I came here to say exactly this. I can't tell if it's because I'm not a traditional "tech" person, but 90% of the best minds I've seen are nowhere near tech in general.

Having a brilliant mind, going to an "elite" school (because someone told you it's elite), joining a FAANG company, building software that you deep down know is killing society, but doing it because the "problems are fun and money is great" is antithetical to what a "best mind of a generation" would truly be.

It's wasted talent with few redeeming qualities for society and a lack of innovation/creativity around using your talents to improve the world.

A "best mind of the generation" would find a way to be successful without riding such a lazy conveyor belt of life.

Thank you, it’s unfortunate that the average person doesn’t seem to understand this.

What is the correlation between "writing code" and product management getting better?

If you want to learn for the joy of learning: yes

If you want to get a job at a competitive company / make a career change: no

Most tech companies are terrible at hiring "managers". I agree with Paul's premise, but the solution to micromanage is missing the point. If companies hired actual manager/leaders, they would see better outcomes.

correct. the last thing that a company needs is a CEO who doesn't empower his direct reports, can't hire good ones, thinks they are all fakers and tries to meddle in every detail, instead of thinking about where the company is going and where it should go and how it should get there.

missed all the independent pizzerias in my hometown.

This is why OpenAI being the "leader" in the space worries me. We need to be building trust in AI systems, not leaning into what the public perception is. On the other hand, maybe it's good they are showing who they really are.

The interesting part here is that it's actually a two-sided marketplace. Most investors aren't "impressive" either, and thus they'll often not be able to get into the best deals because they have no value add.

I recently read some reviews of investors in SV. Some name brand investors like Jason Calacanis, Pejman Nozad, and some YC alumnus, are all actually very clueless people, often with acerbic behaviors to boot. In that respect, at least the investor class of Wall Street seems to have a much higher degree of expertise and civility, compared to the buffoons of Silicon Valley.

There’s a lot of cargo-cult mimicry of Steve Jobs and Elon Musk that happens in terms of behavior.

But those guys were product people and to the extent that their low-empathy personalities were beneficial it’s in the fact that they cared about creating things far more than anything else, including other people or money. The phrase “artistic temperament” long predates them for a reason.

But it’s really absurd and counterproductive to try to mimic that personality if what you’re offering is anything other than being the corporate version of an auteur, and if that’s what you were you wouldn’t be mimicking anyone, and you better produce some stunningly consistent results. Lots of these guys think they’re being uncompromising about “their vision” when it’s really just “their vision” of their spot on the Forbes list.

New York is better in part, I would guess, because there’s no false premise that the investor is doing anything other than acting as a conduit for capital. There’s egos too but no one is trying to live up to the standard of “changing the world” or “innovating” or being “the next ___.”

It probably also helps that Warren Buffet is the most successful traditional investor of all time and a model of good behavior.

It reminds me of the saying: "The problem with the asshole-genius trope is it is much easier to emulate being an asshole then it is to emulate being a genius."

With investors, it is probably the same situation with employers.

A rejection does say nothing about you. The guy the hired says a lot about the company.

You can usually tell who these are by seeing if most of their portfolio they aren't primary investor.

Interestingly, I think that's for us to choose. I'm leaning into AI specifically for this reason. I want to build tools to that reduce the drudgery.

But I agree, there's going to be a "war" around this and if could go wrong, if we are not careful.

what are you building

Isn’t the constant building out tools another form of drudgery?

You want a real DIY MBA?

Start a company.

That's it. :D

To be fair, you set yourself up for the downvote.

There is no science to backup the vegan diet is "far healthier". Also, if the entire world stopped eating meat, we'd have a series of other problems to deal with.

Just make intellectually honest arguments and try and win that way. It's a much better way to "convert" people to your cause.

What problems do you think would result? The only ones I can think of are job losses in agriculture and healthcare. And the entire world wouldn't stop eating meat anyway so it's a made up problem.