Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 20171/ Had some thoughts on this tweetstorm prompt from Friday from @atduskgreg tulip manias vs. pet rocks...Quote TweetGreg Borenstein@atduskgreg·Jul 29, 2017Replying to @vgrHow do you know when hyped up new tech is really a tulip bubble or a pet rock?1822
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr2/ (Disclaimer, tulip manias as popularly understood -- as representative irrational bubbles, whatever the latest revisionist history says)11
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr3/ Pet rocks and tulip manias are two extremes on a spectrum of there being no there there economically13
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr4/ The pet rock was a non-generative innovation and afaik, the sociology around it wasn't too interesting either12
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr5/ It was not just an evolutionary cul de sac... it didn't even do much exciting twisting and branching on the way to a dead end12
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr6/ Tulip manias otoh are complex... there's a lot of excitement, and _apparently_ a story to tell, with events, players, developments, news14
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr7/ But like a ponzi scheme, when you dig, you find the root cause fundamentally underwhelming. You can't dig deep because there's no depth15
Venkatesh Rao@vgrReplying to @vgr8/ The challenge posed by @atduskgreg is to distinguish members of the set {Pet rock, Tulip manias, actual Revolutions} or {P, T, R}7:42 PM · Jul 30, 20173 Likes
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr9/ If there are no complicated branchings and twists and turns to the story it's a pet rock. Test: it's a wikipedia 1-pager.13
Venkatesh Rao@vgr·Jul 30, 2017Replying to @vgr10/ Go read Wikipedia page on pet rocks. Unlike more interesting stories, it won't suck you down big bunnytrail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet_Rock111