1. 7
  1.  

  2. 3

    I dig the whole “informal college breeds interesting ideas” thing, but then when they bring in the computing side of the metaphor it’s simultaneously absurd & strangely boring. like, of all the groups coming together and producing really interesting ideas, you’re gonna focus on the group that invented the concept of “devops”? (i.e., what everybody was already doing up until a couple years ago when management caught on to the idea that a good programmer isn’t necessarily a good admin?)

    also left off the article: the ideas produced don’t necessarily circulate beyond the group, no matter how good they are. even in really influential examples like parc or bell labs, generally speaking, only a handful of the least radical ideas actually end up circulating (even if other ideas are easier to implement or more powerful)

    the biggest factor is not utility but how much effort it takes for somebody to go from zero to full understanding (along with the ability to identify applications)