Live data from Hacker News

Shooting down ideas is not a skill

scottlawsonbc.com

41–50 of 187 posts

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#41
The RSA algorithm was named after its creators: Adleman, Rivest, Shamir.

Their initials were ordered "RSA" to reflect that Adleman was the "shoot it down" guy: "Rivest and Shamir, as computer scientists, proposed many potential functions, while Adleman, as a mathematician, was responsible for finding their weaknesses."

Well, so the story goes.

Who would want to hide their secrets in ARS?

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#42
post #8

With all due respect, if the idea is good, then it will happen. The proposer of the idea needs to nurture it and part of that is defending it. When someone is super optimistic and comes forward with an idea where: - it's actually just a half baked solution for something I already tried to solve 4 years ago - I'm acutely aware of all the spots it will fall - they still think it can work, when it really really honestly…

> what exactly am I supposed to do with the above?

Exactly what you did there: ask a question.

You tried it, you know where the potential failure points are. Don't assume the super optimistic person hasn't considered them. Ask them how they would address those issues. If they have addressed them, maybe there is something workable. If they haven't addressed those failure points, you have given them a choice: to tackle those issues in the background or to set the idea aside.

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#43
The "what to do instead" section is basically DARPA's "Heilmeier Catechism," which is the framework they use to gauge high-risk high-reward ideas. It doesn't kill ideas, but it places the onus on the proposer to be clear-eyed and explicit about what they're putting forward:

What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no jargon.

How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?

What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?

Who cares? If you are successful, what difference will it make?

What are the risks?

How much will it cost?

How long will it take?

What are the mid-term and final “exams” to check for success?

https://www.darpa.mil/about/heilmeier-catechism

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#44
Here's an idea. Shoot down an idea if:

Your boss is presenting something that affects you, or someone adjacent is presenting an idea for something that will affect you.

Or if someone asks what you think.

Doesn't that solve most of the complaints about productivity in this thread?

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#45
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This logic means you can’t ever be wrong because any case of a good idea not being implemented can be hand waved away as “not yet.” Edit: you changed your comment a lot

> This logic means No, it doesn't. Maybe wind back on the absolutism a little and look to the wide world where things happen. Warts and all.

I am arguing it does. Condescending, dismissive responses aren’t arguments. I am not being absolutist, I am saying you are making it impossible to disagree by definition.

I am down to discuss this if you want to but this isn’t exactly a great start to a productive conversation.

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#46
post #8

With all due respect, if the idea is good, then it will happen. The proposer of the idea needs to nurture it and part of that is defending it. When someone is super optimistic and comes forward with an idea where: - it's actually just a half baked solution for something I already tried to solve 4 years ago - I'm acutely aware of all the spots it will fall - they still think it can work, when it really really honestly…

> With all due respect, if the idea is good, then it will happen Working in a corporate environment, I have not found this to be the case. Good ideas get nowhere without buy-in

I think it really depends on the motivations of the business. Some are more R&D and innovation driven. Getting "buy-in" is technically necessary, but trivially easy as long as the biggest cost is only development time. If it's a bad idea, it eventually fades away as other priorities take over.

There is no one singular "corporate environment". This is especially true when a lot of people working there tend to not job hop much. Time both grows that particular work culture, and keeps those people ignorant.

Re: Shooting down ideas is not a skill

#49
> "I haven't heard any customers request this." "We can't use Python for that, it's too slow." "That introduces too much complexity." "We tried something like that before and it didn't work." "DevOps won't want to support another service." "People are used to the way it works now."

> None of these people are wrong or stupid. And none of them have added any value.

Bzzt. Since all of these people are correct and smart, it is now your job to have great answers to their objections.

No customers requested this? Prove that there is a market that wants it.

Can't use Python because it's too slow? Show a proof of concept that is fast.

Too much complexity? Demonstrate that it's the minimum amount of complexity to achieve all the requirements.

Tried it before unsuccessfully? Explain what's changed since then.

DevOps won't want to support it? Burn down the company and start again: you've managed to undo everything that the word "DevOps" is supposed to convey.

People don't want change? Nah, people like change when it is obvious to them that the change is good. People don't want bad changes, and their justifiable default assumption is that a new change is a bad change. You'll need to overcome that.

And if you can't convince these acknowledged correct-and-smart naysayers, then be glad you didn't chase that rabbit. Come up with a new idea tomorrow.

Post reply on HN