IQ is a fuzzy topic. Extreme values of it fit that old trope about pornography. You know it when you see it. There are some people I meet (including several people on this list) where I just wanna cry foul. Not fair. Too much horsepower in one person. At the opposite end of the brain lottery, there are unfortunate cases of outright impairment. For the bulk of us, we reside somewhere in the middle. If you got tested, depending on how you fared, you either believe those tests are pseudoscience or perfectly calibrated thermometers. While everyday experience hints at its wide range, a precise definition of intelligence and its measurement will remain a bloodless debate.
One thing scientists appear to agree on is that whatever notion of IQ you settle on, it probably follows a bell curve. Let’s say the average IQ is 100. Some lazy googling puts the standard deviation at 15 points.
We are used to seeing bell curves everywhere. Height, test scores, the roll of a pair of dice, shoe size. These quantities are well behaved. No single value from the population is going to have a large impact on the average if your sample size is sufficiently large. Our generic impulse is to estimate quantities according to such a benign distribution.
A less intuitive type of curve is the pareto distribution or power law curve. It shows that the bulk of an outcome can be driven by just a few or even a single observation. If you are an hourly wage earner in an Amazon distribution center and Jeff Bezos walks in the room, the average person in the room’s wealth is now that of a “one-percenter”. This computed average, of course, is meaningless to describe how an actual worker in this room is actually living. Wealth is distributed according to pareto curves, not bell curves.
Recognizing when this distribution is governing a situation as easily as we notice bell curves is an invaluable life skill. Pareto distributions dictate strategies that would seem insane or wasteful to somebody who is incorrectly thinking in bell curves. Taleb calls power law dynamics “extremistan” and bell-curve domains “mediocristan”. When deciding a course of action it is critical to know which world you are operating in. It’s the difference between ownership and hourly wages. Being a partner in a law firm has leverage. If the business grows you make more income as a pro-rata owner but you don’t work more hours. If you are an associate, you sell your time for money. Your average hourly wage is fixed. The grunt’s wage per last hour of work is constant. The owner’s average hourly wage can vary widely based on the total business the firm brings in. Or if the firm is acquired. To speak of the owner’s hourly wage is to misunderstand what drives his income and in turn what strategies will maximize it.
Life should display a #DIV/0! error when you try to apply averages to a power law decision.
It would be nice if there were power law X-ray vision glasses that helped you see when the bell-curve is not in charge. The closest thing I have found is Taylor Pearson’s essay about luck. This has been my go-to article on the 80/20 rule since people I share it with have felt the way the concepts are communicated with specific examples and charts made them stick.
Some of my favorite examples of power laws are city populations and the relative frequency of words we use in the English language.
If you want to dive deeper into power law math using venture capital returns as a case study, investor and professor Jerry Neumann has written a fairly accessible treatment.
EWY, the South Korea ETF, was an interesting source of disagreement in our Discord about…
Euan Sinclair needs no introduction from me. I’ll cut straight to the gold. He’s been…
A moontower user sent this [paraphrased] message in our Discord the morning of Jan 9th:…
Remember that chart of CAR last week. (Matt Levine wrote about the fundamentals of the squeeze on…
At least once a day, I think about how the staunchest supporters of “broken window…
From @buccocapital on Anthropic CEO’s insistence that AI is going to wipe out 50% of jobs. Bingo.…