Diary Of A CEO is Making You Less Successful

[TheBG]

Great watch.

[PsychedelicEagle]

Good watch indeed. Thanks!

Edited April 6 by PsychedelicEagle

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Thanks for the share - I came across this one by accident then saw your post 😁

[Shermaningeorgia]

Does anybody seriously watch him for life tips? he's just a person who got lucky in business and via connections, started a podcast. he actually had some good guests on there a few years ago but he seems way more agenda driven these days. 

[Lyubov]

It's just another success treadmill podcast where you are the product and the podcaster and guests have hypnotized themselves and leech your attention to line their pockets. 

Edited April 8 by Lyubov

[Basman]

what do you mean watching YT all day isn't making me successful? 

[Lyubov]

This video is super interesting. I think his view is a tad too deterministic though. He highlights randomness and dumb luck which is without a doubt a huge factor. The middle way is how I make sense of this in practice, because if you believe everything is random and luck, you make yourself a victim instead of the creator. It's not all luck, a ton of luck and just the unfolding of life which has a random nature to it is most definitely a large part of it but it's not what is necessary to focus on entirely when choosing what to react to, what to believe, what to do that works in Wu Wei with life. 

Edited April 8 by Lyubov

[LoneWonderer]

Thanks for sharing. Insightful video.

[LordFall]

This guy makes some good points but is mainly delusional and coping imo. Success is luck is a crazy trope. I run a business community and I've talked to dozens of people that are in business or looking to get into it. A lot of people looking to get into it tell me wow that's sick I wanna start my business! And then 12 months later have done about 2 hours of work towards it.

He does point out some good points like the overall lowering of upward mobility and in general macroeconomics fucks all of us over but saying that successful people have nothing to share and teach is insane. You can look at Mark Zuckerberg and him putting all his time into starting a competitor to myspace and say he got lucky. Sure but there are still plenty of things to learn about product market fit, innovation on competition, finding investors, company structure, etc. As a matter of fact I'm learning from zuckerberg to create my own app so I mean I'm not there yet but I've been inspired and have learned tons already.

He's right that a lot of these long form content is specifically made to be long and consume your attention instead of being as concise as possible but I think he's doing a bit of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. 

 

[Elliott]

16 minutes ago, LordFall said:

This guy makes some good points but is mainly delusional and coping imo. Success is luck is a crazy trope. I run a business community and I've talked to dozens of people that are in business or looking to get into it. A lot of people looking to get into it tell me wow that's sick I wanna start my business! And then 12 months later have done about 2 hours of work towards it.

He does point out some good points like the overall lowering of upward mobility and in general macroeconomics fucks all of us over but saying that successful people have nothing to share and teach is insane. You can look at Mark Zuckerberg and him putting all his time into starting a competitor to myspace and say he got lucky. Sure but there are still plenty of things to learn about product market fit, innovation on competition, finding investors, company structure, etc. As a matter of fact I'm learning from zuckerberg to create my own app so I mean I'm not there yet but I've been inspired and have learned tons already.

He's right that a lot of these long form content is specifically made to be long and consume your attention instead of being as concise as possible but I think he's doing a bit of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. 

 

Do you think Zuck studied all these CEOs before starting facebook, or, he essentially just did it? Most successful people just do it, they don't stay in a constant state of learning from the best to start, first they actually just get successful, then they learn from others to continue and grow their success, usually at a much slower rate though.

Essentially, just go out and keep trying and learning from your experience, and wait for luck(while still trying).

Gates, Bezos, Musk, Buffet, Jobs, Rockefeller, Carnegie,.... you think they hired coaches before they got successful, went to coaching seminars? Read self-help books, Or they just went for it HARD?

Edited April 10 by Elliott

[LordFall]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Do you think Zuck studied all these CEOs before starting facebook, or, he essentially just did it? Most successful people just do it, they don't stay in a constant state of learning from the best to start, first they actually just get successful, then they learn from others to continue and grow their success, usually at a much slower rate though.

Essentially, just go out and keep trying and learning from your experience, and wait for luck(while still trying).

Gates, Bezos, Musk, Buffet, Jobs, Rockefeller, Carnegie,.... you think they hired coaches before they got successful, went to coaching seminars? Read self-help books, Or they just went for it HARD?

Redundant post, of course action taking is important. All of these people had mentors and consultants on their journey though. Zuckerberg had Sean Parker within months of starting the initial project. Bill gates's mother was on the board of United Way with the CEO of IBM.

You learn the basics from Youtube, take action and refine as it goes. The Barry comes at it from the bitter socialist paradigm IMO. He makes some good points but ultimately he has an infectious victim mindset IMO. 

[Elliott]

6 hours ago, LordFall said:

. Zuckerberg had Sean Parker within months of starting the initial project.

 

Quote

Bill gates's mother was on the board of United Way with the CEO of IBM.

And Zuck bought a seminar ticket from Parker, or it was 'luck'? Gates watched his mom's YouTube podcast? Or, luck, like Bobby was talking about?

Quote

The Barry comes at it from the bitter socialist paradigm IMO. He makes some good points but ultimately he has an infectious victim mindset IMO. 

I only skimmed the video, I assume I would agree with this critique of yours. As you say though, don't throw the baby out with the bath water for what Barry is saying either.

Edited April 10 by Elliott

[Ulax]

Various fair points. For example, true about discounting luck, and survivorship bias.

But he also discounts the importance of maximising win percentage. In any domain, if you perform certain actions then you will more likely get better results. For example, the stat the creator makes about businesses that fold doesn't take into account how skilled the CEO was at business. I mean some business founders are probably ex goldman sachs CEOs, and others are porn addicts who jerk off between business calls. Its silly to think that doesn't make a big difference.

[LoneWonderer]

8 hours ago, LordFall said:

This guy makes some good points but is mainly delusional and coping imo. Success is luck is a crazy trope. I run a business community and I've talked to dozens of people that are in business or looking to get into it. A lot of people looking to get into it tell me wow that's sick I wanna start my business! And then 12 months later have done about 2 hours of work towards it.

He does point out some good points like the overall lowering of upward mobility and in general macroeconomics fucks all of us over but saying that successful people have nothing to share and teach is insane. You can look at Mark Zuckerberg and him putting all his time into starting a competitor to myspace and say he got lucky. Sure but there are still plenty of things to learn about product market fit, innovation on competition, finding investors, company structure, etc. As a matter of fact I'm learning from zuckerberg to create my own app so I mean I'm not there yet but I've been inspired and have learned tons already.

He's right that a lot of these long form content is specifically made to be long and consume your attention instead of being as concise as possible but I think he's doing a bit of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. 

 

Thank you for your clarification here

[Alfonsoo]

This guy's questions always seemed quite stupid to me. You have world class people, field leaders (many times at least) in front of you and all you can think off asking is "was this difficult?,"how does this make you feel?"...

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

He made some good points, however it's not so much that watching some youtube channels are preventing you from becomming "successfull", but chances are, if you were actually capable of becomming successfull, you already would've been. Or you'd be working at it relentlessly and already seen some progress prior to even watching stuff like this. But the videos are obviously marketed towards unsuccessfull and unlucky people who want to find out some secret hacks, secret formulas. A lot of these socialist types lacking in grey matter conglomerate here as well. I see the point of the author of this video in how unlikely the success actually is statistically speaking, survivorship bias, etc. but that doesn't mean that it's not worth it working to get more money or that it is a good idea to just go with the flow, not work on yourself and just wait for the goverment to change and give you something. Or that success is purely dependent on luck. Author of this video is obviously kowtowing to this demographic which is also spending a lot of time online (along with the unsuccessfull, unlucky group seeking answers), not saying on purphose as I have no way of knowing what his calculus is, but he's effectively kowtowing nontheless

[WonderSeeker]

Never watched the guy no matter how hard YT peddles his stuff to me. 

Seems like normie content veiled to look like it's sophisticated.

Naval, Huberman, Diary. They make some good points, but they're all click-baity and stale after 10 minutes.

[Lucasxp64]

Rarely nobody will get to be an institutional trader at the top firms unless you come from a top economics university and even there you have only a couple of chances of making it there. Luck is a multiplier of your effort. Some people obviously are so lucky they are literally born from an old money billionaire family, others are lucky enough to not have had a shitty childhood that fucked with their mental health or some other trauma through their lives that cripples them and turns them into homeless drug addicts. Not even mentioning genetics.

Just overcoming by itself the hopelessness itself to get yourself going on some path that your brain is telling you that feels risky is very hard for most people, there is a lot of fried dopamine circuits to overcome and being able to handle dedicating yourself consistently towards money consciously.

Some people naturally feel more confident. But some will use their confidence to get stuck chasing women and getting drunk, others might use it to pursue a doctor's degree and be wrecked by the routine, or perhaps have a small private practice that never truly makes enough money for them to have "no fucks given" money.

Some people feel just fine going through some crazy work routines and they are perfectly confident and their dopamine circuits are not fried of trying to sooth themselves, and they are able to logically follow steps for months and years.

That is something some people find hard because you have to let go of all of your personal interests and way of behaving when you're in that mental space of being at home and not doing school or work stuff, that mental space creeps in, as opposed to getting a job that you just show up to or even if the job requires a lot of brain power like programming.

I'm pretty sure a lot of very rich and "successful" people out there they have been since young educated and developed the kind of personality that they have no concerns for anything but their career and business, and they do it in a way that isn't trying to be too out of the box otherwise that also cripples you as the wannabe entrepreneur that spends time on passion projects here and there, but also not too strict, otherwise they become a bureaucrat that inflates his lifestyle to live pay check to pay check and never building wealth to dedicate himself to any other pursuits, or perhaps, to him, life is literally all about the bureaucracy and they don't even want to build anything that will give them a multi-million dollar exit to live from, or a business that is more low touch, because their consumerist golden cage is good enough to them, to live in some overpriced cramped up apartment in New York or something.

Or coming back to the programmer example, he/she might not have still the emotional and organizational skills to pull off certain things business-wise because it's emotionally ingrained into you and even the knowledge you have of the world, and their mind is about having high discipline and being in the mental space of programming a specific set of specifications and knowing how to prioritize based on what the stakeholders want, but they wouldn't take the risk themselves to try to find that market fit.

And then, when people do pull off, they might put themselves in a situation they work many times as hard as if they stayed employed but earning roughly the same and not really building equity or saving enough money to have "no fucks given" money, like the book below speaks about. Business is a fucking minefield as much as dating, health and spirituality.

"The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and What to Do About It" by Michael E. Gerber

Edited 1 hour ago by Lucasxp64