Friction, often seen as a negative, is argued to be the most valuable commodity. It's the resistance that creates value – in products, experiences, and even personal growth. Easy access and seamlessness diminish appreciation and engagement. Intentionally incorporating friction, whether through thoughtful design choices, gated content, or challenging learning curves, can enhance value perception, foster deeper connection, and ultimately lead to greater satisfaction. This "desirable difficulty" forces users to invest more, making the reward feel earned and therefore more meaningful.
The blog post "What Killed Innovation?" argues that the current stagnation in technological advancement isn't due to a lack of brilliant minds, but rather a systemic shift towards short-term profits and risk aversion. This is manifested in several ways: large companies prioritizing incremental improvements and cost-cutting over groundbreaking research, investors favoring predictable returns over long-term, high-risk ventures, and a cultural obsession with immediate gratification hindering the patience required for true innovation. Essentially, the pursuit of maximizing shareholder value and quarterly earnings has created an environment hostile to the long, uncertain, and often unprofitable journey of disruptive innovation.
HN commenters largely agree with the author's premise that focusing on short-term gains stifles innovation. Several highlight the conflict between quarterly earnings pressures and long-term R&D, arguing that publicly traded companies are incentivized against truly innovative pursuits. Some point to specific examples of companies prioritizing incremental improvements over groundbreaking ideas due to perceived risk. Others discuss the role of management, suggesting that risk-averse leadership and a lack of understanding of emerging technologies contribute to the problem. A few commenters offer alternative perspectives, mentioning factors like regulatory hurdles and the difficulty of accurately predicting successful innovations. One commenter notes the inherent tension between needing to make money now and investing in an uncertain future. Finally, several commenters suggest that true innovation often happens outside of large corporations, in smaller, more agile environments.
Summary of Comments ( 113 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43933091
HN commenters largely disagree with the article's premise that friction is the most valuable commodity. Several argue that attention is more valuable, as friction is often employed to capture attention. Others suggest that trust, or the reduction of friction to build trust, is more valuable in the long run. Some point out that the article conflates different types of friction, such as the friction of learning a new skill versus the friction of navigating a poorly designed website. A few commenters agree with the author's general point about creating intentional friction for user benefit, but find the framing of "friction as a commodity" to be misleading. Several also critique the examples used in the article, arguing that they demonstrate poor design rather than beneficial friction.
The Hacker News post titled "The most valuable commodity in the world is friction" sparked a discussion with several insightful comments.
One commenter argues against the premise of the article, stating that friction is not a commodity because it cannot be bought or sold. They suggest a more apt title would be "The most valuable property is friction," emphasizing the inherent quality of resistance rather than its tradability. They further illustrate their point by highlighting how friction, in the context of social media, isn't being sold by platforms, but rather that the platforms benefit from existing friction within their networks.
Another commenter agrees with the article's sentiment but proposes "attention" as a more fundamental concept than "friction." They argue that friction is simply a method of capturing attention, which is the truly valuable resource. They offer social media as an example, suggesting that these platforms intentionally create friction to hold user attention, which is then monetized through advertising.
A different perspective is offered by a commenter who draws a parallel to physics. They explain that friction, in physics, converts kinetic energy into heat. They then apply this concept to the digital world, suggesting that friction similarly converts human intention into valuable data or engagement. This comment provides a nuanced analogy that helps explain the value of friction in a different light.
Another comment highlights the importance of discerning between good and bad friction. They point out that while some friction can be beneficial, like security measures preventing fraud, excessive or unnecessary friction can be detrimental to user experience and ultimately counterproductive. They use the example of CAPTCHAs being useful for security but frustrating for users.
One commenter expresses a preference for the term "stickiness" over "friction," arguing it more accurately captures the desired quality of keeping users engaged on a platform. This suggestion highlights the subtle but significant differences in how various terms can frame the conversation.
Finally, a commenter introduces the concept of "flow state," contrasting it with the idea of friction. They argue that while some platforms leverage friction to capture attention, others, like TikTok, aim to minimize friction to create a seamless and addictive user experience characterized by flow. This comment introduces a valuable counterpoint to the discussion, demonstrating that while friction can be valuable, its absence can be even more powerful in certain contexts.
Overall, the comments on Hacker News offer a varied and insightful discussion of the article's core premise. They explore nuances of terminology, offer alternative perspectives, and provide concrete examples to support their arguments. The discussion moves beyond simply agreeing or disagreeing with the article and delves into the complexities of friction, attention, and user experience in the digital age.