posted on October 21, 2021 09:46 PM by
u/slowcookedfrog
23
u/Soyweiser26 pointsat 1634898938.000000
Paul declares he is no longer an IQ Guy but he is now an Ideas
Guy.
(This at least explains why I saw people go ‘nobody cares about
ideas, everybody has ideas, it is the implementations of the ideas which
count’ on twitter).
E: here is an idea, perhaps a dominance hierarchy is bad, no matter
what quality you assign to the top. (Also the whole ‘how do we get more
ideas’ is simple, just give people UBI, and let them work on their own
projects, the problem is capitalism mister VC man)
Well go join the various strikes going on in the us then. Some of them are in their 7th month, and strikers hace already turned up dead and wounded. (Cars driven into them and random drive bys). You will have to follow the strikers rules however, so no firearms allowed in defence.
E: 24h later, no reaction. Guess the burning heart of the revolution well have to take place in blender ;) which is valid luxury gay space communism will need video games after all.
There are a lot of genuinely smart people who don’t achieve very
much.
Hey, I resemble that remark.
Seemingly missing from these considerations is the fact that new
ideas typically fail. Those people toiling away in “universities
and research labs”? They’re coming up with new ideas. At some level,
every successful grant proposal has to have an idea in it. But only a
fraction of the ideas that seemed interesting enough to pursue actually
work out.
No, please, you can't tell them that luck is a huge component of success! That's tantamount to sedition toward the high IQ, visionary geniuses overlords that rightfully rule over us! Do you really want to bring the Market's and Innovation's wrath over us, make them leave with your act of defiance, and damn us to be like... (gulps)... *Norway*?! Maybe even ... (sobs uncontrollably) ... *France*?
This reminds me of a rnd department I heard one company had. They had a group of people who each week created a new idea, rushed together a prototype in 4 days and then evaluated how feasible it was (and perhaps extend the work one more week if it was inconclusive) as and idea and how to implement it for the rest of the company. So Paul is 20 years behind the curve on this one.
New ideas fail. People who are actually brilliant come up with enough that some of them succeed. Doesn't need to be every one, but rate * frequency matters.
Puts on vr headset, loads up waifu1.69
[Dunno about that.](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/archer/images/b/bb/Algernop_Krieger.png/revision/latest?cb=20151013042053)
I still can’t get over the fact that this guy wanted to create a
better Lisp and failed miserably, while Clojure, Racket, Chez Scheme
etc. are quietly and humbly chugging along.
so the starting point, that being smart and having ‘important new
ideas’ are different, seems pretty true and unobjectionable
but the way he assumes that people with new ideas are doing something
better than other people kinda reinforces the same dynamic he
was just complaining about when it comes to intelligence
the problem he has with overvaluing intelligence isn’t that
evaluating people’s worth based on a single metric is kinda psychotic,
it’s that intelligence isn’t worth as much as this new metric he’s just
thought up
Why do so many smart people fail to discover anything new? Viewed
from that direction, the question seems a rather depressing one. But
there’s another way to look at it that’s not just more optimistic, but
more interesting as well. Clearly intelligence is not the only
ingredient in having new ideas. What are the other ingredients? Are they
things we could cultivate?
what if there just aren’t that many new ideas, paul
like that’s kind of the thing with ‘new’ ideas, the amount of them
keeps getting smaller the more ideas that are discovered
I’ve only skimmed it & don’t know if I agree with it but it seems
pretty anti-elistest as far as ideas go? Like the idea that just being
born really big-brained and smart isn’t as important and valuable as
being someone who works to find valuable new ideas at least seems like a
nice sentiment.
I have a new idea! Actually, not all that new anymore. I’ll state it
in the form of a null hypothesis: No particular order of DNA bases on
any chromosome determines one’s intelligence quotient.
Paul declares he is no longer an IQ Guy but he is now an Ideas Guy.
(This at least explains why I saw people go ‘nobody cares about ideas, everybody has ideas, it is the implementations of the ideas which count’ on twitter).
E: here is an idea, perhaps a dominance hierarchy is bad, no matter what quality you assign to the top. (Also the whole ‘how do we get more ideas’ is simple, just give people UBI, and let them work on their own projects, the problem is capitalism mister VC man)
Hey, I resemble that remark.
Seemingly missing from these considerations is the fact that new ideas typically fail. Those people toiling away in “universities and research labs”? They’re coming up with new ideas. At some level, every successful grant proposal has to have an idea in it. But only a fraction of the ideas that seemed interesting enough to pursue actually work out.
So much wishful thinking from the guy who’s still butthurt from being unpopular in high school!
I still can’t get over the fact that this guy wanted to create a better Lisp and failed miserably, while Clojure, Racket, Chez Scheme etc. are quietly and humbly chugging along.
so the starting point, that being smart and having ‘important new ideas’ are different, seems pretty true and unobjectionable
but the way he assumes that people with new ideas are doing something better than other people kinda reinforces the same dynamic he was just complaining about when it comes to intelligence
the problem he has with overvaluing intelligence isn’t that evaluating people’s worth based on a single metric is kinda psychotic, it’s that intelligence isn’t worth as much as this new metric he’s just thought up
what if there just aren’t that many new ideas, paul
like that’s kind of the thing with ‘new’ ideas, the amount of them keeps getting smaller the more ideas that are discovered
Love how the title of this essay calls back to Beyond Meat, a substance whose claim to fame is that it is like meat but is definitely not meat.
I’ve only skimmed it & don’t know if I agree with it but it seems pretty anti-elistest as far as ideas go? Like the idea that just being born really big-brained and smart isn’t as important and valuable as being someone who works to find valuable new ideas at least seems like a nice sentiment.
I have a new idea! Actually, not all that new anymore. I’ll state it in the form of a null hypothesis: No particular order of DNA bases on any chromosome determines one’s intelligence quotient.
Standing by, awaiting my call from Stockholm.