A fast heuristic on the value of crazy ideas would be: a) is the premise of this idea based on the rejection or falsification of an established consensus or con

A fast heuristic on the value of crazy ideas would be: a) is the premise of this idea based on the rejection or falsification of an established consensus or convention, and b) does this person (the proponent) survive? A crazy idea is just betting a majority is wrong. What makes it smart is not about being right, it's that you have figured out how to make money if the consensus is vulnerable or wrong. Some of the the biggest startups and plays of the last decade were bets against conventions and rich country taboos like letting strangers crash on your couch, driving strangers around in your car, straight women wanting anonymous hookups and the normalization of sex work, non-technical people using cryptography, working class people investing in alterantive assets - let alone understanding what a short squeeze is enough to execute one, watching movies on little laptop screens. What makes an idea 'crazy' is that it is against one that people align with because the alignment itself means being aligned to power. Most of what people believe, they do so because it works for them, and by works I mean aligns them to what they percieve to be powerful. Most money seems to be made getting short weaker middle class conventions. A crazy idea is making the call that an emperor has no clothes. I suspect the secret to getting short naked emperors is not so much a track record for upholding convention, but rather, a track record of suviving.