is socially worse off than the average European citizen. The success of American companies is based on the financing environment in the U.S. and has less to do with “friction”. The “friction” exists because on average Europeans have different values. So really, wake up SV tech bros. That whole site is a big ball of yuck.

So what does this author consider “psyops”, exactly? I assume anything that subverts the culture being maintained by the ruling class in the current time for a given place.

I understand the human tendency to belong in a group, or want to belong in a group. I don’t think any group that encourages religiosity in any way is conducive to modern civilization. I don’t think being “culturally” anything is acceptable either since part of the culture is regressive attitudes towards the “other”, and often times blind devotion to authority figures.

On average it’s seems many get stuck in some existential crisis by realizing they don’t have enough time left to self actualize according to some previously realized ideal. However, self actualization requires self awareness and understanding of how to navigate changing circumstances–many would take this as being “a loser” or “giving up”, but those are either people with chronic good luck (so it’s impossible to get them to see anything from anyone else’s pov), or people who are prone to self flagellation.

Aging is great if you reframe your life, and give yourself the freedom to explore. Secondly, if you look at some aging athletes, they’re a good example of the possibilities of the human body and the fitness it can maintain with some amount of discipline and care. Exercise also staves off cognitive decline to some degree.