[HN Gopher] How to increase your surface area for luck
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to increase your surface area for luck
        
       Author : jger15
       Score  : 137 points
       Date   : 2025-07-23 18:55 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (usefulfictions.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (usefulfictions.substack.com)
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | her suggestions
       | 
       | - Operate from a place of genuine curiosity
       | 
       | - Assume you're always auditioning for a bigger role
       | 
       | - Give before you take
       | 
       | - Air your weirdness
       | 
       | - Host events
       | 
       | - A period of lostness is a part of it
       | 
       | i think some novel points (host events is good, i agree) but also
       | the rest of this is fuzzy and unorganized. you can spend a lot of
       | effort accumulating microlucks but not get anywhere and burn out
       | completely and early.
       | 
       | my version: https://swyx.io/create-luck
       | 
       | basically classic advice is do more x talk more about what you do
       | = surface area
       | 
       | can improve that by pursuing authentic curiosity as TFA suggests
       | 
       | but then i add in an element of strategic thinking - go to where
       | luck is more likely to occur.
        
         | dublinben wrote:
         | If everyone is hosting events, who will attend them?
        
           | kosmavision wrote:
           | People who haven't read the book I suppose.
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | ai, of course
        
           | evrimoztamur wrote:
           | We would still be cutting hair even if everybody was a
           | hairdresser.
        
           | TideAd wrote:
           | This would be a great problem to have. Most scenes don't have
           | enough event hosts.
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | > https://swyx.io/create-luck
         | 
         | Thanks, really enjoyed this.
        
       | foota wrote:
       | I've always felt that a key part of my success comes from an
       | intense curiosity. The alternative of course is to have won the
       | birthright lottery for generations in a row, but unfortunately
       | I'm not that lucky.
        
         | chankstein38 wrote:
         | This is my struggle. I'm intensely curious but have no prior
         | super successes in my lineage so I still feel like I've only
         | gotten so far and feel like I'm kind of stuck because I can't
         | leave the job that pays my bills. I also wish I naturally
         | wanted to broadly share my curious deep-dives but I can't find
         | a format that wouldn't take away from the enjoyment of pursuing
         | them.
        
         | kulahan wrote:
         | Curiosity is the opposite of fear, so this probably played a
         | big part in you feeling comfortable enough to seize your
         | opportunities when you saw them.
        
       | chankstein38 wrote:
       | This reads like every single self-help book ever. "Grow and
       | cultivate your network (and make sure you're genuine), dress for
       | the job you want (or act like the job you want), other generic
       | stuff about networking."
       | 
       | I don't know, I don't see an inherent issue with this, I think
       | there's value in some things said here but I don't see a lot of
       | value in "going out and meeting more than 1-2 people per week" or
       | whatever. It feels like one of those things you read and get
       | excited about then have no way to act because "Oh yeah let me
       | just go meet people! At ... walmart maybe?"
        
         | swyx wrote:
         | hosting events (people come to you on your terms) > going to
         | events (others)
        
           | RicoElectrico wrote:
           | For some reason many people find it acceptable to cancel
           | their plans last minute just because.
           | 
           | Hell is (trying to herd) other people.
        
         | z_open wrote:
         | Yeah I have always wondered about the success rate for self
         | help books. Seems like the people who need it have an inherent
         | problem using it.
        
         | tornadofart wrote:
         | Fermats last theorem was notoriously proved by going to
         | parties, socializing and making smalltalk /s
        
           | HPsquared wrote:
           | People only knew about the theorem and tried to solve it
           | because a lot of people have already gossiped about it: "Oh
           | do you remember that unsolved theorem? Oh what a story!"
        
         | rezz wrote:
         | Last week I entered the elevator in my apartment building and
         | there were two women who started laughing and proclaimed
         | "whoops we didn't hit L". I immediately replied "if that's the
         | worst thing that happens to you today you're doing alright".
         | Followed by them replying "or it's the beginning of a Dateline
         | tragedy".
         | 
         | We all had a good laugh then she introduced herself as the
         | mother of the other woman who happened to be very attractive.
         | We continued chatting and exchanged contact info.
         | 
         | I'm not sure anything will come of it but I do know that I had
         | a much more pleasant and serendipitous elevator experience
         | because instead of just smiling after they admitted their
         | mistake, I threw out a silly reply which turned into what it
         | did.
        
           | hibikir wrote:
           | One of my biggest issues with American suburbia and car
           | dependence is the much smaller percentage of reasonable
           | opportunities for serendipity vs my old Spanish hometown.
        
             | udkl wrote:
             | vs in denser cities too .... Cities in India in my case
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | are you going to ask the daughter out? we're invested in the
           | story now
        
             | SCUSKU wrote:
             | HN was probably the last place I'd expected to see a
             | romance novella, but that makes it all the more intriguing.
             | I hope OP asks the daughter out.
        
             | rezz wrote:
             | The building is hosting a party tomorrow so I was banking
             | on a chance encounter there, but if not I think I'm going
             | to have to.
        
               | grillitob wrote:
               | I think I am going to activate notifications from here
               | just to receive the outcome of this story.
        
               | Projectiboga wrote:
               | This is for you and everyone reading, focus on making a
               | friend first, not saying take it slow. If love blossoms
               | great but if not maybe one of you two can meet someone
               | via the friendship. I met my wife via a woman I met at a
               | party. We went out a few times without any chemistry but
               | I went to the beach w her and some friends and have been
               | w my wife now 28 years. The rule for dating should be
               | like camping "leave it (them) better than you found it
               | (them)".
        
               | swyx wrote:
               | or it can just be a casual relationship, not everything
               | needs to be wife goals maximum stakes all the time
        
             | grillitob wrote:
             | I think a latent space episode dedicated to luck, love and
             | LLM could be well received.
        
               | swyx wrote:
               | thanks! we've tried to do an ai + dating episode but
               | havent really found the right angle. i think an
               | alternative to status quo is desperately needed for the
               | sake of human population but also economy
        
           | grillitob wrote:
           | As someone from Spain, I asked an LLM about the L button and
           | the Dateline tragedy just to assess how witty the situation
           | was, it seems shared culture played big here. Also, I looked
           | up about the serendipity reference, and there is a love film
           | of 2001 in which elevator plays a romantic role. In my mostly
           | scientific life L button, Dateline and serendipity has
           | different meaning, furthermore luck and romance occupy
           | infinitesimal space. To stay on topic, I really hope you luck
           | and romance.
        
           | wslh wrote:
           | Yes, it is basically an elevator pitch!
           | 
           | Returning to the main topic: the problem with networking is
           | that the scale of sellers is much greater than the buyers,
           | and those networks have hierarchies difficult to penetrate.
        
         | Norcim133 wrote:
         | It is a fair point.
         | 
         | But I found this article landed different than most self-help.
         | It spoke in terms of _mindsets_ one can adopt to do the things
         | you mentioned.
         | 
         | And it made those mindsets compact/memorable so I'm more likely
         | to use them.
        
         | celticninja wrote:
         | This should just boil down to "say yes" to invites
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | > This reads like every single self-help book ever.
         | 
         | And every "business success" book ever. They're all just
         | Survivor Bias. Have 1,024 people flip a coin 10 times, find the
         | guy who flipped heads 10 times in a row, and have him write a
         | book about what it takes to be a master coin flipper.
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | He/she probably has a technique. Life isn't a static
           | probability chart. Coins have three sides in 3d space and
           | will land on its side once in awhile. People learn how to
           | toss a coin to get a certain result.
        
       | emptybits wrote:
       | Fortis fortuna adiuvat. Fortune favours the bold. Just do it.
       | 
       | Take those risky leaps but I'd add that "luck" also favours the
       | well-prepared.
        
         | throwaway81523 wrote:
         | If it has a high chance of success and not much downside to
         | failure, it wasn't much of a risk then, was it.
        
           | emptybits wrote:
           | I agree. Risks are often given too much weight in our
           | imaginations. We psych ourselves out. Just do it. :-)
           | 
           | Risks that are imaginary can be real psychological barriers,
           | fear-inducing, and life-limiting. So making those leaps is
           | important, don't you think?
        
       | sschnei8 wrote:
       | Another great way to increase your surface area for luck is being
       | born in a first world country with access to a computer. I hear
       | that has a good success rate!
        
         | kulahan wrote:
         | Being lucky once does not make you lucky later
        
           | gcheong wrote:
           | No, but it can set the stage for being lucky later on. Warren
           | Buffet calls it winning the ovarian lottery.
           | 
           | https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/04/warren-buffett-says-the-
           | key-...
        
             | kulahan wrote:
             | Well no, because again, luck is just about seizing
             | opportunities, so it's all relative. Someone lucky in
             | America may not fare well in Cambodia and vice-versa.
        
         | ipaddr wrote:
         | Or being born to a King with great riches.
        
       | adamgordonbell wrote:
       | "Air your weirdness" is great advice. It's framed here as "start
       | a blog," which can feel trite, but the larger point is powerful:
       | don't hide what makes you different.
       | 
       | I spent years smoothing out my quirks until I realized those
       | quirks are what people find compelling. Ironically, aspiring
       | influencers sometimes fake eccentricity. Think "Liver King", when
       | genuine oddity is far more interesting.
        
         | paulryanrogers wrote:
         | Liver King doesn't seem to offer a lot of usable and positive
         | lessons. Being weird and toxic is a well trodden path.
        
       | markus_zhang wrote:
       | My opinion is success is difficult to copy and luck plays a huge
       | part.
       | 
       | A better way is to observe the people who failed and failed
       | miserably, and learn from their failures. My model of the world
       | is that, for ordinary people, you are going to be exposed to some
       | opportunities to succeed from time to time, but in a random
       | fashion. You only need to catch one or two to be successful. So
       | the key is NOT to maximize your success rate, but to make sure
       | you never fell into a hole you cannot climb back, and prepare for
       | the next opportunity.
       | 
       | But so far I have not seen any serious conference that focuses on
       | failures. Everyone wants to learn from the winners. I'd hold a
       | losers conference if I got the time.
        
         | jonfromsf wrote:
         | You might like FailCon. https://thefailcon.com/
        
         | Horffupolde wrote:
         | It's better not to lose than to win. Life is non-Ergodic.
        
         | billy99k wrote:
         | Suceess always seems random, but it really isn't. It involves
         | about as much luck as anything in life.
         | 
         | As an example, if you studied for an exam and did well, was it
         | because you didn't get into a car accident on the way or
         | overslept or got sick when you needed to study? Or because you
         | studied?
         | 
         | I have found that many people want to attribute all success as
         | 'luck' due to their own insecurities.
        
         | robocat wrote:
         | > A better way is to observe the people who failed and failed
         | miserably, and learn from their failures
         | 
         | I've always wondered about this for startups: failure porn just
         | feels so useful but my suspicion is that it is useless.
         | 
         | There's just too many different ways to fail.
         | 
         | Focusing time and energy on how to avoid failure just seems so
         | wrong. Getting sidetracked. Unmotivated. However I do think one
         | needs the right amount of fear, and one needs to avoid the
         | failure modes for your particular startup and your particular
         | personality.
         | 
         | Surely the right idea is to focus on competing to win.
        
       | eikenberry wrote:
       | Poor title. Increasing the role of luck in your life has no
       | upsides. You should do everything possible to reduce lucks role
       | in your life as it can't be relied upon and you can only (and
       | have to) plan for bad luck.
        
         | kulahan wrote:
         | Luck isn't real anyways. It's actually all about getting
         | yourself in front of opportunities as often as possible,
         | learning to recognize when they show up, and acting on them
         | ASAP. That's all it is. I consider myself extremely lucky, but
         | that's just another way of saying I've seen a lot of the
         | opportunities in my life and consciously decided which to
         | chase, rather than floating through the river of fate
         | aimlessly.
        
           | nlawalker wrote:
           | This article could have been called "How to increase your
           | surface area for opportunities to find you", because that's
           | another component. You still have to recognize them and act
           | on them, but these behaviors can potentially get more of
           | those opportunities "into the funnel".
           | 
           | Scott Adams' book "How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still
           | Win Big" talks a lot about this, and is an enjoyable read,
           | despite the author's current reputation.
        
         | jcalx wrote:
         | As supplemental reading see "bulk positive randomness" as
         | discussed here [0]. It is tempting, but fallacious, to imagine
         | "luck" as a zero-sum, EV=0 (or worse) process across every
         | domain of life, where all upside or alpha has long been
         | arbitraged away. Yes, there are some domains where you want to
         | minimize variance, like the distribution of transit times to
         | the airport when you have a flight to catch, or the odds of
         | being robbed in a bad neighborhood. But there are also many
         | situations where meeting new people, trying new things, etc.
         | have many upsides and few drawbacks, and for most people these
         | are (1) common and (2) recognizable.
        
       | smokel wrote:
       | This is related to the exploration-exploitation tradeoff studied
       | in reinforcement learning [1], for which no universally optimal
       | solution is known. This article suggests to explore more, but it
       | might be wise to exploit your knowledge and be somewhat risk-
       | averse every now and then as well.
       | 
       | Also, there is a difference between making decisions at the
       | individual level and looking at the actions of all humans
       | combined. A strategy that is sub-optimal for most individuals can
       | still yield positive outcomes at the societal level. For example,
       | it is fortunate that many people go into research, even though it
       | is highly unlikely for an individual to find a massive
       | breakthrough.
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration%E2%80%93exploitati...
        
         | chrisweekly wrote:
         | I learned about "explore vs exploit" in a fantastic book titled
         | "Algorithms to Live By - What computer science can teach is
         | about human decision-making" [subtitle from memory]
         | 
         | Highly recommended!
        
       | csa wrote:
       | For the curious, "luck surface area" was coined/popularized by
       | Jason Roberts from the Techzing and Tropical MBA podcasts.
       | 
       | Our own patio11 (Patrick McKenzie) also helped propagate the
       | concept.
       | 
       | The basic equation is L = D * T -- that is, luck surface area
       | equals doing times telling.
       | 
       | I think the author strays from the original concept a bit. She's
       | not necessarily _wrong_ , but I get a sense of focusing on style
       | over substance in most of her examples as compared to the
       | original concept.
        
       | gmuslera wrote:
       | It may very opinionated towards exactly what/where/etc you are
       | looking for. Increasing the number of interactions may also
       | increase the odds of bad outcomes. The rest of the owl should be
       | put in the picture too.
        
       | 65 wrote:
       | Step 1: Be an extreme extrovert
       | 
       | Step 2: Do not be anything other than an extreme extrovert
        
         | vlod wrote:
         | For those that are flinching at this, there's a technique where
         | you pretend you're someone else (extrovert persona) while going
         | to network events.
         | 
         | e.g. pretend you're Tony Stark, a form of role playing (like
         | how actors operate).
        
         | billy99k wrote:
         | Not being interested in communicating with other humans has
         | never helped with success.
         | 
         | It's like saying you want to swim, but refuse to touch water.
        
       | jslakro wrote:
       | Today I was rereading an old link on the same topic from my
       | bookmarks
       | 
       | https://www.codusoperandi.com/posts/increasing-your-luck-sur...
        
       | humbleferret wrote:
       | This piece hits on the idea you can cultivate luck. It's about
       | increasing your 'Luck Surface Area' (L = D x T: Luck = Doing x
       | Telling).
       | 
       | My notes/ points that stood out for me:
       | 
       | - Actively seek diverse social, intellectual, and professional
       | interactions. Each one expands your surface area for serendipity.
       | TAKE MORE SHOTS!
       | 
       | - Don't go into interactions with an agenda. Real interest opens
       | doors unexpected.
       | 
       | - Always aim for excellence. Even in small tasks. People notice
       | this. A strong reputation pulls in opportunity.
       | 
       | - Give before you take. Offer attention, time, or resources
       | without expecting immediate return. That builds high trust
       | relationships.
       | 
       | - Share your authentic self. Put your unique thoughts out there.
       | It's a magnet for those who truly resonate with you. Don't fake
       | it.
       | 
       | - Host stuff. Simple, low pressure events work best. Taking the
       | initiative to create connections is often more effective than
       | just showing up.
        
         | udkl wrote:
         | Goes good with https://perell.com/essay/serendipity/
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | > Actively seek diverse social, intellectual, and professional
         | interactions
         | 
         | The word is yes (Yes Man 2008)
        
         | pstuart wrote:
         | > Don't go into interactions with an agenda. Real interest
         | opens doors unexpected.
         | 
         | Expectations are premeditated resentments. (from a 12-step
         | friend)
        
       | tibbar wrote:
       | The luckiest thing I ever did was probably burning out, quitting
       | my small-town engineering job, and then, after a few months,
       | getting in at an AI-related SF startup before AI really took off,
       | during that bubble when it was a little easier to get hired in
       | general. That generated such an enormous volume of opportunity,
       | growth, and well-connected friends that it makes my head spin.
       | 
       | Put another way: I had very few opportunities previously, and
       | they weren't too good. I also didn't really have good ideas on
       | how to get ahead. Now, it almost doesn't really matter what I do
       | - every direction is incredible.
       | 
       | I'm not quite sure how to boil down this situation, but I'm not
       | sure that it matches up to the article. My luck surface area is
       | certainly larger now, but it mostly stems from one very well-
       | timed decision, not from intentionally going out to make
       | connections (I still struggle with that.)
        
         | guilamu wrote:
         | Good for you, man!
        
         | mettamage wrote:
         | Are you up for a chat, for fun and for career?
         | 
         | I started with AI six months ago at work and am feeling kind of
         | lost where to take my career.
         | 
         | My email is in my profile.
        
         | godelski wrote:
         | I think there is also a good general lesson to learn for the
         | tons of cases like yours.
         | 
         | First, I want to say that I don't think it was all luck. You
         | put in hard work and you made it. I like the saying "the harder
         | I work, the luckier I get." Luck gets you opportunities, work
         | lets you take advantage of them. I say this first because I
         | don't want anyone to read things as saying "you don't deserve
         | it, you just got lucky". Luck doesn't detract.
         | > getting in at an AI-related SF startup before AI really took
         | off
         | 
         | We spend so much time and effort for finding the best
         | candidates. I think if we look at the history of things, this
         | surprisingly doesn't matter as much as we might think. Huge
         | companies have been built by people who on paper don't look the
         | best. Some of these companies also take off by luck, or what we
         | might call "timing." A lot of what matters is how a team or
         | group works together. A lot of what matters is a candidate's
         | potential, rather than where they are right now.[0]
         | 
         | I want to point this out not to say we should just roll the
         | dice on every person that applies for a job. Rather I say this
         | because like most things in life, there's noise. If we forget
         | about the noise, we're going to be less accurate. Randomness is
         | literally a measurement of uncertainty. While we should try to
         | optimize certainty, we are unable to be absolutely certain. So
         | it requires recognizing the noise if you want to be accurate.
         | 
         | I think we often make a mistake by ignoring noise. Or worse,
         | thinking we've removed it. We don't talk about this as computer
         | engineers, but if you talk to any physical engineer (like a
         | mechanical engineer), or even a machinist, all measurements
         | will include tolerances. That's uncertainty, noise. Without
         | tolerances, designs are not good enough to physically make
         | something. And, the machinists will just make some assumption
         | for you, which you gotta roll the dice if they're going to have
         | too small of tolerances, making your part worthless or overdo
         | your tolerances, making you pay far more than the part should
         | cost. I think it applies to us when programming too.
         | > My luck surface area is certainly larger now
         | 
         | And I think this is another important part (that can connect to
         | what's been said above). Success gives us more opportunities.
         | Importantly, these compound. Unfortunately, this means luck
         | matters far more earlier on. I think we should recognize this
         | as it plays a huge role when talking about juniors, high
         | schoolers, college graduates, and so on. The difference between
         | two random people starts small, but grows as they progress. If
         | you took the same student and sent them to Standford they'd
         | probably do better than if you sent them to some Cal State. The
         | former is much more likely to give connections and internships
         | while the latter might lead to none, even if the education was
         | exactly the same.
         | 
         | [0] It can be funny when people will spend so much looking for
         | candidates but also say that degrees are worthless. There's
         | probably a lot of these contradicting mindsets we all have (me
         | included).
        
       | grillitob wrote:
       | "Increasing Surface Area for Luck? Don't Just Show Up--Engage."
       | 
       | The advice to "increase your surface area for luck" by
       | interacting more is half-right. The real leverage isn't just
       | volume--it's receptivity.                   Forced interactions
       | [?] luck. Dragging yourself to a party disengaged? Skimming a
       | book you don't care about? You're not expanding opportunities--
       | you're a ghost in the room. Luck sticks to presence, not
       | proximity.              Serendipity favors the prepared. Ever
       | meet someone transformative because you were primed to listen? Or
       | stumble on an idea because you were actively searching? That's
       | not randomness--it's alertness meeting opportunity.
       | True "surface area" is neurological. It's the difference between
       | hearing and listening, attending and connecting. Optimize for
       | depth of engagement, not just foot traffic.
       | 
       | TL;DR: Luck isn't passive. It's the collision of action and
       | attention.
        
       | taneq wrote:
       | "Trust your luck, Taran Wanderer! But don't forget to put out
       | your nets!" - Llonio
       | 
       | Do things, talk to people, engage. Note that this is different to
       | "hustle". Don't try too hard to minmax, because that leaves no
       | room for serendipity.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-23 23:00 UTC)