I find it extremely dumb to see overconfident people that really have nothing special about them or are even incompetent. These people are not contributing positively to the system, quite on the contrary.
But we don't work for the system, fundamentally, we work for ourselves, and the system incentivizes us to work for it by aligning our constraints: if you work that direction, you'll get that reward.
Overconfident people ofc do not contribute positively to the system, but they skew the system reward's calculation towards them: I swear I've done that work in that direction, where's my reward ?
In a sense, they are extremely successful: they managed to do very low effort, get very high reward, help themselves like all of us but at a much better profit margin, by sacrificing a system that, let's be honest, none of us care about really.
Your problem maybe, is that you swallowed the little BS the system fed you while incentivizing you: that the system matters more than yourself, at least at a greater extent than healthy ?
And you see the same thing with AI: these things convince people so deeply of their intelligence that it blew to such proportion that NVidia is now worth trillions. I had a colleague mumbling yesterday that his wife now speaks more with ChatGPT than him. Overconfidence is a positive attribute... for oneself.
Overconfident people are conquerors. Conquerors do not contribute positively to a harmonious system, true, but I'm not so sure we can glean the system is supposed to be harmonious.
If one contributes "positively" to the system, everyone's value increases and the solution becomes more homogenized. Once the system is homogenized enough, it becomes vulnerable to adversity from an outside force.
If the system is not harmonious/non-homoginized, the attacker would be drawn to the most powerful point in the system.
Overconfident people aren't evil, they're simply stressing the system to make sure it can handle adversity from an outside force. They're saying: "listen, I'm going to take what you have, and you should be so happy that's all I'm taking."
So I think overconfidence is a positive attribute for the system as well as for the overconfident individual. It's not a positive attribute for the local parties getting run over by the overconfident individual.
Not talking about THE system or any system in particular same way gaming the system doesn’t refer to any system but just cheating in general. And if you like overconfident people good for you, I can’t stand them because they’re hollow with no basis in reality, flawed like everyone, just pumping out their egos with hot air. And your reasoning that overconfidence is a positive attribute doesn’t make much sense to me but we’re entitled to our own opinions.
Yeah this is what I meant, both in the behavior being intelligent and it being unfortunate that this is the case. It’d be nice if the most self-maximizing behavior were also the best behavior for the global system, but it doesn’t seem that it is.
That's a fallacy. There are certainly some unqualified elected leaders, but humans living in democratic societies have yet to shake the mental framework we've constructed from centuries without self-rule. We invest way more authority into a single executive than they actually have, and blame them for everything that goes wrong despite the fact that modern democracies are hugely complex systems in which authority is distributed across numerous people. When the government fails to meet people's needs, they lack the capacity to point at a particular Senator or a small party in a ruling coalition and blame them. It's always the executive.
Of course, the result is that people get fed up and decide that the problem has been not that democratic societies are hard to govern by design (they have to reflect the disparate desires of countless people) but that the executive was too weak. They get behind whatever candidate is charismatic enough to convince them that they will govern the way the people already thought the previous executives were governing, just badly. The result is an incompetent tyrant.
and getting yourself elected while being underqualified is intelligent? i think its not. its stupid and damaging behavior based in selfish desires. about as far from intelligent you can get.
Intelligence is seperate from goals: if you're only interested in gaining power and wealth for yourself, then concern about the rest of the system is only incidental to what you can get for yourself.
