7 ms·

Ideas Having Sex

44 points by numeromancer 16y ago

thiele 16y ago
"Technologies emerge from the coming together of existing technologies into wholes that are greater than the sum of their parts."
rortian 16y ago
Some interesting stuff in there but it's a bit scatterbrained and too obsessed with coming back to libertarian dogma. There is a line of argument that says that most growth comes from innovation. While some of it surely does, I think interconnectedness is much more important. It's sad this just turns into ideas having sex in the article. But then again lots of stuff is important in how inter-human relations develop over time. It's foolish to obsessively attribute much of the growth of the economy to one thing. For a scatterbrained, but much more interesting and less dogmatic, rethinking of economics theory I recommend Origin of Wealth by Eric D. Beinhocker.
- fgf 16y ago
  Changes in institutions/networks/interconnectedness etc. as described in the Beinhocker book is innovation according to the economic textbook definition. I have read the summary of his books and he does not seem to contradict the essay. I'd be interested to see an explanation of how you think he does (assuming you do).
  - rortian 16y ago
    >Changes in institutions/networks/interconnectedness etc. as described in the Beinhocker book is innovation according to the economic textbook definition. Innovation is hardly considered in economics at all. As is alluded to in the essay, it is considered an external variable. This is a huge point of Beinhocker's that economic theory is based on a physics of equilibrium. Bad idea. Networks and interconnectedness are not considered at all in 'textbook' economic definitions. When agents already have perfect information, why do you need to meet others? I'd love to see a textbook definition of innovation that comes close to what you have asserted here.
    - kiba 16y ago
      One of the entrepeneurs' role in our economy is to see the gaps in other entrepeneurs' plan. So, to me, it's quite obvious that there's lot a whole of inefficiency in our economy. The idea of "perfect information" in our economy is not real, but an artificial condition that could never be reached. If you think about it, uncertainty is everywhere. People lust after certainty all the time. Think about how many economic predictions that were wrong like off 1 percents or 2. Think about the economists who tell people that the housing boom is going to last. Think about the fortune tellers. That to me, tell that information can never be perfect, because there wouldn't be tons of people who offer services predicting something, who nonetheless get it wrong anyway. And that why patio sometime talk of economic inefficiency as a kind of Nirvana for entrepreneurs, because there are ton of opportunities.
      - rortian 16y ago
        Yeah, I'm with you. Unfortunately people like to take economic theorems off the shelf without looking at some of the assumptions.
    - fgf 16y ago
      "Innovation is hardly considered in economics at all." Well, you're wrong.* It should, however, be noted that the dominance of this kind of economics may be new to the mainstream. I have only been reading economics textbooks for the last three years. "Networks and interconnectedness are not considered at all in 'textbook' economic definitions." Of course they are, for example in every study ever written on globalization, the structure of corporations, corporate governance or insider trading. Or is there some special definition of the terms you're using? "When agents already have perfect information, why do you need to meet others?" None of the textbooks in economics (HS and undergraduate courses) or economists I have read assume this to be true, or even a useful approximation for most markets. "I'd love to see a textbook definition of innovation that comes close to what you have asserted here." Innovation is used in my textbook as it is in the description of the innovation economics theory. (I don't have it with me now.) *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation_economics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation_economics
bdr 16y ago
If you want something along these lines, but better thought out, read Nonzero http://www.nonzero.org/ http://www.nonzero.org/
asmosoinio 16y ago
Single page link: http://reason.com/archives/2010/06/14/ideas-having-sex/singlepage http://reason.com/archives/2010/06/14/ideas-having-sex/singl...

44 points by numeromancer 16y ago

"Technologies emerge from the coming together of existing technologies into wholes that are greater than the sum of their parts."

rortian 16y ago

Some interesting stuff in there but it's a bit scatterbrained and too obsessed with coming back to libertarian dogma. There is a line of argument that says that most growth comes from innovation. While some of it surely does, I think interconnectedness is much more important. It's sad this just turns into ideas having sex in the article. But then again lots of stuff is important in how inter-human relations develop over time. It's foolish to obsessively attribute much of the growth of the economy to one thing. For a scatterbrained, but much more interesting and less dogmatic, rethinking of economics theory I recommend Origin of Wealth by Eric D. Beinhocker.

fgf 16y ago
Changes in institutions/networks/interconnectedness etc. as described in the Beinhocker book is innovation according to the economic textbook definition. I have read the summary of his books and he does not seem to contradict the essay. I'd be interested to see an explanation of how you think he does (assuming you do).
- rortian 16y ago
  >Changes in institutions/networks/interconnectedness etc. as described in the Beinhocker book is innovation according to the economic textbook definition. Innovation is hardly considered in economics at all. As is alluded to in the essay, it is considered an external variable. This is a huge point of Beinhocker's that economic theory is based on a physics of equilibrium. Bad idea. Networks and interconnectedness are not considered at all in 'textbook' economic definitions. When agents already have perfect information, why do you need to meet others? I'd love to see a textbook definition of innovation that comes close to what you have asserted here.
  - kiba 16y ago
    One of the entrepeneurs' role in our economy is to see the gaps in other entrepeneurs' plan. So, to me, it's quite obvious that there's lot a whole of inefficiency in our economy. The idea of "perfect information" in our economy is not real, but an artificial condition that could never be reached. If you think about it, uncertainty is everywhere. People lust after certainty all the time. Think about how many economic predictions that were wrong like off 1 percents or 2. Think about the economists who tell people that the housing boom is going to last. Think about the fortune tellers. That to me, tell that information can never be perfect, because there wouldn't be tons of people who offer services predicting something, who nonetheless get it wrong anyway. And that why patio sometime talk of economic inefficiency as a kind of Nirvana for entrepreneurs, because there are ton of opportunities.
    - rortian 16y ago
      Yeah, I'm with you. Unfortunately people like to take economic theorems off the shelf without looking at some of the assumptions.
  - fgf 16y ago
    "Innovation is hardly considered in economics at all." Well, you're wrong.* It should, however, be noted that the dominance of this kind of economics may be new to the mainstream. I have only been reading economics textbooks for the last three years. "Networks and interconnectedness are not considered at all in 'textbook' economic definitions." Of course they are, for example in every study ever written on globalization, the structure of corporations, corporate governance or insider trading. Or is there some special definition of the terms you're using? "When agents already have perfect information, why do you need to meet others?" None of the textbooks in economics (HS and undergraduate courses) or economists I have read assume this to be true, or even a useful approximation for most markets. "I'd love to see a textbook definition of innovation that comes close to what you have asserted here." Innovation is used in my textbook as it is in the description of the innovation economics theory. (I don't have it with me now.) *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation_economics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation_economics

bdr 16y ago

If you want something along these lines, but better thought out, read Nonzero http://www.nonzero.org/ http://www.nonzero.org/

asmosoinio 16y ago

Single page link: http://reason.com/archives/2010/06/14/ideas-having-sex/singlepage http://reason.com/archives/2010/06/14/ideas-having-sex/singl...