Slashdot Mirror
Isaac Asimov: How Do People Get New Ideas?
HughPickens.com writes: Arthur Obermayer, a friend of the Isaac Asimov, writes that he recently rediscovered an unpublished essay by Asimov written in 1959 while cleaning out some old files. Obermayer says it is "as broadly relevant today as when he wrote it. It describes not only the creative process and the nature of creative people but also the kind of environment that promotes creativity." Here's an excerpt from Asimov's essay, which is well worth reading in its entirety:
"A person willing to fly in the face of reason, authority, and common sense must be a person of considerable self-assurance. Since he occurs only rarely, he must seem eccentric (in at least that respect) to the rest of us. A person eccentric in one respect is often eccentric in others. Probably more inhibiting than anything else is a feeling of responsibility. The great ideas of the ages have come from people who weren't paid to have great ideas, but were paid to be teachers or patent clerks or petty officials, or were not paid at all. The great ideas came as side issues." A couple more quotes:
"My feeling is that as far as creativity is concerned, isolation is required. The creative person is, in any case, continually working at it. His mind is shuffling his information at all times, even when he is not conscious of it. The presence of others can only inhibit this process, since creation is embarrassing. For every new good idea you have, there are a hundred, ten thousand foolish ones, which you naturally do not care to display."
"Presumably, the process of creativity, whatever it is, is essentially the same in all its branches and varieties, so that the evolution of a new art form, a new gadget, a new scientific principle, all involve common factors. It is only afterward that a new idea seems reasonable. What is needed is not only people with a good background in a particular field, but also people capable of making a connection between item 1 and item 2 which might not ordinarily seem connected. To begin with, it usually seems unreasonable. It seems the height of unreason to suppose the earth was round instead of flat, or that it moved instead of the sun, or that objects required a force to stop them when in motion, instead of a force to keep them moving, and so on."
"A person willing to fly in the face of reason, authority, and common sense must be a person of considerable self-assurance. Since he occurs only rarely, he must seem eccentric (in at least that respect) to the rest of us. A person eccentric in one respect is often eccentric in others. Probably more inhibiting than anything else is a feeling of responsibility. The great ideas of the ages have come from people who weren't paid to have great ideas, but were paid to be teachers or patent clerks or petty officials, or were not paid at all. The great ideas came as side issues." A couple more quotes:
"My feeling is that as far as creativity is concerned, isolation is required. The creative person is, in any case, continually working at it. His mind is shuffling his information at all times, even when he is not conscious of it. The presence of others can only inhibit this process, since creation is embarrassing. For every new good idea you have, there are a hundred, ten thousand foolish ones, which you naturally do not care to display."
"Presumably, the process of creativity, whatever it is, is essentially the same in all its branches and varieties, so that the evolution of a new art form, a new gadget, a new scientific principle, all involve common factors. It is only afterward that a new idea seems reasonable. What is needed is not only people with a good background in a particular field, but also people capable of making a connection between item 1 and item 2 which might not ordinarily seem connected. To begin with, it usually seems unreasonable. It seems the height of unreason to suppose the earth was round instead of flat, or that it moved instead of the sun, or that objects required a force to stop them when in motion, instead of a force to keep them moving, and so on."
Not just the common-or-garden Isaac Asimov, but THE Isaac Asimov !!!
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
We might actually find out how they thought of slashdot Beta
of the the Dunning Kruger effect which coupled with the present "I wan't to be a genius" narcissism creates a greate many people who behave like geniuses, rather then actually being geniuses.
"Little particles of inspiration sleet through the universe all the time traveling through the densest matter in the same way that a neutrino passes through a candyfloss haystack, and most of them miss."
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
What is Creativity?
Is it like that haiku comment
"To be creative - you must resist common sense .... "
at the TFA at the TR page ?
The dude who invented the round wheel didn't invent the wheel by "resist common sense", or did he?
Does one really have to resist common sense in order to "get out of the box"?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Automation should test what we know about job and job security and see who is right about the luddite fallacy vs lump of labour fallacy.
The great ideas of the ages have come from people who weren't paid to have great ideas, but were paid to be teachers or patent clerks or petty officials, or were not paid at all. The great ideas came as side issues.
I'd really feel better if he had some actual data here, instead of speculation. The legacy of Bell Labs kind of runs contrary to this idea, because they were not only paid to come up with ideas, but also told to come up with ideas that would be profitable. Then there were the guys in the Advanced Institute who got paid to do nothing else but come up with great ideas.
The only thing I would even dare venture to guess is that the great ideas of the ages have come from people who were looking for things, even if they found something other than what they were looking for (like Penicillin).
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Why is it patent clerks are so good at inventing things? I mean yeah ok their timing is suspiciously close with submissions but who's to say who invented what first.
We can see evidence of this in how copyright treats derivative works. All works build on other works, as Asimov wrote when he described connecting A to B to C, yet some forms of such building are forbidden by law.
All works build on other works, as Asimov wrote when he described connecting A to B to C, yet some forms of such building are forbidden by law.
So maybe you need to be more creative to find a way that doesn't infringe the law :-)
If you succeed, then copyright law has succeeded in its' stated goal, to encourage creativity (though perhaps not quite in the way intended).
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I mean, he managed to write an essay at the same time that he was cleaning out old files!
So maybe you need to be more creative to find a way that doesn't infringe the law :-)
But how can a layman know where the line is for a particular use? The uncertainty itself has a chilling effect on creativity.
Words from a beloved authority figure come down revealing, (without even intending it to be a direct nudge), that many of his adoring flock lead lives dominated by of anti-creative thought patterns.
The bitter and begrudged ruffle of feathers in some of the posts here is telling.
He wasn't attacking you. Settle down. If you recognize yourself, then that calls for introspection, not defensiveness.
El Senior Isaac Asimov. :-P
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Doh ... Senor, not senior.
Yo soy el stupido. :-P
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
> Asimov's essay, which is well worth reading in its entirety:
No, it isn't. John Cleese's thoughts on the matter are much more thoughtful and thought provoking. He's had a lifetime to consider it. Although he didn't make much progress, it was more than Asimov.
http://petapixel.com/2014/10/2...
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.
I've come up with many ideas on my own that others have made millions or billions on. The execution is the hard part. There's a quote from someone who eludes me that says,"If you're on the right track, but you're standing still, you'll be run over." The comforting thought you get when this happen is that you come up with good ideas.
My theory for coming up with good ideas is simple. Look at new technologies, and try and apply them to the world. Look at a lot of the first electrical devices, they're just an application of applying spinning motion to a tool creatively. The Internet when it first started getting released to the public, a lot of people figured there would be graphical games, instant messaging, and online stores, but when it first came out, it didn't have those yet. You always look at a new technology and figure how it will change the world.
The Internet still has lots of applications to still be made that people haven't thought of. I think someone's eventually going to make a Real Estate application where anyone can list their place, and have a search for places, and they do the transaction on their own, with some way to confirm the transaction and only charge 200$ for the whole ordeal. So undercutting realtors could be a huge thing. No one has made an application that caught on as the defacto ap for listing your house as a flea market because if so, people could link to their smart phone when they're within X miles of one. There are probably new social media sites that haven't been made. One site I've been thinking of, but can't come up with how to do it right is for PC video gamers to register on to keep in touch with long lost teammates.
So the most common way to invent a new thing is think how new technologies can make life easier, but sometimes prayer works too. I have always been fascinated with AI since the 80s with the movie TRON and stuff. Everyone thought AI would be a computer algorithm go out of control maybe on networks to learn and use the memory. Other people thought AI would be when science invented a pseudo brain. Neither of these are viable ways to start an R&D project because you have no way to gauge progress towards success and failure is almost assured. So I asked God how to make AI. Instantly I thought of a computer that holds a world state in memory that it gathers in through cameras and sensors. Then it can identify the objects in the world, and interacting with them via goals is almost trivial once you have the data in mind since that's how sandbox video games work. I have an AI site here which shows the building of AI is doable for anyone who would be willing to fund a team Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if we had AI in 15-30 years if someone started now. I just thought it was cool that I came up with this AI algorithm instantly after praying for it.
God spoke to me
Doh ... Senor, not senior.
Yo soy el stupido. :-P
It's actually Señor.
The great ideas of the ages have come from people who weren't paid to have great ideas, but were paid to be teachers or patent clerks or petty officials, or were not paid at all.
There is a long tradition of finding secure but undemanding jobs for creative talents who, for political or ideological reasons, could not be subsidized openly.
I really like this video from Terence McKenna and think it applies even without the psychedelics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvvbahR97bA
"My notion of what the psychedelic experience is for, is that we each must become like fishermen and go out on to the dark ocean of mind and let your nets down into that sea. And what youre after is not some behemoth that will tear through your nets, foul them and drag you and your little boat into the abyss. Nor are what we looking for a bunch of sardines that can slip through your nets and disappear (ideas like "Have you ever noticed that your little finger exactly fits your nostril?" and stuff like that). What we are looking for are middle sized ideas that are not so small that they are trivial and not so large that theyre incomprehensible. But middle sized ideas that we can wrestle into our boat and take back to the folks on shore and have fish-dinner. And every one of us, when we go into the psychedelic state - this is, what we should be looking for. Its not for your elucidation. its not part of your self directed psycho therapy... YOU are an explorer and you represent our species and the greatest good you can do, is to bring back a new idea. Because our world is in danger by the absence of good ideas. Our world is in crisis because of the absence of consciousness. And so to what ever degree anyone of us can bring back a small piece of the picture and contribute it to the building of the new paradigm then we participate in the redemption of the human spirit. And that after all is what its really all about."
I wonder if he was also a friend of the Bruce Dickinson. The secret to creativity is... more cowbell.
We can see evidence of this in how copyright treats derivative works. All works build on other works, as Asimov wrote when he described connecting A to B to C,
Copyright rewards creativity, originality.
The geek's imagination doesn't to stretch much farther than fan fiction. The golden triangle of Star Trek, Star Wars and Dr. Who.
Yo soy el stupido = I am the stupido?
I think you meant "Yo soy estupido"
The good doctor passed away in 1992
If you want a process for fostering creativity, read something like this:
http://smile.amazon.com/Young-...
Ad agencies have to come up with ideas all the time, and their processes for doing so have worked for over a century. Each agency is different, but all of them have to be creative on demand.
Yo soy el stupido = I am the stupido?
I think you meant "Yo soy estupido"
Simpler and correctly accented: "Soy estúpido."
I get new ideas by cleaning out old files.
Table-ized A.I.
I don't often Isaac Asimov.
But when I do, it's The Isaac Asimov.
In my company the consensus is that creativity and innovation magically appear if you buy shitloads of Apple hardware
Mr Asimov seemed to only be aware of 50% of the population...
Not much different from Edward de Bono's writings on Lateral Thinking, which of course go into somewhat more depth and systematize a method for doing the creative/lateral thinking.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
Mod parent up for being absolutely fabulous. Those Dos Equis ad references never get old.
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
... not just any old Isaac Asimov.
Unbelievable.
There are two modes of thinking: focus and diffuse. To be creative, the brain needs to be in a relaxed state, i.e., to be able to form new pathways to new ideas. There are methods to induce diffuse thinking. One of them, as the article suggests, is to do mundane chores, such as clearing out old files.
In the Coursera course, Learning How to Learn by Barbara Oakley, there are anecdotes of how famous people (Thomas Edison, Salvador Dali) trigger their subconscious minds to do their biddings.
No it doesn't.
I challenge you, or anybody for that matter, to come up with a new chord or rhythm in music. Hell, I challenge you to find any music written in the last 100 years that is completely original and is not some form of derivative work, whether the derivation was done intentionally or not.
To be fair, copyright originally was for 14 years (plus a one time 14 year extension). So if you took 28 year old A and added 29 year old B plus 14 year old (and not renewed) C, you could come up with something new. It might have been a delay, but it wasn't a horrendous one. Now, though, you'd need to wait for A, B, and C to be 120 years old before you could use them. (When Asimov wrote this article, copyright terms were 28 years with a one-time 67 year extension. Arguably, still too long.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
So maybe you need to be more creative to find a way that doesn't infringe the law :-)
But how can a layman know where the line is for a particular use? The uncertainty itself has a chilling effect on creativity.
For most laypersons, it's not a problem because they'll never be in a position to produce copyright works. So only those who are actually exercising their creativity in a fashion that is governed by copyright need worry.
From this subset, someone who's producing music, art, or literary works has probably had it drilled into them in school that plagiarism is wrong. So, if they're lifting someone else's work and calling it their own, they're not being creative and deserve what they get. They're just trying to ride on the coattails of someone else anyway.
If, on the other hand, their story, music, or artwork is original and creative, the problem probably won't arise, and if someone falsely accuses them of being rip-off artists, it's up to the accuser to spend the money to take it to court. And not just anyone can do that - only someone who holds the rights to a similar work, so the problem, if your writing, music, or artwork is truly original, is self-limiting.
This being slashdot, there is the question of software. Now since we're talking only about copyrights in this thread (no trademarks or patents), a comparison of the source code of the two products should suffice, and most people in the biz know enough to know that a lot of code is simply not protectable by copyright anyway.
When people have an itch to scratch, whether it's to create a new piece of art, or compose a new song, or write a new story, or even build some new type of software, I don't think that copyright law has a chilling effect on their scratching. To the contrary, they know that if it's original, they can register the copyright to it for a nominal fee, and even if they don't, their copyrights are still enforceable (just that they only get actual damages instead of statutory damages). But actually registering the copyright may have another benefit - it could make your DMCA takedown notices more effective.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
For most laypersons, it's not a problem because they'll never be in a position to produce copyright works.
What? Everything you create is covered by copyright.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Asimov's advice for how to run effective bull sessions for creative geniuses is based on the assumption that progress is made by a few "great men" who can see and imagine things that all others miss. This theory is not exactly politically correct these days, to say the least. Modern history books are full of attempts to find and highlight what I might call the "Forgotten Man" of history, the story of ordinary people who represent an entire class of people who collectively brought about change.
Personally, I subscribe to a combination of the two ideas. Masses of people lived for tens of thousands of years in exactly the same manner as their ancestors until someone came along with a genuinely new idea that was then adopted and perfected by mass experimentation and use. So: great men for the original ideas, but forgotten men for productizing them.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
I wonder how Isaac Asimov would have regarded social media. His essay had the statement "For every new good idea you have, there are a hundred, ten thousand foolish ones, which you naturally do not care to display." In social media, people will post hundreds of statements of varying quality. Most will be ignored (or read and instantly forgotten in the flood of content). A few will rise to the top (being retweeted, reposted, shared, etc). I know using social media (and the Internet in general) has made me less reluctant to share my ideas. The ridicule of expressing something stupid is lessened if the person mocking you for said stupid idea is just a screen name versus a flesh and blood person in front of you. On the flip side, losing the "quality filter" and making sharing ideas easier might mean that you quickly express a mediocre idea instead of spending more time on it and honing it into a great idea.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
I think that Asimov's observations on the inhibitory effect of visibility and accountability are applicable to the smaller forms of creativity and risk taking like trying new tools and technologies.
I've seen this occur with SCRUM. We had dev team build a new product, burning down backlog through multiple sprints, with an overall results that were pedestrian. By which I mean functional, pretty interface; nothing to complain about really, code was reviewed, tests passed, etc. But you were left wondering there is a better fundamental approach to the problem.
Then they got a bit of down time and someone on the team prototyped a new architecture that would have halved the development effort. This exploration could have been done at the beginning and had been thought of by the person concerned, but the talented - and introverted - individual didn't advocate for it in the face of daily stand-up and burn-down visibility.
Yo soy el stupido = I am the stupido?
I think you meant "Yo soy estupido"
Simpler and correctly accented: "Soy estúpido."
The attack of the grammar spaniards!!!
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
For most laypersons, it's not a problem because they'll never be in a position to produce copyright works.
What? Everything you create is covered by copyright.
Au contraire, not everything that someone creates is covered by copyright. To be eligible for copyright, it has to be original, non-trivial, and not a compilation of facts such as a list of names and addresses. And then there's the stuff that people "create" that someone else already did - hence the expression "great minds think alike."
It also has to be fixed in some medium.
A work is “created” when it is fixed in a copy or phonorecord for the first time; where a work is prepared over a period of time, the portion of it that has been fixed at any particular time constitutes the work as of that time, and where the work has been prepared in different versions, each version constitutes a separate work.
A work is “fixed” in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration. A work consisting of sounds, images, or both, that are being transmitted, is “fixed” for purposes of this title if a fixation of the work is being made simultaneously with its transmission.
Only to the extent that artwork contains non-utilitarian aspects is it protected. The rest isn't. So if the artwork is strictly utilitarian, it isn't eligible for copyright, even if it took you 1,000 hours to create it:
“Pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works” include two-dimensional and three-dimensional works of fine, graphic, and applied art, photographs, prints and art reproductions, maps, globes, charts, diagrams, models, and technical drawings, including architectural plans. Such works shall include works of artistic craftsmanship insofar as their form but not their mechanical or utilitarian aspects are concerned; the design of a useful article, as defined in this section, shall be considered a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work only if, and only to the extent that, such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article.
Also, inventions, while an exercise in creativity, are not copyrightable - hence patents. Nor is stuff protected by copyright if it is subject to fair use provisions.
Also, you can't claim copyright on work you did for hire - that resides with the entity that paid you, and only to the extent that it is subject matter fit to copyright.
So no, not everything you create is covered by copyright, and that's a good thing, or there really would be quite the chilling effect on creativity.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Nobody expects the grammar inquisition!
http://www.neilgaiman.com/p/Co...
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Remember this one:
people capable of making a connection between item 1 and item 2 which might not ordinarily seem connected.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
tut tut.
Fair use is a provision of copyright law. It does not negate it.
Every photo taken since 1976 is held in copyright by the person that pressed the shutter button. Every cell phone that takes images is in fact a copyright machine that every layperson has access to. Most people don't ever exercise the copyright they do own.
You may want to read up on the US joining the Berne Convention.
Nobody expects the grammar inquisition!
You haven't been on /. long if you didn't expect the grammar inquisition.
the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
You may want to read up on the US joining the Berne Convention
The US Copyright Office disagrees with you:
(c) Effect of Berne Convention.—No right or interest in a work eligible for protection under this title may be claimed by virtue of, or in reliance upon, the provisions of the Berne Convention, or the adherence of the United States thereto. Any rights in a work eligible for protection under this title that derive from this title, other Federal or State statutes, or the common law, shall not be expanded or reduced by virtue of, or in reliance upon, the provisions of the Berne Convention, or the adherence of the United States thereto.
Fair use is a provision of copyright law. It does not negate it.
Again, read what I actually wrote:
Nor is stuff protected by copyright if it is subject to fair use provisions.
You can't rely on copyright protection to prevent others from using stuff that is subject to fair use. Sure, you hold the copyright - but if it's subject to fair use, good luck protecting it.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Mod parent up for being absolutely fabulous. Those Dos Equis ad references never get old.
I wouldn't say "never". I agree that they don't get old often.
But when they do...
Open floor plans. Does anything else need to be said?
Unfortunately, he can't lay claim to being the Bruce Dicksinson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...
"The geek's imagination doesn't to stretch much farther than fan fiction. The golden triangle of Star Trek, Star Wars and Dr. Who."
If you believe this you don't really read a lot.
someone who's producing music, art, or literary works has probably had it drilled into them in school that plagiarism is wrong
So what can a composer of music do to determine whether or not he is accidentally infringing or plagiarizing? George Harrison got bit by this (Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music, the "My Sweet Lord" case).
If, on the other hand, their story, music, or artwork is original
Let me rephrase the question: How can someone starting out in the business determine what is original?
how do all works build on other works? at some point in time there was no work
It's actually estúpido.
A "work" is a piece of human expression fixed in a tangible medium. The first work was built on oral tradition. Oral tradition in turn was based on whatever preceded behaviorally modern humans' language, and science currently has no answers for that.
You can never be sure, especially if you're a newcomer to the field, that someone hasn't plowed that field before.
So what should a newcomer to a creative field do to avoid being blindsided and bankrupted by incumbent owners of exclusive rights? If there are no good steps that a newcomer can take, then this impossibility has a chilling effect on people even trying to become a newcomer to a creative field.
How many times have you heard someone who isn't in tech come up to you and say "I've got this great idea ..." and they haven't even bothered to do the most cursory search, which would have revealed that it's not original at all?
What kind of search?
Obviously you can't do this [an alternate-point-of-view adaptation of a culturally significant work]
This is a form of creativity of which society currently disapproves through its elected representatives. How does it benefit society for society to disapprove of this?
you pays your money (or in this case, sweat equity) and you takes your chances.
Why the subject-verb disagreement? Are you quoting (or paraphrasing) a work of which I am not aware? Even so, I don't understand how to ensure that I avoid attorney's fees, statutory damages, and other ways of losing even more than the sweat equity that I had invested.
Harrison admits to having thought "Why didn't I realise?" when others started pointing out the similarity between the two songs
So what should Harrison have done instead to ensure that he realized his having accidentally made such a blatant ripoff before publishing it and thereby opening himself to infringement lawsuits?
Nobody's reminded of modern BBSs? A few people going at it, without recourse of authority, being as silly and degenerate as need be? As bad as moderator-less discussion is, I'm reminded of a short poem of "Infinity bottles of beer on the wall" which provoked pages of number theory arguments.
If your book or film or artwork is truly original, it should stand on its' own.
You skipped music.
What kind of search?
Oh for the good old days of justf***inggoogleforit.
I have Google Play Sound Search installed on my Nexus 7 tablet. But it supports only known commercial recordings, not my own singing or piano playing. Shazam has the same limit.
So what should Harrison have done
Not published it.
That'd be fine if the accidental ripoff had been pointed out before All Things Must Pass went gold. Otherwise it would have involved an expensive recall, withdrawing copies that had already been shipped to stores.