5 ms·

I listened to Robert Green's talk at Google recently [0] He proposes the following idea: - Everybody born within 22 years of each other belong to a "gener

I listened to Robert Green's talk at Google recently [0] He proposes the following idea: - Everybody born within 22 years of each other belong to a "generation" - Generations follow a cycle: - There is a rebellious generation - The next generation is trying to keep the ideals of the rebellious generation alive - The third generation is very conservative - The fourth generation is a "crisis" generation that will eventually lead to a rebellion in the next generation and the cycle continues. - Millennials are the crisis generation today It's a very interesting theory - and provides a new way to think about what comes next. Looking back, the last generation that appears to be a "rebellious" generation were the hippies centered around 1969. I can't think of any giants that started in that era. Instead, that era felt like it produced most of the core technologies that drove big economic changes in the next several decades. History doesn't really repeat, but it sometimes rhymes with itself. If the next generation is rebellious - and they end up being like the last rebellious generation - we are looking at 22 years of deep technological developments that will lead to the next big things in two generations from now. Honestly - this is just an interesting way to think about the world but I wouldn't act upon it. If I was forced to place a bet on who (not what) will make it big in the next 25 years, I'd put $5 (and not a cent more) on somebody who is doing a PhD today and will get to work on deep research for a few decades. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcaVhMt71qE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcaVhMt71qE

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
This looks like it could just be cherry picking. If you look hard enough, you can find someone rebellious, then 20 years later, someone trying to maintain those ideals, and so forth. There's so many people, so many stories out there, you could form any narrative you wanted about theories of generational cycles.
- hinkley 7y ago
  I'll bet it says more about the overlap between fashion and the media than it says about people. Something comes back 'into style' at intervals and the narrative is hyped up to accentuate that fact. But it probably has more to do with burnout and collective amnesia. We've forgotten how awful "bell bottoms" can be and so here's some "bell bottoms", 20-30 years later.
yellowapple 7y ago
It's more likely that every generation is all of the above - or more precisely, every generation goes through phases where one or more of those might apply. Every generation will believe that the older generations are stupid and short-sighted, then as that generation gets older it will believe that the younger generations are stupid and short-sighted. Every generation will think the older generations are backwards and the newer generations naïve. If there's any sort of cycle between generations, it seems like cynicism v. optimism is more likely. I like to think of it as a sort of "day" v. "night": 1920's: evening / night 1930's: night / early morning hangover 1940's: (cycle temporarily pauses while the world blows itself up) 1950's: morning 1960's: afternoon 1970's: evening 1980's: night 1990's: morning hangover 2000's: afternoon 2010's: evening / night 2020's: night / morning (predicted) It's something I can hear in the music from those time periods, though I can't quite quantify it. Re: "hippies", they seem to be a feature of the Boomer, Gen-X, and Millennial/Gen-Y generations alike; all three have had very similar movements (which makes it all the more poignant that now the Millennial hippies are scolding the very generation from which hippies originated in the first place). Also, I don't know if I'd characterize Gen-X as "conservative".
- abledon 7y ago
  i liked the soft pastels, 'cozy' home decor, and simple garb of the 90s.. People are trying to make their houses look like the inside of a friggin iphone box today ~ 'architectural minimalism'.
hanniabu 7y ago
I see this rebellious generation as those paving the way for financial revolution with permissionless and trustless blockchain technologies. They are ignoring suppressive regulation and moving forward building the world they want to see.
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  I see idealists making all the mistakes that led to the monetary system we have now. They may end up in a different place, but they'll make lots of mistakes and it'll blow up in their faces many times before they're done.
  - hanniabu 7y ago
    Can you point out some of these mistakes? Also, traditional finance has had it's share of blowing up in their faces. The difference with DeFi is that economies are being being build on an economic model rather than an economic model being built on an economy.
    - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
      Sure - multiple robberies of exchanges. Every-increasing transaction times. Ponzi-style valuations. Pretty much everything bitcoin.
firstbabylonian 7y ago
Is this based on any historical data beyond the 20th century? Because the 20th century is not necessarily representative of the "standard" human nature. With all the wars, rapid technological advancements, globalisation, etc., we have created a different environment and different kind of people.
thebigspacefuck 7y ago
This sounds like Strauss-Howe generational theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss–Howe_generational_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss–Howe_generational_theo...
K0SM0S 7y ago
He was probably drawing from the Strauss-Howe generational theory[1], which is more than 20 years old now. He (or you) should have credited the original thinkers for these ideas. Their 1997 book "The Fourth Turning" is considered pseudoscience but nonetheless great food for thought, imho. Note that the cycle may sometimes be shorter (3 gens) or longer (5). It's not really a theory, more like empirical observation. Unfortunately, it has no predictive power whatsoever, so it's just that, food for thought. Edit: Interestingly, it came out almost at about the same time as Huttington's "Clash of the Civilizations"[2], and a number of interesting scenarios from Shell[3][4] and the CIA (link?), which notably informed Clinton's push for global democracy — all these studies concurred, at the time, that positive disruption was a plausible scenario. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generatio... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clash_of_Civilizations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clash_of_Civilizations [3]: https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/new-lenses-on-the-future/earlier-scenarios/_jcr_content/par/expandablelist/expandablesection_225706646.stream/1519772477959/e19b5221f581ce9c5e5cee0069c7439720e81526/shell-global-scenarios19952020.pdf https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-futur... [4]: https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/new-lenses-on-the-future/earlier-scenarios/_jcr_content/par/expandablelist/expandablesection_225706646.stream/1519772497153/2c501efef838a67595501d4acb83194f6c5da570/shell-global-scenarios19982020.pdf https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-futur...
- mellosouls 7y ago
  The idea of cycles in social history is as old as the hills. It's possible your claim that he drew from Strauss-Howe is correct, but while they may have packaged the idea in a distinctive way, it has a long history. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory
  - K0SM0S 7y ago
    Oh indeed! Thanks for the precision, well worth noting. The particular arrangement of The Fourth Turning is adamantly specific though (and quite famous in sociological circles, iirc it's where our modern concepts of "millenials" or "gen X" etc. come from); it's hard to mistake it for anything else. I don't doubt for one second that Greene knows it, or that he'd expect a sophisticated audience (such as Googlers) to know it too — the credit is probably very much implied as soon as you present things this way. Like we don't need to credit someone for E=mc² or a²+b²=c² because it's obvious. Green is notoriously awesome at doing synthesis of a bunch of seminal sources, that's his M.O. — more than original thinking imho, but his delivery is often incredibly worthy of interest. Fwiw, I'd argue it's extremely easy to take pretty much any social dimension(s) and slap some abstract model on top of it with relevance. I've read countless such accounts, and did it myself in regard to cycles in concentration of political power. Strauss-Howe's model is relatively interesting insofar as it draws upon quite long-term history (some variations / extensions go back to ~1200 iirc, though the core theory was fundamentally applied to the American civilization), which gives it weight. Source: I studied sociology-anthropology-politics.
biztos 7y ago
> Everybody born within 22 years of each other belong to a "generation" So everybody belongs to (up to) 44 generations?
thedstrat 7y ago
Millenials are the first generation to realize that they will be around for the climate crisis. In the circle of people I know, it’s a huge motivator to learn and hopefully do something about.
iabacu 7y ago
> If the next generation is rebellious - and they end up being like the last rebellious generation - we are looking at 22 years of deep technological developments that will lead to the next big things in two generations from now. Or quite the opposite. They’ll be anti-tech, like: let’s break up and impose limits to tech companies and research.

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago

This looks like it could just be cherry picking. If you look hard enough, you can find someone rebellious, then 20 years later, someone trying to maintain those ideals, and so forth. There's so many people, so many stories out there, you could form any narrative you wanted about theories of generational cycles.

hinkley 7y ago
I'll bet it says more about the overlap between fashion and the media than it says about people. Something comes back 'into style' at intervals and the narrative is hyped up to accentuate that fact. But it probably has more to do with burnout and collective amnesia. We've forgotten how awful "bell bottoms" can be and so here's some "bell bottoms", 20-30 years later.

yellowapple 7y ago

It's more likely that every generation is all of the above - or more precisely, every generation goes through phases where one or more of those might apply. Every generation will believe that the older generations are stupid and short-sighted, then as that generation gets older it will believe that the younger generations are stupid and short-sighted. Every generation will think the older generations are backwards and the newer generations naïve. If there's any sort of cycle between generations, it seems like cynicism v. optimism is more likely. I like to think of it as a sort of "day" v. "night": 1920's: evening / night 1930's: night / early morning hangover 1940's: (cycle temporarily pauses while the world blows itself up) 1950's: morning 1960's: afternoon 1970's: evening 1980's: night 1990's: morning hangover 2000's: afternoon 2010's: evening / night 2020's: night / morning (predicted) It's something I can hear in the music from those time periods, though I can't quite quantify it. Re: "hippies", they seem to be a feature of the Boomer, Gen-X, and Millennial/Gen-Y generations alike; all three have had very similar movements (which makes it all the more poignant that now the Millennial hippies are scolding the very generation from which hippies originated in the first place). Also, I don't know if I'd characterize Gen-X as "conservative".

abledon 7y ago
i liked the soft pastels, 'cozy' home decor, and simple garb of the 90s.. People are trying to make their houses look like the inside of a friggin iphone box today ~ 'architectural minimalism'.

hanniabu 7y ago

I see this rebellious generation as those paving the way for financial revolution with permissionless and trustless blockchain technologies. They are ignoring suppressive regulation and moving forward building the world they want to see.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago
I see idealists making all the mistakes that led to the monetary system we have now. They may end up in a different place, but they'll make lots of mistakes and it'll blow up in their faces many times before they're done.
- hanniabu 7y ago
  Can you point out some of these mistakes? Also, traditional finance has had it's share of blowing up in their faces. The difference with DeFi is that economies are being being build on an economic model rather than an economic model being built on an economy.
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    Sure - multiple robberies of exchanges. Every-increasing transaction times. Ponzi-style valuations. Pretty much everything bitcoin.

firstbabylonian 7y ago

Is this based on any historical data beyond the 20th century? Because the 20th century is not necessarily representative of the "standard" human nature. With all the wars, rapid technological advancements, globalisation, etc., we have created a different environment and different kind of people.

thebigspacefuck 7y ago

This sounds like Strauss-Howe generational theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss–Howe_generational_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss–Howe_generational_theo...

K0SM0S 7y ago

He was probably drawing from the Strauss-Howe generational theory[1], which is more than 20 years old now. He (or you) should have credited the original thinkers for these ideas. Their 1997 book "The Fourth Turning" is considered pseudoscience but nonetheless great food for thought, imho. Note that the cycle may sometimes be shorter (3 gens) or longer (5). It's not really a theory, more like empirical observation. Unfortunately, it has no predictive power whatsoever, so it's just that, food for thought. Edit: Interestingly, it came out almost at about the same time as Huttington's "Clash of the Civilizations"[2], and a number of interesting scenarios from Shell[3][4] and the CIA (link?), which notably informed Clinton's push for global democracy — all these studies concurred, at the time, that positive disruption was a plausible scenario. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generatio... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clash_of_Civilizations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clash_of_Civilizations [3]: https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/new-lenses-on-the-future/earlier-scenarios/_jcr_content/par/expandablelist/expandablesection_225706646.stream/1519772477959/e19b5221f581ce9c5e5cee0069c7439720e81526/shell-global-scenarios19952020.pdf https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-futur... [4]: https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/new-lenses-on-the-future/earlier-scenarios/_jcr_content/par/expandablelist/expandablesection_225706646.stream/1519772497153/2c501efef838a67595501d4acb83194f6c5da570/shell-global-scenarios19982020.pdf https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-futur...

mellosouls 7y ago
The idea of cycles in social history is as old as the hills. It's possible your claim that he drew from Strauss-Howe is correct, but while they may have packaged the idea in a distinctive way, it has a long history. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory
- K0SM0S 7y ago
  Oh indeed! Thanks for the precision, well worth noting. The particular arrangement of The Fourth Turning is adamantly specific though (and quite famous in sociological circles, iirc it's where our modern concepts of "millenials" or "gen X" etc. come from); it's hard to mistake it for anything else. I don't doubt for one second that Greene knows it, or that he'd expect a sophisticated audience (such as Googlers) to know it too — the credit is probably very much implied as soon as you present things this way. Like we don't need to credit someone for E=mc² or a²+b²=c² because it's obvious. Green is notoriously awesome at doing synthesis of a bunch of seminal sources, that's his M.O. — more than original thinking imho, but his delivery is often incredibly worthy of interest. Fwiw, I'd argue it's extremely easy to take pretty much any social dimension(s) and slap some abstract model on top of it with relevance. I've read countless such accounts, and did it myself in regard to cycles in concentration of political power. Strauss-Howe's model is relatively interesting insofar as it draws upon quite long-term history (some variations / extensions go back to ~1200 iirc, though the core theory was fundamentally applied to the American civilization), which gives it weight. Source: I studied sociology-anthropology-politics.

biztos 7y ago

> Everybody born within 22 years of each other belong to a "generation" So everybody belongs to (up to) 44 generations?

thedstrat 7y ago

Millenials are the first generation to realize that they will be around for the climate crisis. In the circle of people I know, it’s a huge motivator to learn and hopefully do something about.

iabacu 7y ago

> If the next generation is rebellious - and they end up being like the last rebellious generation - we are looking at 22 years of deep technological developments that will lead to the next big things in two generations from now. Or quite the opposite. They’ll be anti-tech, like: let’s break up and impose limits to tech companies and research.