Wonder if it may have something to do with longer commute times, which is not discussed in the article, i.e. a trip that used to take n minutes a few years ago may now take double due to congestion, leading to more impatient drivers. At least in my city (Miami) all people talk about is how untenable the commute times have become.
Meta provides direct API access for publishing content to Facebook pages [0] and, more recently, to Instagram accounts [1]. Any third party company can apply for access and use these apis as long as they comply with Meta's terms of service and data security requirements, which have become stricter in the last few years (for each individual api permission you must submit documentation and evidence of how your app will use the permissions, and must provide a way for Facebook to log in to your app and test the functionality).
LinkedIn provides similar access, as well as Twitter, and other social networks.
There are literally hundreds of companies that provide functionality similar to Buffer and Hootsuite, including scheduling for future publishing which is not forbidden at all. (Source: I run one of these services.)
The confusion may arise because until 2021 it wasn't possible to publish directly to Instagram. Before that only some big players like Hootsuite and Buffer had direct access to the publishing api, and some less than reputable companies used unsanctioned hacks to schedule Instagram content. But in 2021 Instagram opened their publishing api to other third party apps.
Imagine in the Dunning-Kruger chart the second plot (perceived ability) was a horizontal line at 70, which is not true but not far off from the real results. Now imagine I told you "did you know that, regardless of their actual score, everyone thought they got a 70?" That's a surprising fact.
I think the most egregious thing about the original presentation is that it leads you to believe that people with a given skill level all self-assessed similarly. If you plotted the scores and self-assessments of each individual you would see that it's not "everyone [in the first quartile] thought [they were about average]", it's that their self-assessments varied wildly, from low and accurate to high and inaccurate.
> Most people have an above-average number of legs.
The arithmetic mean and the median are both averages, but the upthread comment was about the median and yours about the arithmetic mean.
> There's really no contradiction there; all it takes is for there to be a couple low scores pulling the average down.
Well, no, when what you are estimating is relative performance by score percentiles, and people's self evaluation is biased toward the 70th percentile, that's not what is happening.
I found it interesting that you framed "people not wanting to do things by themselves" as the opposite of grit. What if it's just an issue of loneliness? I can see how even the most resilient individuals may want someone to talk / relate to if they feel lonely, and this desire be completely independent from their drive and competitiveness.
