Stuart_Armstrong comments on Innovation's low-hanging fruits: on the demand or supply sides? - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 25 February 2014 02:58PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (54)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 25 February 2014 03:46:33PM 4 points [-]

Interesting argument. But though the "demand" for this is there in some sense (it seems it would be extremely useful to have this) the demand isn't there in another sense (lots of people or rich organisations willing to put up money for this).

Comment author: CAE_Jones 26 February 2014 03:13:38AM 1 point [-]

the demand isn't there in another sense (lots of people or rich organisations willing to put up money for this).

This pretty much describes most of the innovations I'm personally interested in, where the fruit hangs low enough that twelve-year-olds can pick them, but nothing ever comes of them, presumably because of lack of sufficient market pressures / sufficiently rich and motivated investors.

The concept generalizes, it seems. Are there other (successful) innovations that overcame such hurtles in the past? I don't know where the Rite Brothers got there funding/supplies, for example; I don't know what the astronomy market thought of Galileo's telescope at first / how his spat with the Pope impacted its development; etc. People do seem to be interested in the logistics of spreading useful innovations, at least more so than in my pet game-changers; what sorts of efforts are being made on that front? Givewell's identifying the most efficient charities seems like a good component (why haven't we tiled whole African countries in mosquito nets, yet?), but teleportation would obviously be much better.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 26 February 2014 05:42:39AM -1 points [-]

I don't know what the astronomy market thought of Galileo's telescope

Nitpicks:

1) Galileo didn't invent the telescope.

2) What "astronomy market"?