4 ms·

At least in some of these examples, the problem seems to be rooted in a lack of understanding of the audience/customer. Implicit in this essay is an expectatio

by meany 5y ago

At least in some of these examples, the problem seems to be rooted in a lack of understanding of the audience/customer. Implicit in this essay is an expectation that the audience/customer will do the work for you. Saying :"We’ll be able to put avatars on web pages. Start thinking about what you might do with that.” Doesn't explain the value proposition or the problem solved. Why should they care? You'll always be disappointed if you expect the audience to figure this out for you. They've got 101 problems they're working on and your asking them to invest in your idea. You need to do this leg work for them. As for the statement "why would people put documents on the web?" That seems a very valid question. If you can't nail that answer, you haven't invested enough in understanding the customers/audience for who you're trying to solve problems. Pitching a new idea is hard. You need to iterate on it obsessively, cutting it down to the core value prop in easy to digest words for the specific audience you're talking to.

PaulHoule 5y ago
Yep. I've been there and done that at the "two people and a crazy idea" level and seen how hard it is.
6510 5y ago
> Pitching a new idea is hard. You need to iterate on it obsessively, cutting it down to the core value prop in easy to digest words for the specific audience you're talking to. Then, after failing to explain it 1000 times, you find a combination of working simplifications and it finally can be explained in a few sentences.... Then people say: If it was that simple someone else would have thought of it. > As for the statement "why would people put documents on the web?" That seems a very valid question. If you can't nail that answer, you haven't invested enough in understanding the customers/audience for who you're trying to solve problems. The answer would have to be a lie. Neither of us would understand it when told it is all to watch cat pictures and to document and manipulate peoples personality and behavior to sell products and nudge their political ideas while they exchange cooking updates with their mum. If someone told me or you the honest factual truth that it was a sound plan for world domination we would have laughed so hard. Why would anyone use google or facebook if it's that expensive to use?
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  > Then people say: If it was that simple someone else would have thought of it. That's when you go into the prior art. Give a summary (long list of things other people have done – five or six will do), then start drilling down into them, touching on what they address, genuine pros and cons wrt your approach (when relevant), and then go back to how yours is different. (“But none of these XYZ, which is useful for foo and bar.”) Or, you know, whatever else feels right to say at the time. If you're well-calibrated, your gut instinct will be a result of “reading the room”. That comes with practice.
  - _y5hn 5y ago
    They'll just subtly say you're overthinking it or this is irrelevant to today. People just have a compulsion to put others down. Some years later when someone else comes up with the same idea, it's gold.
    - Enginerrrd 5y ago
      Its possible to have the right idea before the world is ready to receive it. That includes good ideas where the technology just isn't there yet.
      - _y5hn 5y ago
        Ideas themselves are cheap, and it makes no sense but to share them.
        6510 5y ago
        One should treasure ideas and never share them with cheap people.
        _y5hn 5y ago
        While I understand the sentiment, I find I lose nothing and have only to gain, from sharing my ideas with others. Of course, I wouldn't share business secrets that way, but those are rare exceptions. Oh, you said cheap people.. Sure :)
joe_the_user 5y ago
I think someone can certainly explain an idea if both people take enough time and have enough motivation. The thing that stands out for me is people who have different ideas concerning where the obligation is in communicating concepts. Is it the speaker's job to put things so the listener can understand? Or is it the listener's job to spend time parsing an objectively correct explanation? In society, overall, this involves a process of negotiation. Notably, I think some people who's job involves manipulating abstract ideas don't think it's their job to put spend time putting concepts into a form appropriate for a given person - the concepts being expressed in an abstractly correct fashion is sufficient.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  > Notably, I think some people who's job involves manipulating abstract ideas don't think it's their job to put spend time putting concepts into a form appropriate for a given person - the concepts being expressed in an abstractly correct fashion is sufficient. If your job involves manipulating abstract ideas, then surely you should know that different people have different abstract representations of those abstract ideas! The more abstract the concept, the more “and this is this” “yes, I follow” handshakes you have to do before you get into the details.
  - thingification 5y ago
    > different people have different abstract representations of ... abstract ideas I'm not sure I've ever thought about this in precisely these terms. Thanks

by meany 5y ago

PaulHoule 5y ago

Yep. I've been there and done that at the "two people and a crazy idea" level and seen how hard it is.

6510 5y ago

> Pitching a new idea is hard. You need to iterate on it obsessively, cutting it down to the core value prop in easy to digest words for the specific audience you're talking to. Then, after failing to explain it 1000 times, you find a combination of working simplifications and it finally can be explained in a few sentences.... Then people say: If it was that simple someone else would have thought of it. > As for the statement "why would people put documents on the web?" That seems a very valid question. If you can't nail that answer, you haven't invested enough in understanding the customers/audience for who you're trying to solve problems. The answer would have to be a lie. Neither of us would understand it when told it is all to watch cat pictures and to document and manipulate peoples personality and behavior to sell products and nudge their political ideas while they exchange cooking updates with their mum. If someone told me or you the honest factual truth that it was a sound plan for world domination we would have laughed so hard. Why would anyone use google or facebook if it's that expensive to use?

wizzwizz4 5y ago
> Then people say: If it was that simple someone else would have thought of it. That's when you go into the prior art. Give a summary (long list of things other people have done – five or six will do), then start drilling down into them, touching on what they address, genuine pros and cons wrt your approach (when relevant), and then go back to how yours is different. (“But none of these XYZ, which is useful for foo and bar.”) Or, you know, whatever else feels right to say at the time. If you're well-calibrated, your gut instinct will be a result of “reading the room”. That comes with practice.
- _y5hn 5y ago
  They'll just subtly say you're overthinking it or this is irrelevant to today. People just have a compulsion to put others down. Some years later when someone else comes up with the same idea, it's gold.
  - Enginerrrd 5y ago
    Its possible to have the right idea before the world is ready to receive it. That includes good ideas where the technology just isn't there yet.
    - _y5hn 5y ago
      Ideas themselves are cheap, and it makes no sense but to share them.
      - 6510 5y ago
        One should treasure ideas and never share them with cheap people.
        _y5hn 5y ago
        While I understand the sentiment, I find I lose nothing and have only to gain, from sharing my ideas with others. Of course, I wouldn't share business secrets that way, but those are rare exceptions. Oh, you said cheap people.. Sure :)

joe_the_user 5y ago

I think someone can certainly explain an idea if both people take enough time and have enough motivation. The thing that stands out for me is people who have different ideas concerning where the obligation is in communicating concepts. Is it the speaker's job to put things so the listener can understand? Or is it the listener's job to spend time parsing an objectively correct explanation? In society, overall, this involves a process of negotiation. Notably, I think some people who's job involves manipulating abstract ideas don't think it's their job to put spend time putting concepts into a form appropriate for a given person - the concepts being expressed in an abstractly correct fashion is sufficient.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
> Notably, I think some people who's job involves manipulating abstract ideas don't think it's their job to put spend time putting concepts into a form appropriate for a given person - the concepts being expressed in an abstractly correct fashion is sufficient. If your job involves manipulating abstract ideas, then surely you should know that different people have different abstract representations of those abstract ideas! The more abstract the concept, the more “and this is this” “yes, I follow” handshakes you have to do before you get into the details.
- thingification 5y ago
  > different people have different abstract representations of ... abstract ideas I'm not sure I've ever thought about this in precisely these terms. Thanks