Live data from Hacker News

People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

freakonomics.com

271–280 of 453 posts

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#271

An interesting bit from the article was that he talks about 'sunk cost' with the defining example of ordering a dessert when you're nearly full and feeling compelled to finish it. > There was an economist once early in my career who said to me, “You know, if you’re right, what am I supposed to do? What I know how to do is solve optimization problems.” A career economist not wanting to change their ways because they h…

Sometimes it's a mistake to think about how these companies could pivot to adapt to new technology. A major feature of capitalism is that companies are (relatively) unimportant and it's the market and society that really matter. Without companies collapsing, it can be really difficult to recycle the manpower and capital invested in obsolete business models.

Blockbuster's organizational, legal and physical infrastructure was wholly devoted to video rental via physical stores. Decommissioning those organizational components and creating the systems necessary to spin up and run an online video portal would have required changes in the company so massive that it would effectively be a different company.

Even if Blockbuster had bought Netflix early on, Blockbuster would have been left running an organization they did not understand in a market that only vaguely resembled something it was familiar with. Even worse, and totally contrary to modern management theory, management skills alone are necessary but not sufficient to operate a growing and dynamic company on the forefront of technology. The entire management organization of Blockbuster would have been totally unequal to the task of operating Netflix competently.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#272
post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding with Kodak is that they invented digital tech far earlier than expected (pre 80s) and hushed it to avoid cannibalizing their existing film business. I suspect Blockbuster behaved similarly. It's hard to kill the golden goose. Still examples of the sunk cost fallacy, for sure, but it feels like "lack of realization" is perhaps the wrong attribution.

In a way, it is sunk cost all the way down. Those companies' entire existance - supply chain, manufacturing, down to identity of what they do was so etched into everything it was hard to change.

It happens all the time with large companies.

Motorola is another, mostly forgotten example. They invented digital radios for cell phones, but they were so entrenched in analog radios at the time that they gave the technology away to a small company called Nokia. A few years later, they collaborated with Apple on an iTunes equipped cell phone, and shared their own internal designs of a full screen phone.

I think this phenomenon is one of the few ways a big company can die.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#273
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn’t intent on killing the joke, I was hoping it would allow more people to appreciate it. But apparently I failed at that. :)

No worries. :) "Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process." -- Elwyn Brooks White

Isn't a joke "alive" until the explanation? So those that 'got' the joke would've enjoyed the joke, before moving onto read the next line. So reading the explanation of the joke wouldn't interfere with their enjoyment of the joke since they already enjoyed it prior to reading the explanation.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#274
post #95

Reminded of this timeless Carl Sagan quote: "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."

Our civilization has attained its complexity by encompassing such knowledge that it would take a million lifetimes to learn all of it. I have made my career learning about technology and learning about science is a great hobby of mine. But I have only the dimmest understanding of even how much there is to know.

You don't need to know a lot to change league though. Most kitchen appliances, tools are basic geometry and a bit of time. It's damning when you open them to see how there's nothing to it. It's damning to see that kids get to learn geometry in the abstract and unless they go for some kind of technical or engineering career, will never know "life critical" use of it.

Also a surprising amount of devices are overly complex because there's this historical separation between business and users (and because economic incentives are compiled into the implementation).

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#275
post #95

Reminded of this timeless Carl Sagan quote: "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."

I always found this odd. Maybe civilization as a group has progressed in knowledge of the universe, but the populations are in yet another form of religion. A reincarnation of plato's cave.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#276
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how you revealed that you dislike joke comments on HN and unintentionally killed it at the same time.

I don't think the explanation killed the joke. As someone who wouldn't have gotten it otherwise, it made me able to appreciate the pun.

Disagree. It killed it.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its extremely unlikely that there is any actual evolutionary process selecting for less intelligent people, in fact the opposite is probably more likely to be true. I'm not sure you were really sugesting that though.

There is different kinds of intelligence. Like said, it can be smart to not be smart, if you want to survive under a stupid, but powerful regime. Smart in that moment, not so smart now, when it is wise, to understand more, than just be able.to follow simple orders. Robots can do that better.

How does that play out today because it is very lucrative to be smart in today's world. You don't get to work at FAANG or on Wall Street by pretending to be less intelligent than you are. The same applies across many industries like Academia, Healthcare, Law etc. You may have to suppress opinions that go against the grain of the industry you are in but I don't see that as being the same.

Re: People Aren’t Dumb, the World Is Hard

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some people have strong opinions about Alan Kay's CS / programming work I'm curious. I wasn't aware of this. What are these strong opinions about?

Common ones I hear: - He hasn't shipped anything popular (he's a researcher, expanding the tree of knowledge, not an engineer optimizing for shipping) - Smalltalk isn't as great as Alan makes it out to be (again he's a researcher) - That the computer revolution has happened but he's stuck in the 70's - Many, many more things

Being stuck in the 70's isn't that bad, many avantgarde things from that era still have to make it to mainstream adoption.
Post reply on HN