1/14,000,065 just my random thoughts :)

avengers infinity war was released and the avengers faced their greatest enemy yet: thanos. he was a very difficult opponent and proved really tough for the avengers. he was on a quest to get the six infinity stones and wipe off half of humanity. dr strange had the time stone and, with it, the ability to see the future. hoping to use it to gain an advantage, dr strange tried to see the future and figure out a possible way to defeat thanos. according to him, he saw 14,000,065 possibilities, and they only beat thanos in 1 of those millions. that's an almost zero percent chance of success. any normal person would probably give up. however, as we eventually see in avengers endgame, they were able to defeat him thanks to iron man. it was mathematically and logically impossible, but they did it.

with the widespread knowledge of probability and statistics, everyone now takes the safest bets. before doing anything, we observe the data and make decisions around it. the choice with the best probability is almost certainly the one picked. the higher the probability of success, the better it is for all parties. so now everyone is conservative. why gamble on what is more likely to fail when you can go for a safer choice and avoid problems? why build a startup when almost 90% of startups fail? just get a job. why try out for competitive basketball when just a few make it to the nba? this right here is why i dislike statistics. as much as it shows us insights, it also clips our wings from trying new things and induces conservative tendencies. let me break down a major flaw of statistics. let's imagine there are two scenarios. you can shoot something with a gun or you can throw a stone at it. for some reason we don't know, everyone starts throwing stones and very few people actually shoot guns. let's now say that those few who shoot guns don't even know how to shoot the gun. the failure rate will be high for shooting guns, and throwing stones will look like the most logical thing to do. the data won't tell you that it was captured in an area where most of the people there love throwing stones, or that the few who shot guns didn't even know how to shoot the gun. what you will see is that it's safer to throw a stone instead of shooting a gun. that's the problem with following probability: there are multiple things that aren't captured. there are multiple factors that contribute to failure, and statistics always fails to capture most of them. and here's a catch that people don't know. those things with almost zero chances of success are revolutionary in nature. building a plane was logically impossible. replacing horses with cars seemed foolish. a world where people on different continents can communicate was impossible. but some people ignored those statistics of failure and did it. if you can put in the work and be lucky enough to succeed, you leave behind a legacy. and because they are almost always ignored, you would most likely have a free run at it. as long as it's not zero, i am always going to give it a chance. if anything, i enjoy playing against the statistics. because it seems impossible, i enjoy doing it more than i would a simple task. what's the fun in replicating what others have done? i want to create a new path in the forest that everyone has run from. you can too. the ball is in your court. unconventional thinker,

14:49 est p.s.: i wrote a substack post yesterday, so writing another one today definitely wasn't on my mind. however, i traveled for the thanksgiving break and i am currently on a bus back to school. it's a long journey, and after napping a bit, as is usual of me, i started thinking about various matters. this was what i wrestled with the most. i am a bit nauseous from the bus journey, so it's disjointed, but i hope you got my point.