3 ms·

Obviously the thesis is true. Maintenance is crucial while innovation rarely changes anything substantive... I think that is the reason that we hold innovators

Obviously the thesis is true. Maintenance is crucial while innovation rarely changes anything substantive... I think that is the reason that we hold innovators in high regard. People are very bad at it and it happens so infrequently. We rarely get the right person when we hand out credit so such idolization is usually meaningless, but I suppose in the long run that is not important. We have this irrational need to attach a person to the idea. So we end up failing to properly credit any of the people that make and keep our civilization...

cies 10y ago
"We" hold innovators in high regard because of technology and the way capitalism neeeeeds technology. We live under capitalism so we are taught to love innovation. By maintenance alone a capitalist (person who has so much he no longer needs to work) cannot out run the herd, he needs to innovate because the other capitalists are also innovating. Since labour has already been squeezed to the max, they seek technologies that increase the output of labour, or even "better", make labour obsolete. Workers should be weary of innovation, but they have been taught to love it, and thus they do :)
throwaway91111 10y ago
> People are very bad at it and it happens so infrequently. Is this really true? Plenty of innovations occur in parallel. Perhaps the people who desire to innovate dwarf the opportunities for innovation.