4 ms·

That's one take. Another is that innovation is driven by money, e.g. seeing an increase in war economies (government spending) or by high income inequality (VC/

That's one take. Another is that innovation is driven by money, e.g. seeing an increase in war economies (government spending) or by high income inequality (VC/PE spending.) Overall, optimism is probably also higher in these situations than others. The question is if the people who are optimistic are also the ones being innovative, or if they're just "rallying the troops." If optimism was itself linked to ability to innovate, you'd expect to see innovation happen regardless of money flows, because those innovating would not have to be paid to do it. But, I'm pretty sure the space programs of the 1950-1980s were innovative because a few optimistic directors got funding to pay rocket scientists to be innovative. In fact, it's quite possible no rocket would have left Earth if the scientists were optimists.

froh 3y ago
Isn't it rather about who is optimistic and who isn't? when you scratch a personal itch with some innovation, _you_ are the optimist. when pointy haired boss has that brilliant idea _he_'s the optimist and the engineers may very well be "that pig ain't gonna fly no matter how hard you throw it..." and the middle managers may prevent the two from talking for a loooong time. anyhow, my key point was: the study I understand (if you don't know enough, you can easily be unrealistically optimistic) and the PR department twist on it I don't, and I disagree with, violently. .oO( else I'd have to admit how stupid I am ;-) )
lonelyasacloud 3y ago
>But, I'm pretty sure the space programs of the 1950-1980s were innovative because a few optimistic directors got funding to pay rocket scientists to be innovative. In fact, it's quite possible no rocket would have left Earth if the scientists were optimists. And not that the pessimists thought that if they didn't do it the enemy would be able to lob nuclear missiles at them with impunity?

froh 3y ago

Isn't it rather about who is optimistic and who isn't? when you scratch a personal itch with some innovation, _you_ are the optimist. when pointy haired boss has that brilliant idea _he_'s the optimist and the engineers may very well be "that pig ain't gonna fly no matter how hard you throw it..." and the middle managers may prevent the two from talking for a loooong time. anyhow, my key point was: the study I understand (if you don't know enough, you can easily be unrealistically optimistic) and the PR department twist on it I don't, and I disagree with, violently. .oO( else I'd have to admit how stupid I am ;-) )

lonelyasacloud 3y ago

>But, I'm pretty sure the space programs of the 1950-1980s were innovative because a few optimistic directors got funding to pay rocket scientists to be innovative. In fact, it's quite possible no rocket would have left Earth if the scientists were optimists. And not that the pessimists thought that if they didn't do it the enemy would be able to lob nuclear missiles at them with impunity?