Not sure if that articles proves anything. Yes, there are many factors, but good workers tend to have better outcomes than bad workers. And with good and bad I mean with how much value they create on the market. Then there is a question of how strong the correlation is. On some imaginary scale, I feel confident that r≥0 and would guesstimate r=0.6-0.8. Which is good enough for me to classify it as meritocratic.
Similarly with the world's billionaires, you can employ confirmation bias to make anything "seem" right. These people aren't all shunned, either. I just really don't buy that it has anything to do with "they worked hard so it makes people feel bad." First, we don't live in a meritocracy as much as we think we do, so that alone invalidates the theory to some degree. Second, the whole reason the false concept of meritocracy exists is because we admire hard work and results. Most good movies have an underlying puritanical "hard work leads to good outcomes" theme. We adore work ethic. So I just don't subscribe to the hypothesis presented.
Don't really disagree except about how Gates is framed. He was lucky. He bought DOS for pennies and literally "FLIPPED" it to IBM who had no clue that Bill and MS didn't write the code for DOS. This was then parlayed into a UI they stole from Jobs whom stole that from Zerox, lmao. I don't think Gates gets to be on the same level as Elon. In his formative MS years, the guy was totally CUTHROAT. There's a large list of competitors that Gates devoured or sued into oblivion. It's not common knowledge these days, but gdamn, being in IT back then, *sugar* I remember MS for what it is.
Exactly, I mean *sugar* is so bad it's even in the Simpsons. If it's in the Simpsons, you know the *sugar* is real!
The actual FT article makes it a lot more clear and is not as open to interpretation:
Most media protects their sources when they don't want to speak on the record for obvious reasons. That doesn't mean they are necessarily lying or making it up however. I see a lot of people above shooting the messenger and claiming media bias simply because the account is not positive, but note FT gave Elon Person of the Year for 2021:
That is a perception.
I think it's easier to tell next week. If it's a uniform reset that is one thing. If certain accounts remains banned and ones from the other side are freed that's another thing.
It’ll probably depend what regime they were banned under, as well it should.
Was already discussed previously. If it is true that the rules would be changed as promised (up to now Twitter is still operating using preexisting rules), it should not depend on which "regime" it was banned under, given all bans up to now are still under the previous "regime." If however, the rules remain the same, then that may be a different story.
I think you are selling gates short. He wrote GORILLA.BAS one of the greatest games of all times!
