You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
This is a little over-simplified. But I find the core question fascinating - why do our society's supposed innovation systems often fail to create the most valuable innovations, which instead come from the fringe?pic.twitter.com/OTYgdAfhGq
Pretty sure part of the answer is that the most valuable ideas create new narratives that are completely outside (& eventually redefine) the mainstream. But to get funding - in either academia or tech - you need a somewhat plausible starting narrative.
Groucho's Law: never work on any project for which you can get funding.
FWIW public-key cryptography was invented at GCHQ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_Cocks …
It's close enough to academia I'm willing to give academia much of the credit: the useful (because public) parts came from Diffie, Hellmann, Merkle and RSA, as well as the inventors of ideas like hashing. And Cocks (& to some extent Ellis) were in any case a product of academia.
Incidentally, this earlier letter of John Nash's is rather remarkable: https://www.gwern.net/docs/cs/1955-nash …
They are overfitting ...could not think outside the box. That's what happen if you are optimized only for one/few things in life. Look at the great scientist of our time ... Einstein ..he didn't come from academia ... If fact he has a rather boring job at that time
He got his PhD in 1905 and had had a rather conventional academic life up to that point.
It does speak poorly of academia at the time that he wasn't able to secure an academic job in 1905. But as his biographers make clear, it was a near thing, and he certainly was trying to get such a job.
Look at Geoffrey Hinton ...he used different hats in his life time ....not just a computer scientist ..infact he used to be a carpenter
Status-y places resist weirdos. Weirdos make stuff happen. Institutions where stuff happens seem to generally have nooks for weirdos, intentionally or unintentionally, or the resources to provide nice weirdo habitats for the few weirdos who stumbled onto status
Weirdness only starts to be valuable when someone is brilliant. Unless someone is brilliant, being a weirdo is a net negative in expectation.
Which is why status-y places resist weirdos: most of them are just weird, and normies can't pick out the brilliant ones until they've seen their TED talks
Brilliant weirdos find other brilliant weirdos easily, because they're not trying to figure out who's "TED-level," they're just trying to hang out with people who aren't boring
Hmm, that's a little too generous for my taste. A lot more people consider themselves brilliant than is warranted.
She didn't say THEY consider themselves (or others) brilliant. Instead, an even deeper gut-level discrimination: INTERESTING. The value of INTERESTING as a compass is very underappreciated.
Clarification: BRILLIANT is a red herring. I think it's 20% smarts and 80% seeing outside the box (or at least seeing there IS a box). And I think she meant that an outside observer, who can see the box (either via perspective today or from the future) will call them brilliant.
Importantly, some of these people will never be recognized in any significant way... some won’t even do much worth recognizing. There are lots of reasons for this, but brilliant weirdos live all kinds of lives
Incentives?
Sorry if this is overly obvious... But I think we still underestimate how little someone's thinking they want to innovate and their actual will and ability to innovate overlap. Sadly resources are mostly wasted on groups who have no interest to subvert, to step back, to rebuild.
But the question is *what do we do*
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
