群体从不承认失败Groups Never Admit Failure
Naval：群体从不承认失败。一个群体宁可一直活在"我们遭受过压迫"的神话里，也不肯承认失败。只有个体才会承认失败。即便是个体也不喜欢承认失败，但最终，他们可以被逼着承认。
一个群体永远不会承认自己错了。一个群体永远不会承认"我们犯了错误"，因为一个试图改变想法的群体会分崩离析。我很难在历史上找到大型群体说"我们原本认为是A，但答案其实是B"的例子。
通常这种情况下发生的是分裂，就像从天主教分裂出新教那样。随之而来的是分歧，通常还有大量的内斗。这在加密货币领域同样会发生，就像币的分叉。比特币不会突然说"我们本该有智能合约"。ETH不会突然说"我们本该是不可变的"。
我曾担任一家基金会的董事，该基金会负责为某项事业发放资金，我发现这非常令人幻灭，因为我学到的是：无论基金会做什么，他们都会宣布胜利。每个项目都是胜利的。每项计划都是成功的。到处都是相互吹捧，大量冠冕堂皇的使命宣言和愿景宣言，大量的祝贺、大量高档的晚宴——但什么实际的事情都没做成。
我意识到这是因为没有客观的反馈。因为没有损失——全都是社会层面的收益——所以他们不可能失败。而正因为他们不可能失败，他们整天都在错配资源。最终，当然，这样的群体会把钱花光。
如果你想让世界变得更美好，最好的方式就是创办营利性事业，因为营利性企业必须接受来自现实的反馈。讽刺的是，营利性实体比非营利性实体更具可持续性。它们是自我维持的。你不需要整天端着讨饭的碗到处跑。
当然，你会失去那美好的非营利身份；你必须缴税；而且纯粹的营利导向也可能让你腐化。但我认为，最好的企业是那种营利、可持续而又合乎道德的企业，这样才能吸引最优秀的人才。你能把它维持下去，是因为它是一种使命，而不只是为了钱——因为赚钱的边际回报是递减的。
金钱在你生活中的边际效用是递减的。
Naval: Groups never admit failure. A group would rather keep living in the mythology of “we were repressed” than ever admit failure. Individuals are the only ones who admit failure. Even individuals don’t like to admit failure, but eventually, they can be forced to.
A group will never admit they were wrong. A group will never admit, “We made a mistake,” because a group that tries to change its mind falls apart. I’m hard pressed to find examples in history of large groups that said, “We thought A, but the answer’s actually B.”
Usually what happens in that case is a schism, where you go from the Catholic Church to Protestant and so on. There’s a divergence and usually a lot of infighting. This happens in crypto land, too, where the coins fork. Bitcoin doesn’t suddenly say, “We should have smart contracts.” ETH doesn’t suddenly say, “We should have been immutable.”
I was on the board of a foundation that was charged with giving out money for a cause, and I found it very disillusioning because what I learned was that no matter what the foundation did, they would declare victory. Every project was victorious. Every project was a success. There was a lot of back slapping. There were a lot of high-sounding mission statements and vision statements, a lot of congratulations, a lot of nice dinners—but nothing ever got done.
I realized this was because there was no objective feedback. Because there is no loss—it’s all social profit—they couldn’t fail. And because they couldn’t fail, they misdirected resources all day long. And eventually, of course, such groups run out of money.
If you want to change the world to a better place, the best way to do it is a for-profit because for-profits have to take feedback from reality. Ironically, for-profit entities are more sustainable than non-profit entities. They’re self-sustainable. You’re not out there with a begging bowl all the time.
Of course, you lose the beautiful non-profit status; you have to pay your taxes; and also you can get corrupted by being purely for-profit. But I would argue that the best businesses are the ones that are for-profit, sustainable and ethical so you can attract the best people. You can sustain it because it’s a mission and it’s not just about the money—because there are diminishing returns to making money.
There’s a diminishing marginal utility to the money in your life.