Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 157 posts

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#71

Post by consumer451 »

everdrive wrote: post #70

It seems obvious to me that younger people are more predisposed towards building their reputation (and taking some serious risk to do so) and older people are more predisposed towards maintaining what they've built. This feels like a pretty standard evolutionary psychology approach. It's not as if no one can disrupt in their older years, but in general people get more cautious as they get older. They're less interest…

I am not disagreeing, but is a possible additional factor that younger, more naive, people just don't have what is and isn't "possible" so deeply ingrained in their minds?

The disruptive part of the startup ecosystem kinda runs on that, right?

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#72

Post by inglor_cz »

silvestrov wrote: post #69
slillibri wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about number 3. As a 53 year old Gen X'er, I still haven't come across things that see against the natural order. The main things I don't understand are things like the Humane AI pin, which didn't seem against the natural order, I just didn't see the appeal or usefulness of it. Maybe it just doesn't seem like there is much new being invented.

A lot of boomers thinks windmills are against the natural order and will end the world. Also solar parks are just the most ugly thing in the world. They must be banned.

My experience is that some people (of all generations) react really strongly against anything that involves birth and family.

IVF, gamete donation, surrogacy, gay families, various experiments with human embryos or artificial wombs, much or all of this is banned in many countries of the world mostly due to the "ick" factor. The smarter opponents tend to decorate their objections in the "we must be very, very careful" cloak, but if you dig deeper, you will find that it is indeed just a cloak in many cases and that the underlying root cause is "ick, this is against nature", and "really careful" means "erect impossibly high barriers by law".

This even isn't subject to polarization and seems to be shared across the political board.

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#73

Post by inglor_cz »

analog31 wrote: post #19

>>> It was the Nobel laureate and quantum physicist Max Planck who wrote that “science advances one funeral at a time” (which is actually a somewhat artful translation of his original statement, in German) about revered gatekeepers and their nostalgia for insights past that keep leaps in scientific understanding from happening. Turns out, he may have been right. Or he may have been wrong. I think it was Paul Feyerabe…

A sufficiently obstinate person in a position of power can block any progress in a certain direction for a long, long time.

Ancel Keys is known for really hating the "sugar is problematic" theory and sinking careers of younger nutritional scientists who dared touch it for decades.

Sen. Richard Shelby was a huge hater of the "orbital fuel depot" concept and it only started being developed further once he retired and didn't hold sway over the American cosmic sector anymore.

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#74

Post by missingdays »

silvestrov wrote: post #69
slillibri wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about number 3. As a 53 year old Gen X'er, I still haven't come across things that see against the natural order. The main things I don't understand are things like the Humane AI pin, which didn't seem against the natural order, I just didn't see the appeal or usefulness of it. Maybe it just doesn't seem like there is much new being invented.

A lot of boomers thinks windmills are against the natural order and will end the world. Also solar parks are just the most ugly thing in the world. They must be banned.

Windmills were invented more than a thousand years ago though

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#75

Post by leonidasrup »

silvestrov wrote: post #69
slillibri wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about number 3. As a 53 year old Gen X'er, I still haven't come across things that see against the natural order. The main things I don't understand are things like the Humane AI pin, which didn't seem against the natural order, I just didn't see the appeal or usefulness of it. Maybe it just doesn't seem like there is much new being invented.

A lot of boomers thinks windmills are against the natural order and will end the world. Also solar parks are just the most ugly thing in the world. They must be banned.

A lot of younger people think that building of solar power and wind power in the past years caused decrease of global CO2 emissions. In reality, global CO2 emissions have been increasing each year.

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#76

Post by krige »

leonidasrup wrote: post #75
silvestrov wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of boomers thinks windmills are against the natural order and will end the world. Also solar parks are just the most ugly thing in the world. They must be banned.

A lot of younger people think that building of solar power and wind power in the past years caused decrease of global CO2 emissions. In reality, global CO2 emissions have been increasing each year. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

The per region and per capita graphs do tell something you might want to consider.

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#77

Post by CPLX »

slillibri wrote: post #27
hackthemack wrote: post #6

I prefer the full quote by Douglas Adams. I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies: 1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. 3. Anything invented…

I don't know about number 3. As a 53 year old Gen X'er, I still haven't come across things that see against the natural order. The main things I don't understand are things like the Humane AI pin, which didn't seem against the natural order, I just didn't see the appeal or usefulness of it. Maybe it just doesn't seem like there is much new being invented.

I am GenX and also an avowed fan of Douglas Adams and that quote.

I have to say that recently I’ve been coming to the opinion that making it pointless to perfect the craft of producing music and art is against the natural order of things.

I know I’m just old and the kids will figure out a way to bend and warp the new tools but I don’t think it’s for me any more.

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#79

Post by kelseydh »

hackthemack wrote: post #6

I prefer the full quote by Douglas Adams. I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies: 1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works. 2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it. 3. Anything invented…

Feel the third so much with LLM's. But I get the sense younger generations aren't a fan of where it's moving the world either.

Re: As researchers age, they produce less disruptive work

#80

Post by casey2 »

consumer451 wrote: post #71
everdrive wrote: post #70

It seems obvious to me that younger people are more predisposed towards building their reputation (and taking some serious risk to do so) and older people are more predisposed towards maintaining what they've built. This feels like a pretty standard evolutionary psychology approach. It's not as if no one can disrupt in their older years, but in general people get more cautious as they get older. They're less interest…

I am not disagreeing, but is a possible additional factor that younger, more naive, people just don't have what is and isn't "possible" so deeply ingrained in their minds? The disruptive part of the startup ecosystem kinda runs on that, right?

Young people understand that it isn't possible to win gambling, they due it anyways because of thrill seeking, which decays for multiple reasons as you get older, but has a lot to do with reputation/how established you are and your relative comfort level.

This is probably why old people in highly competative fields take HRT, Dopamine Agonists, Stimulants or Psychedelics

Post reply on HN