Matt Levine wrote this sentence but it rhymes heavily with a very pg thought: > The basic reason to work in finance is that, traditionally, it was the industry where you could get the most leverage on being smart.https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-01-13/the-robots-will-take-your-bonus …
-
Show this thread
-
(The classic articulation of that thought was in this essay, although I'll pg wrote / spoke / etc about it in many other places, too. http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html )
1 reply 2 retweets 29 likesShow this thread -
Incidentally, I think I read this for the first time in something like 2009, and it might have been the most important two sentences I read in my life. (You can reasonably assume my goal wasn't "getting rich" per se but it generalizes to a lot of goals.)pic.twitter.com/3vGU2OcvZU
5 replies 21 retweets 173 likesShow this thread -
That was essentially the internal design brief for my consultancy: "In scope: anything I can licitly do which acts as a multiplier on a firm's revenue line or enterprise value. Out of scope: everything else." (Ended up with the "For B2B SaaS companies" later.)
5 replies 3 retweets 66 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @patio11
Is there a reason you use "licit" over "legal" everywhere?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The "precise to the point of pedantry" part of my brain sees the word "legal" and replies "There are a great many legal things that you'd never consider doing and would be alarmed if anyone thought you capable of doing them."
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.