3 ms·

Innovation happens in fits and spurts -- it's highly nonlinear. More importantly, there is a positive feedback cycle between what the author would consider "tr

by niggler 14y ago

Innovation happens in fits and spurts -- it's highly nonlinear. More importantly, there is a positive feedback cycle between what the author would consider "true innovation" and "trivial apps" -- before we can make a very large leap in terms of true innovation, we need some societal comfort with the paradigm. Those apps (like Twitter, the one Peter Thiel derided) serve a very important role: they move the bar culturally. These apps help acclimate people to the idea of technology (for example, owning and keeping a smartphone close to you) and make sure that society is ready for whatever next innovation happens. Without the societal leg of the cycle the "true innovation" will be stymied.

david927 14y ago
Honestly? I think that's what investors(and the trivial startups who court them) tell themselves as they tuck themselves in at night. Innovation, like a new tree, has many branches which can be developed and on which to exploit and make money. Exploiting innovation is lucrative; research is costly. But now we've over-grazed. We got so greedy that we threw everything into harvesting the leaves, forgoing the costly part of sowing new seeds, and now we're navel-gazing and wondering what happened. It's not hard to understand. In WWII there was a ton of investment into important research and the results were overwhelming. Currently there is a ton of investment into photo-sharing social networks for dogs, and the results are, surprise!, quite underwhelming.
- niggler 14y ago
  Whether an innovation is lucrative or not depends highly on cultural factors. Ultimately to exploit an innovation there needs to be something to exploit, and unfortunately that is almost always other people. Many companies have produced tablets for decades before Apple came in with the iPad. If the iPad were launched in the early 90s, for example, it would not have taken off in the same way it did now.

by niggler 14y ago

david927 14y ago

Honestly? I think that's what investors(and the trivial startups who court them) tell themselves as they tuck themselves in at night. Innovation, like a new tree, has many branches which can be developed and on which to exploit and make money. Exploiting innovation is lucrative; research is costly. But now we've over-grazed. We got so greedy that we threw everything into harvesting the leaves, forgoing the costly part of sowing new seeds, and now we're navel-gazing and wondering what happened. It's not hard to understand. In WWII there was a ton of investment into important research and the results were overwhelming. Currently there is a ton of investment into photo-sharing social networks for dogs, and the results are, surprise!, quite underwhelming.

niggler 14y ago
Whether an innovation is lucrative or not depends highly on cultural factors. Ultimately to exploit an innovation there needs to be something to exploit, and unfortunately that is almost always other people. Many companies have produced tablets for decades before Apple came in with the iPad. If the iPad were launched in the early 90s, for example, it would not have taken off in the same way it did now.