4 ms·

Ripe for Disruption

7 points by biscarch 14y ago

dkokelley 14y ago
Is anyone else a little upset to see that the "use 'fucking' in your title to get to the front page" tactic is still working? I understand that 'fucking' is in the original submission, but I really can't understand how a small 4-paragraph rant (by the author's own admission) makes it to the front page in <20 minutes except for the fact that HN seems to love the word 'fucking'. [flash edit] I mean no disrespect to the author and the point he makes with the article.
- biscarch 14y ago
  Author here. No offense taken. For the record "fucking" wasn't included for front page-ness, I felt it appropriately conveyed my feelings on the topic.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
saraid216 14y ago
That's not true. Most people who say that an industry is ripe for disruption have no clue how to disrupt it other than invoking magic fairy dust ("All you have to do is solve X!"). They're not talking about "ripeness"; they're talking about the amount of pain undergone by those interacting with the industry.
citricsquid 14y ago
This blogs design is "ripe for disruption".
- biscarch 14y ago
  I was waiting for this comment to show up. I agree completely and am choosing to spend my time on other projects.
polemic 14y ago
Disagree. Simply "doing something better" is not disruption - that's just business as usual. Disruption is radical change through technological innovation. The author seems to think that all industries are equality ready for that sort of shift. I'd argue that Facebook didn't disrupt social media: it just overhauled MySpace/Bebo and expanded the online advertising "disruption" instigated by Google. eBay and Amazon disrupted the retail shopping industry, but building a better eCommerce site isn't more disruption. There is also the question of how easily radical change can disrupt an industry. Weapons manufacturing could, for all I know, be swathed in unnecessary beaurocracy and be mired in ancient technology, outdated processes and unnecessary overheads. But it's fair to say that the industry is unlikely to be 'ripe' for anything without some sort of monumental policy changes at government levels. The exception that proves the point is the space industry: a shift of government policy lead to actual disruption by SpaceX.
owenjones 14y ago
Hard to hear the message over all the brogrammin' going down.
pwniekins 14y ago
How is this crap front page?
mvkel 14y ago
Hey "brah" There are indeed industries that are more ripe for disruption than others. Count the amount of years it's been since there was true innovation in an industry. If it's over 10, it's ripe. If it's less than 10, it's not. In other words, if the barrier to entry is extremely high due to constant innovation, it will be very difficult to disrupt, hence not "ripe" for disruption. Additionally, you need to consider the capital investment required to enter a market. Starting a car company: incredibly expensive, thus, the auto industry is not ripe for disruption. Starting a higher ed tech company: small competitive landscape, potentially cheap entry into the market. Ripe for disruption. P.S. Not sure if you noticed, but your hat's crooked.
- herval 14y ago
  > Starting a car company: incredibly expensive, thus, the auto industry is not ripe for disruption. You can't simply label something "not ripe for disruption" just because it's expensive to do so. Why would an opportunity have to be cheap in order to be "ripe"?
  - mvkel 14y ago
    It was more of a corollary to the previous point, not the sole reason per se.
- biscarch 14y ago
  Is the angle of my hat the reason people are posting about brogramming? I'm going to change the photo as I don't desire to be associated with being a "brogrammer" (or how distracting it apparently is to people), but I'm not sure I understand the connection.
  - hallmark 14y ago
    Your foul language appeared unnecessary. Combine that with a short rant lacking depth. Not trying to criticize - you're free to write whatever you want - but it is what it is. The bro connection had nothing to do with your photo. I didn't even look at your photo until you asked.

7 points by biscarch 14y ago

Is anyone else a little upset to see that the "use 'fucking' in your title to get to the front page" tactic is still working? I understand that 'fucking' is in the original submission, but I really can't understand how a small 4-paragraph rant (by the author's own admission) makes it to the front page in <20 minutes except for the fact that HN seems to love the word 'fucking'. [flash edit] I mean no disrespect to the author and the point he makes with the article.

biscarch 14y ago
Author here. No offense taken. For the record "fucking" wasn't included for front page-ness, I felt it appropriately conveyed my feelings on the topic.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

saraid216 14y ago

That's not true. Most people who say that an industry is ripe for disruption have no clue how to disrupt it other than invoking magic fairy dust ("All you have to do is solve X!"). They're not talking about "ripeness"; they're talking about the amount of pain undergone by those interacting with the industry.

citricsquid 14y ago

This blogs design is "ripe for disruption".

biscarch 14y ago
I was waiting for this comment to show up. I agree completely and am choosing to spend my time on other projects.

polemic 14y ago

Disagree. Simply "doing something better" is not disruption - that's just business as usual. Disruption is radical change through technological innovation. The author seems to think that all industries are equality ready for that sort of shift. I'd argue that Facebook didn't disrupt social media: it just overhauled MySpace/Bebo and expanded the online advertising "disruption" instigated by Google. eBay and Amazon disrupted the retail shopping industry, but building a better eCommerce site isn't more disruption. There is also the question of how easily radical change can disrupt an industry. Weapons manufacturing could, for all I know, be swathed in unnecessary beaurocracy and be mired in ancient technology, outdated processes and unnecessary overheads. But it's fair to say that the industry is unlikely to be 'ripe' for anything without some sort of monumental policy changes at government levels. The exception that proves the point is the space industry: a shift of government policy lead to actual disruption by SpaceX.

owenjones 14y ago

Hard to hear the message over all the brogrammin' going down.

pwniekins 14y ago

How is this crap front page?

mvkel 14y ago

Hey "brah" There are indeed industries that are more ripe for disruption than others. Count the amount of years it's been since there was true innovation in an industry. If it's over 10, it's ripe. If it's less than 10, it's not. In other words, if the barrier to entry is extremely high due to constant innovation, it will be very difficult to disrupt, hence not "ripe" for disruption. Additionally, you need to consider the capital investment required to enter a market. Starting a car company: incredibly expensive, thus, the auto industry is not ripe for disruption. Starting a higher ed tech company: small competitive landscape, potentially cheap entry into the market. Ripe for disruption. P.S. Not sure if you noticed, but your hat's crooked.

herval 14y ago
> Starting a car company: incredibly expensive, thus, the auto industry is not ripe for disruption. You can't simply label something "not ripe for disruption" just because it's expensive to do so. Why would an opportunity have to be cheap in order to be "ripe"?
- mvkel 14y ago
  It was more of a corollary to the previous point, not the sole reason per se.
biscarch 14y ago
Is the angle of my hat the reason people are posting about brogramming? I'm going to change the photo as I don't desire to be associated with being a "brogrammer" (or how distracting it apparently is to people), but I'm not sure I understand the connection.
- hallmark 14y ago
  Your foul language appeared unnecessary. Combine that with a short rant lacking depth. Not trying to criticize - you're free to write whatever you want - but it is what it is. The bro connection had nothing to do with your photo. I didn't even look at your photo until you asked.