3 ms·

from my blog post: "An idea is a seed; many ideas have to be discovered and implemented along the way for it to grow up. The initial fertilisation is essential,

by juwo 19y ago

from my blog post: "An idea is a seed; many ideas have to be discovered and implemented along the way for it to grow up. The initial fertilisation is essential, but differentiation into organs, the "other ideas along the way" must come along." this was the seed. even after differentiation into organs - as the Theory of Relativity, it was still an idea on paper. You cannot reasonably argue that it was worthless. Other people executed it.

jkush 19y ago
Look Juwo, you're still playing with words. It's not so much that an idea is WORTHLESS (where it doesn't have any value) as it's that an idea doesn't really count for anything UNTIL it's been brought out into the real world. For all intents and purposes, Einstein's ideas were worthless until he put them down on paper. Let me phrase this another way: what if Einstein had never written The Theory of Relativity? Would his ideas still be worth anything just sitting there in his brain? Also, PG never wrote that ideas were "worthless". He wrote that people "overvalue ideas". This is what I mean when I say you're playing with words. Changing "overvalue ideas" to worthless frames it very differently and isn't very precise.
- juwo 19y ago
  I am not bothered to look for his article but I am sure he used the term "ideas are worthless". Otherwise that phrase would never have independently stuck around here so long.
  - jkush 19y ago
    See here: http://paulgraham.com/ideas.html http://paulgraham.com/ideas.html He did write "The fact that there's no market for startup ideas suggests there's no demand. Which means, in the narrow sense of the word, that startup ideas are worthless." What I mean when I say playing with words is that he qualified that statement with "in the narrow sense of the word." He was also referring to startup ideas in particular. This discussion is getting to be a little ridiculous because you're splitting hairs and and missing the point entirely.
    - juwo 19y ago
      I dont read his essays any more. No, you are missing the point. So, now it is qualified by startup ideas? Then where did all the "ideas are worthless" phrases come from? (like this thread). If you agree that in general, ideas have worth - some more than others - then we are on the same side. :)
      - akkartik 19y ago
        "where did all the "ideas are worthless" phrases come from?" Perhaps from other people who contracted a phrase because they understood what the context was? How'll you know unless you read the original source?
dpapathanasiou 19y ago
No one executed the theory of relativity. This debate is silly.
- jkush 19y ago
  No, but what's important is that the idea was physically incarnated in the form of writing. The act of writing is what counts.
  - juwo 19y ago
    1) the theory of relativity was executed by people who used that idea to develop nuclear weapons, satellites, GPS systems, semiconductor electronics etc. Here are two 'proofs': 2) According to the patent office, if you can write down in sufficient detail your idea so that "a person of reasonable skill in the trade" can implement it, then you can patent it. (assuming other conditions like non-obviousness etc apply). Even if someone patents before you, you can still patent it (if you wrote it down with proof of date) and claim royalties. (example, the laser). 3) Have you read about the numerous lawsuits in the entertainment world about ideas for a TV show or book being stolen and executed? There are no prototypes to steal - just ideas, but they carry weight in court.
    - akkartik 19y ago
      "if you can write down in sufficient detail your idea so that 'a person of reasonable skill in the trade' can implement it," you have in fact implemented it. Your approach is just less efficient; in most areas a whiteboard is not an effective way to be sure your design works, that you have considered all possibilities. You are persistently ignoring all the execution that goes into nuclear weapons, GPS, etc. If you think implementing nuclear weapons was trivial in the 50s and 60s (50 years after the theory was in place), talk to israel. In fact the huge difference in times different applications have entered the market is an indicator that the theory of relativity is not the bottleneck. Something else is: the engineering constraints. Why have science fiction writers consistently anticipated new technologies? Because thinking up the idea could happen before it was practical to implement. Should those writers receive royalties for geostationary satellites or submarines? Lots of theories go into each new application, rather than one theory spawning lots of new applications. Not all ideas are worthless. But until you have shown there are no subtle deal-breakers (think fusion reactors) there is no reason to assume your idea has value in the current historical, social, economic context. Valuing ideas may be right in the entertainment world. Do you want to move?

by juwo 19y ago

jkush 19y ago

Look Juwo, you're still playing with words. It's not so much that an idea is WORTHLESS (where it doesn't have any value) as it's that an idea doesn't really count for anything UNTIL it's been brought out into the real world. For all intents and purposes, Einstein's ideas were worthless until he put them down on paper. Let me phrase this another way: what if Einstein had never written The Theory of Relativity? Would his ideas still be worth anything just sitting there in his brain? Also, PG never wrote that ideas were "worthless". He wrote that people "overvalue ideas". This is what I mean when I say you're playing with words. Changing "overvalue ideas" to worthless frames it very differently and isn't very precise.

juwo 19y ago
I am not bothered to look for his article but I am sure he used the term "ideas are worthless". Otherwise that phrase would never have independently stuck around here so long.
- jkush 19y ago
  See here: http://paulgraham.com/ideas.html http://paulgraham.com/ideas.html He did write "The fact that there's no market for startup ideas suggests there's no demand. Which means, in the narrow sense of the word, that startup ideas are worthless." What I mean when I say playing with words is that he qualified that statement with "in the narrow sense of the word." He was also referring to startup ideas in particular. This discussion is getting to be a little ridiculous because you're splitting hairs and and missing the point entirely.
  - juwo 19y ago
    I dont read his essays any more. No, you are missing the point. So, now it is qualified by startup ideas? Then where did all the "ideas are worthless" phrases come from? (like this thread). If you agree that in general, ideas have worth - some more than others - then we are on the same side. :)
    - akkartik 19y ago
      "where did all the "ideas are worthless" phrases come from?" Perhaps from other people who contracted a phrase because they understood what the context was? How'll you know unless you read the original source?

dpapathanasiou 19y ago

No one executed the theory of relativity. This debate is silly.

jkush 19y ago
No, but what's important is that the idea was physically incarnated in the form of writing. The act of writing is what counts.
- juwo 19y ago
  1) the theory of relativity was executed by people who used that idea to develop nuclear weapons, satellites, GPS systems, semiconductor electronics etc. Here are two 'proofs': 2) According to the patent office, if you can write down in sufficient detail your idea so that "a person of reasonable skill in the trade" can implement it, then you can patent it. (assuming other conditions like non-obviousness etc apply). Even if someone patents before you, you can still patent it (if you wrote it down with proof of date) and claim royalties. (example, the laser). 3) Have you read about the numerous lawsuits in the entertainment world about ideas for a TV show or book being stolen and executed? There are no prototypes to steal - just ideas, but they carry weight in court.
  - akkartik 19y ago
    "if you can write down in sufficient detail your idea so that 'a person of reasonable skill in the trade' can implement it," you have in fact implemented it. Your approach is just less efficient; in most areas a whiteboard is not an effective way to be sure your design works, that you have considered all possibilities. You are persistently ignoring all the execution that goes into nuclear weapons, GPS, etc. If you think implementing nuclear weapons was trivial in the 50s and 60s (50 years after the theory was in place), talk to israel. In fact the huge difference in times different applications have entered the market is an indicator that the theory of relativity is not the bottleneck. Something else is: the engineering constraints. Why have science fiction writers consistently anticipated new technologies? Because thinking up the idea could happen before it was practical to implement. Should those writers receive royalties for geostationary satellites or submarines? Lots of theories go into each new application, rather than one theory spawning lots of new applications. Not all ideas are worthless. But until you have shown there are no subtle deal-breakers (think fusion reactors) there is no reason to assume your idea has value in the current historical, social, economic context. Valuing ideas may be right in the entertainment world. Do you want to move?