Author Topic: The Paradox of Abundance  (Read 6349 times)

odput

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
  • Age: 38
  • "I reject your reality and substitute my own"
The Paradox of Abundance
« on: March 12, 2021, 07:26:02 PM »
I read this article and immediately thought of the MMM community:

https://perell.com/note/the-paradox-of-abundance/

I think it sums up today's climate on finance, politics, fitness, science and well pretty much anything pretty succinctly. Keep enjoying life on the right side of the graph, and if you find a way to pull the masses over here with us, do let me know. One of the great shortcomings of humanity is charted out here, but unfortunately there is no solution offered to help our fellow man get the most of such an abundant world.

cool7hand

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1319
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2021, 05:08:11 AM »
Thanks for sharing. Interesting read.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2021, 12:42:53 AM »
I don't see anything wrong with this. Some people are clever and some aren't. What's the issue, really? No one's being forced to buy unhealthy snacks.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8827
  • Location: Avalon
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2021, 04:52:35 AM »
I don't see anything wrong with this. Some people are clever and some aren't. What's the issue, really? No one's being forced to buy unhealthy snacks.
They are if they live in an area where only unhealthy food is available or readily available.  It's easy to live healthily if everyone around you is doing the same and everything you need to do it is on your doorstep.  If you have to step out of the norm to do it, to spend more money than those around you to do it, to break the social conventions you live within to do it then it is a lot harder.

How many social conventions do you break on a daily basis?

I don't see anything in the article which has anything to do with relative levels of intelligence.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2021, 05:39:39 AM »
I break a lot of social conventions. I don't see how that's relevant. The whole point of having a good job and good finances is that (like MMM) you can break a lot of social conventions with impunity.

As for relative intelligence, the article talks about the ability to make full use of surplus knowledge, choice, etc, between high-information individuals / consumers and average ones. Excerpt:

"On the Internet, low-quality content drives out high-quality content, as the most wide-read articles are polarizing and emotionally jarring. First, they distort the truth by eliminating nuance and adding emotional charge to important topics. If you check almost any major publication, the most popular stories are opinionated and fear-inducing. They draw us in because they sway our base-level instincts in irresistible ways."

Are you arguing that intelligence isn't a factor in, for example, discriminating between high-quality and low-quality content? Does it all just come down to luck or some sort of socio-economic teachings? Is the only reason I read the Guardian and WSJ because I learned by osmosis that only heathens read USA Today?

Quote
It's easy to live healthily if everyone around you is doing the same and everything you need to do it is on your doorstep.

Kind of like saying it's easy to be tall if your parents are tall. It may be true but it doesn't necessarily follow that the causal process is via social osmosis.

odput

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
  • Age: 38
  • "I reject your reality and substitute my own"
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2021, 09:32:06 AM »
I don't see anything wrong with this. Some people are clever and some aren't. What's the issue, really? No one's being forced to buy unhealthy snacks.

It wasn't meant to present an issue, just an interesting commentary on the fact that in the age of the internet, anyone can learn anything about any topic and become an expert - the right side of the graph. Yet many more people tend to not sort the wheat from the chaff, and end up worse off for it.

I don't think that people who don't discern high quality information from low are less intelligent per se...plenty of smart people do silly things (like with their money), they just need to know that there is better quality information out there. But the low quality stuff is what they see first and most often, so it can either give them the idea that the bad information is correct, or that good information is just too difficult to find, so they give up.

Also, providers of low quality information tend to be the ones who stoop the lowest to get attention. Clickbait headlines are a thing because they prey on people's basest instincts. Hardly any viral posts/videos/whatever are of people talking calmly and rationally about issues.

the_gastropod

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
  • Age: 37
  • Location: RVA
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2021, 09:49:16 AM »
I don't see anything wrong with this. Some people are clever and some aren't. What's the issue, really? No one's being forced to buy unhealthy snacks.

It wasn't meant to present an issue, just an interesting commentary on the fact that in the age of the internet, anyone can learn anything about any topic and become an expert - the right side of the graph. Yet many more people tend to not sort the wheat from the chaff, and end up worse off for it.

I don't think that people who don't discern high quality information from low are less intelligent per se...plenty of smart people do silly things (like with their money), they just need to know that there is better quality information out there. But the low quality stuff is what they see first and most often, so it can either give them the idea that the bad information is correct, or that good information is just too difficult to find, so they give up.

Also, providers of low quality information tend to be the ones who stoop the lowest to get attention. Clickbait headlines are a thing because they prey on people's basest instincts. Hardly any viral posts/videos/whatever are of people talking calmly and rationally about issues.

I think something that makes matters worse is virtually everyone thinks they’re above average in most areas. I chuckled at the author citing Naval Ravikant, a charlatan if there ever was one. I think people can easily fool themselves into believing nonsense because it’s not mainstream. The paleo diet, cryptocurrencies, climate denialism, Trumpism, etc. all stem from a deep-seated distrust in the mainstream, and (imo, anyway) are comically misguided and misinformed.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #7 on: March 14, 2021, 10:16:36 AM »
Quote
I don't think that people who don't discern high quality information from low are less intelligent per se

Isn't this literally one of the components of intelligence?



ender

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7402
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #8 on: March 14, 2021, 10:27:00 AM »
Quote
I don't think that people who don't discern high quality information from low are less intelligent per se

Isn't this literally one of the components of intelligence?

.... no?

Plenty of people engage in self destructive behavior or believe misleading things all the time.

I think something that makes matters worse is virtually everyone thinks they’re above average in most areas. I chuckled at the author citing Naval Ravikant, a charlatan if there ever was one. I think people can easily fool themselves into believing nonsense because it’s not mainstream. The paleo diet, cryptocurrencies, climate denialism, Trumpism, etc. all stem from a deep-seated distrust in the mainstream, and (imo, anyway) are comically misguided and misinformed.

People also dramatically underestimate how strong confirmation bias impacts this whole area. This applies to both sides.

It's pretty common now to basically take someone's conclusion and throwout any evidence or rationale driving it, regardless of what it is, based on the conclusion.

I'm not old enough to know how prevalent this was pre-internet ages, but in this timeframe it's immensely popular to do this (across both sides of a political spectrum).

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #9 on: March 14, 2021, 10:40:38 AM »
Quote
.... no?

Plenty of people engage in self destructive behavior or believe misleading things all the time.

'Self-destructive behaviour' is rather orthogonal to the concept being discussed which is the ability to discern between high quality and low quality information.

All of the below statements are red herrings:
- Intelligent people do dumb things all the time
- All people have cognitive biases
- All people are self-destructive in some way
- Intelligence doesn't prevent you from being a conspiracy theory nutjob
etc

scottish

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2716
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2021, 07:57:15 PM »
Quote
I don't think that people who don't discern high quality information from low are less intelligent per se

Isn't this literally one of the components of intelligence?

.... no?

Plenty of people engage in self destructive behavior or believe misleading things all the time.

I think something that makes matters worse is virtually everyone thinks they’re above average in most areas. I chuckled at the author citing Naval Ravikant, a charlatan if there ever was one. I think people can easily fool themselves into believing nonsense because it’s not mainstream. The paleo diet, cryptocurrencies, climate denialism, Trumpism, etc. all stem from a deep-seated distrust in the mainstream, and (imo, anyway) are comically misguided and misinformed.

People also dramatically underestimate how strong confirmation bias impacts this whole area. This applies to both sides.

It's pretty common now to basically take someone's conclusion and throwout any evidence or rationale driving it, regardless of what it is, based on the conclusion.

I'm not old enough to know how prevalent this was pre-internet ages, but in this timeframe it's immensely popular to do this (across both sides of a political spectrum).

I didn't have access to such a wide range of information before the internet.   Published material was generally factual and could be relied on.    It was also much harder to get.   For example, if I wanted to find information on perceptrons, I would have to go to a technical library and look up perceptrons in a huge index.     That would give me a call number of a journal, magazine or book and I would walk through the stacks until I located it.    Sometime in the late 80's the index moved onto a computer (instead of a book!).

Now I can google "perceptrons site:arxiv.org" and get tons of stuff of dubious quality.   Or if I want better quality I can get a subscription to the IEEE or ACM digital libraries, but that costs money.

In terms of news, there were high quality, mainstream newspapers like the NY Times and the Globe and Mail.    Then there were medium quality newspapers like the Toronto Sun.   Finally there was silly stuff like the National Enquirer.    The quality of the source was always clear (at least to me).

It was much harder to get stuck in an echo chamber where the other people in there would reinforce your crazy ideas and ignore everything else.     But I suppose there were still people who believed the National Enquirer stories about aliens breeding bigfoot with alligators in area 51.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2021, 08:13:51 PM »
So it seems that information abundance is a good thing. It allows those with good perceptive skills to gain a greater relative advantage.


Kazyan

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 114
    • Books By Tanner Jacobi
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2021, 07:26:02 PM »
I read this article and immediately thought of the MMM community:

https://perell.com/note/the-paradox-of-abundance/

I think it sums up today's climate on finance, politics, fitness, science and well pretty much anything pretty succinctly. Keep enjoying life on the right side of the graph, and if you find a way to pull the masses over here with us, do let me know. One of the great shortcomings of humanity is charted out here, but unfortunately there is no solution offered to help our fellow man get the most of such an abundant world.

It's interesting how getting to the right side of the graph requires different techniques, depending on whether you're talking about finance, fitness, or informedness. I think I'm handling the finance pretty well, but definitely not the fitness (despite some efforts), and I've largely given up on informedness.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2021, 05:39:59 AM »
Quote
I don't think that people who don't discern high quality information from low are less intelligent per se

Isn't this literally one of the components of intelligence?

NO.  When I was teaching college and university one of the basic topics was how to evaluate information sources.  If anything, the internet makes this harder, because so many sites look authoritative but are not.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #14 on: April 16, 2021, 09:03:02 PM »
Wow. So you're saying the ability to critically evaluate and cross-reference information (to see if the information is likely to be accurate or not) is NOT a component of intelligence.


former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8827
  • Location: Avalon
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2021, 12:59:11 AM »
Wow. So you're saying the ability to critically evaluate and cross-reference information (to see if the information is likely to be accurate or not) is NOT a component of intelligence.
RetiredAt63 is saying it's a component of education.

I trust you are sufficiently educated to understand the difference between "educated" and "intelligent".

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2021, 02:28:16 AM »
Wow. So you're saying the ability to critically evaluate and cross-reference information (to see if the information is likely to be accurate or not) is NOT a component of intelligence.
RetiredAt63 is saying it's a component of education.

I trust you are sufficiently educated to understand the difference between "educated" and "intelligent".

That's another disingenuous post which sets up a false equivalence. To use an analogy which should be immediately obvious, reading comprehension and vocabulary are also components of education - yet they also correlate with intelligence. That is to say, education and intelligence can both (whether dependently or independently) affect someone's ability to perform a certain task.


scottish

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2716
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2021, 08:26:10 AM »
And yet so much of the information people see on the internet is of only limited veracity.     When you can't experience it yourself, as in a physics experiment, how are you going to tell if it is likely true or not?

Just the other day, some lawyer on the internet was explaining that "contracts aren't worth the paper they are written on".    When questioned about his meaning, he provided examples that suggested he meant larger commercial contracts which are generally resolved by negotiation rather than in court.

How would a novice know to interpret this hyperbole correctly without having any experience with the ground truth?

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2021, 09:23:13 AM »
And yet so much of the information people see on the internet is of only limited veracity.     When you can't experience it yourself, as in a physics experiment, how are you going to tell if it is likely true or not?

Just the other day, some lawyer on the internet was explaining that "contracts aren't worth the paper they are written on".    When questioned about his meaning, he provided examples that suggested he meant larger commercial contracts which are generally resolved by negotiation rather than in court.

How would a novice know to interpret this hyperbole correctly without having any experience with the ground truth?

No, I didn't mean larger commercial contracts. My anecdote, as Malcat noted, applies to any professional contractor or employee. I followed this principle even as a junior lawyer. And it has nothing to do with negotiation; it has to do with the 'stronger party' not wanting to take the risk/optical cost of enforcement.

And it wasn't hyperbole.

And what you said has nothing to do with what I was saying earlier. If anything it proves my point that critical thinking is required to discern good info from bad. Note for example that Malcat is not a lawyer, but is able to deduct from her own experiences.

Finally, even if (as I've said now) one needs education or experience, that does not rule out intelligence being a factor. No doubt, the smarter you are, the better you can (1) figure out for yourself the commercial realities of the world, if you are so minded; (2) predict how an entity will behave in contractual negotiations (if any).

That's all I (and the article) am saying. Intelligence helps in this world - ever more so now that it's becoming more and more complex. The great thing about having more information, more stratification, is that the pay-off for being 'smart' has never been greater. Of course you could replace 'smart' with beautiful, athletically talented, musically talented, etc or any other good attribute that gives you a competitive advantage.

ender

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7402
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2021, 06:34:51 AM »
And yet so much of the information people see on the internet is of only limited veracity.     When you can't experience it yourself, as in a physics experiment, how are you going to tell if it is likely true or not?

Just the other day, some lawyer on the internet was explaining that "contracts aren't worth the paper they are written on".    When questioned about his meaning, he provided examples that suggested he meant larger commercial contracts which are generally resolved by negotiation rather than in court.

How would a novice know to interpret this hyperbole correctly without having any experience with the ground truth?

I actually think the internet has caused integrity of information to be even worse because everyone is an expert.

It's impossible to tell in your reference if:

  • that lawyer is even a lawyer
  • that lawyer is using hyperbole but otherwise saying "true" statements
  • that lawyer is simply incorrect
  • that lawyer is misleading but "correct" based on personal agendas
  • that lawyer is just trolling using credentials as "I'm right!"

etc.

Add in the phenomena where people feel they are experts based on having stayed at a holiday inn reading an article or two, and confidently declare their expertise...  I think it's safe to say the internet has dramatically and negatively impacted the ability of folks to discern truth.

I see this all over the place with personal finance articles. Many, many are written well and at first glance appear useful and accurate. But, given my expertise in this area, it's easy for me to see a whole bunch of them are fundamentally flawed and problematic. The average reader is dramatically unlikely to have my experience/knowledge and be able to understand what situation it is.

Calling this intelligence is just... wrong.

Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2021, 09:36:51 AM »
Quote
The average reader is dramatically unlikely to have my experience/knowledge and be able to understand what situation it is.

A lot of personal finance is derived from basic things like compounding and the rule of 72. You don't need to be in finance (or maths) to intuit that stuff. It's middle school maths and once you read an article about it you can work it out from first principles.

Likewise, anyone with access to the internet can understand the tax code - just read it. It's somewhat convoluted but not brain surgery. You can read a few articles, compare it to the legislation/the simplified fact sheets put out by the tax office and then figure it out for yourself.

SwordGuy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8956
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2021, 12:45:44 PM »
Quote
The average reader is dramatically unlikely to have my experience/knowledge and be able to understand what situation it is.

A lot of personal finance is derived from basic things like compounding and the rule of 72. You don't need to be in finance (or maths) to intuit that stuff. It's middle school maths and once you read an article about it you can work it out from first principles.

The average American reader goofed off during middle-school math and avoided math ever after.    The average American is laughably ignorant about basic math and could no more do that than figure out that Trump is a narcissistic scam artist and liar.


Bloop Bloop Reloaded

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 757
  • Location: Australia
Re: The Paradox of Abundance
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2021, 03:50:16 PM »
That's true. That comes down to intelligence, largely. The average American has an IQ of ~100