6 Comments
User's avatar
Filiz Tamer's avatar

I'm not convinced age is the catalyst to being brilliant and it's framed as such. It's more about aptitude and attitude and as you get older you become wiser, more resilient, even more humble. This is the first time I read about someone's experiences at one of these events. Great take, the dating bit made me chuckle as well.

Expand full comment
Brad & Butter's avatar

If they are dealing with Intelligence, an IQ test is more accurate as a predictor of long-term success (Emil Kirkegaard). Something tells me this is just a lagoon of narcissism, and there is no "draining the swamp" for this one.

Expand full comment
Denys Kulyk's avatar

You had me laughing at: “Both sides seemed to be privately asking themselves: without the dating prospects, what’s the point of attending?” :)

On a serious note, to be considered for a list, don’t you have to be nominated? Which to me seems like a network exercise to find someone who will help you get in instead of being selected by the committee based your industry work.

Expand full comment
Erik Hoel's avatar

True! The nomination and selection process are both quite opaque. However, to this day I still don't know who nominated me, or why, although I'd bet it was some nice science journalist.

Expand full comment
Brad & Butter's avatar

Some weird thoughts:

1. To any pedestrian, it feels like Oscars for industrialists. But to people who are more educated, aren't this supposed to be some kind of extended talent pool for people to pick?

2. If this is a talent pool, are there any other talent pools that are clearly out-performing this one? (other than the NGO ones of course, le Cathedral is watching)

3. Which is better, a million true Instagram followers, or the Forbes and Wall Street "social network"?

4. How far is this from being Clueless (Gervais Principle) or Midwit bait, specifically made for re-enchantment?

Expand full comment
David J George, PhD's avatar

Nailed it.

Expand full comment