Conversation

A good measure of how much of a fit you are for gritty, glass-chewing, winner-take-all type games is how many times you can handle hearing "no" before quitting. My limit is 1. In general, I have very low patience for paths where others have genuine yes/no control over my future.
6
55
If my first try at a game isn't at least moderately successful, I generally switch games. If I find myself stalling out and unable to level up, I switch games. I don't know what to call this attitude. Least-effort, zero-iteration, disrupt-only luck-orienteering.
3
23
It is the exact opposite of an entrepreneurial attitude to things. But anti-entrepreneurial rather than entrepreneurial. A different pattern of adaptation rather than a non-adaptive stick-in-the-mudness. Breaking smart like water rather than rock.
Replying to
One might reasonably argue that both ends of the spectrum are useful - constant optimization for the best possible game, or, being the last one standing at any game you can find. Would be interesting to see how each plays out long term.
Replying to
This is what picking problem spaces based on interestingness feels like. If someone’s saying yes/no, you’re on a path where subtle things cannot be found. Only the most important subtle things are worth carrying through the fog of yes/no to install in manufactured normalcy field.
Replying to
I see your point, but interestingly enough I am drawn to entrepreneurial games for the exact opposite. The heart of entrepreneurship is doing things without anyone's permission.
1