This is what happened in Scandinavian countries where people naturally took to things they liked internally
Broadening access to something doesn't always lead to more equal outcomes. When what you broaden access to is a tool that magnifies people's natural talents, it will lead to less equal outcomes.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Broadening access just lowers the value of whatever is now more widely accessible (i.e. more common).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes! Although it would lead to equal outcomes among those who have the same talent but had different levels of access to the resources needed to express it.
-
This is an important point that PG is glossing over. Yes unequal outcomes will persist, but they won’t be limited by access. Groups without access before will have the big wins now. And we won’t call that unequal, because it’s not artificial
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
x^y (x is your ability, y is the power of the tool) e.g. 1.5^10 = 57.6 2^10 = 1024
-
Multiplying the ability by itself many times is counterintuitive and unrealistic. How often workers can earn 20 times what similar workers earn? It should be x times y, and y can't be more than 4 or 5.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Does the access lead to outcomes with true-er talent distributions?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A concrete example?
-
Home computers going from a rare luxury item to more mainstream in the late 80s / early 90s exposed tons more kids to computers and technology in a new way.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
True for "a tool"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.