
The concept of antifragility: Shockingly Happy - grosen
http://williampeng.com/post/38700040137/shockingly-happy
======
blackhole
I want proof that the "Entitlement Generation" actually exists. I see it
talked about everywhere, yet never experience it. Why, exactly, is my
generation different from an older generation that thinks it's entitled to
social security that a shrinking workforce could never possibly sustain? If we
have entitlement problems, our _entire society_ has entitlement problems, not
just a bunch of sheltered kids.

~~~
confluence
This is what one calls anecdotal overload and should set one's bullshit alarms
blaring.

No data. No definitions. Just entrepreneurial feel good bullshit.

I stopped reading these types of articles for the purpose of trying to discern
any type of value other than trying to understand how delusional people think.
There are oh so many of them - I try to make sure I don't get freight trained
by them.

------
charlieflowers
Wow, I just found something _really_ insightful. It was in the _link_ that the
parent article offered.

On Quora, the _second_ highest response is excellent. It's from Michael O
Church, and here's the heart of it:

"Resiliency comes from an ability to realistically analyze setbacks, which
often have complex causes. People who aren't resilient have a variety of
unhealthy tendencies, listed from the most unhealthy to the least:

* Internalize the rejection. ("It happened because I'm a loser.") This leads to depression and implosion.

* Exaggerate the damage or long-lasting nature (perceived autocorrelation) of the rejection. ("Now that I got fired, I'll never get another job.") This leads to bitterness and "cold" anger, which is more dangerous than the "hot" kind because it's long-lasting and tends toward generalization.

* Get angry about it. ("It happened because he is an asshole.") This leads to "hot" anger and, often, stupid behaviors (revenge).

* Prematurely generalize about the environment. ("It happened because <industry X> is full of sharks.") This doesn't usually impair general psychological health, but it creates an inaccurate model of the world and leads to sub-optimal choices and lost opportunities in the future."

I'm going to have to find some way to get this in front of my face every day
for a few months until I internalize it. I have found myself making each of
those mistakes at times, and when presented in this manner, it is crystal
clear that they are nothing more than reasoning errors.

------
maxwin
There seems to be a trend to invent new words for an old concept when writing
articles. I don't know if the intention is to attract eye balls or to claim
that "hey I invent this concept". But most of the times, what you discover is
not new. Why invent "The concept of antifragility" when there is a word called
"resilience" . Since English is not my first language, please correct me if I
am wrong.

~~~
gagabity
This is quite thoroughly explained in the book, the anti-fragile benefits from
adversity, the resilient does not.

~~~
nacker
Nothing new under the sun, kids. Hormesis. Look it up.

<http://gettingstronger.org/stoicism/>

------
dpapathanasiou
" _The prototypical entrepreneur is highly risk-seeking to the point of
irrationality. A simple cost-benefit analysis would dissuade most people from
traveling down this path; yet, the entrepreneur is an entrepreneur because of
the risk involved._ "

If that is his understanding of Taleb's book, then he has misread it
completely.

Taleb says the best approach is a dumbell strategy, combining conservative
choices with convex options whose downside risk is fixed or finite but whose
upside is unlimited.

~~~
wpeng
Thanks for the comment - appreciate it and thanks for reading. I qualify that
point with the following paragraph:

"When you look at the decision tree from that perspective, it seems not so
bad: failure is always the same, a zero, while the return (however you define
it: monetary, happiness, utility, etc.) is astronomical, and worth it."

------
EzGraphs
Taleb's Antifragile book has a number of direct entrepreneurial references and
many other ideas that are relevant but of more general interest (economics,
technology, health related, etc). For example, he talks about the concept of
options (based upon the financial vehicle) applying in other areas of life. In
general if you have something with a small downside potential and large upside
potential, it is an option that is antifragile. Learning new technical skills
seems to me to fit into this area. By sacrificing a bit of time and a few
bucks on training / books / videos you can develop a product that will delight
users, address a need in the workplace, or otherwise create value. Limited
downside and great potential upside.

------
yyyytttt
Antifragility sounds exciting, but there's really nothing there. In the
context of economics, it simply means relying on competition instead of
central planning (by government or by TBTF banks). Outside of economics Taleb
has no real examples of antifargility. Engineering is always about robustness,
you have 0 examples of engineering systems that are "antifragile".

~~~
diego
The idea is that the evolution of engineering systems is antifragile because
they benefit from trial and error. Computers keep getting better over time
because of how the industry identifies and fixes issues. An obvious (but not
the best) example would be the Macbook power connector. A given system cannot
be antifragile (unless it learns on its own), but the evolution of technology
can be. Contrast with economics, where (he argues) policy makers learn little
or nothing after each boom-bust cycle.

------
rheide
If that's what helps you deal with failure then go for it. I agree with most
of the points mentioned in the article but I don't see how that leads to
'antifragility' as the solution. A healthy dose of realism (perhaps
cynicism..) works fine for me.

------
pbateman
This reminds me of pg's Relentlessly Resourceful essay.

<http://paulgraham.com/relres.html>

------
ErikAugust
Tell you what's fragile: taking out college loans. Great read by the way.

------
GlennS
Antifragility? Why not 'resiliance'?

~~~
aduric
The difference is explained in the book.

------
exit
burdening the world with 6 (six!) descendants sounds pretty entitled to me.

------
michaelochurch
I really hate this "entitled Millennial" schtick. It's complete fucking
bullshit. Are there some overprivileged, sheltered assclowns in my generation?
Sure, as with every other. The idea that this applies to the whole set is
insulting and ridiculous.

Most of us just want a fair shake. We don't want to be given the prize for
doing nothing, because that makes it vacuous, but we want a fair opportunity
to compete-- not some bullshit meritocracy that has already been set up to
make the well-connected rich kids come out the winners. When it comes to
excellence, we know that _we_ will have to do the legwork. We just want the
entrenched, incompetent morons who are currently in power to get out of the
fucking way so we can do something great. We're not asking for a meaningless
victory. We're asking to be liberated from the meaningless defeat that most
people get.

~~~
codex
So, you could be successful if only the morons in the previous generation
would let you? Is that how the previous generation became successful? Sounds
like entitlement to me.

~~~
michaelochurch
_So, you could be successful if only the morons in the previous generation
would let you?_

This isn't about me, personally. I'm fine. However, I think most people in my
generation have been screwed, and the ones who have avoided it (present
company included) tend to be fairly privileged. If you were born in 1990 in
the U.S. with average means, then chances are that you're not beating away
venture capitalists with a stick.

What's especially hilarious to me is that the age obsessions of VC-istan are
thinly-veiled classism. A meritocracy wouldn't give a shit how old you are.
The age narcissism is just a way for rich people to brand themselves, because
people of average means don't get their startups bought at age 24. They have
to work normal people jobs for a few years. The age bullshit is to keep the
latter crowd out.

We need a society where the best people are free to excel, rather than wasting
their lives taking orders. We'd have such a better world if the incompetent
morons currently running it just stepped down and let some actually smart
people take the reins. They can keep all their private jets and gaudy houses,
but the decision-making power should go to people who actually have a few
brain cells to rub together.

Entitlement, to me, suggests people wanting to be rewarded for just existing,
with no desire to actually do anything. I don't see that in my generation.
Yes, there's some of it, as there is everywhere, but it's not a defining
trait. I see a lot of pissed-off people, but I see people who work really
hard.

~~~
charlieflowers
>>>"A meritocracy wouldn't give a shit how old you are. The age narcissism is
just a way for rich people to brand themselves, because people of average
means don't get their startups bought at age 24."

Holy cow! I never thought about that, but now that you mention it, there's no
doubt that explains at least part of it.

I had thought either that they wanted (1) the coolness factor, (2) naive
entrepreneurs that they could sway more easily, and/or (3) to make sure there
was no family, so the entrepreneurs would work like crazed zombies.

I'm sure those factor in somewhat, but what you mention is probably a bigger
factor.

The good thing is that the "real world" doesn't give a shit whether or not you
start out rich. In other words, if you can overcome all the obstacles and
produce something disruptive that succeeds, you will get the rewards.

------
thoughtcriminal
Rejection Therapy [1] is what I would think a perfect example of antifragility
in the wild. [2] People learn to manage their anxiety in stressful social
situations and become more resilient to rejection after playing for awhile.
Entrepreneurs like Jia Jiang even leverage rejections to launch and grow their
startups. [3]

[1] <http://rejectiontherapy.com>

[2] [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-
fitness/healt...](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-
fitness/health/can-we-really-immunize-ourselves-against-
rejection/article5817930/)

[3] [http://www.entresting.com/blog/100-days-of-rejection-
therapy...](http://www.entresting.com/blog/100-days-of-rejection-therapy/)

~~~
unoti
Rejection therapy has its ideological roots in Stoicism, just as the central
ideas of this article does. Seneca talks about spending a few days each month
wallowing in the things that you fear the most, so that they can't control
you.

And with regard to the anti-fragility thing, this is discussed at length also
in Letters from a Stoic. Seneca talks about not being overly dominated by your
fears, but also you can be a slave to _hope_ as well. The idea of being happy
and free when poor, and cautious when prosperous is also straight out of
stoicism.

When I read Seneca in Letters from a Stoic, I get the impression that he's a
mental martial arts master, constantly training to be in control of his mind
and his happiness, always pursuing excellence.

[http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/04/13/stoicism-101...](http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/04/13/stoicism-101-a-practical-
guide-for-entrepreneurs/)

~~~
nacker
You would enjoy this site <http://gettingstronger.org>

Likewise <http://mises.org/books/stoics.pdf>

As a long-time fan of Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, I was pleasantly
surprised to discover the links between them and modern anarcho-capitalists
like Hazlitt and Mises.

~~~
unoti
Hey this is really good, thank you for sharing it! I've already started
reading the stoics book.

