I would question the above statement under the following premises: -Disruption is about taking a different path than the historic "proven" one... example

I would question the above statement under the following premises: -Disruption is about taking a different path than the historic "proven" one... example future based on the past bad product: motorcycle front suspension fork, disruption improved product: telelever suspension (or similar in approach Mcpherson suspension) -Based on the past Genetic Algorithms could lead to local maximum; alternative option is always to let some non top-fit elements to prevent or minimize this situation. -History provides context and therefore bounds... counter example of not taking history leads to more successful results [0][1] [0] http://www.snopes.com/college/homework/unsolvable.asp [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Dantzig Edit: I would also suggest a "Confirmation bias" on the Article; from Wikipedia: >The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions. With that said that would lead us to the already existing question of if correlation doesn't imply causation what does? Edit2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11211583 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11211583 which seems to state (a priori) the opposite idea.