People also get over confident. Thinking the first time wasn't luck (or rather misinterpreting their success). Thinking about it, it might be a meta-skill. Problem selection/formulation combined with receptivity to identifying/abstracting newly possible approaches
-
-
It's why the system is so incredibly stagnant. I don't believe that stagnation is an accident: I think it's effectively a product of design; it's what universities effectively collectively want. The only chance of a change is from outside.
-
Related: if things like Xerox PARC in the 1970s are so great - & I believe they were - then why didn't the NSF acquire them? It would have fit the NSF's supposed mission, and would have provided a growth model for a better way of doing things.
-
The obvious answer is that the NSF effectively - not necessarily as the result of any individual choice or error - isn't really serious about its supposed mission. It's really about something else.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So I’m going to say I think this is a myth. Primary reason. Two teenagers in a garage only works if their parents are rich enough to have a garage and they’ve got health insurance (at least in a US context, slightly different in the civilised world)+
-
What do you mean a myth? I know people - more than 20 - for whom this is effectively true. They grew an org 1,000x or more because they had a better model, over < 10 years. Not true of starting a university or grant agency.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
)