Labeling individuals like Einstein as geniuses helps commodify their legacy, turning them into brands that can sell products from toys to technology. This branding mechanism benefits heirs and marketers but may not actually foster more world-changing work or reflect the reality of their contributions.
History shows that transformative innovations like airlines, vaccines, and PCs, while beneficial to society, often fail to create sustained, concentrated shareholder value as they become commoditized. This suggests the massive valuations in AI may be misplaced, with the technology's benefits accruing more to users than investors in the long run.
Breakthrough creativity, like that behind Disney's *Frozen* or behavioral economics, is often "innovation brokerage." It doesn't come from a blank slate but from combining established concepts from disparate fields—like mixing psychology with economics—to create something new and powerful.
Child prodigies excel at mastering existing knowledge, like playing a perfect Mozart sonata. To succeed as adults, they must transition to creation—writing their own sonata. This fundamental shift from rote skill to original thinking is where many prodigies falter because the standards for success change completely.
Successful individuals earn 'idiosyncrasy credit,' allowing them to deviate from social norms. However, observers often make the mistake of assuming these eccentricities were necessary for success. In reality, these behaviors are often tolerated or hidden until success provides the freedom to express them.
The internet democratizes consumption but consolidates production, meaning everyone remembers Apple but not Samsung's founder, Usain Bolt but not the silver medalist. The gap between #1 and #2 is infinite fame versus obscurity. In content-driven markets, the only rational strategy is to aim for being "insanely great," not just "good."
People surrounding a so-called genius, like Picasso's friends or employees at cult-like startups, often tolerate terrible behavior. They rationalize the unpleasantness by telling themselves they are part of an extraordinary, history-making experience, which creates a toxic enabling environment.
A successful entrepreneur who built her business on her personal brand now cautions against it being the only viable strategy. She admits she was wrong and now advocates for building businesses not tied to one's name and likeness, stressing the need to separate the human from the brand.
Dr. Li views the distinction between AI and AGI as largely semantic and market-driven, rather than a clear scientific threshold. The original goal of AI research, dating back to Turing, was to create machines that can think and act like humans. The term "AGI" doesn't fundamentally change this North Star for scientists.
Society celebrates figures like Edison for the 'idea' of the lightbulb, but his real breakthrough was in manufacturing a practical version. Similarly, Elon Musk's genius is arguably in revolutionizing manufacturing to lower space travel costs, a feat of logistics often overlooked in favor of visionary narratives.
Similar to how charisma is often ascribed to leaders only after their organizations succeed, we tend to label people as geniuses after a major achievement. This creates a narrative fallacy where we assume innate genius caused the success, rather than success causing the attribution of genius.