Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Study Concludes that Luck, not Talent or Smarts, Results in Wealth

posted by janrinok on Saturday March 03 2018, @11:56PM   Printer-friendly
from the just-my-luck dept.

Robotron writes:

MIT Tech Review reports on a new study which used computer model to analyze wealth distribution in society. It concludes that the majority of riches do not result from talent, intelligence or hard work - but luck. Those who succeed most in modern society are born well and experience several 'lucky events' which they exploit, but are of mediocre talent. The study's abstract states that the model has potential for encouraging investment in the genuinely gifted, and summarizes:

"...if it is true that some degree of talent is necessary to be successful in life, almost never the most talented people reach the highest peaks of success, being overtaken by mediocre but sensibly luckier individuals. As to our knowledge, this counterintuitive result - although implicitly suggested between the lines in a vast literature - is quantified here for the first time."

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Study Concludes that Luck, not Talent or Smarts, Results in Wealth | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 197 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:12AM (5 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:12AM (#647393) Journal

    "Luck" is just our word for favorable outcomes of systems too complicated to model effectively.

    So you believe that the Universe is deterministic? In other words, you were pre-destined to write your post? The Universe deterimined that you would write it and you really had no choice?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by julian on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:18AM (4 children)

    by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:18AM (#647395)

    At bottom it seems to be probabilistic, but we don't choose the outcomes of those random values either

    • (Score: 1) by anubi on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:51AM (3 children)

      by anubi (2828) on Sunday March 04 2018, @01:51AM (#647410) Journal

      Chaotic.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday March 04 2018, @02:05AM (2 children)

        by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Sunday March 04 2018, @02:05AM (#647413) Homepage
        Stochastic?
        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves

        • (Score: 2) by ilPapa on Sunday March 04 2018, @02:08AM (1 child)

          by ilPapa (2366) on Sunday March 04 2018, @02:08AM (#647415) Journal

          Anemic.

          --
          You are still welcome on my lawn.

          • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:30PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 04 2018, @05:30PM (#647672)

            This thread is converging towards the next Daft Punk hit.