
"If you're over 30, you're a slow old man" – Zuckerberg. He turns 30 tomorrow. - tfang17
http://thedailywyatt.wordpress.com/2013/08/21/young-people-are-just-smarter/
======
dang
Seeing this on the front page makes me ashamed of Hacker News. I would have
killed the post hours ago, but I was on a plane.

The alleged quote that the submitter put in the title appears to be completely
bogus. Is that so? Googling it [1] brings up nothing but this HN page and a
few other web pages from today.

If the quote was just made up, then this post manages not only to be asinine
linkbait, but fraudulent as well. You don't put made-up horseshit in quotation
marks and attribute it to someone.

Apart from that, what an unredeemably stupid thread. This is a shining (or
should I say a steaming) example of what we don't want on Hacker News. That
ought to be obvious! If it isn't obvious to you, please pay closer attention,
and kindly don't post anything until it is.

Now off to bed without any supper, all of you.

1\.
[https://www.google.com/search?q=zuckerberg+"slow+old+man"](https://www.google.com/search?q=zuckerberg+"slow+old+man")

~~~
lobo_tuerto
This guys says he was there:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7741814](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7741814)

~~~
dang
You're confusing two things: whether Zuckerberg spoke at Startup School (he
did, of course), and whether he said "slow old man" (which someone seems to
have just made up). It's bad enough to stir up dumb indignation about
something someone said years ago. But to rewrite their words to make them even
more offensive? Eesh.

The larger issue, though, is that these discussions are so lame. Young people
think they're smarter? You don't say!

It's also lame that we live in a world where interesting people can't speak
their minds. (Most thoughts are wrong. Some are interesting anyway.) In a
position like that, make one slip and a thousand cackling magpies instantly
descend and start pecking at you. How many such experiences before you're
trained to dumb down and sanitize everything you say—two? three? After which,
of course, people will criticize you instead for spouting vetted corpspeak.
Talk about a lose-lose. We're all poorer for it, because it makes discourse
much more tedious.

------
DanielBMarkham
I came to realize that Zuckerberg didn't program computers: he programmed
_people_. His skill was in understanding how people thought and how to
manipulate them.

So it doesn't surprise me that he said that to a room full of young
wantrepreneurs ready to kill themselves working 100-hour weeks in hopes of an
acquihire (probably by Facebook). It also doesn't surprise me that he blew
$100 million on the good cause of helping his home school district -- looked
great in the press and continued the narrative he wanted for himself. It
manipulates large numbers of people in a way he wants them manipulated. This
is his medium.

I wish him the best -- and that maybe he learns a little bit. I know that
probably sounds condescending, but Zuck is at a huge disadvantage compared to
the rest of us, similar to that disadvantage faced by rockstars: he's at the
top of his game. The job has to be a killer, but as far as _social feedback_
goes, he's unlikely to screw it up. When I was 25, if I went in and told my
boss he was an idiot, I would lose my job. People would ask me what my problem
was, and I'd have a good chance to do some introspection. He has no similar
natural social limitations. So he can keep on saying and doing things like
this without the opportunity for introspection most of us would have.

That sucks.

EDIT: Removed the first clause, which seemed to be giving some people
problems.

~~~
anewcolor
the social network was a movie.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Good grief. It was a shortcut. I absolutely don't make such broad
generalizations based just on films. If you would like me to support my
premise, just ask. Happy to provide it.

~~~
vonklaus
Irrespective of your reply to the person above, I think the default position
for making claims should always be supporting them and your premise.

~~~
chc
You just made a claim without supporting it.

Which is perfectly understandable, because that's how humans normally
converse, particularly on topics that are not known to be very controversial.

------
yoyar
I think I was quicker and smarter when I was younger. Now I have experience
and a broad skill set with which my younger self would not be able to compete.
And in ten years from now I plan to be saying that again about my current
self. The stuff I produce now is rock solid and well architected. I don't need
to work 12-15 hour days because I know how to get things done right, I know
the appropriate solutions for a wide variety of problems. I know what works
and what doesn't.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
That's what I tell myself, too. ;)

Seriously, what I've found I'm better at:

1\. Seeing the big picture. It used to be about the technology; now, it's
about people. Technology is the means to an end, not an end in itself
(usually; sometimes playing is just fun).

2\. Predicting pain points. School of hard knocks and all that. I've also seen
a lot of technological change from my first BASIC programs on a TRS-80 and
Atari 600, which informs that.

3\. Knowing when to be passionate. Some things really matter; others, not so
much. Those things that matter need the time and energy they deserve; the
things that don't matter, well, don't. I'm much better at letting unimportant
things go under the bridge, freeing time, energy and mental capacity for more
important things.

This does mean it doesn't come without a cost. Here are the tradeoffs (for me,
not speaking generally):

1\. Much less time available. Life competes, kids have plays and soccer games,
yard work has to happen, etc.

2\. The desire to beat my head against a problem for 96 hours straight has
waned significantly. I'm much more likely to go off and do something else and
come back to it later.

3\. Learning is different. It's not slower, but the process is different. For
things that have a positive pattern match from the past, learning is very
fast; but if there is no pattern match, it takes more repetitions to make it
stick long term.

Over all, I think I'm a much better software developer today than I was 15
years ago. My code is better, stronger, faster, and I'm not running in circles
as often.

------
cjensen
We were all young once. We all made hilariously incorrect assertions.

~~~
sillysaurus3
Is it an incorrect assertion?

[http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3...](http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0094215&representation=PDF)

Taken literally, it seems to be true. Your reaction time slows down after 24,
as the data shows.

~~~
readme
Reaction doesn't matter so much if your reactions aren't correct.

~~~
vonnik
That's the whole story of HFT.

------
nathanbarry
I look back at things I said and thought a couple years ago and am amazed at
how little I knew then. Then whenever I think I really understand something I
remember that this has been a pattern for more than a decade.

Now I just admit that I am probably clueless and just try to make the best
decision with what I know now. It's helped me to be a lot less cocky.

~~~
xpop2027
I'm on the same boat. I tell myself that I will always be smarter five years
from now than I am today.

------
smtddr
_“Why are most chess masters under 30? I don’t know. Young people just have
simpler lives. We may not own a car. We may not have family. Simplicity in
life allows you to focus on what’s important.” ---Mark Zuckerberg_

Because chess is more important than family.

I love this place, but will not deny that the Bay Area tech community's hubris
is at astronomical levels.

...I'm just glad we're done talking about splitting California into smaller
states.

~~~
perrylaj
Good point. The counter-quote could easily be something like _" Why do most
Nobel Prize winners do their prize winning work in their mid/late 30s? I don't
know. Older people have more experience. They prioritize. They have families.
Having more responsibilities forces you to be more efficient."_

But I won't knock Zuckerberg for being young and naive once. I was too.
Hopefully he's growing up a bit and realizing that there is a lot more to
success than founder age.

------
ShardPhoenix
Fluid intelligence (basically ability to process new things quickly) falls
with age while crystallized intelligence (basically knowledge/experience)
continues to improve, eg:

[http://examinedexistence.com//wp-
content/uploads/2013/12/cry...](http://examinedexistence.com//wp-
content/uploads/2013/12/crystallized-fluid.jpg)

Depending on what your problem is you may want a younger person or an older
one, or both.

------
barsonme
The youth think they know everything, but the old know they don't know
everything.

Honestly though, 30 isn't that old. Perhaps it was growing up with older
parents (they had me when they were over 40) but I've never viewed even 40 as
"old". Getting there, sure. But not old. Old is like 70 -- retirement home.

~~~
sheltgor
I have to agree completely with you there...

My parents were in their 40s while I was starting elementary school, and can't
help but see that as 'old'.

------
rayiner
Zuck invented FB as a 20-something. Bradeen, Brattain, and Shockley were 37-45
when they invented the transistor. See:
[http://m.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/02/big-
breakthr...](http://m.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/02/big-
breakthroughs-come-in-your-late-30s/283858) (breakthroughs happen in late
30's).

------
csel
I'd be interested to know the number or ratio of startup created by under 30
and have failed vs number of startups created by over 30 and failed. My guess
is there'd be less failure by over 30 founders.

~~~
Mandatum
Data/results from it would be near useless unless you were able to question
only people with zero-responsibility (ie no family, commitments) and equal
risk.

~~~
perrylaj
Not necessarily - depends on your goal in such a study. If you were looking to
see the impact of age and age alone, sure that'd be tough to control for with
all the added factors. However, startups don't occur in a vacuum and I think
it'd be interesting to see some comparisons without worrying about age as the
only factor.

Most research points to mid/late 30's as the peak of technological
breakthroughs (largely determined by age of Nobel winning work). I'd actually
be somewhat surprised if successful company founders weren't largely
distributed around that same range.

------
adamnemecek
So what are some technological feats that people under 30 have achieved? The
only one I can think of is Linux, I think that Linus was like 22 when he
started it. That being said, I don't know how l33t were first versions of
Linux.

~~~
chriswait
Facebook.

~~~
adamnemecek
I doubt that first version of Facebook should be considered some pinnacle of
engineering.

~~~
general_failure
AFAIK, Facebook is the most used software in the world. That is some
achievement. Even technically - serving so many people is kinda mind blowing

~~~
jholman
> _Facebook is the most used software in the world._

This is very obviously not true. For example, more people use PHP than use
Facebook (supposing that there is at least one user of PHP who does not use
Facebook, such as e.g. myself). I'll let you construct additional examples for
yourself.

And if, btw, you argue that the users of Facebook don't "use" PHP, then I'll
argue that they don't "use" Facebook in exactly the same way, since their web
browser (or mobile client) is an intermediary.

------
onezerozeroone
I don't think younger people are smarter. Some people younger than I am are
smarter than I will ever be, simple as that, especially when it comes to niche
topics. But that's true for people older than me, too.

That being said, I feel like silicon valley gives preference to younger people
in large part due to ingrained social expectations. A young 20-24 year old
that pitches gets a lot of lee-way.

They have a passion and fire in them, so anything they say seems more
impressive especially because you might not expect it of them. It's like a 5
year old regurgitating some obscure or advanced factoid...wow you say, what a
smart young man! Objectively the kid isn't smart, but relatively speaking he
appears very smart, especially compared to other 5 year olds.

The standards increase as you get older. You can't just walk in and pitch like
you're an idealistic 20-something. You have to project complete
confidence...essentially you need to act like the boss society expects you to
already be. In contrast, younger entrepreneurs benefit from a sort of
stereotype: younger people are "fresher" ideas, aren't held back by
convention, etc. Older people are expected to know how to run shit and aren't
allowed to just skate by on vision alone.

------
zkinion
I was there at that YC startup school where Mark said younger people are
smarter. The atmosphere in the air was part humor and part insight, not some
seriousness to mean that older people are stupid in anyways.

The most important thing he said that day I can remember was that his company
was, no matter what, a "software" company, and even his chief legal team
lawyer codes as well, and stressed the importance of understanding and doing
coding.

Now, I'm 32, and made a lot of money in my late 20's, and also in my early
20's, but lost everything right before I turned 30 in some legal grow op
investments in California. I've never had a successful startup, even though I
had a successful affiliate program in college, and am beginning to feel old.

When I was 22, in college and making more than a plastic surgeon because I
figured out how to generate oodles of mortgage leads online during the
mortgage bubble, I not only felt different, the world itself was different.
Everybody seemed to be happier, friendlier. The world is just simply a
different place when you're making lots of money and building things, whether
its in internet marketing or in the startup world. The world is a very shitty
place when you're stagnant, barely making any money, and just rotting away
some like dead animal.

Its hard to even think straight any more. It's like a part of me is just not
there that once was. I exercise and eat healthily, but its just not the same.
Maybe I need to start getting on some HGH treatment, but that's nearly 30k a
year. Its probably more mental than hormones.

So yeah, if you're over 30, you're a slow old man, only if you let it get to
you deep down.

~~~
graeme
Interesting. I felt like you at age 25, when I was hit by poverty, uncertain
direction, and health problems.

I'm 28 now, and feel like I'm getting younger as I age. But not quite as young
as when I was 21. There's definitely aging there, I think.

The three things that have produced the biggest impact for me have been:

    
    
      1. Barbells 
      2. Mindfulness + stoicism (Seneca)
      3. Finally earning a good amount of money
    

The first one was the easiest to implement. Have you tried barbells?

Mindfulness I only really managed after a health crisis forced me to deal with
the stress constructively. Money I can't advise on.

But barbells are very easy to implement. Takes me about 30 minutes, three
times per week + a $40 gym membership.

~~~
zkinion
Barbells I've got down solid. I was on Stronglift's 5x5 for quite a while. Now
I've been getting more gains from a hybrid zyzz's workout, with enough
compound lifts mixed in. My diet could use some work though, as that's what
accounts for most lifting gains.

I'll look into #2. Maybe that can help with #3. When I can think straight and
focus, I can stomp my foot on the ground and money seems to spring up around
it. Thanks for the advice.

~~~
graeme
Good luck! Money's still out there for entrepreneurs.

The Miracle of Mindfulness was a good read. Actually, the first ten pages was
enough for me. It got me to try being totally mindful for a morning as I went
about my affairs, and that stuck with me. I am solidly in the present most of
the time.

Letters from a stoic is what I read for Seneca. He taught me that we will lose
everything eventually, but accepting this lets us enjoy what we have without
fear. And he taught me to rehearse any scenarios I fear and write them down,
to see that they're ultimately not so bad, or the common fate of us all.

------
onislandtime
I not only feel more mature in my reactions and my thinking but also feel I am
a much better coder and creative thinker. You don't need to be 20 to code or
start a company. Age discrimination in Silicon Valley is real though. It has
nothing to do with intelligence. It has to do with trying to hire people like
yourself. Of course a 20-year old would not want to hang out with a 50 year
old dad. Asking silly quizes in interviews to a professional engineer to judge
decades of experience is beyond idiotic. The reason older people are not good
at solving quizes is because that's not what we do in the real world so you
don't develop that skill. That's what you do in school. The best ideas come
after hitting the wall a few times. A good workplace needs diversity of
skills, experience, cultural background, gender, etc. Startups who ignore this
are not only breaking the law but are also missing out on great people. I
would love to hear suggestions on how we can change this culture. Is it
possible to prove age discrimination? Should companies adopt a standardized
and open protocol for hiring?

------
lobo_tuerto
Yes, this is Mark Zuckerberg. He went on to say:

"Why are most chess masters under 30? I don’t know. Young people just have
simpler lives. We may not own a car. We may not have family. Simplicity in
life allows you to focus on what’s important."

Then, have a look at this list:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_top_title_holders_in_Go](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_top_title_holders_in_Go)

~~~
jquery
Zuckerberg was wrong about the age of chess masters. Chess players peak in Elo
rating, on average, at age 35.

Former world champion Anand hit his peak rating at age 41.

[http://theconversation.com/anand-vs-carlsen-the-age-
effect-i...](http://theconversation.com/anand-vs-carlsen-the-age-effect-in-
the-world-chess-championship-20120)

------
jayfuerstenberg
In every craft you get better with age, as long as your keep you mind and body
active.

Zuckerberg will learn this as he gets older.

~~~
rhizome
He's the original Buzzfeed. Start out talking a lot of crap, then try to earn
goodwill by improving.

------
nashashmi
116 comments and exploding: I commented a few points on the blog and I will
say it quickly here. I know what he said and why he said it because I said the
same thing at the same time when I was only two years younger than him and I
believe the same thing now.

He said this: Do not avoid hiring young people. They are great and terrific
and amazing and full of ideas and energy. Give them more power and more
responsibility. Just baby sit them periodically and gently guide them when
they need it. Value them and utilize them.

Every other interpretation of that quote is just bizarre. Btw, when you are
that young and have taken such a deep ownership of life and world, you see
things other people just don't see, and one of them is the power of the
twenty-somethings. And you might remember the power of 18-20 crowd.

------
grue_
Does ageism have as much of a perceived presence in tech culture in regions
other than the valley?

~~~
morganherlocker
I do not see it much in the southeast US. .Net and Java dominate the
programming language culture here, and you do not just jump in and learn all
of .Net or Java in a year or two. For all of its many shortcomings, the south
does seem to have a reverence for age and experience (which might contribute
heavily to aforementioned shortcomings).

Even at startups, I would guess that the average programmer is over 30 in my
area (Charleston, SC). An older programmer here can pretty much live like a
king/queen on their salary with nearly limitless employment, assuming they
keep somewhat up to date ("up to date" being more like "knows how to use OOP
and a standard ORM", not "has a prolific Github profile and uses TDD"). In
fact, many of the top programmers you see here are people who left SF or NYC
for more stable employment in finance, cushy consulting, and better real
estate prospects.

[Disclaimer: I am neither an older programmer nor a .Net/Java dev, but this
has been my anecdotal experience]

------
Fr0styMatt
I'm understanding and doing stuff now in my mid-thirties that my young self
only wished he could do. To boot, I'm more excited and passionate about my
craft than ever; certainly more excited than I was in my mid-twenties. I don't
see this trend changing anytime soon.

Then again, I'm probably an old engineer at heart :) I love talking to those
guys in their 50s that were programming COBOL or assembler before I was born.
I was sitting in a career course thing recently and some of the older guys
were sharing their experiences applying for jobs; all I could think was that
I'd love to hire these guys if I had the means. Give me a wise engineer any
day.

------
tommu
I had my 40th on Sunday. I had an interview on the Friday and I had the
distinct impression that I did match the interviewers picture of the team
member he wanted. This was as Security Engineer working on a relatively large
Security team within a large company that hosts a lot of domains. Point of
this comment is that this is the first time I walked away thinking 'does he
think I'm too old for that role'. Maybe I shouldn't be saying how much I want
to work around people who know things I don't.. how much I want to learn.
Perhaps I'm expected to be a manager now :(

~~~
lolatu54
As a forty something manager - I want to work around people who know things I
don't - I want to learn from them. And I do every day :) But ageism is real
and you most likely felt it. You might want to focus on team leadership, but
certainly never lose your enthusiasm.

------
dustingetz
Tech innovation is accelerating.

The old guys vastly underestimate the productivity difference between old tech
and hip new tech.

The young guys vastly overestimate how much of their productivity is due to
their own smarts rather than using hip tech, and don't sufficiently appreciate
that when they get older, the experience they've accumulated won't be worth
much, either. Re-learning everything every 5 years is only fun the first and
second times.

But certainly, years of experience with some tech is becoming less and less
valuable, as the tech is changing faster and faster.

~~~
zik
The old guys are watching the "hip new tech" with amusement because they've
seen it all before and know why it didn't work last time around.

------
brandonhsiao
There's no reason to be insulted by this quote. Either Mark is wrong, and
someday he'll learn, or he's right.

When kids say mistaken things about stuff they don't understand, adults
usually just ignore them because they're confident they know better. They
don't (ordinarily) get upset. I think people denounce a quote like this for
being naive _and_ get upset about it because they worry it might be true.

~~~
hetman
I doubt they would care if they weren't worried it could actually disadvantage
their employment prospects. The tech community is full of fads and it's hard
to know which will catch on (regardless of whether they reflect reality or
not).

------
jqm
I'm over 40 and I happen to agree with Zuckerberg. Young people do think
faster.

But on the flipside, there is probably a good reason the US doesn't allow
people to run for president before age 35. And most powerful leaders in the
modern world are considerably older than that.

You lose something with age I have found. But, you gain something just as
valuable. Thinking fast doesn't necessarily mean thinking better.

~~~
jqm
I guess the one thing I wish I had realized when I was younger is that I
wouldn't stay young forever. I probably would have made better use of my
efforts.

------
cratermoon
Let's be honest. The only reason anyone thinks Zuckerberg is "all that" is
because he made a shitload of money. You know who else made a shitload of
money? Edison. How many HN readers would put Edison over Tesla?

How much money a person makes is a _very_ poor indicator of .. well, anything,
except how much money got made.

------
brandonhsiao
I have no clue whether or how much being over 30 matters, but I find this
article to be full of poor arguments.

> I would guess that a fair majority of the human race has, at one time or
> another, been young.

This supports Mark's point more than counters it.

> Most chess masters, he tells us, are under 30, and he explains why. Oops,
> sorry, no he doesn’t. Turns out he doesn’t know why, so he asks us. This
> seems something of a failure on two counts. First on his knowledge of the
> subject itself, and second, on the wisdom of bringing up your own lack of
> knowledge in a speech about the superiority of your mental abilities.

Not really; the statement is more in the spirit of "here is theory; here is
data; data matches theory; I don't know why the data is, though." What matters
here is _whether_ most chess masters are under 30; if that's false, he should
just say that.

> I have to give credit to Mr. Zuckerberg here. He has made me think, and I am
> a house divided; 50% laugh, 50% throw up.

What values do these sentences add?

> Jesus, if you so believe, was a simple man, who saved the world. Ghandi
> simplified his life in order to lead people to freedom. Buddha decamped to
> the wilderness, as did Moses. Mandela lived an enforced simple life for 27
> years in prison because of the importance of his ideas. That is Importance.
> Those are concepts, beliefs, visions, that require a life of simplicity.
> Pulling an all-nighter to run a debugger in your cubicle just doesn’t seem
> the same somehow.

Here he acknowledges that simplicity matters, but says it doesn't matter the
way Mark claims it does because it's less admirable or heroic than in the
cases of Jesus and co. That's not the point. Mark's argument is simply that
young people are smart _er_ because they lead simpl _er_ lives, which lets
them focus on things that matter, presumably to them. (Not things that are
heroic.) And pulling all-nighters to run debuggers in a cubicle is something
he says, not Mark.

> The difference is, all those 40 year olds have been through that 21 year old
> stage and know it well. They have learned how to be more focused, more
> efficient, more productive in less time so they can actually devote time to
> the things that really are important, like those kids. These are the people
> who can teach you how to build a happy, sustainable, productive, and
> satisfying life while still getting a job done.

He is probably agreeing with Mark here, but they are certainly not
disagreeing.

> Take a stroll through the nearest cemetery some day. Look at the
> gravestones. Read the inscriptions. These are whole lives pared down to one
> phrase. Search for the ones that say CEO, or Chairman, or Acting Vice
> President, or President’s Club for Sales. Go ahead I’ll wait. Oh really?
> Well what do they say? Hmm, Loving Father, Devoted Mother, yes, that sounds
> about right. They all speak of love, family, the home, the heart.

When Mark made the remark about being younger and smarter, he was at a YC
startup event. He was most likely stressing the importance of being younger
and smarter _in starting a startup_. What this man's saying is irrelevant.

Overall, I personally feel this was upvoted to the front page more because of
the controversiality of the topic than because of the quality of the article.
All it does is throw a bunch of objects at random at something Mark Zuckerberg
said _at a startup event_ , and then reiterate a couple (old) irrelevant
arguments about wisdom and experience.

~~~
mfisher87
One thing I can agree with you on is that it sounds like Zuck was taken out of
context as a blanket statement about working in tech, when maybe he didn't
mean it that way.

However, what does your comment really add other than attacks? Everything you
wrote is practically calling the author an idiot, when does it really matter
that part of his blog post may be in agreement with Zuck? The author makes
excellent points, although indirectly, about how a person's value as a
founder/engineer/whatever can't be decided based on age. That sort of
prejudice discourages valid innovations and inventions that come from people
with experience on two fronts: 1) You're telling older people that they can't
contribute. 2) You're telling VCs that older people can't contribute, and VCs
often make judgements in far too little time. When you're Mark Zuckerberg, you
tend to be listened to.

>That's not the point. Mark's argument is simply that young people are smarter
because they lead simpler lives, which lets them focus on things that matter,
presumably to them.

The author understands that and he's directly arguing that point. Young people
may understand what is important _to them_ , but they don't understand what is
important _in life_. That sort of understanding is important in more areas
than you seem to think.

~~~
brandonhsiao
I might have expressed myself poorly, but this was really my main point:
_Overall, I personally feel this was upvoted to the front page more because of
the controversiality of the topic than because of the quality of the article._

I wasn't trying to attack the author. I was just trying to point out where his
arguments were flawed. If any part of my comment was unnecessarily mean-
spirited, please tell me.

I pointed out the parts where he is agreeing with Mark as a way of pointing
out the flaws in his argument, since his intent was to disagree.

You're right that people are rightly indignant that someone as highly regarded
by VCs as Mark is saying such disparaging things about older people.

> That sort of understanding is important in more areas than you seem to
> think.

I disagree that having an appreciation for love and family is related to being
a successful startup founder in the way Mark meant his statement, except
perhaps in the vague sense of, say, being happier and therefore more
productive. I agree it matters _in life_.

If I'm agreeing with the author here, if that was his real point, then I
believe the title of this submission is linkbait.

~~~
mfisher87
I think what bothered me is that your comment was entirely negative about
someone else's work without any sort of balance. The author of the blog post
you're responding to was able to demonstrate that you can disagree with one
thing someone says while agreeing with other things. If you're concerned about
controversy, pure negativity can only add to it.

>I disagree that having an appreciation for love and family is related to
being a successful startup founder in the way Mark meant his statement, except
perhaps in the vague sense of, say, being happier and therefore more
productive.

I took "the importance of love and family" as examples of things that, along
with other undeniable benefits, come with experience. To deny the importance
of those things excludes people who can contribute more than simple boundless
energy.

------
jesuslop
"Von Neumann used to say that a mathematician is finished by the age of
thirty. As he got older, he increased the age to thirty-five, then to forty,
to forty-five, and soon to fifty." .- Indiscrete thoughts, ch. XX. / by Gian-
Carlo Rota.

------
csel
Particularly on the topic of having children, buying cars or homes, being
loyal to a company or the concept of risk taking, the current 30 - 40 year old
would have a complete different mindset than the 30 - 40 year old from 10 - 20
years ago.

------
martco
"Is he still a member of the smarter set? Or has he aged out? If not, what is
the cut off?"

Also, can we please raise the cut off if it's really young? Please?

------
gcb0
"...unless you have truckloads of money paying under 30 slaves" \-- slow old
man Zuckerberg.

------
t3hSpork
I think there can be a certain inquisitiveness that those under 30 have which
dwindles as one ages. I wouldn't say 30 is the point where that all breaks,
but certainly he has a point. That inquisitiveness, I think, leads youngsters
to try new things and come at problems from a new angle.

------
lechevalierd3on
I stopped reading went the author brought up religious figures.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
You regard that as your cue to stop listening? That's rather narrow-minded of
you. (You also missed a fairly important point that the author was trying to
make.)

------
rfrey
We'd be lost without the nuclear reactor of young hubris.

------
adrianlmm
By that logic I'm old, but I'm also wiser.

------
knodi
To be fair, he's a slow old billionaire man.

------
blazespin
Older people are better at creative things (think writing, art, etc). Younger
people are better at math, programming, etc.

~~~
brandonhsiao
That is actually a striking thought if it's true. Can you please tell us why
you think it is?

------
antifragile
Hmmm :-) :-) This is a GREAT opportunity to dispel myths & confirm truths

What Zucka said, I'm presuming he did, but haven't checked, has truths & flaws
all at the same time. Actually it matters little who said it. This is a great
discourse potential. Indeed, I've said similar things in the past,probably way
more stupid. What this demonstrates is your IQ to the world, albeit at a
singular point in time. But the world is an unforgiving place, & the bigger
they are the harder they fall. Reasonable we can assume that the numbers
wanting to have a dig at you increases in a power-law-like manner, the
`bigger´ you are and the more you say; if he'd thrown the word `women´ in
there somewhere, it would have gone-up so much he could have been literally
toasted, maybe even contract kill from some nutter. Still, it doesn't demean
my respect of him, we all have stupid off-days. One has to look at the (verbal
+ doing) batting average, but I agree if the verbal average per se is low but
it's best not to speak! Question is, are you prepared to cast the first stone?
I'm not, 'cause I screw-up constantly. I've tripped over so many of my biases,
I'm biased that I've biases.

As for me, I'm 45. Anyhow, that's what it says on my passport, but I don't
believe it 'cause I still feel 12 on the inside. Moreover, I consider myself
faster, more efficient, more clued-in & way smarter than I ever was.
Physically, I was a former multiple WR in deep-sea freediver, but I can still
do what I did way back when. So what gives? Secretly I'm running nature's
`smart pills´. Want some?

Anyhow, back to the story. Innovation is not so much about IQ (I know plenty
of `box-tickers´ with IQ of +140). But it takes more than IQ & speed. BIG
innovation, which is or should really be the name of the game, requires MQ (=
CQ + IQ) (C, for creativity & perspective-shifting, M, moonshot). Most people
under 30 still have a deluded self-centered view of the universe (even
secretly) which makes this incessant sense of self-centeredness difficult to
allow for any majorly significant perspective-shifts to do 0 to 1. On the
other hand, the `program´ in `old dogs´ is also pretty entrenched, which makes
the field fairly level.

One last thing: I actually, paradoxically, agree with him(!), i.e., if you're
doing incremental or `me too´ innovation, bu not if you're looking to do or
invest in real-world (i.e., physical) moonshot innovation, of the type that
will magically defy steadfast & age-old laws of nature, not the 140 characters
stuff. Sure 140 characters will make money, but I'm not talking about that,
I'm talking altering the real fabric of reality & your existence. In this
extraterrestrial landscape the brain-strain & the chasm of difference is so
deep & wide (think Mars' Valles Marineris vs. Grand-Canyon) that there simply
ain't no way, no how you're going to generate or process, say, condense, the
broad based & deep knowledge required to go from 0 to 1 in a short time. It
can happen, but then we're talking about a special type of person (another
conversation for another time perhaps). I'm talking about the BIG
opportunities, the stuff that exists at the intersection of fields & which
require really deep, sometimes life-long domain knowledge acquisition; the
stuff of Newton, Galileo, Da Vinci, Taleb, & Co.). Some evidence for this:

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/singularity/2013/09/11/peter-
thi...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/singularity/2013/09/11/peter-thiel-
promised-flying-cars-instead-we-got-caffeine-spray/)

Peter's experiment wasn't the program per se, it was the young- & smart-guns
lack of really deep & really broad basic fundamental education (self imposed
or otherwise) that requires more time than going from kindy to even college,
where by enlarge you're made to jump through pointless hoops over & over
again, ad nauseum. No doubt, there is an education problem & a hack in the
waiting. The problem with his approach was that it takes time for flowers to
blossom, & to paraphrase Taleb:

 _“I’d rather be dumb & antifragile [i.e., old & experienced] than extremely
smart & fragile [i.e., young & inexperienced], any time.”_ \- Taleb (2012)

The bottom-line: risk saying or doing nothing & the outcome is certain:
nothing. The trick is to have a willingness to alter your position if
demonstrably shown to be wrong, 'cause that'll certainly boost your IQ, & most
notably. All good!

------
blizkreeg
Stopped reading the article when the author misspelled Gandhi as Ghandi.

~~~
koenigdavidmj
Stopped reading when you misspelled गांधी as Gandhi.

