
Bantu expansion shows that habitat alters the route and pace of human dispersals - curtis
http://phys.org/news/2015-09-human-trial-and-error-lightbulb-moments.html
======
thanatosmin
This article is about migration of Bantu-speaking people 5000 years ago, not
innovation in general, and isn't really applicable to scientific/technological
discoveries. Perhaps link to the original paper without the clickbaity title:

"Bantu expansion shows that habitat alters the route and pace of human
dispersals"
[http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/09/09/1503793112](http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/09/09/1503793112)

~~~
dang
Wow, good catch—that's worse than average even for a press release farm.

We've changed the title (from "Human innovation more trial-and-error than
'lightbulb' moments"), but have left the URL because the popular article,
distorting as it is, provides more background. Also, the researchers
themselves are pushing this interpretation, to judge by the quotes in the
article, so it isn't just spin by a headline writer. Anyone who wants to read
the paper can follow the link you've helpfully provided.

------
jeffwass
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

Isaac Asimov

~~~
hn9780470248775
And then, in by far the majority of cases, after much head scratching and
scribbling, the "That's funny" turns into "Doh!"

But in an extreme minority of cases, when the "That's funny" remains ...

~~~
jeffwass
Absolutely. Like the handful of cases we "discovered" room temperature
superconductivity. Until we tracked down something shorting somewhere in our
system :-)

------
earlyadapter
It is said that true fundamental innovation in a technological sense takes
15+years... stable ecosystems (govt policies, strong economies etc) are needed
to foster this innovation. Fundamental innovation also creates new
methodologies in two or three areas, whether it be tech, market or
implementation.

Everything else is incremental innovation (new tech enhancing products in a
known market), this can be achieved in 1 to 3 years.

~~~
Denzel
Genuinely interested in where those figures come from. Do you have any sources
I could read?

~~~
earlyadapter
Yup, my MIT professor Eugene Fitzgerald's book, "Inside Real Innovation".
Enjoy the read!

------
barking
Like how evolution is supposed to work then. Mutations are the 'ideas' and
natural selection decides if they're worthwhile or not.

~~~
Toine
I can see this pattern in other areas, like startups. Founders have ideas,
users/market decide if they're worthwhile or not.

------
toolslive
"""Watt's engine was more a redesign more than an invention. Edison's notebook
reveals that he tried thousands of filament materials before alighting by
chance on his favoured material. """

Why isn't Edison's Light bulb not considered a redesign as well? Edison
himself called it "Improvement In Electric Lights" in the patent he filed in
1878.

~~~
jacquesm
Because beyond using electricity lightbulbs and carbon arc lights have little
in common.

~~~
alephnil
Once you have electricity, you will soon discover two things. First that a
thin conductor will be heated when you pass electricity through resistive
heating, and secondly, that it will soon burn, melt or vaporize after a short
time if you heat it enough to produce any significant amount of light.

In other words, the initial idea came from a quite basic fact about
electricity, and Humphry Davy experimented with it already around 1800, but a
lot of trial and failure had to be done before it could be used for practical
lighting.

Edison did enough research to come up with a practical one. He was not the
only one, and others, including Joseph Swan made practical light bulbs at
about the same time. Even this seemingly revolutionary idea was really more
trial and failure than anything else.

------
lisivka
Human innovation is 'lightbuld' moment first, then lot of trial-and-error.

~~~
wpietri
Is it? For me, it's generally the opposite. I do a bunch of trial and error as
I explore the problem space and the solution space. Small details gradually
accumulate. Then, finally, things shift into a new pattern and I say, "Aha!"

After that I'll still have a fair bit of experimentation as I tune. But that
feels much less trial-and-error-ish to me; before I was wandering; after I
have a direction.

~~~
lisivka
It is called "understanding", not "inventing".

~~~
restalis
An undiscovered understanding IS (novel discovering and therefore) an
invention.

~~~
lisivka
My level of English is low, so I cannot beat you in word game, so I cease
fire, but let me explain my position better.

About decade ago, I played engineering game written in Flash (I cannot
remember it name), where player must solve various tasks, e.g lift ball or
stop ball which is dropped from high altitude. Unique idea of that game was
fixed amount of money for whole game, which player need to spend wisely to
pass all levels, or redo some levels again but with better efficiency, to save
money. My first implementations in this game were simple: I understood problem
and implemented most obvious solution, to advance quickly. Second solutions
were improvements or optimization, to save money, to advance further. I beat
game, but then my brother started to play same game and beat my score, so we
started competition. Third solutions, made during competition, were true
innovations: they are non-obvious and highly efficient, but each of such
innovative solution had "lightbulb" moment first, and then sometimes hours of
tweaking to implement it. So my gradation is: understanding of problem leads
to obvious non-optimal solution first, then understanding of problem with
first solution leads to improved solution (local optimum), then "lightbulb"
moment leads to non-obvious efficient solution (global optimum).

------
JDDunn9
Good news for artificial intelligence. Computers are a lot better at trial and
error than "thinking" through a solution.

~~~
raverbashing
Trial and error exists, it's called 'genetic programming'

~~~
rational-future
The trial in genetic programming is too random, compared to what a human
researcher would try.

~~~
chongli
Doesn't this tear down the entire premise of the article? "Just trial & error"
dismisses all the thought that goes into designing experiments and analyzing
the data.

~~~
nitrogen
Human trial and error is more like a hill-climbing algorithm or a localized
graph search algorithm, things which computers can do quite well.

------
restalis
A missing piece inhere is the Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Discovery usually
occurs only at the highest levels, not when the mind is busy obsessing with
that pain in the stomach or fear of being eaten or whatnot! Life in Africa was
(and still is) tough.

