Thoughts & Ideas
On Greatness
v0.crap
- ââWriting, Brieflyââ
Shaped and reshaped
A distinct and complementary stance
But bulldozers move mountains
Argue against the best
Half-winged, half-imprisoned
Curiosity spurred on
From one Arte to another
The Innovation Funnel
The power of One
An Article by Kathy SierraIt's not teams that are the problem, it's the rabid insistence on teamwork. Group think. Committee decisions.
Most truly remarkable ideas did not come from teamwork. Most truly brave decisions were not made through teamwork. The team's role should be to act as a supportive environment for a collection of individuals. People with their own unique voice, ideas, thoughts, perspectives. A team should be there to encourage one another to pursue the wild ass ideas, not get in lock step to keep everything cheery and pleasant.
A bad tweet is like a deepfake of an idea
AÂ Fragment by Ryan BroderickI guess what youâre describing is like a tweet that hits the uncanny valley of good and bad in such a precise way, with such confidence, that it just pisses everybody off.
Because if you look at this tweet for just a second youâre like ok, thatâs a fine bedroom, but then you look at it, and it starts to unravel in your mind, like trying to remember a dream after you just woke up. And youâre like âwhat is this?â Itâs like a deepfake of a personâs face.
âŚOk, Iâve got some fire for you: A bad tweet is like a deepfake of an idea.
The perfect bad tweet is like something you read and youâre like âok yeahâ but then youâre like, âwaitâŚâ, and it just starts to come apart in your mind and youâre like that makes no fucking sense, just like this photo of this incredibly bad room.
The McDonaldâs Theory of Creativity
An Article by Jon BellI use a trick with co-workers when weâre trying to decide where to eat for lunch and no one has any ideas. I recommend McDonaldâs.
An interesting thing happens. Everyone unanimously agrees that we canât possibly go to McDonaldâs, and better lunch suggestions emerge. Magic!
Itâs as if weâve broken the ice with the worst possible idea, and now that the discussion has started, people suddenly get very creative. I call it the McDonaldâs Theory: people are inspired to come up with good ideas to ward off bad ones.
Eulogy for Steve Jobs
An Article by Jonathan IveHe was without doubt the most inquisitive human I have ever met. His insatiable curiosity was not limited or distracted by his knowledge or expertise, nor was it casual or passive. It was ferocious, energetic and restless. His curiosity was practiced with intention and rigor.
Many of us have an innate predisposition to be curious. I believe that after a traditional education, or working in an environment with many people, curiosity is a decision requiring intent and discipline.
In larger groups our conversations gravitate towards the tangible, the measurable. It is more comfortable, far easier and more socially acceptable talking about what is known. Being curious and exploring tentative ideas were far more important to Steve than being socially acceptable.
Our curiosity begs that we learn. And for Steve, wanting to learn was far more important than wanting to be right.
- ââSteve Jobsââ
Ideas behind their time
An Article by Tim HarfordThese days I am more interested in the reverse case [of Da Vinci's helicopter]: ideas that could have worked many centuries before they actually appeared. The economist Alex Tabarrok calls these âideas behind their timeâ
Curious minds want to know why these ideas appeared so late â and whether there might be anything that would prevent delays in future. One explanation is that the ideas arenât as simple as they appear.
The bicycle is not as straightforward an invention as it seems. To move from ox-hauled cart to human-powered bicycle requires smooth-rolling wheel bearings, which in turn need precisely engineered bearing balls. Modern steel ball bearings were not patented until the late 1700s, and demand from the 19th-century bicycle industry helped to improve their design.
Negative Creativity
An Article by Scott AlexanderComing up with entirely novel ideas is really, really hard.
Early work
An Essay by Paul GrahamImagine if we could turn off the fear of making something lame. Imagine how much more we'd do.
The Top Idea in Your Mind
An Essay by Paul GrahamI think most people have one top idea in their mind at any given time. That's the idea their thoughts will drift toward when they're allowed to drift freely. And this idea will thus tend to get all the benefit of that type of thinking, while others are starved of it. Which means it's a disaster to let the wrong idea become the top one in your mind.
The still life effect
AÂ Fragment by Paul GrahamIf you're going to spend years working on something, you'd think it might be wise to spend at least a couple days considering different ideas, instead of going with the first that comes into your head. You'd think. But people don't. In fact, this is a constant problem when you're painting still lifes. You plonk down a bunch of stuff on a table, and maybe spend five or ten minutes rearranging it to look interesting. But you're so impatient to get started painting that ten minutes of rearranging feels very long. So you start painting. Three days later, having spent twenty hours staring at it, you're kicking yourself for having set up such an awkward and boring composition, but by then it's too late.
A lightbulb is not an idea
An Article by Ralph AmmerWith conventional placeholders, such as words, we can describe patterns for a large number of situations. On the other hand it is easy to fool yourself (and others) with words, since you can avoid to be specific. Any business meeting can confirm this.
When you draw something you are forced to be specific â and honest.
Our illustration of an âideaâ from above is unconventional in the sense that it conveys specific original thoughts of what an idea is. It adds value to the words.
And that is the catch: The drawing must be unconventional to support the conventional words. We have to make sure not to use âwords in disguiseâ. Take a common illustration for âideaâ for example, which haunts flip charts all over the world: the lightbulb.
The lightbulb image works on a purely symbolic level, it only replaces the word âideaâ. This image of a household item contains no original thought about what an idea is. While symbols like these work well as international replacements for words or icons to indicate a light switch for instance, they convey no nutritional value as illustrations â they are empty.
The small web is beautiful
I believe that small websites are compelling aesthetically, but are also important to help us resist selling our souls to large tech companies. In this essay I present a vision for the âsmall webâ as well as the small software and architectures that power it.
Why aim small?
Why aim small in this era of fast computers with plenty of RAM? A number of reasons, but the ones that are most important to me are:
- Fewer moving parts. Itâs easier to create more robust systems and to fix things when they do go wrong.
- Small software is faster. Fewer bits to download and clog your computerâs memory.
- Reduced power consumption. This is important on a âsave the planetâ scale, but also on the very local scale of increasing the battery life of your phone and laptop.
- The light, frugal aesthetic. Thatâs personal, I know, but as youâll see, Iâm not alone.
Features and complexity
Niklaus Wirth of Pascal fame wrote a famous paper in 1995 called A Plea for Lean Software. His take is that âa primary cause for the complexity is that software vendors uncritically adopt almost any feature that users wantâ, and âwhen a systemâs power is measured by the number of its features, quantity becomes more important than qualityâ.
Solving the problem of software bloat
But instead of just complaining, how do we actually solve this problem? Concretely, I think we need to start doing the following:
- Care about size: this sounds obvious, but things only change when people think theyâre important.
- Measure: both your executableâs size, and your programâs memory usage. You may want to measure over time, and make it a blocking issue if the measurements grow more than x% in a release. Or you could hold a memory-reduction sprint every so often.
- Language: choose a language that has a chance.
- Remove: cut down your feature set. Aim for a small number of high-quality features. My car canât fly or float, and thatâs okay â it drives well.
- Say no to new features: unless they really fit your philosophy, or add more than they cost over the lifetime of your project.
- Dependencies: understand the size and complexity of each dependency you pull in. Use only built-in libraries if you can.
Raw size isn't enough
A few months ago there was a sequence of posts to Hacker News about various âclubsâ you could post your small website on: the 1MB Club, 512KB Club, 250KB Club, and even the 10KB Club. I think those are a fun indicator of renewed interested in minimalism, but I will say that raw size isnât enough â a 2KB site with no real content isnât much good, and a page with 512KB of very slow JavaScript is worse than a snappy site with 4MB of well-chosen images.
...[Instead, it's about] an âethos of smallâ. Itâs caring about the users of your site: that your pages download fast, are easy to read, have interesting content, and donât load scads of JavaScript for Google or Facebookâs trackers.