9 ms·
New industries come from crazy people (2021)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- RagnarD 4y ago"Crazy" here is just a euphemism for: Well out of the ordinary. Should it be surprising that the ordinary, the mundane, the average, the rock-no-boats, never accomplish great things? Why would they? Those who're complacent about the world as it is - or worse, sneeringly nasty at anyone stepping beyond the status quo - have no ability to be a Henry Ford or a Nikola Tesla or an Elon Musk. Why would such minds be limited to just building a business? Of course they aren't ordinary.
- napierzaza 4y ago[dead]
- mikrl 4y agoI don’t think they mean ‘crazy’ in the mentally ill sense because nothing could be a bigger detriment to leadership than the irrational outbursts associated with manic episodes and the crushing inability to function associated with depressions. Although Elon Musk likes his LSD or so I’ve heard, and a ‘trip’ is basically a self induced euphoric psychosis which can be compared to a schizophrenic episode.
- LBJsPNS 4y agoSpoken like someone who has never dropped acid before. Schizophrenic episode indeed.
- mikrl 4y agoSomeone who isn’t me is well versed in small, stiff pieces of paper, but admittedly not schizophrenia. They claim there is a lack of voices talking to them, but the effects on their serotonin system does lead to a euphoric and psychotic state.
- sammalloy 4y ago> Although Elon Musk likes his LSD or so I’ve heard, and a ‘trip’ is basically a self induced euphoric psychosis which can be compared to a schizophrenic episode. You might want to revisit the literature. That idea, known as pychotomimetism, is an old one, and was disproved in the case of LSD many decades ago. However, you are not solely to blame as the mainstream drug literature continues to promote this error (much of it is bunk), and even the Wikipedia page on pychotomimetism continues to list LSD (without a source, of course). Although it’s been a while since I took a gander, I’m fairly certain that the leading researchers stopped treating LSD as a psychotomimetic in the late 1970s to early 1980s. The idea you are defending came out of the 1950s. A lot has changed in our understanding since that time. The more current paradigm for LSD borders on its therapeutic and entheogenic properties, which are admittedly difficult to categorize and verbalize beyond certain metaphors, analogies, and mythological symbols. As an atheist, it interests me, because when you take LSD, you realize that this experience is the root of religion. And if you’re someone who considers themselves religious and you’ve never had a psychedelic experience, well, you’re missing out on an opportunity to truly understand what religion is and what it’s all about, and how it works in the human mind. The experience itself goes far beyond that oddity, of course. In addition to that insight, you will also receive a new perspective on the arts, as every imaginable design, pattern, and image will appear during your trip. There are, of course, many other highlights one could discuss. For me, I’m convinced it helped me recover memories from my childhood, and some people will tell you it can lead to closure on things in your life by promoting acceptance and peace of mind. Obviously, it’s not for everyone, and should be used wisely and with caution, just like anything else.
- qroolen 4y agoare you really sure you understand what religion is about by taking LSD-25? seriously, religion is so broad that claiming that you understand it and resume it on a simple feeling because you took a psychedelic, makes my stomach whirl... even after a sense deprived room psychodelic experience as well many other introspective trips in easier environments, as an atheist since children days
- sammalloy 4y ago
- croes 4y ago>the ordinary, the mundane, the average, the rock-no-boats Most great things are accomplished by them, often by teams of them. They don't just run around and brag about their success. For instance Polio wasn't nearly eradicated by people like Musk, it where hard working ordinary people. BTW most of the things attributed to Musk are done by his employees, the ordinary guys who never accomplish great things /s
- mmsimanga 4y agoI think you are conflating things here. The gentleman who came up with the polio vaccine is the "crazy" person who decided not to accept the status quo. That polio should be literally a death sentence. I am not saying the hard working people who administered the vaccine should not be acknowledged, they should be but we cannot equate administering the vaccine to inventing the vaccine.
- croes 4y agoIt wasn't one gentleman but the result of multiple people. Solutions are seldom the result of one lonely working geniuses. For instance the internet or FB changed the world, but I wouldn't categorize their inventors as those crazy ones mentioned in the article. We just tend to attribute special features to the most well known people, higher endurance, greater skill, stronger will. There are way to many inventions and companies to thinks the world is formed by a few 'crazy' ones. The only crazy one who achieved that are the real crazy ones and they didn't change the world to the better, see Putin.
- mmsimanga 4y agoI agree that most things aren't invented by one person. We stand on the shoulders of giants. I am okay with recognising all 20 or 100 people who contribute to an invention. Heck even the 1000 people. I am just having a hard time with notion that those administering the vaccine are the same as those who invented the vaccine. I use Linux promote Linux to those in my circles. I certainly do not view myself as an equal to Linus.
- amelius 4y ago“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
- worldsavior 4y agoFinally someone says it. Always felt like it.
- crazygringo 4y ago"God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference." — Reinhold Niebuhr, the Serenity Prayer
- taeric 4y agoI get a large distaste in my mouth when reading pieces like this. Supposed "crazy" people can be found everywhere if you expand your definition enough. Passionate, would work as well. Somehow contriving that the "crazy" ones are the ones that successfully expand and create industries feels way too selection biased. Especially since there is nothing learnable from the examples that are picked. Worse, it ends with: America was not always the only country that permitted breakthrough industrialists to build unproven new industries and upend the economic order, but it is today. Which is at sharp odds with every story of how expensive construction is in the US compared to what we call developing nations. Or nations that typically give wider authority to the government builders than the US does.
- sneak 4y ago* some kinds of unproven new industries (excluding construction/housing) As someone who has a US passport, loves cities, and lives half the year in the US, this is particularly frustrating to me. It seems that no matter how wealthy or powerful you become, it's still basically illegal to build innovative things on land you own in the US (anywhere near other people).
- tw98521358 4y agoThat’s true in most countries, you need to pay off government officials/protection. That can either be done legally or illegally but it has to be done.
- mmsimanga 4y agoInteresting. In my home country in Africa building in the cities and towns is also quite difficult. There are all sorts of regulations along with corruption you have to deal with. From as far back as I can remember most people still wanted to own a house in the town or city. It was seen as more prestigious. We would bear with it and eventually build your home. However in the last 10 years or so with availability of solar panels and drilling boreholes being cheaper I have noticed a shift. People now migrating back to the villages. Two main reasons, the land is free and there are no building regulations. The village headman allocates you your land and you good to go. There are some rules to follow with how deep your pit latrine needs to be but that's about it. There has been an explosion of all sorts of building designs in the villages, some good and some not so. But lack of regulation has been good. Oh final note another "disadvantage" with building in village is that there are no title deeds. Homes are passed down to kids or other relatives
- honkler 4y agois this supposed to be a surprising insight?
- lkrubner 4y agoConsider the agricultural revolution of the early 1700s, Charles Townshend, walking around after his cows, noting every poop, taking detailed notes about every poop, and then a year later, what grew where that poop was, and what were the cows eating when they created that poop? His neighbors certainly regarded him as eccentric, having such a fascination with poop. And yet the whole modern world is indebted to him for his odd obsession. And likewise, Jethro Tull's obsession with designing a machine that could replace the workers his father and grandfather had worked with.
- gamblor956 4y agoTownsend developed the 4 crop rotation system, not fertilizer.
- lkrubner 4y agoDo you understand what the 4 crop rotation system is? The key thing is what he did with animals on the fields that were fallow. He brought in animals and had them poop on the fields that were fallow, so in future years they'd be more productive. The poop is a key part of the 4 crop rotation system.
- gamblor956 4y agoFertilizer was used for centuries before this. He did not invent fertilizer.
- lkrubner 4y agoHe invented the 4 crop rotation system, which involved the strategic use of farm animals and their poop. You might want to do some research on this.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 4y ago
- mkl95 4y agoWith the current interest rates and inflation, those people will also need to be well off to even get started.
- thinkmcfly 4y agoor you need a vulture capitalist to come in and steal 49% of any good idea
- kosasbest 4y agoSomething often said: 'We don't use the word crazy around here'. I'm sorry but bandying around that word is vague and misleading. Authors really need to be more specific. This is why we have distinct terms like ADHD, Neurodiverse, Eccentricity, etc.
- johndhi 4y agoDisagree. Seems like a useful word and the article title conveys its meaning quite well. The multiple interpretations of 'crazy' are exactly what makes the title interesting. Crazy looney or crazy like a fox?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- andai 4y agoI think the gist is that people who think differently are often thought insane, but are also disproportionately the ones who will stumble upon new and useful ways of doing things.
- dinkumthinkum 4y agoNeurodiverse, that’s just leftist propaganda. It’s like calling someone “vertically challenged” or something equally silly. People use the word “crazy” in this context and we all know what it means unless we are very pedantic or completely unaware of words having meanings other than the most literal, dry definitions. But if you read English in that way then articles like this are not for you, really, which is not an attack. It’s just there for most people, we want to read more engaging content that something that reads like a 1970s instruction manual.
- aortega 4y agoBe careful with the redefinition of words, as it's a basic 101-mind-control-technique.
- civilized 4y agoAs always, seeking lessons by studying only the successful suffers from nasty selection bias. Maybe most new industries come from crazy people, but you're probably not one of them. Most crazy people just lose everything being crazy.
- sammalloy 4y ago> Most crazy people just lose everything being crazy Rich crazy people are known as eccentrics, precisely because they don’t lose their wealth and safety net.
- heavyset_go 4y agoAgreed and there's a big difference between having a weird idea and mental illness, and it's strange to see them conflated. Most people who end up like Kanye, for example, don't become insanely rich, they end up alienating everyone in their lives if they don't take care of themselves, and eventually end up in prison, institutionalized, homeless or dead.
- afarrell 4y agoThis is an important thing to keep in mind when engaging with institutions which make most of their money from outliers. Their incentives are not aligned with the stability of your mental health. (Though they don’t follow their incentives perfectly because institutions are still made of humans who care about people)
- Juliate 4y agoExactly. No one is an island. The supporting network around you also plays a significant part.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- relativ575 4y agoAnd as usually the case when people brought up selection bias, or survivor bias, you made the assumption that he only studied the successful. He never said he did. I agreed that most attempts to invent new industries ended up in failure, by either crazy or regular people. That's because it's insanely hard to do so in the face of competition by the incumbents, not to mention going against the opinion of logical and well reasoning smart people, who are of course right 99.9 % of the time. For those who succeeded however, they are crazy -- as defined by the author -- most of the time. I think that's what the author intends to convey. If you can think of any new industry that invented by "normal" people who work within the system, I'd love to hear.
- bjornsing 4y agohttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mtftHaK9tYY https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mtftHaK9tYY
- college_physics 4y agoAs individuals we need some reassurance that our actions matter and there is no better way to achieve that than to identify "great men" (somehow these characters are always male) and posit that they somehow managed to single handedly change history. Thinking is systems, discontinuous, non-linear collective phenomena precipitate social changes like a breaking wave. Invariably somebody will be at the cusp and a smaller number might even have the energy, ruthlessnes and thick skin to survive there for a longer period. This makes them no more "responsible" for a new industry than a molecule is responsible for the existence of the wave. But paint that well placed molecule with a fluerescent marker and it does a good job identifying the location of the discontinuity. This is really the main role of the "crazy people". To signal to the silent "normie" multitudes the existence of a shock front.
- colechristensen 4y agoNonsense, there are plenty of circumstances where a lone person or small group was responsible for great change. The thing that’s missing from people’s attention is that usually this change was ripe and if not one person, another would have come along in a short time. The many occurrences of scientific discoveries happening completely independently at almost the same time demonstrates this. And there certainly have been great women, too often somebody else got credit for far too long, but there have been plenty. Khun, summarized, said that (in science but really applicable anywhere) development tends to happen with long periods of many people making incremental changes interspersed with short bursts of paradigm shifts where the basic assumptions change… often led by small groups or individual outsiders.
- college_physics 4y ago> The thing that’s missing from people’s attention is that usually this change was ripe and if not one person, another would have come along in a short time This is more or less what i am saying. When conditions are ripe for change, change happens, irrespective of whether there is a "crazy person" around or not. Individuals mostly make a small difference in timing.
- scaredginger 4y agoI think 'crazy' isn't the right word here. I'm not a psychologist, but I think a lot of this behaviour is consistent with autism or ADHD
- kleer001 4y agoAnd 'crazy' is the non-pc word for that umbrella of non-standard neurotypes that are just-barely normal-ish. Crazy is a fine word. Let's not hop on the euphemism treadmill.
- hooande 4y ago"Having a different opinion than the consensus" isn't the same thing as "crazy". The article does this for many of its examples. It's tautological that people who start new industries do so by questioning the status quo. But simply having a different point of view doesn't make you a crazy person.
- postsantum 4y agoCrazy is the knee-jerk word when you need to describe heterodoxy. If you spend more than a second to think about it, you might come up with different words. But not "crazy", which is effectively a placeholder
- bawolff 4y ago"Crazy" is informally used to mean acting outside the norm - e.g. "i had a crazy idea" when people say things like that, they do not (neccesarily) mean crazy as in have a mental health problem.
- hamdouni 4y agoMarie Skłodowska Curie wasn't "crazy" and her radium extraction method from pitchblend ignited an industry