3 ms·
I don't at all disagree with you that disruptive innovations happen but, the problem as I see it is that you've simply _described_ some past innovations of such
by troutwine 15y ago
I don't at all disagree with you that disruptive innovations happen but, the problem as I see it is that you've simply _described_ some past innovations of such a sort without hitting the sticky problem of quantifying such a thing. How do you 'call' a 'match' and on what authority?
The analogy to chess, I assert, rather breaks down quickly, as most analogies tend to, when examined closely. A two-agent zero-sum game is mathematically unlike an n-agent non-zero-sum game with non-total knowledge.
- rbanffy 15y agoIf I could quantify it, I would probably be able to accurately predict it. The chess analogy was only to point out how optimizing for short outcomes can be against your best interests.