6 ms·

It's funny. Last night I was just reading the chapter in Taleb's "Antifragile" where he argues the same thing as the author of this paper, i.e. that tinkering i

by yoran 7y ago

It's funny. Last night I was just reading the chapter in Taleb's "Antifragile" where he argues the same thing as the author of this paper, i.e. that tinkering is at the root of most technological innovations, whereas the common belief is that science precedes all innovations. Coincidence in timing!

verdex_phone 7y ago
I had several history of science and technology courses at university that caused me to reach the same conclusion. Basically the same story repeated over and over. Somebody invents a thing (usually through some sort of crackpottery or insane devotion to some personal belief or theory) and then the crackpots all get to work messing with the invented thing. Eventually the crackpots die or get bored and real science is hopefully the last man standing (but that can sometimes take a long time). There's an indepth analysis into the switch from geocentricism to helieocentricism that basically gives the same impression. http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smackdown.html?m=1 http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smac... Our advances are spearheaded by crazy or unhealthily opinionated people who just want to try and do things they think are neat.
pgt 7y ago
“All invention is technique.” (Can’t find author of the quote)
wolfgke 7y ago
> It's funny. Last night I was just reading the chapter in Taleb's "Antifragile" where he argues the same thing as the author of this paper, i.e. that tinkering is at the root of most technological innovations, whereas the common belief is that science precedes all innovations. Coincidence in timing! I personally believe that you can find examples in both directions: where engneering precedes science and where scientific progress leads to new engineering.
- gumby 7y ago
  I don’t think Dick would disagree with you; his point was that it’s not inherently a unidirectional path with the scientists as vanguard and engineers in their wake.

by yoran 7y ago

verdex_phone 7y ago

I had several history of science and technology courses at university that caused me to reach the same conclusion. Basically the same story repeated over and over. Somebody invents a thing (usually through some sort of crackpottery or insane devotion to some personal belief or theory) and then the crackpots all get to work messing with the invented thing. Eventually the crackpots die or get bored and real science is hopefully the last man standing (but that can sometimes take a long time). There's an indepth analysis into the switch from geocentricism to helieocentricism that basically gives the same impression. http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smackdown.html?m=1 http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smac... Our advances are spearheaded by crazy or unhealthily opinionated people who just want to try and do things they think are neat.

pgt 7y ago

“All invention is technique.” (Can’t find author of the quote)

wolfgke 7y ago

> It's funny. Last night I was just reading the chapter in Taleb's "Antifragile" where he argues the same thing as the author of this paper, i.e. that tinkering is at the root of most technological innovations, whereas the common belief is that science precedes all innovations. Coincidence in timing! I personally believe that you can find examples in both directions: where engneering precedes science and where scientific progress leads to new engineering.

gumby 7y ago
I don’t think Dick would disagree with you; his point was that it’s not inherently a unidirectional path with the scientists as vanguard and engineers in their wake.