[HN Gopher] How to get new ideas
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How to get new ideas
        
       Author : elorm
       Score  : 290 points
       Date   : 2023-01-24 12:24 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (paulgraham.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (paulgraham.com)
        
       | adversaryIdiot wrote:
       | Hi, Idiot here.
       | 
       | How can I reliably find "Frontiers of Knowledge"? Especially in
       | fields I'm not savvy in?
        
         | js8 wrote:
         | Walk (study and be curious) in a single direction, eventually
         | you'll reach the frontier.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | walking the engineering lattice allows for way more vector
           | intersection considerations.
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | > ... reliably find "Frontiers of Knowledge" ...
         | 
         | currently, search engines/chatgpt seem to fill that roll vs
         | more historical library/university.
         | 
         | aka search term "frontiers of knowledge" <replace with subject
         | area field(s) unfamiliar with>
         | 
         | compared with traditional library/university book
         | writer/teaching assistant
         | 
         | note: sed & awk not required to do text replacement, but good
         | editor certainly helps
         | 
         | But if patient enough to wait, will eventually show up on
         | internet as a video(s) way before the random monkeys typing
         | away at a type writer get to it [1]
         | 
         | [1] : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem
        
       | wbharding wrote:
       | The "gaps that seem obvious"-notion describes exactly how I feel
       | about pull request tooling these days. The status quo for PR
       | review has very obvious-seeming improvements that have not been
       | pursued (ex: de-emphasizing moved code vs. deleted code, making
       | AI predict what comment will be left before dev starts typing,
       | auto-reviewing trivial changes).
       | 
       | If I'm correct that PR review is currently much less efficient
       | than it will be soon, it won't be because I'm smart or this is a
       | new idea. It would just be because our company has spent last
       | five years building code review tools, right place right time.
       | Eventually there was enough infrastructure accumulated (and
       | ambient events unfolding, ie OpenAI) that it became a small step
       | to pass the edge of what PR review meant circa 2022.
        
       | bamazizi wrote:
       | One of the oldest saying in entrepreneurship is "need is the
       | mother of invention"
       | 
       | It starts with finding the right problem/need and before jumping
       | into to solutioning, the smart person would validate and pitch
       | the problem to as many relevant target customers as possible.
       | Once the problem is validated and tangible root cause is flushed
       | out then it's time to explore the solution and pitching it to the
       | same customer research group for validation before going into
       | building mode.
       | 
       | Finding ideas is not hard, but the process is gruelling,
       | frustrating and potentially rewarding. Good luck!
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | yeah, 'news'/documentation/commentary one way to find
         | 'problems' with possible unmet solutions.
        
       | ljlolel wrote:
       | ChatGPT
        
         | jadbox wrote:
         | I've yet to find an original idea from it. It can help with the
         | process of brainstorming.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | so, try feeding chatgpt random garbage? unlike humans,
           | chatgpt wont physically go after you.
        
           | themantalope wrote:
           | Agree. ChatGPT can help with taking a rough or vague idea and
           | better articulate what you are trying to say.
        
         | dboreham wrote:
         | Eliza 2.0
        
       | Octokiddie wrote:
       | > Someone fed my essays into GPT to make something that could
       | answer questions based on them, then asked it where good ideas
       | come from. The answer was ok, but not what I would have said. So
       | I asked: What would I have said?
       | 
       | It's not entirely clear whether or not the essay was written by
       | GPT because it's not clear who PG asked. Himself or GPT?
       | 
       | I'm leaning toward the former, but can't rule out the latter.
       | Maybe that's the point.
        
       | 3dsnano wrote:
       | i think new ideas come from being naive and possessing the "no-
       | mind" or a childlike sense of wonder. the older i get, the less
       | plastic my brain is and the more depression and other issues
       | start to seep in, get in the way, overcomplicate shit.
       | 
       | to be completely free, uninhibited, released from guilt and
       | predjudice. to just think, play, laugh, fart, and yawn. boring
       | days spent looking out the window wondering how crows fart, or
       | what makes zebras sassy.
       | 
       | the only limit is our own adult psychosis. we are prisoners of
       | our own minds, locked and shackled by constructs of our own
       | design. too focused on the failures of the past and anxieties of
       | the present to take a moment and b-r-e-a-t-h-e. like who fucking
       | cares about businesses and startups and shit. saas my ass. when
       | you actually stop trying, give up, and stop caring, and truly let
       | go (like in the movie frozen) you can actually go in and through
       | and back out the other side.
       | 
       | just learn to get out the way of yourself. that's what im working
       | on, but it's really hard. you think you're supposed to be there
       | and generate brilliance 24/7 but it's not possible.
       | 
       | go outside and find a patch of earth where things are growing.
       | get really close to the ground and start looking at it real hard.
       | there's honestly so much stuff there, it's wild. like who knew?
       | wow thats nuts. acorns, rocks and shit. touch the dirt and rub it
       | on your face. mushrooms are literally everywhere. the water in my
       | body was once in a bowl of rice that your great grandma ate at
       | becky's 27th birthday party.
       | 
       | just give up just give up stop caring be free
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | or be around long enough that have time/resources to find a
         | soluion to what have wanted a soluion to which noone else seems
         | to want to provide.
         | 
         | edit: needs of the many refinements out weight the needs of the
         | few refinements
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | toss1 wrote:
         | >>wow thats nuts. acorns, rocks and shit. touch the dirt and
         | rub it on your face. mushrooms are literally everywhere.
         | 
         | If you want to really blow your mind, start looking into soil
         | biology. Entire ecosystems of bacteria, fungi, multicellular
         | creatures, plants, minerals, water....
         | 
         | And ALL OF IT IS CRITICAL TO LIFE.
         | 
         | People just think "oh, it's just dirt", and move on, when
         | nothing could be further from reality
        
         | Existenceblinks wrote:
         | I'm locked in my own personality trap. I don't understand why
         | people buy shit and my toxic also think they are dumb sheep of
         | some made up social values. And I can't change myself to get
         | out of my trap. I always think what I'm going to sell to people
         | has to be really good .. but I just realize it's about a lot of
         | bullshit going on on marketing and sales and network effect vs
         | pure functionality.
        
           | graeme wrote:
           | Here's a quick tip: remove the word "bullshit" from your
           | personality and assume that people aren't morons.
           | 
           | People obviously _do_ do dumb things, and some stuff is
           | obviously crap. But if you change perspectives a lot of stuff
           | actually....makes sense?
           | 
           | Like, looking at the world and seeing a bunch of bullshit is
           | actually a flaw in your own thinking, not the world.
           | 
           | Take fast food for example. Widely derided, clearly poisons
           | the body, not the best taste, produces a lot of waste. More
           | expensive than cooking.
           | 
           | But, flip it around:
           | 
           | * Standard experience --> you know exactly what you're
           | getting
           | 
           | * Much cheaper than restaurant food
           | 
           | * Much faster than restaurant or home cooked food
           | 
           | * Tasty
           | 
           | * Easy
           | 
           | It's something with obvious downsides but also obvious
           | upsides.
           | 
           | It isn't obviously dumb. It is only obviously dumb if you
           | decide the downsides outweigh the upsides and then ignore all
           | the upsides. Which is flawed thinking.
           | 
           | You can repeat this analysis and find that on their own terms
           | most people mostly aren't doing things that are totally
           | irrational.
           | 
           | Even something like a lottery ticket gives someone hope
           | despite the clear negative EV. You can take that too far,
           | but....
           | 
           | The point is if you think everything is bullshit, your
           | analysis is probably crap. And merely allowing yourself to
           | use the term bullshit rewards this sort of lazy, negative
           | analysis.
           | 
           | Whatever you sell doesn't have to be the absolute best of all
           | possible things. But it has to meet a need, and the vast bulk
           | of stuff which sells does exactly that.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | long as it's legal/legitimate, does it really matter if can
           | make enough $$$ to earn a living?
           | 
           | nerf was last minute class project.
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | yeah we have to blur it out... your excellence can be sold
           | but only to a few, the rest will want various degrees or
           | simplicity, cost etc
           | 
           | anything in that game requires a lot of planning to make
           | something livable that can be sold at many groups over many
           | years so you can finally get enough leverage to move the
           | minds along some value axis
        
           | gizmo wrote:
           | You don't have to cynically exploit your customers just
           | because that's what other businesses do. If you can make an
           | excellent product that solves a real problem and charge a
           | reasonable price for it you'll likely do pretty well. Sure,
           | other people will become immensely successful by cheating or
           | by gaming the system in some way. But what difference does
           | that make? Just do your own thing.
        
         | userabchn wrote:
         | We like to believe that the problem is just "our own adult
         | psychosis", but I spend my days around many people over quite a
         | range of ages (including elderly) and it is very obvious to me
         | that cognitive abilities decline in the way shown in the charts
         | you have probably seen (or, it feels to me, even more
         | dramatically) and that it is apparent at an earlier age that we
         | would like to think. Old people lose the ability to infer - if
         | they know two Johns and I say something about one of them (just
         | referred to as "John"), they will be confused even though it
         | should be easy to infer which I meant. That might not be a
         | surprise, but from my experience the same effect can be traced
         | back linearly to much earlier ages, to those mature students in
         | your university class, who were probably only 40, and who
         | continually caused us to roll our eyes by asking questions with
         | obvious answers - even at that age they had lost some of the
         | ability we had to infer the answers from what we had already
         | been taught. Such abilities are useful when coming up with
         | ideas for new products, so I have no doubt that the likelihood
         | of doing it successfully declines rapidly with age.
        
           | tchaffee wrote:
           | Good communication has long been known as difficult to
           | achieve. I could easily infer answers. But by asking
           | questions with "obvious" answers I regularly uncover
           | miscommunication. Try it.
        
           | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
           | You have inferred something that may well be untrue.
           | 
           | A 40 year old mature student was last in school more than 20
           | years ago. Younger students were last in school as recently
           | as 1 year ago. Learning is a skill and it's perfectly
           | possible to be out of practice. There may also be some
           | knowledge gaps because recent practices and knowledge are
           | different to common knowledge 20 years ago.
           | 
           | It's also possible that mature students are more assertive
           | about asking questions.
           | 
           | And also - what some of the students in a class consider
           | "obvious" is not at all obvious to all of the class.
           | 
           | Of course if someone is showing clear evidence of dementia,
           | that's a different issue.
        
           | adversaryIdiot wrote:
           | I thought your mental faculties peak in their abilities in
           | your 40's?
           | 
           | I don't have a specific reference but if you google it, you
           | should find what I mean.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > I thought your mental faculties peak in their abilities
             | in your 40's
             | 
             | different abilities at different ages, on average, but
             | IIRC, some as early as late teens, some as late as the 40s.
             | 
             | EDIT:
             | 
             | Actually, some as late as 50+.
             | https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/when-
             | do...
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | > Old people lose the ability to infer - if they know two
           | Johns and I say something about one of them (just referred to
           | as "John"), they will be confused even though it should be
           | easy to infer which I meant.
           | 
           | Old people have been bitten by the "A 95% inference will be
           | wrong 1 in 20 times" thing a lot more, and also have been
           | exposed to a wider array of experience where they might often
           | judge an inference as being less certain than someone with a
           | narrower range of experience would.
        
           | zachthewf wrote:
           | The example from University is not a good one. There are
           | bright and not-so-bright young people too, but older people
           | typically have fewer misgivings about asking "dumb" questions
           | that may have obvious answers.
        
             | iamwil wrote:
             | Also, I think older people have seen more exceptions
             | through experience, and know that sometimes, "dumb"
             | questions don't have obvious answers.
        
               | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
               | There's an interesting phenomenon where middle IQ people
               | see bright people as rather stupid. They can't see the
               | extra layers of complexity and possibility that bright
               | people can, so they read "Yes but...?" questions as naive
               | and uneducated.
               | 
               | Obviously I'm not suggesting all mature students are
               | hyper-intelligent, but I do think it's not as easy to
               | tell as it might seem to be.
        
         | somethingreen wrote:
         | Name 3 things you own or use that were invented (even at
         | conceptual level) by a child.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | [1] has more researched 10 list.
           | 
           | https://inventionland.com/blog/ten-kid-inventors-that-
           | change...
        
             | somethingreen wrote:
             | The fact that one needs to google the list and even then
             | may still fail to answer is kind of the point. The struggle
             | to give an answer is the actual answer.
             | 
             | This myth that children's ideas are somehow more valuable
             | that adult's is nonsense. If this was true, businesses
             | would organize and act on it. Parents would be hired to
             | bring children into brainstorming sessions. Filled idea
             | diaries would be sold and bought in bulk. Sponsored
             | kindergarten and school networks would be established to
             | gain access. Children hackathons with prizes would be held
             | every day of the week. Video games would be designed to
             | siphon ideas.
             | 
             | None of this happens. Because the reality is: children are
             | great, their ideas are useless, most beautiful genius
             | things in your life weren't invented and designed by a
             | child or a nameless enlightened being in a tropical
             | bungalow, but by a perfectly boring adult at their desk in
             | their work time.
        
           | tchaffee wrote:
           | The many fictional worlds of my nephew. I use them for
           | entertainment and they are an excellent fit.
        
           | acuozzo wrote:
           | If you're willing to accept innovations in place of
           | inventions and if you're willing to consider the central
           | message of OP's post i.e. needing a childlike sense of
           | wonder, then...
           | 
           | 1. "Mum, when I grow up I am going to invent a telephone with
           | no wires that's also a flashlight, a compass, a map, a
           | jukebox, a movie theater, and even an ENTIRE computer!"
           | 
           | 2. "Dad, when I grow up I am going to invent a table saw that
           | will JUST KNOW when it touches your finger and it will
           | disappear so fast that you'll only get a little cut next
           | time!"
           | 
           | 3. "Sis, when I grow up I am going to figure out some way to
           | make it possible for even six year olds like you to have
           | their own TV channel and put whatever you want on it! You can
           | show everyone your toys and dresses. We can call it Roxanne-
           | TV!"
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | well, era of antibiotics was started with the curiosity
             | about empty space in a petri dish.
             | 
             | both telephone and rubber tire vulcanization process were
             | because of an unintended oops mistake while exploring /
             | trying make sense of world.
             | 
             | adults tend to have wider interaction with world than kids,
             | but kids dont have the baggage of years of preconceived
             | notions/rules of adult experiences.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | "ChatGPT, gimme 10 startup ideas"
       | 
       | TBH, at this point, if there is a problem that hasn't been
       | solved, its because some people tried and failed and found that
       | the problem is not solvable currently. It may be more fruitful to
       | start with something promisingly popular, and improve upon it
       | (e.g. tiktok)
        
         | yamtaddle wrote:
         | I'm finding the whole AI thing discouraging. Nothing like
         | earlier tech gold-rushes. Every single idea I have starts with
         | "have, or acquire, an absolute shitload of capital"--because
         | you need huge, tagged datasets to move forward with any of
         | them. That means capital, and lots of it. And if you find a way
         | around that you're still burning non-trivial amounts of money
         | on every little experiment (for compute time) all in search of
         | an outcome that may not materialize, i.e. you may never even
         | have anything that you _could_ attempt to sell or raise money
         | with. Seems impossibly expensive to engage in just to fail
         | several times, unless you 've got a large pile of capital.
        
           | seydor wrote:
           | It s not like google invented the web, or that they wrote any
           | web pages. Yet they made all the money
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | > ... problem not solvable currently ...
         | 
         | pre or post order traversal of copyright/trademark?
         | 
         | perhaps switch heap stacks?
        
         | cableshaft wrote:
         | This can work. I've done this for some of my game designs.
         | "ChatGPT, I have a game design with this theme and these
         | mechanics. What are some ideas for some new special tiles /
         | cards I can add to the game?" And it'll give me 5-10 ideas,
         | some junk, but a few that are worth exploring and I might not
         | have thought of on my own.
        
       | surprisetalk wrote:
       | My algorithm for generating ideas:
       | 
       | https://taylor.town/an-algorithm-for-generating-ideas
        
         | Jun8 wrote:
         | Using combinatorial mechanics to generate new ideas is a
         | powerful technique, perhaps first popularized by Ramon Llull in
         | his _Ars Magna_ (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramon_Llull).
         | Similar techniques are also used in TRIZ
         | (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ).
         | 
         | The bottleneck here is to have the domain knowledge and
         | experience to judge which generated ideas are good.
        
           | surprisetalk wrote:
           | Wow, thank you for the amazing links.
           | 
           |  _> The bottleneck here is to have the domain knowledge and
           | experience to judge which generated ideas are good._
           | 
           | This comment reminds me of my grandpa.
           | 
           | I occasionally call him when I have a "brilliant" idea, and
           | he dismembers the idea with simple questions.
           | 
           | It's like magic. Even if my idea sits outside his domain
           | knowledge, he has an incredible gift for finding fatal flaws
           | in things.
           | 
           | This gift has proven to be lucrative over his lifetime, and I
           | suspect it makes him deeply unhappy.
           | 
           | I'd like to acquire this power too, one day.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | or enough connections outside of one's area of interest to
           | generate comments about where the idea is considered
           | good/$$$$
        
       | qikInNdOutReply wrote:
       | Have a anomoulus brain, that recombines things that do not belong
       | together (conspiracy theories) but have enough filter to
       | recognize the the bad recombinations. Train said brain with
       | rewards for recombinations, even ridculous ones.
       | 
       | Also recongize that inventors would be excellent in story
       | writting when asked to produce a recipe for creativity. So the
       | step by step instructions may be nonsense.
       | 
       | Creativity, the far reaching one, not the incremental one, is
       | topological adjunct to insanity. Which is why the radical new
       | things, only get funded in times of desperation. If I were a
       | inventor, i would be heading for ukraine or russia right now.
        
       | reffle wrote:
       | This essay is very short. Has he given up on writing? Maybe too
       | much Twitter has melted his brian.
        
         | baxtr wrote:
         | He is pretty active on Twitter, so short form content is
         | nothing new for him.
         | 
         | Maybe he's trying out if he can use his blog for short form
         | too, since Twitter is going down a new / strange? path.
        
         | brap wrote:
         | I really liked the length of this "essay".
        
           | Dave_TRS wrote:
           | Me too. Most blog posts have one pretty simple idea that it
           | takes a ton of reading to figure out what it is. I appreciate
           | the time he put into distilling it.
           | 
           | If he were to make it longer some examples might be
           | interesting to read about and drive home the message, he no
           | doubt has examples in his mind, and his readers would no
           | doubt be curious as to what they are
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | > ... melted his brain.
         | 
         | wouldnt that require a 'back to the future' tie-in?
        
         | Separo wrote:
         | "I apologize for such a long letter - I didn't have time to
         | write a short one." - Mark Twain
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | much more subject material with a joseph campbell / wierd al
           | yankovich take on 'jason and the argonauts' aka weighted gram
           | and the arc-a-oughts.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | though moving away from pg rating to statistical r, might
             | result in some twisted python stuff. especially if ast
             | taken to the limitless turing resources extreme.
        
         | valstu wrote:
         | Well, I asked GPT-3 to make this longer:
         | 
         | One of the surest ways to come up with new ideas is to pay
         | attention to what doesn't fit in. We're used to seeing things
         | in a certain way, and often times it's the things that don't
         | quite fit into our preconceived notions that can provide the
         | best insights. The most obvious place to look for these
         | anomalies is at the frontiers of knowledge.
         | 
         | Knowledge grows like a fractal; from a distance its edges may
         | appear smooth, but when you get closer you begin to see the
         | jagged gaps and spaces. These gaps can be surprisingly obvious;
         | it can seem strange that no one has thought to ask a certain
         | question or investigate a certain problem. When you explore
         | them, you can often discover entirely new areas of knowledge
         | that have been previously untouched.
         | 
         | That's why it's useful to investigate these gaps in knowledge.
         | It may feel uncomfortable at first; we don't always like to
         | challenge our preconceptions and explore things beyond our
         | comfort zone. But often times this can be the source of some of
         | our best ideas.
         | 
         | You don't even have to look far for these anomalies; they can
         | be found in everyday life. Much of stand-up comedy is based on
         | this, by finding the oddities and quirks about our daily lives
         | that we normally take for granted.
         | 
         | So don't be afraid to take a closer look at what seems strange
         | or missing or broken. It could lead you to unexpected discovery
         | and perhaps even uncover some of your best ideas. This may be
         | challenging and uncomfortable, but it's often worth it.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | per 'doesnr sem to fit in': is looking outside of ones field
           | and/or historical anacronisms reframed to current
           | day/technology cheating when comes to idea
           | developement/gemeration?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | specialist wrote:
       | And I'm over here trying turn off my endless torrent of new
       | ideas, to better focus on the work in front of me.
       | 
       | During the apocalyse, it got really bad. Probably due to
       | isolation and so I didn't have my usual inhibitors. ("Being
       | polite company" turn upkeep.)
       | 
       | --
       | 
       | The one strategy I have "to let it go" for my idea factory is to
       | journal. Write however much of the notion down in notebooks that
       | emotionally allows me to mentally stop chewing on it. Sometimes
       | just a one liner. Sometimes long white papers.
        
       | interleave wrote:
       | I love this.
       | 
       | Short and concise, this combines two of my most favorite
       | mindshares.
       | 
       | 1. "Hackers and Painters" - I stumbled across in late 2004 at the
       | Technical University of Vienna's (excellent) bookstore. Reading
       | it changed my life.
       | 
       | 2. "Ideas are the Enemy of Observations (2012)" - Just Three
       | months ago yamrzou shared this gem of a text. For me, it has
       | become the most meaningful post ever shared on HN.
       | 
       | "How to get new ideas" seems to fit snuggly right in the middle
       | :)
       | 
       | [^1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33355094
        
         | borroka wrote:
         | I read the essay and found it reasonably entertaining, but not
         | exactly in a good way. What exactly is the writer trying to
         | accomplish? I didn't get it, but maybe it's about having an
         | "unbiased" look at the world, probably/maybe in the context of
         | inferring causality, not just for lolz.
         | 
         | The essay writer's main problem is that they are attempting to
         | infer causality from observation or to find an explanation of
         | the data that justifies or supports their worldview. After all,
         | "why?", "how curious", "I wonder how that happens" are powerful
         | questions and statement that have led to countless inventions,
         | investigations, novels, and pleasurable, although at times
         | frustrating, time.
         | 
         | I would recommend something more scientific: observe the world
         | (data/observations), develop a hypothesis that is hard in
         | Platt's sense (meaning it should be discriminating) and test
         | the hypothesis on new data and observations, where new means
         | not used to develop the hypothesis to be tested. And they will
         | see that they should not only collect observations that
         | describe the world, but develop and test hypotheses that can
         | test the mechanisms that lead to those observed facts.
         | 
         | Sometimes this is possible, sometimes it is not. But it is
         | always entertaining.
        
       | nickdothutton wrote:
       | Most of the truly new innovation that happens is between
       | established disciplines. Biology <-> Chemistry, Biochemistry.
       | Statistics <-> [insert field].
        
       | gizmo wrote:
       | Most things are strange, missing, broken for mundane reasons that
       | you can't do much about. The space of new ideas is huge, but
       | almost all new ideas are bad. One strategy I really like is to
       | think of technologies you couldn't build 5 years ago but are just
       | barely possible today. That's where yesterday's bad ideas become
       | today's good ideas.
       | 
       | For example, laptops and phones produced 20 years of incremental
       | improvements in li-ion batteries, and suddenly electric cars are
       | "unlocked".
        
         | FranGro78 wrote:
         | Progress in the technology landscape, which makes previously
         | impossible ideas barely possible, sounds like just the thing
         | wardley maps are good for.
        
         | bob1029 wrote:
         | > One strategy I really like is to think of technologies you
         | couldn't build 5 years ago but are just barely possible today.
         | 
         | Streaming gaming is something I am still laser-focused on. Our
         | networks are only getting faster. I feel there is a gigantic
         | opportunity here that is being passed up by efforts like
         | Stadia.
         | 
         | To do this thing correctly, the game engine itself needs to be
         | developed with these concerns in mind. Expectations of things
         | like having GPUs available on the same machine that is
         | servicing player input events should be eliminated. The
         | simulation itself may benefit from being distributed across
         | multiple nodes connected via a low-latency network.
         | 
         | The future of shard-less, million player MMO worlds will not be
         | feasible if every player's computer will be required to
         | replicate and render all of that game state.
        
           | Aperocky wrote:
           | > The future of shard-less, million player MMO worlds will
           | not be feasible if every player's computer will be required
           | to replicate and render all of that game state.
           | 
           | I think the problem here isn't render, on that scale you'll
           | have to shard on the server end anyway.
        
           | aeonflux wrote:
           | MMO seems to be in decline, not due to technical limitation.
           | Also, I've just tried GeForce Now and I was blown away. I
           | don't think that huge changes in the model are practical in
           | order to get 1% improvement over what's available now
        
           | cjwebb wrote:
           | What kinds of things do you think has to change with game
           | engines?
           | 
           | Sharding would have to happen to handle geographic distance
           | between people, wouldn't it?
           | 
           | I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
        
             | bob1029 wrote:
             | You can still do things like client-side prediction with
             | streaming, but imagine if you controlled all of the clients
             | and could always trust them. You could have the actual
             | simulation running in a big bunker in Ohio somewhere on
             | entirely synchronous terms (<1ms node-to-node), with a
             | bunch of "player" nodes geo-distributed talking to the
             | shared simulation and operating with CSP.
             | 
             | The game concept itself can be engineered around vertical
             | scale constraints. For instance, imagine flight routes in
             | WoW. If the cost to take a flight was modulated by the
             | system load _in the desired target region_ , you could
             | create a much more seamless way to make this work. Think
             | about real-world flight routes and system demand... The
             | determinism goes down a lot for the technology owner, but
             | the effect is much more compelling to the end customer.
        
               | cjwebb wrote:
               | Interesting. Can't think of any faults in your logic!
               | 
               | Are you actively working on this?
        
               | bob1029 wrote:
               | Yes - Right now it's entirely side-project mode, but I am
               | averaging about 10-20 hours per week.
        
         | kqr wrote:
         | A similar strategy is to find things which were invented 10-100
         | years ago but considered insignificant then, but due to
         | changing _environments_ can be adapted to be useful today in a
         | way that wasn 't possible then.
         | 
         | My day job is to work on software working with self-organising
         | maps, which were last popular in 1980. As far as I know, they
         | were never really used for anything significant then. The
         | reason we can be so successful using them is that we discovered
         | a relatively new environment in which they can improve profits
         | fairly immediately: e-commerce.
        
           | jasonb05 wrote:
           | Man I love SOMs. When Kohonen's book came out in 2000, I read
           | that thing a bunch of times.
           | 
           | Seems like an expensive way to structure a "this is like" or
           | "people also bought" compared to an SVD.
        
         | JackFr wrote:
         | "With a big enough engine even a brick will fly." - famous
         | quote about the F-4, which captures that much of early airplane
         | development was engine development rather than aeronautics.
         | It's no coincidence that Glenn Curtiss got his start in
         | motorcycles before moving onto aircraft.
         | 
         | I think to some extent we are seeing the same thing with the
         | latest AI models, where if you just throw enough parameters and
         | GPU's at a problem, you can get pretty good results.
         | 
         | In a way, I see some parallels to aircraft, in that it was
         | important to study birds as the best example of heavier than
         | air flyers early on, but understanding the nuances of the
         | biomechanics of flapping wasn't necessary to surpass them.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | andjelam990 wrote:
       | Ask chatGPT :D
        
       | topherPedersen wrote:
       | I thought GPT wrote what Paul posted! I guess I cannot tell the
       | difference anymore between who's saying what. I actually thought
       | what Paul wrote sounded like a poor imitation of Paul Graham...
       | spooky!
        
       | biscuits1 wrote:
       | The question wasn't answered.
       | 
       | How to fill those gaps? Write.
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | painting works wonders at filling the gaps. more colorful than
         | plumber spak.
        
       | iamflimflam1 wrote:
       | My problem isn't a lack of ideas. It's having the bandwidth to do
       | them all. What I really need is the ability to clone myself.
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | I try to find forests of related idea, so that working a bit on
         | one, will contribute vaguely to another. I'm discovering
         | logarithms
        
         | exevp wrote:
         | So cloning yourself is the actual idea you should pursue? ;)
        
           | dr_dshiv wrote:
           | It's called hiring?
        
             | affgrff2 wrote:
             | 'leveraging your talent by means of labor'
        
               | sargstuff wrote:
               | no, that's what caused the romans/greeks to avoid making
               | use of steam for labor -- what will the current slaves
               | do?
        
             | exevp wrote:
             | Psssst, if you put it this way it won't attract VC $$$
        
               | sargstuff wrote:
               | > ... wont attract VC $$$
               | 
               | because of clone cache coherencey issues?
        
         | moneywoes wrote:
         | I guess this is where employees come in
        
         | cableshaft wrote:
         | Yep. Or somehow focus more, that would help knock a few more
         | ideas out as well.
         | 
         | My backlog of games/puzzles/stories I'd eventually like to get
         | out there might be >100 at this point.
         | 
         | Focusing mostly on a bit more of an ambitious game right now,
         | and it's probably still 6 months before I get it into Steam
         | early access (coding in my spare time and energy, which is
         | sparse lately), so everything else is just waiting at this
         | point.
         | 
         | But sometimes I get an idea that I need to at least get some
         | playable prototype with index cards, pen, paper, and tokens, at
         | least. Just had another concept pop into my head a couple days
         | ago for a roll-and-write I should at least make a board and
         | write up some rules for before I forget.
         | 
         | Waiting for the day when something like ChatGPT can code up a
         | basic but working game based on my description of its
         | mechanisms. Even if it can only handle abstract games on a
         | sqauare or hex grid, that'd still be useful for me.
        
           | jvanderbot wrote:
           | After I hit midlife I decided that I just didn't have enough
           | time to do them all, and started pruning aggressively. I now
           | keep three projects alive and bounce between them as interest
           | directs. It takes discipline. But it also exercises my focus
           | which was never a strength.
        
             | cableshaft wrote:
             | I'm mainly working on one video game and one board game
             | design at the moment, mostly the video game right now.
             | Sometimes if I want a break from the game I'll do a tiny
             | bit of work on a library that should facilitate future web
             | game development, or trying to get a personal site up again
             | to showcase all my games (including past ones that have
             | been released and videos for board game prototypes I've
             | pitched to publishers before).
             | 
             | I do have a list of what to work on next after that,
             | though. I did used to try to juggle a lot more and bounce
             | amongst several projects at once, but it's been too long
             | since I've released something, so I've got to knock it off
             | for a little while. But if I don't scratch the creative
             | itch when it strikes at least as far as some notes and some
             | card ideas or something, then I start feeling pretty stuck,
             | since a lot of my current game is just getting all the UI
             | running and polished right now, not exactly super creative
             | stuff.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | > ...proto type with index card, pen, paper ....
           | 
           | go e-ink & vr and save the $$ not spent on consumable
           | resources for venture capital.
        
           | babuloseo wrote:
           | I am interested in that? Maybe we can use ChatGPT or related
           | tech to change Dungeon Crawler games or related procedural
           | generated games? I think DCSS would benefit from this,
           | imagine designing entire levels so that they fit your
           | character well. A common frustration between people that play
           | Felid, draconians or Octopodes according to the dungeon crawl
           | subreddit is that, a lot of armor that generate that they
           | can't use. I think if we had better code or algorithms that
           | targetted even something as basic as item generation based on
           | class or race you play will make games more immersive for
           | people that pick them. It's always weird when I play DCSS,
           | and I am playing a human brigand or something and I see
           | Centaur warding or armor that I can't wear. Some of the best
           | games I have had are where the character that I play, gets
           | items or environments or vaults that help my character
           | progress, this means the correct spells, items, stat
           | increases, enemies and so on.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | alway dinkstra's maps[1] but a reverse hascii [2] might be
             | more future proof
             | 
             | [1] : http://www.roguebasin.com/index.php/Dijkstra_Maps_Vis
             | ualized
             | 
             | [2]: https://github.com/jaromil/hasciicam
        
         | affgrff2 wrote:
         | Collect a list of problems. Then roll a dice. Work on the
         | matching problem and let the other yous in the multiverse work
         | on the others.
        
         | smallerfish wrote:
         | The issue is having a full time job, leaving little time where
         | I have creative energy to work on side projects. Strongly
         | considering trying to find a part time consulting gig once my
         | current is played out.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | google glasses / vr & double down on what can do at any one
           | given time?
        
             | adversaryIdiot wrote:
             | God that's so toxic lol. But it's what capitalism wants!
        
               | sargstuff wrote:
               | does extend the life span of outlook.
        
       | steele wrote:
       | 1) have capital 2) bet capital on people with ideas 3) exploit
       | their labor 4) declare yourself their muse
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | wonder if that's what einstein was thinking when came up with e
         | = m (c squared).
         | 
         | 1) aka two see m is to b without [need for financial] backing.
         | 
         | 2) sed e/two/to/ | tr '[a-z]' '[A-Z]'
         | 
         | sed e/m/money/ | tr '[a-z]' '[A-Z]'
         | 
         | sed e/b/be/ | tr '[a-z]' '[A-Z]'
         | 
         | 3) crap -- type face doesnt do this justice --- gotta go re-
         | invent tex for ycombinator
         | 
         | 4) ha ha ACME; errr.. sed e/ol/al/
         | 
         | sed g/ol$/lol/
         | 
         | sed g/al$/ai/
         | 
         | sed g/capit/car(cdr(ulate)) /
         | 
         | ^Gli movie ref[1]
         | 
         | ^G ed ^D
         | 
         | [1] : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigli
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | so, must vi 4/attention
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | Real progress in any field or endeavor comes down to about 5% new
       | ideas and creativity, 95% hard work putting those new ideas into
       | practice or building something functional out of them.
       | 
       | That 5% is pretty critical however, as without it you're just
       | continuing to redo what's already been done.
        
         | valgor wrote:
         | This is very true. Ideas are pretty cheap to come by.
         | Implementing, building, teasing them out into a practical
         | scenario is hard.
        
           | gizmo wrote:
           | I don't think it's easy at all. Try to come up with an
           | original plot for a hollywood big budget time travel movie.
           | Take the plot of Edge of Tomorrow. I could never come up with
           | that. Ideas are easy when it's just "Grand theft auto in
           | space", but actual originality? Extremely difficult.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | novelty or origial application of combination of ideas?
             | 
             | working fax machine was a 1800's idea.[1]
             | 
             | [1] : https://www.damninteresting.com/curio/the-fax-
             | machines-of-th...
        
             | corobo wrote:
             | On the other hand I ditch a handful of film/TV ideas each
             | week.
             | 
             | Many because they'd be crap of course, but the rest because
             | there's no way in this lifetime I'll have the resources to
             | bother thinking about them, never mind have the time to
             | actually write them out.
             | 
             | Gotta do regular people work till I die. So glad I was
             | dragged out of the universal energy just to pay rent for 60
             | years haha. Fuck I wish I could afford to do something arty
             | farty instead. Such is life.
             | 
             | I passed my GCSE English literature (end of high school
             | exam in UK) writing a time travel story, haha.
        
               | sargstuff wrote:
               | > ... arty farty...
               | 
               | so, take appropriate precautionary measures and stop
               | flushing crap down drain ?
        
               | corobo wrote:
               | There ain't no time for my dumb stories to get written
               | down, the rent's due soon. Back to work.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | guess why producers such as spielber and lucas draw from
             | literature -- starwars from joseph campell 'warrior myth' &
             | japanse 'magnificant 7'
        
           | ly3xqhl8g9 wrote:
           | That expression, "ideas are easy, implementations are hard",
           | is lacking nuance. No, new ideas are ridiculously hard: can
           | you have the idea for an alphabet if you have never seen one
           | before?, even the banal equals sign is a ridiculously hard
           | idea, Euclid and al-Khwarizmi never had such an idea [1].
           | Ideas are hard, implementations are sometimes hard, idea
           | collages or idea twistings are almost always easy, given a
           | ripening context: sliced bread; sell things, but on the
           | internet.
           | 
           | [1] "Robert Recorde invented the equals sign (=) and also
           | introduced the pre-existing plus sign (+) to English speakers
           | in 1557." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Recorde
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | at least until gpt3 gets paired with 3d printer & amazon auto
           | delivery to generate the crude diy precursor to star trek
           | transporter
        
         | borroka wrote:
         | The problem with using percentages in these contexts is that
         | they refer to something seemingly intuitive, but not
         | quantifiable, and therefore ambiguous at best and useless at
         | worst. What does 5%-95% refer to? Time? Effort/energy? We don't
         | know.
         | 
         | It is like saying that to lose weight 90% is about nutrition
         | and 10% is about exercise. 90-10% of what, exactly? And what
         | would change in my approach to diet/exercise if it was 80-20%
         | or 70-30%?
         | 
         | I think vague quantification does more damage along the way to
         | achieving goals than we suspect. Maybe 10% more.
        
       | naillo wrote:
       | I couldn't really parse the header to tell if he authored this
       | essay or if he asked chatgpt to make it up. (If the latter,
       | pretty impressive!)
        
         | whstl wrote:
         | That's PG. The GPT answer is in the linked tweet.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | there's a gpt arc?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | baxtr wrote:
       | It's actually so short, you can read it here. (If you're like me
       | you head to the the comments section before going to a page...).
       | 
       | Here it is:
       | 
       |  _How to Get New Ideas
       | 
       | January 2023
       | 
       | (Someone fed my essays into GPT to make something that could
       | answer questions based on them, then asked it where good ideas
       | come from. The answer was ok, but not what I would have said. So
       | I asked: What would I have said?)
       | 
       | The way to get new ideas is to notice anomalies: what seems
       | strange, or missing, or broken? You can see anomalies in everyday
       | life (much of standup comedy is based on this), but the best
       | place to look for them is at the frontiers of knowledge.
       | Knowledge grows fractally. From a distance its edges look smooth,
       | but when you learn enough to get close to one, you'll notice it's
       | full of gaps. These gaps will seem obvious; it will seem
       | inexplicable that no one has tried x or wondered about y. In the
       | best case, exploring such gaps yields whole new fractal buds._
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | > .. exploring such gaps yields whole new fractal buds.
         | 
         | so, 'through the looking glass' by another name?
         | 
         | edit: at time of writing, in wrong hemisphere for summer's day.
        
       | ignoramous wrote:
       | Https mirror: https://archive.is/1YOzz
        
       | kensai wrote:
       | Well, actually the ChatGPT essays-fed answer
       | (https://twitter.com/stef/status/1617222536344764416/photo/1) is
       | pretty close to what Paul Graham himself said, although he would
       | not admit it. Real Paul talked about anomalies, and that's eerily
       | close to "accidents and mistakes" in my opinion. :)
        
       | thenerdhead wrote:
       | A willingness to change one's mind and the cliche Socrates idea
       | that one knows they know nothing always helps too.
        
       | Existenceblinks wrote:
       | His take on non-natural lang for AI
       | (https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1612510768674795523) sounds
       | right (bias: because it's also what I was thinking)
       | 
       | So I'm not hyped about ChatGPT _at all_
       | 
       | > much of standup comedy is based on this (anomalies)
       | 
       | I think it's more about capitalize popular rants though. Not sure
       | most of them are even feasible things to fix.
       | 
       | It's an ok essay .. though nothing sparks new idea of thinking
       | about new idea.
        
       | josht wrote:
       | Simply beautiful.
        
       | bryanmgreen wrote:
       | Of PG advice/tips/guidance, "Do things that don't scale" I think
       | is still a great starting point and a piece of advice that is a
       | bit less abstract.
       | 
       | When you start from that, only the ideas that most people would
       | never consider float to the top.
       | 
       | It's worked for me and my business.
        
       | sidcool wrote:
       | Question. How does one feed content to ChatGPT and get such
       | output?
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | chatgp isnt limited to spoonfuls, so guessing internet setup /
         | tty typing speed.
         | 
         | would tying infinate google search feeds to chatgp crash the
         | internet or just reduce down to 42?
        
         | swyx wrote:
         | not an expert, but i think usually one of two ways - either use
         | openai's finetune api (the right way) or embed all the docs,
         | retrieve them using embedding of the questions, and add just
         | enough of them to the prompt to generate a response (gpt-index
         | or langchain help automate some of this).
         | 
         | downside of former is lack of sources, downside of latter is
         | context constraint
        
           | firasd wrote:
           | I'm not sure fine tuning helps with this kinda thing. Because
           | the fine tuning mechanism involves sending the API a bunch of
           | data like
           | 
           | {"prompt": "<prompt text>", "completion": "<ideal generated
           | text>"}
           | 
           | So I'm not sure how you would feed it PG's essays in this
           | mechanism
        
       | r3trohack3r wrote:
       | Lots of truth to this. Just start building. Build for yourself
       | and real people, not imagined profiles of people. The more you
       | build, the more you explore, the more you'll find low-hanging
       | useful ideas. As you encounter them it'll surprise you that the
       | space is mostly empty.
       | 
       | Patio11 tweeted about using ChatGPT to immitate social signaling
       | by rewriting content. I thought that was fun so I started doing
       | it. That grew into Spencer Westford: https://vc.blankenship.io
       | 
       | That grew into a product: https://persona.ink
       | 
       | That keeps snowballing. Ever since building for myself my
       | notebook of ideas is growing faster than I can keep up.
        
         | prmph wrote:
         | But can you build products on ChatGPT with the assurance that
         | they will not yank their service from under you in the future,
         | like how Twitter did?
        
           | exevp wrote:
           | This space is getting so much interest that OpenAI will not
           | be the only one providing LLM as a service forever.
        
             | somethingreen wrote:
             | Like web search in the 90s.
        
               | sargstuff wrote:
               | until to much tangle, then jump ship for something with
               | less initial entangements
        
         | acuozzo wrote:
         | > Lots of truth to this. Just start building. Build for
         | yourself and real people, not imagined profiles of people.
         | 
         | I've been doing this for years and all it has done is drill me
         | further down into super-niche rabbit holes that the majority of
         | people don't care about.
         | 
         | I mention this because I see this kind of advice all the time
         | on here, but it so often comes bundled with the unwritten
         | assumption that the kinds of things the reader will build won't
         | stray too far from the mainstream.
         | 
         | After more than a decade of "building", I can state with
         | confidence that profitable ideas don't spring up from countless
         | hours invested in building e.g. a better comb filter for NTSC.
         | 
         | The reality of the situation is that if your interests are
         | things like "doing cool stuff with AI" or "SaaSify yet another
         | thing" or "shoehorn Merkle trees into yet another square hole",
         | then this advice will likely work for you.
         | 
         | If you're the kind of dude (not me) to write ld-decode1, then
         | it will likely not.
         | 
         | I mean, shit, Donald Graft2 has been "building" far longer than
         | I have and yet none of his "building" has led to a business
         | AFAICT.
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/happycube/ld-decode
         | 
         | [2] https://www.rationalqm.us/mine.html
        
         | xwowsersx wrote:
         | Your careers and privacy policy page links in the footer just
         | link to the home page.
        
           | r3trohack3r wrote:
           | Aye, thanks for checking for broken windows! I haven't
           | launched yet and they're both still on the todo list. Both
           | should be done today.
        
             | xwowsersx wrote:
             | No problem. I figured!
        
         | moneywoes wrote:
         | What is the moat here?
        
           | rd wrote:
           | I don't think a majority of these LLM/GPT companies will ever
           | a moat apart from first to market.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | 1st to market & release the dragon scorching foames on
             | competiton?
        
       | goertzen wrote:
       | It might not be good at generating original posts, but it's
       | really good at generating HN comments.
       | 
       | Try it! Generate typical HN comments to this PG post [ ... ]. -
       | Include both positive and negative comments. - add replies that
       | focus on annoying details that draw attention to the commenter -
       | include fan boy defence of original post - point out obvious
       | exceptions
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | sounds like enumeration of 1st order logic concepts
        
       | martin-adams wrote:
       | I was inspired by comparing DNA to information and used that as a
       | formula for generating new ideas.
       | 
       | https://meda.io/evolve-your-thinking/
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | i am genuinely surprised that pg is writing such a short response
       | to a question that seems _right down his alley_ , seemingly very
       | core to his subject matter. how has he _not_ written an
       | authoritative "how to get ideas" post until now?
        
         | starkd wrote:
         | True. Not sure what he was trying to convey. It was just a
         | paragraph. Not even an essay. So vague it makes you wonder if
         | it was an AI response.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | or attempt to get everyone else to fill in the blanks.
        
         | goshx wrote:
         | http://paulgraham.com/bronze.html
         | 
         | http://paulgraham.com/ideas.html
         | 
         | http://paulgraham.com/organic.html
         | 
         | http://paulgraham.com/startupideas.html
        
       | halfmatthalfcat wrote:
       | I think the key is _noticing_ , which implies being a more
       | passive observer. Most people want to _find_ new ideas, which is
       | being active. I 've never had success at actively finding ideas
       | but much more successful just living life, listening and the
       | ideas just come.
        
         | sargstuff wrote:
         | got to get out of oen's comfort zone/familar & figure out how
         | the wierd/strange/unknown fits/matches up with what one is
         | comfortable/familiar with.
         | 
         | best done on one's own terms vs. letting life exclusively
         | dictate when the wierd/strange/unknown happens.
         | 
         | edit:' does result in lot more blue screen issues.
        
           | halfmatthalfcat wrote:
           | It's not about whose terms you're living on, it's about
           | listening. Most people around us are dealing with mundane
           | things that need fixing, just listening to people's
           | grievances is a great way to ideate. There are individuals
           | who you just end up meeting through life that have great
           | niche problems that require nothing else other than living
           | and listening to attain them.
           | 
           | Going out and "pursuing" ideas often leads to some
           | confirmation bias as we're determined to "find" an idea,
           | rather than sitting back and letting the lightbulb go off
           | when you're not actively trying.
           | 
           | To each their own though.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | but the invariant of checking out/exploring just for the
             | sake of being somewhere but 'here' does present one with
             | way more opportunities to listen/hear.
        
       | marban wrote:
       | As someone who worked with Bill Gross* for almost two decades,
       | I'd suggest watching this playlist.
       | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLeabOFsFccYCkD9ZUsoI0...
       | 
       | * Overture, Picasa and many more OGs.
        
       | UncleOxidant wrote:
       | So PG has been automated?
        
         | threeseed wrote:
         | Some of his more recent political takes have been disappointing
         | to say the least.
         | 
         | So would be nice to have a PG bot without all of that.
        
       | jarrenae wrote:
       | I feel I can speak to this pretty well, over the past year I've
       | launched 130+ projects as part of https://ae.studio/same-day-
       | skunkworks and I've come up with ~250+ ideas.
       | 
       | Similar to "look for anomalies" my general rule of thumb is to
       | solve some sort of problem, even if it's rather small.
       | 
       | So for example:
       | 
       | 1. I pick a topic/product. Let's say: Gmail
       | 
       | 2. I look for things that I'd like to be able to do, wish I could
       | do, or consider frustrations I've experienced in the past.
       | 
       | - I want to review how many emails I get a day on average, where
       | are my "inbox metrics"?
       | 
       | - I want to see threaded messages more clearly, why is the design
       | so opposite a normal chat message?
       | 
       | - I want to create emails faster, why do I have such an elaborate
       | editor and format for something that I typically want to use
       | informally?
       | 
       | 3. I consider ways to solve said problems
       | 
       | - Where are my "inbox metrics"? - Chrome extension to show
       | average emails per day, and graph on a timeline which types of
       | emails I get on certain days. Huge personal data opportunity
       | here.
       | 
       | - I want to see threaded messages more clearly - An app that
       | connects to my gmail that intelligently restructures my emails to
       | make them appear like chat messages. It handles all the noise, I
       | just message as I would in any instant messenger.
       | 
       | - I want to create emails faster - predictive text templates,
       | quick starters, GPT powered replies, change the "bulky editor"
       | out for a simple text box + clever replies.
       | 
       | 4. I then research if there are existing solutions to said
       | problems, and if there are, I either ignore and move on, or
       | consider ways that I could quickly one up their product to make
       | mine the better product in the marketplace.
       | 
       | For my specific use-case, I'm trying to build a product per day,
       | so I'll look for speedy ways to solve the problem that I've
       | selected in a novel and agency increasing way. But I think this
       | is a great structure for anyone looking to build a startup or a
       | small side hustle.
        
         | hooande wrote:
         | 250 ideas is incredible. if only 1% of them grow to have ~$1MM
         | in value (or anything close), you should have two or three real
         | winners by now. If only by pure chance.
         | 
         | I'm really curious about how that's going. I can't quite suss
         | out what your biggest successes are on your website.
        
       | sargstuff wrote:
       | wonder what the typical painting brush stroke count is between
       | posted writings.
       | 
       | edit: perhaps a stippling[1] to stipulation [2] ratio tuppled
       | with relevant/appropriate pruning technique(s)
       | [1] stipplism vs pointillism : https://www.davidaccurso.com/the-
       | art                [2] document of concurrence :
       | https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/stipulation
        
       | robg wrote:
       | Neuroscientist here. Closer I got to the physiology of mental
       | health - sleep, stress, exercise, and nutrition - realized it was
       | another fractal for personal and population health. Problem
       | remains navigating regulatory or reimbursement hurdles from
       | wellness into professional care.
        
         | aleks5678 wrote:
         | 100%. Start projects, bet small, grow
        
         | Schroedingers2c wrote:
         | Would you mind giving a high-level summary of the physiology of
         | mental health (like one paragraph or two, however much you
         | like)? Just the main things that are currently known/believed.
        
           | robg wrote:
           | The autonomic nervous system and the glymphatic nervous
           | system are both things I never really learned about in
           | schools. ANS is taught as a textbook fact of homeostasis, not
           | the constant fight-or-flight reflex that's on every second of
           | every day and the impacts that causes on health. The
           | glymphatic system has only been discovered in the last 10
           | years but helps explain why sleep deficits explain cognitive
           | performance decrements, mental health concerns, and age-
           | related declines. And still so much we don't know like gut-
           | brain health and neuroelectronics as for implants!
        
       | paraschopra wrote:
       | Wrote about the exact same idea a few years back:
       | https://invertedpassion.com/to-get-good-startup-ideas-look-f...
        
       | samsquire wrote:
       | I think that finding gaps as Paul Graham says is a good approach
       | to finding ideas.
       | 
       | My approach to finding ideas is to think, write and use words I
       | like to explore creatively and join arbitrary ideas together.
       | Writing and talking IS thinking itself!
       | 
       | I even journal all my ideas in the open on GitHub! I share all my
       | ideas with everyone, including startup ideas. Links are on my
       | profile. I LOVE SHARING IDEAS.
       | 
       | I enjoy reading people's problems to encounter inspiration for
       | problem solving. I would read Slashdot when growing up to learn
       | about computer issues people were solving.
       | 
       | Some words I enjoy are "mesh", "parallel", "multiplex", "multi",
       | "schedule", "marketplace", "tree", "additive", "auto", "query",
       | "traversal", "graph".
        
       | papito wrote:
       | When I was in my 20s, I could code for days on straight. I had so
       | much energy and the perception of the bottomless capital of time.
       | Now that I am forty, the cost-benefit analysis is getting
       | tougher.
       | 
       | Can I have my big break and retire early? Sure, but the chances
       | of that happening are not that great. Many serial entrepreneurs
       | fail multiple times with nothing to show for it.
       | 
       | All I think about now is - when I am on my deathbed, and I look
       | back at my life, will I regret not living it, or that I didn't
       | spend enough time writing code in front of my computer on an off-
       | chance that my idea works out?
        
         | actionfromafar wrote:
         | I can identify with that. One tidbit that might interest you,
         | is that most successful startups are not done by kids, but
         | middle aged people.
        
         | TaupeRanger wrote:
         | Sounds like burnout. The reason you can spend days on end
         | coding is because you're excited about the thing you're working
         | on. If you're coding something that you don't find exciting or
         | that is just a pipe dream, you'll have thoughts about your
         | deathbed. That's pretty natural.
        
           | sargstuff wrote:
           | so, software went to crap when the coder's square girl friend
           | stoped emmitting random radiation that sparked idea
           | mutations?
        
           | sarkhan wrote:
           | Burnout from doing same thing over and over.
        
             | sargstuff wrote:
             | well, didnt go from cooking meat to oven by not toasting /
             | charing things over & over.
        
             | papito wrote:
             | Pretty much. Every project I start, it's the same kind of
             | yak-shaving. Database schema, logging, authentication,
             | display of errors, build tools, CI/CD, backend, front-end.
             | Full-time is not even enough for this for one person.
             | 
             | There is a ton of CRUD and mind-numbing tasks you have to
             | churn through to get to the interesting parts, and I have
             | been doing the boring parts for 20 years. The goals barely
             | changed, but how we implement things has. New ways to
             | build, new way to deploy, new languages, new frameworks.
             | Just keeping up with it is a struggle.
             | 
             | I think my next project, I am just going to go Rails. It's
             | my way of giving up :)
        
               | sargstuff wrote:
               | clippers to sledge hammers & spikes -- pretty big jump.
               | changing direction to up does get ne off the rail (way)
               | plane.
        
       | hristov wrote:
       | HN should have a [chat GPT] tag for stuff generated by chat GPT.
       | So that I can ignore it. I do not mind reading what paul graham
       | said about how to get new ideas. I do not care what chat GPT
       | said. What chat GPT said may or may not be a good summary of paul
       | grahams thoughts, it may be wrong in an important aspect, etc.
       | 
       | If Paul Graham wants to say something, he should say it directly
       | and not hide behind a chat gpt layer.
        
         | rileymat2 wrote:
         | That is an interesting concept in itself, if the idea is sound,
         | why does the originator matter?
        
           | hristov wrote:
           | Usually if one wants to take advice, one should consider the
           | reliability of the source of advice as a factor.
        
             | rileymat2 wrote:
             | Most certainly we do, but I find the question interesting,
             | a focus on advice verifiability helps both cases.
        
           | AnimalMuppet wrote:
           | Yes, but _is_ the idea sound? ChatGPT can produce fine-
           | sounding nonsense at least as well as a human can. The
           | difference is that I have a lot more experience calibrating
           | my BS meter with humans than I do with ChatGPT.
        
         | guptaneil wrote:
         | This _is_ PG saying something... he linked to a chatGPT
         | generated response and said he didn 't like the response so he
         | wrote his own.
        
           | hristov wrote:
           | PG was a little ambiguous about this. He said "So I asked:
           | What would I have said?" It is not clear whether he asked
           | himself or ChatGPT.
        
             | mediaman wrote:
             | It appears pretty clear that PG wrote what he actually
             | thought in response to ChatGPT's render of his potential
             | thoughts.
        
           | jimkleiber wrote:
           | The thing is, I have to trust that PG wrote the words saying
           | he wrote his own response. What stops ChatGPT from saying
           | those same words?
           | 
           | I'm wondering what ways/technologies we'll create to tell if
           | someone actually generates text themselves. Right now, I can
           | feel a rising desire to avoid text-based communication with
           | people, almost a fear of getting catfished by text.
        
       | olalonde wrote:
       | I think that's why a lot of innovation comes from "outsiders"
       | rather than industry veterans. You are more likely to notice the
       | anomalies with fresh eyes and stop noticing them through time.
        
         | david927 wrote:
         | I agree. Things fall into existing grooves. Your band comes up
         | with a new sound and people say, "That's kind of like Mazzy
         | Star," and now you point it more that way. It falls into that
         | nearby groove instead of continuing on its own. A lot of great
         | sounds came out of the 1960s because there were so few grooves.
         | No one knew what the rules were.
         | 
         | Plus, a lot of low hanging fruit stays there because no one
         | looks at it. Everyone is looking at x, y, and z, and there are
         | a thousand variations of those, and they ignore a, b, and c
         | because no one brought it up.
        
         | arcturus17 wrote:
         | Conversely, I have seen that some of the most boring startups
         | that you never hear of, but are killing it, are built by domain
         | experts who know the task they're trying to solve inside and
         | out. Two examples from my own country, Spain:
         | 
         | - A man who built a SaaS for local administrations and has
         | about a ~50% share of the market. He spent 30 years working for
         | the Spanish IRS in different positions. I don't know the
         | insider story, but looking at the website he just made a SaaS
         | solution with good UX in a space where UX tends to be
         | atrocious.
         | 
         | - RatedPower's CTO. RatedPower makes a software that automates
         | the design of renewable power plants. This guy had been drawing
         | the plans by hand as a renewables engineer, realized a computer
         | would be perfectly equipped to do it, and the competition in
         | the space had grown complacent and barely innovated in years,
         | so he did it.
         | 
         | The older I grow the more I get excited by boring ideas. People
         | pitch ideas to me frequently and most of the time I literally
         | end up thinking "not boring enough"!
        
       | paulorlando wrote:
       | Love the comments here. I try to get ideas for what is becoming
       | possible (not what's a good or bad idea) by visualizing how
       | drivers of timing work. I wrote a bit about it here:
       | https://startupsunplugged.com/why-now/timing-drivers-visuali...
        
       | ok_dad wrote:
       | I don't need _ideas_! I need some sort of  "basic income" that
       | allows me to pursue the ideas I have _today_ while providing for
       | a family.
        
         | corobo wrote:
         | Right! I think we might be the only two on this site who have
         | more ideas than money haha.
         | 
         | How to get new ideas? How do I stop them coming?! My method is
         | to scribble them on a piece of card and chuck that into a tub
         | to get them out the way for now.
         | 
         | I know that tub is being emptied with nothing in there seeing
         | the light of day. Simple fact is if I work on my own stuff I
         | don't get to pay rent or eat this month.
         | 
         | One day. In the next lifetime if not this.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-24 23:01 UTC)