I love this train station photo in the snow.
Page 13 of 13
#
Forbes has a profile of Sam Altman with some interesting quotes from him and others:
Altman knows his history. His itch to release products quickly is informed by studying Xerox PARC, the legendary Silicon Valley research lab known for inventing the modern graphical user interface, laser printers and computer mouse, yet failing to commercialize any of them. “You have to have an economic engine in the cycle,” Altman says. “I think there’s probably a lot of great innovation that has never gotten out of the lab because someone didn’t do the work to just get it into people’s hands.”
#
Linking to a post about Apple from Matt Gemmell, Michael Tsai blogs:
At times, the company seems like a cargo cult, repeating mantras from a previous era without actually following them and applying the same strategies as before even though they no longer make sense.
Saying “No” In an Age of Abundance
You’ve probably heard this famous quote from Steve Jobs about saying ‘no’:
People think focus means saying yes to the thing you’ve got to focus on. But that’s not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I’m actually as proud of the things we haven’t done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying no to 1,000 things.
People think focus means saying yes to the thing you’ve got to focus on. But that’s not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I’m actually as proud of the things we haven’t done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying no to 1,000 things.
But wait, we have AI now. We don’t have to say no to 1,000 things. We can say yes to all the things — generate them all, simultaneously!
Do you really have to “pick carefully” when AI can materialize everything you previously would’ve been too constrained to do?
Generative technology paired with being “data-driven” means it’s easy to build every idea, ship it, measure it, and see what sticks.
Humans, money, time — these all used to be constraints which required budgets, trade-offs, and decision making.
Organizations had an incentive to say “no” when development was constrained — “We can only do so much, so let’s make sure we do the most impactful things.”
But maybe the scarcity of organizational resources was the wrong focus all along?
It’s never been a good idea to ship everything you think of. Every addition accretes complexity and comes with a cognitive cost.
Maybe we need to reframe the concept of scarcity from us, the makers of software, to them, the users of software. Their resources are what matter most:
- Attention (too many features and they can’t all be used, or even tried)
- Stability (too much frequent change is an impediment to learning a product)
- Clarity (too many options creates confusion and paralysis)
- Coherence (too many plots and subplots cannot tell a unified story)
So maybe the way you argue for saying “no” isn’t because it helps you as a business, but because it helps your customers. It helps them make sense of what you’ve made.
And yet: arguing for customer clarity has always been harder than arguing for internal efficiency or some bottom line.
In an age of abundance, restraint becomes the only scarce thing left, which means saying “no” is more valuable than ever.
I’m as proud of the things I haven’t generated as the things I have.
#
I found "Nordisk Sang" in a long-forgotten folder of music from iTunes. Haven't listened to it in years. It's great! 🎵 Also found in that folder: "Sonic New York" by Sxip Shirey.
