michael_nielsen

I think generally people have a belief that the more they learn/ know the better they create & forget that if you just create first, anything you need to learn within the process of creating, you just reach out and find & learn. IMO this trend is based in lack of self trust.

Being openly creative without being a “expert” is perceived as vulnerable & risky.

I don’t think his findings can be ‘hacked’ by producing as much as possible because the people he studied, regardless of output, likely always published what they thought was important...increasing output while removing this filter will change the conclusions.

The power of the result (if true), is that the chance of creating a masterpiece seems to be roughly the same _across many different authors with different senses of what’s important, and different skill levels_. Which I do think can be leveraged by anyone.

Or maybe it simply takes more informational input to produce something useful today than it used to? Compare physics today with only a few centuries ago. The bleeding edge is also moving away at faster rate as you try to catch-up with it.

If production is naturally centralising then it makes sense that more and more people are only able to absorb what the 'creative elite' produce.