3 ms·
Just to point out, we not only find stuff where our obsession lies, we can sometimes create complexity and interesting stuff where it lies, out of the thin air.
by mojuba 7y ago
Just to point out, we not only find stuff where our obsession lies, we can sometimes create complexity and interesting stuff where it lies, out of the thin air.
I'm obsessed about audio/music tech. Some part of this area is immensely complex due to people's obsession with good sound, or new interesting sounds, or new ways of altering it. They don't discover these things, they create it. Time stretch or pitch shift algorithms, for example, were created (I suppose) by obsessed people who like to create complexity and by extension, useful stuff.
So no, Darwin's invention model is not the only possible one.
I can't imagine how you can create useful complexity by collecting bus tickets, but who knows, maybe some key to inventing more efficient public transport lies there. Or at least more efficient bus ticket printing. Can be anything!
- DanBC 7y ago> I can't imagine how you can create useful complexity by collecting bus tickets, Some people have an obsession for the actual tickets, while others have an obsession with the ticketing pricing system. These people can find useful oddities with the system. In some parts of the UK it's worthwhile buying a year long railcard for two stations that you will never travel to or from, because that gives you a gold card, and the gold card gives you 1/3 off other tickets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbrFze0XH5M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbrFze0XH5M I guess this is a long-winded way of saying if you want to test systems you want a legitimate way for these people to look at it, because otherwise they may find ways that are problematic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_McCollum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_McCollum But also, the essay does say that some obsessions are useful and others don't appear to have wider uses than being interesting for that individual person.
- mojuba 7y agoTrue, but my point was that it seems like usefulness can be created out of the think air, i.e. you don't discover it (or miss it) but instead you direct your obsession towards usefulness by adding complexity. I think maths is a great example of this, though some big part of it hasn't proved its usefulness yet.