With that being said, it's a refreshing article. Most articles on Steve Jobs focus on how visionary he was, how he was predicting everything etc. This one is stating that, he was a human after all, just like us, and that the future is notoriously hard to imagine and predict. Nassim Taleb would agree :)
In almost every major market, I'm seeing the same pattern: A year or two, it's "the wild west", where 100s (or 1000s) of people compete. Within a year or two, the market solidifies, and it becomes MUCH more difficult for indie makers to stand out.It seems like most markets (including new one like bitcoin) are well into the second phrase. I got an impression that the indie makers kind of slowly...
Survivorship bias at its best: https://xkcd.com/1827/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18920079
I wonder if it's a similar thing about the supposed benefits companies thought they were going to get about limiting the customers "right" to repair their products.
On one hand, the benefit look "obvious", yet when you take into consideration the second-hand effects (like bad publicity, people getting frustrated by the inability to repair and getting a cheaper alternative) my guess is the costs were bigger than the benefits.
I wonder what's the underlying issue behind this disparity. Wonder if it the teams themselves behind those products...
A guy who made money by selling user data lobbied to pass a law that lets him get access to even more data to sell.
If you make money off something, you want more of that "something" :)
Open https://anttiviljami.github.io/browser-autofill-phishing/ , enter some auto-fill info, click "Submit" and monitor your "Network" tab requests. You'll find your browser leaked way more info than those 2 information...
While this is an extreme, I think every developer is a perfectionist in one area or another. This can be a disadvantage when you're working in highly unpredictable environments (read: business) and where a simple quick-and-dirty MVP will do the job.
So their tendency to be a perfectionist (in situations where this is NOT the optimal mindset) is my biggest struggle when working with developers.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/318450.php
Some of these articles are more detailed than the first link I posted.
"Something central, very central, is missing in historical accounts of scientific and technological discovery. The discourse and controversies focus on the role of luck as opposed to teleological programs (from telos, “aim”), that is, ones that rely on pre-set direction from formal science.
The luck versus knowledge story is as follows. Ironically, we have vastly more evidence for results linked to luck than to those coming from the teleological, outside physics—even after discounting for the sensationalism. In some opaque and nonlinear fields, like medicine or engineering, the teleological exceptions are in the minority, such as a small number of designer drugs. This makes us live in the contradiction that we largely got here to where we are thanks to undirected chance, but we build research programs going forward based on direction and narratives. And, what is worse, we are fully conscious of the inconsistency."
What's interesting, according to Taleb, is that science has been hiding this fact, that progress mainly comes from trial & error & risk-taking, as opposed to well-defined theories and narratives.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rawnshah/2012/11/02/for-innovat...
This is an aspect it seems many people forget.
https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/891357
I can't believe people are not talking about this more. I guess it's not in the pharma industry's best interest, but the truth of the matter remains: We can do a lot to manage our pain without taking a huge number of pills.