"The Paradox of Choice" has a couple good insights, especially for entrepreneurs selling, but I think it misses one very important thing.
Yes, the unknowledgeable shopper will feel overwhelmed if you ask them what spice you want to buy out of 40 different spices, but the world would be much worse if there was a mandate that you could only buy pepper and garlic.
It would be easier for the unskilled cook, but serious chefs would have their ability severely curtailed.
Likewise, I think a lot of the "paradox of choice" applications evolve into tyranny - force simpliciy, because hey, that's great for people! All these choices confuse people! It's true, yes, that 80% to 90% of people don't want more choice and the choice is a hardship for them. But removing choice from that last 10 to 20% that are educated on the tradeoffs is really, really, really bad.
There's a fundamental flaw with the whole premise of paradox of choice - it ignores that there are people for whom a wide variety of choices is incredibly valuable and important. Encouraging restricting choices (especially by force! yuck!) makes things easier for most people, but destroys a lot of potential for amazing creations as well.
Spices are a hopeless example of the paradox of choice, since they're all genuinely different things.
The kinds of choices I hate are the ones that have been deliberately and often artificially cooked up between things that are in essence the same -- or that I'd benefit from really being the same.
Two examples:
(1) Washing powder. My local supermarket has a whole aisle filled with essentially identical products in different packaging (many from the same manufacturer/conglomerate). Ironically, this proliferation of meaningless branding seems to push out genuine choice: despite the acres of shelf space devoted to washing powders, I can't buy an ecologically sound washing powder here.
(2) Travel insurance. The choices faced for insurance (and other financial products) are genuinely overwhelming: to sensibly choose between the hundreds of available policies I'd need to read and compare the T&Cs for each one. I'd enormously prefer there to be some central body mandating a minimum standard for travel insurance (or maybe 2 or 3 levels of minimum standards) and then just pick the cheapest policy adhering to my standard of choice.
In the absence of this, companies often appear to go out of their way to make it difficult to compare their products with others' -- mobile/cell-phone plans are a case in point here.
In short, the 'paradox of choice' should really be 'the paradox of pointless artificial choices'... but then it becomes more obvious that it's only a paradox if you were previously a sucker for economic theory at its purest and most crazy.
The problem is arguably not too many choices, but too many indistinct choices. This is something I've been banging on about from a game design perspective - having a dizzying array of skills or research options can be exciting, or it can be overwhelming and boring, depending on how each option is characterized and distinguished from the rest.
Less is only better insofar as it widens the "difference gap" between each option.
Why anyone would buy travel insurance is a mystery to me, but maybe you'd like http://www.insuremytrip.com/ which has a pretty nice comparison feature.
Why anyone would buy travel insurance is a mystery to me
Medical expenses, repatriation, accommodation in case of particular delays, emergency cash in case of theft.. I can't see why you wouldn't have it for any trip overseas given how unpredictable medical costs can be (unless you have a great existing policy that would cover all of these).
I've been seeing more and more of these "best _____" questions on Quora and I can't help thinking it doesn't really fit the Quora mold very well. I emailed them asking that they implement a feature making it easier for people to create lists. The problem right now is that if I post 5 suggestions, and someone votes up my answer because they agree with one of those 5, that information is blurred. It should split those suggestions into 5 separately votable answers.
That said, I think that one of the biggest entrepreneurial opportunities on the web is recommendation of content. I sometimes think about how much stuff there is to experience, from books to movies to music, and it depresses me that I'll only ever be able to enjoy a tiny, tiny fraction of it all before I die. With that in mind, I'd like to know I'm experiencing the best this world has to offer. It's a complicated problem, but I have my wallet ready for the person who solves it.
I feel the same way. I'm disappointed that social status and elitism permeates throughout a forum that is supposed to be about advancing human knowledge and the human condition.
You must have missed the last 10,000 years of human development, because the elite have always been at the forefront of human development. It is part of what makes them elite. Humankind does not advance because of the efforts of the average person, it simply continues.
Having said that... Why Julia Sweeney is always at TED is still a mystery to me. When one of her videos come up, I can't find the skip button fast enough.
Not necessarily, as a counter argument consider some of the giants such as Michael Faraday (physics and chemistry) and Bernhard Riemann (Mathematician), who were born into poverty and later in life had many conflicts with the people that would be considered elitist. (Especially when the elitist believe that they were better and that people such as the son of a black smith should stay away (a crude summary of some conflicts in Faraday's life). Riemann died of TB, a common infliction of poor people (not elitists).
What is the use of this question without context? You could check the ratings/stats on TED.com and pick what is most popular. Quora is slightly different demographics than general TED audience, but is this minor difference worth asking such a question? I don't think so.
Everyone has an opinion and everyone wants to differentiate his answer which in turn, given enough answers (700 roughly) all the talks turn to be 'must-see'. Quora become boring with these subjective questions.
How can a source on knowledge like TED, thriving conferences that are entertaining and full of knowledge, be unknown by so many people. I mean they have access on TV to so many brain melting content, but a source of knowledge and idea like TED, is burried on the internet.... What a world !
Yes, the unknowledgeable shopper will feel overwhelmed if you ask them what spice you want to buy out of 40 different spices, but the world would be much worse if there was a mandate that you could only buy pepper and garlic.
It would be easier for the unskilled cook, but serious chefs would have their ability severely curtailed.
Likewise, I think a lot of the "paradox of choice" applications evolve into tyranny - force simpliciy, because hey, that's great for people! All these choices confuse people! It's true, yes, that 80% to 90% of people don't want more choice and the choice is a hardship for them. But removing choice from that last 10 to 20% that are educated on the tradeoffs is really, really, really bad.
There's a fundamental flaw with the whole premise of paradox of choice - it ignores that there are people for whom a wide variety of choices is incredibly valuable and important. Encouraging restricting choices (especially by force! yuck!) makes things easier for most people, but destroys a lot of potential for amazing creations as well.