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

Crazy New Ideas

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 808 posts

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#2

Post by swayvil »

From the footnotes

>3] This is one reason people with a touch of Asperger's may have an advantage in discovering new ideas. They're always flying on instruments

On the contrary, it is everybody else who is flying on instruments. The sperg sees straight.

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#4

Post by bestinterest »

Very interesting. This sounds like a response to the Mighty [0] launch which Paul Graham has been defending on twitter recently after an outcry from some of the 'hardcore' developers such as Jonathan Blow [1] and Casey [2].

[0] https://www.mightyapp.com/

[1] https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1387101172230672389

[2] https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1387645578067124224

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#5

Post by anotha1 »

swayvil wrote: post #2

From the footnotes >3] This is one reason people with a touch of Asperger's may have an advantage in discovering new ideas. They're always flying on instruments On the contrary, it is everybody else who is flying on instruments. The sperg sees straight.

Maybe he meant to say we're observing the rules via mental systems(instruments) we developed to "fit in" instead of whatever neuro-typs use.

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#6

Post by CJefferson »

This is an interesting idea, but I feel it's not calibrated right -- I'm an academic, so I'd imagine I work with many "domain experts" (if you don't think so, that's of course another valid discussion). I don't think "if you bet on the entire set of implausible-sounding ideas proposed by reasonable domain experts, you'd end up net ahead.".

I hear a implausible sounding ideas all the time. I think one of the main points of academia is to give people the chance to explore those ideas. But they don't turn out good "on average", not even close.

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#7

Post by anotha1 »

bestinterest wrote: post #4

Very interesting. This sounds like a response to the Mighty [0] launch which Paul Graham has been defending on twitter recently after an outcry from some of the 'hardcore' developers such as Jonathan Blow [1] and Casey [2]. [0] https://www.mightyapp.com/ [1] https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1387101172230672389 [2] https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1387645578067124224

Mighty is a good idea, marketed to the wrong people. I mean, who wouldn't just upgrade their computer? New software is a cost, even if it's "free."

I'm sure there's a niche, though. Like low-paid workers needing to do a lot on their crappy personal machines.

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#8

Post by blocked_again »

bestinterest wrote: post #4

Very interesting. This sounds like a response to the Mighty [0] launch which Paul Graham has been defending on twitter recently after an outcry from some of the 'hardcore' developers such as Jonathan Blow [1] and Casey [2]. [0] https://www.mightyapp.com/ [1] https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1387101172230672389 [2] https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1387645578067124224

Yeah. Also, Suhail Doshi, the founder of Mighty, is mentioned as one of the people who draft read this essay.

Re: Crazy New Ideas

#9

Post by anotha1 »

CJefferson wrote: post #6

This is an interesting idea, but I feel it's not calibrated right -- I'm an academic, so I'd imagine I work with many "domain experts" (if you don't think so, that's of course another valid discussion). I don't think "if you bet on the entire set of implausible-sounding ideas proposed by reasonable domain experts, you'd end up net ahead.". I hear a implausible sounding ideas all the time. I think one of the main poin…

Yes, because even when those implausible ideas fail, your more likely to learn something than when experimenting on an existing hypothesis with just a minor change.
Post reply on HN