Conversation

Replying to
If you have questions like: “How is this not just X but worse?” “What problem does it solve?” “What value does it create?” “How can you justify the emissions?” “Isn’t this just privileged play?” I’m the wrong person to ask. I’ve done my tours of duty on such debates.
2
26
The post linked above got me thinking, with its heuristic of following “smart, good-judgment, knowledgeable” people, who appear to be divided on Web3. Makes me realize I *don’t * take my cues from such people. They’re basically a crapshoot around tech booms.
1
19
People who seem to have uncanny instincts are rarely particularly smart or knowledgeable. And they don’t tend to have good judgment in traditional ways either. What they do have is an ability to avoid both of Clarke’s “failures of prophecy” — lack of imagination, lack of nerve.
2
45
You need mediocre smarts and mediocre knowledge as table stakes, but beyond that everything is a function of imagination and nerve. Bayesian modes of good judgment, which Wil gestures at, are like QA to limit errors, but irrelevant to seeing the imaginative+gutsy options early.
3
30