This was interesting to ponder.
On one hand, we shouldn't withdraw from opportunities to reinforce points of weakness. Focusing only on strengths to the exclusion of strengthening weaknesses is a risky play. One might not get burned by one's weaknesses. One might be able to leverage the economy to convert value earned from strengths into value paid for coverage of areas of weakness. It mostly depends on how the value streams balance. If the income stream is high and the expenditure stream is low, this strategy can pay off. Often times the people in the wealthier echelons of society are elite at one, maybe two things.
This, however, creates problems. When someone is amazing at one thing and garbage at everything else, that person is "top heavy". They're not well rounded. They're dependent upon numerous people who they must pay in order to enable them to focus exclusively on their forte. This creates the need for trusted third party authorities or, at the very least, it creates the need to solicit bids from multiple vendors to compare/contrast bid details and pricing.
I'm prone to think that the sweet spot Goldilocks zone entails the Pareto principle. Let's say that I can learn/acquire 80% of a subject in 1 month, but it will take me 4 months to acquire the other 20%. It would be 4x better for me to learn 80% of 5 different subjects across 5 months (80% x 5 = 400%) than it would be for me to spend 5 months learning 100% of 1 subject.
I think it's worth it to pursue the final 20% on a few subjects, but perhaps that's best done on an 'as needed' basis.
Tried to zap you just now. Not sure if it will work. Zaps are so frustrating. I'm making progress on reworking my NOSTR setup. First step was getting my node and lightning node better set up. Still got a little bit of work to do there but progress has been made. NOSTR wallets and nsec management are next on my list.
