5 ms·

I think the most interesting consequence of this idea is the realization that the origin of the idea alters its value. Evidence that an idea is good can come i

by emmett 19y ago

I think the most interesting consequence of this idea is the realization that the origin of the idea alters its value. Evidence that an idea is good can come in many forms, but it's rare that external evidence changes your mind unless it comes from someone you respect.

yariv 19y ago
I don't think this is always the case. I think that many good ideas are obviously good regardless of their origin and even in the absence of external evidence. You can tell those ideas are good because they solve real problems in people's lives (Ebay, Yahoo, Craigslist, Amazon, Hotmail, etc, are all based on obviously good ideas). To use Paul's analogy, some pots of gold are at the top of mountains, but others are visible on the flatlands, and only speed of execution determines who will win them.
- paul 19y ago
  Those ideas are obviously good in hindsight, but at the time a lot people thought that they were bad ideas or businesses. (what "idea" is Yahoo btw?)
  - yariv 19y ago
    Indeed it's often impossible to know if a new idea could lead to a profitable business (or how profitable that business would be), but at least you can have a good hunch that the idea would be something people want. The original Yahoo idea was a centralized directory of web pages, wasn't it?
  - deleted 19y ago
    [deleted]
danteembermage 19y ago
I see the same thing in ideas for research papers. I have lots of ideas I think are great, the trouble is it takes a year to do the grunt work to prove my idea right, and then even if it's right it may not be marketable to my scholarly community. So, it becomes obvious really quickly that it's better to find someone who's succeeded in the market (here has a good CV) and either work on their ideas or get them to certify yours and guide you through the work. Maybe I would change Paul's analogy around a bit and imagine a beach full of pyrite and gold sand. Certainly you wouldn't say sand is worthless; some of it is gold. A random shovel full probably is approximately worthless though, to get real value you'd need a talented prospector.

by emmett 19y ago

yariv 19y ago

I don't think this is always the case. I think that many good ideas are obviously good regardless of their origin and even in the absence of external evidence. You can tell those ideas are good because they solve real problems in people's lives (Ebay, Yahoo, Craigslist, Amazon, Hotmail, etc, are all based on obviously good ideas). To use Paul's analogy, some pots of gold are at the top of mountains, but others are visible on the flatlands, and only speed of execution determines who will win them.

paul 19y ago
Those ideas are obviously good in hindsight, but at the time a lot people thought that they were bad ideas or businesses. (what "idea" is Yahoo btw?)
- yariv 19y ago
  Indeed it's often impossible to know if a new idea could lead to a profitable business (or how profitable that business would be), but at least you can have a good hunch that the idea would be something people want. The original Yahoo idea was a centralized directory of web pages, wasn't it?
- deleted 19y ago
  [deleted]

danteembermage 19y ago

I see the same thing in ideas for research papers. I have lots of ideas I think are great, the trouble is it takes a year to do the grunt work to prove my idea right, and then even if it's right it may not be marketable to my scholarly community. So, it becomes obvious really quickly that it's better to find someone who's succeeded in the market (here has a good CV) and either work on their ideas or get them to certify yours and guide you through the work. Maybe I would change Paul's analogy around a bit and imagine a beach full of pyrite and gold sand. Certainly you wouldn't say sand is worthless; some of it is gold. A random shovel full probably is approximately worthless though, to get real value you'd need a talented prospector.