The fact that you’re calling a video showing that Gates built an empire using nepotism to get effectively unlimited resources from IBM non sequitur shows that you’re intellectually dishonest and there’s no point continuing this discussion. Bye.
Yet again, Bill Gates is almost completely irrelevant to this conversation. He’s just one billionaire among hundreds, and was one of the examples I happened to jump to first. In hindsight, I likely should have avoided an individual that would trigger you so much.
You’ve claimed that billionaires are just regular idiots who won the birth lottery. I’ve demonstrated that you haven’t show that this is the case. Not even close.
To do so would require showing that each billionaire a) is an idiot, and b) has won the genetic lottery. You’ve ignored all of the other billionaires I’ve brought into the discussion, likely intentionally because they don’t conform to your requirements.
That already makes me skeptical of your intellectual honesty, but I’ll reserve judgment until I see your reply (or lack thereof) to this comment.
Seems to me that you’re the one triggered here. You gave couple of examples that I demonstrated to be false. I linked you a study showing that luck is the major factor as opposed to personal qualities, and another showing that in fact birth place is a good predictor of success. Literally everything you’ve claimed is demonstrably false. Based on your comments it’s evident that you don’t understand how statistics work. The fact that you just keep replying with smug and vapid comments is just a cherry on top.
To prove your claim that “billionaires are just regular idiots who won the birth lottery”, you would have to go billionaire by billionaire and show that all of them conform to these assertions. I’ve given a decent number of examples for whom this would be quite difficult.
You have failed to do so, and instead have not only misconstrued two examples out of hundreds as representative samples, but have the audacity to claim that I’m the one who doesn’t understand statistics.
I’ve pointed this out to you multiple times, and you’ve dodged the point so many times that at this point it’s clear that you have no intention of participating in this conversation in good faith.
Maybe read the links I gave you?
I did. I even watched the non sequitur Youtube video.
The fact that you’re calling a video showing that Gates built an empire using nepotism to get effectively unlimited resources from IBM non sequitur shows that you’re intellectually dishonest and there’s no point continuing this discussion. Bye.
Yet again, Bill Gates is almost completely irrelevant to this conversation. He’s just one billionaire among hundreds, and was one of the examples I happened to jump to first. In hindsight, I likely should have avoided an individual that would trigger you so much.
You’ve claimed that billionaires are just regular idiots who won the birth lottery. I’ve demonstrated that you haven’t show that this is the case. Not even close.
To do so would require showing that each billionaire a) is an idiot, and b) has won the genetic lottery. You’ve ignored all of the other billionaires I’ve brought into the discussion, likely intentionally because they don’t conform to your requirements.
That already makes me skeptical of your intellectual honesty, but I’ll reserve judgment until I see your reply (or lack thereof) to this comment.
Seems to me that you’re the one triggered here. You gave couple of examples that I demonstrated to be false. I linked you a study showing that luck is the major factor as opposed to personal qualities, and another showing that in fact birth place is a good predictor of success. Literally everything you’ve claimed is demonstrably false. Based on your comments it’s evident that you don’t understand how statistics work. The fact that you just keep replying with smug and vapid comments is just a cherry on top.
To prove your claim that “billionaires are just regular idiots who won the birth lottery”, you would have to go billionaire by billionaire and show that all of them conform to these assertions. I’ve given a decent number of examples for whom this would be quite difficult.
You have failed to do so, and instead have not only misconstrued two examples out of hundreds as representative samples, but have the audacity to claim that I’m the one who doesn’t understand statistics.
I’ve pointed this out to you multiple times, and you’ve dodged the point so many times that at this point it’s clear that you have no intention of participating in this conversation in good faith.
Thanks for once again confirming that you don’t understand the concept of statistics.