Interesting insight on the importance of the "tinkerer" and his resources.
[think: the "Homebrew Computer Club" and similar idea-seeders: perhaps even Vortex on occasion] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/science/13make.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&sq=maker%20faire%20&st=cse&scp=1&oref=slogin Also interesting: can this megatrend be taken to the next level by a company like GM, and possibly avoid nearly inevitable bankruptcy? Edward Tenner, an author and observer of the way that technology affects society, said "tinkering" had waxed and waned but never disappeared in American culture. A great deal of mechanical know-how, he said, came from people raised on farms, where they had to fix their own equipment. [think: Henry Ford and the early auto pioneers] But these days, he said, “this improvisation is starting to flourish in a mainly suburban and perhaps urban milieu.” [think: Apple, Hewlett Packard, etc and now the new-energy] It is pretty clear the the $500 million that GM has already sunk into the Volt will pay off sometime in the next several decades, but could it have been done sooner, better -- or for much less cost - by encouraging smaller companies and even individual inventors to participate? As it stands now, in addition to what they have already spent, GM will be forced to buy any breakthrough which comes along at greatly inflated cost. Which is not to say that throwing money at a problem always results in a breakthrough ... but consider the oft-mentioned EEStor - which GM could have participated in, but declined. After all they have no real way to weed out the shysters: http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1517 Therefore - the proper strategy to stimulate the nearly unpredictable breakthrough, which is never guaranteed at any price, is much easier to pinpoint in hindsight. For instance: Unlike some observers, I strongly feel that the EEStor thing is for real- and just going through the expected growing pains. The Wiki page is being continuously updated, and it seems that there must be an 'inside' source for this (probably at Lockheed). OTOH - if EEStor is high-level BS then this is the way a good viral marketer would work; so it is easy to see why there can be a valid difference of opinion. But as for the Megatrend itself - if this 'bettery' (bat-cap) technology does indeed work out as a major breakthrough - then yes it was essentially invented in the metaphorical silicon valley 'garage' by a couple of tinkerers, and then followed the VC model of getting into production quickly. Any car company could have gotten involved on the ground floor for $25 million now instead of several billion later. Which -- all things considered, IF one wanted to benefit and 'bootstrap' from this societal insight even further -- i.e. to up the stakes in megatrends to the next level, it would seem to be prudent for the successful car company of the future to operate more like the VC and less like the entrenched bureaucracy..... .... so that instead of shunning outside innovation - they actually embrace the notion of "not invented here" and actually seek out the good 'tinkerers' proactively, and invest on the ground floor (even if most of them do not succeed). ... what is that pun-ny old truism about the quick and the dead? Jones
