Stupid innovation

We’re taught to glorify innovation. Every new invention is pitched as a step forward, a clever disruption, a mark of progress. But here’s the uncomfortable reality: not all innovation is good. Some of it is pointless, harmful, or simply stupid. Just because something can be invented doesn’t mean it should exist.

We don’t talk enough about bad innovation. The products that solve non-existent problems, the technologies that make products even worse.

Juicero

A $400 Wi-Fi juicer that squeezed juice packs you could already squeeze with your hands. A monument to Silicon Valley’s obsession with reinventing the obvious.

Squeezed out: widely mocked startup Juicero is shutting down | Silicon Valley | The Guardian

Google Glass

Sold as the future of wearable tech. Delivered as a creepy surveillance device nobody wanted to wear in public. A failure not just of design, but of common sense.

Google Glass Enterprise Edition 2 Developer Kit (Glass Pod and Titanium Band) : Amazon.in: Electronics

Plastic coffee pods

Convenient but extremely unnecessary. A brilliant way to turn convenience into global pollution.

Which is best - aluminum, plastic or compostable coffee capsules?

Hoverboards

Cheap self-balancing scooters that exploded (literally) because manufacturers raced ahead of safety.

Hoverboard 6.5 inch White | Voltes - Electric Mobility

Endless social media “features”

Are stories, reels, shorts, fleets, threads and endless copies of each other necessary? Innovation disguised as repetition, designed only to steal more of our attention.

Instagram unveiled a new feature. Here's how you can use it (and why you'll want to) | ZDNET

3D TVs

A stupid, useless gimmick that died almost as fast as it arrived.

Reviving Home Entertainment- Trends in the 3D TV Market

Disposable e-cigarettes

Marketed as a healthy alternative to smoking. In reality, they hooked a new generation on nicotine while creating mountains of toxic waste.

ECO Menthol E-Cig | Disposable E-Cigarette | ePuffer Vape

Innovation without purpose is just noise. Sometimes it’s laughable, a Wi-Fi toaster, sometimes it’s dangerous, vaping devices for teenagers, and sometimes it’s destructive, convenience products that poison ecosystems.

The real problem is that we confuse novelty with progress. We treat any new feature, any shiny object, any “world-changing” startup pitch as inherently valuable. Progress isn’t about making things new. It’s about making things better. And those two are not the same.

August 13, 2025

When money blocks progress

Business Idea. Businesswoman in a Business Suit Holds a Light Bulb in Her Hands. a Gold Dollar Coin Light Bulb Emits Light in the Stock Vector - Illustration of high, energy: 203548012 History is filled with brilliant discoveries and revolutionary technologies that never had the chance to reach their full potential. Sometimes, it’s not because the idea didn’t work, but because it threatened powerful financial interests.

1. Nikola Tesla and the “Free Energy” Threat

Nikola Tesla’s work with alternating current (AC) revolutionized electricity distribution, defeating Thomas Edison’s less efficient direct current (DC). But Tesla’s more ambitious dream, wireless global power through the Wardenclyffe Tower, was abruptly halted when financier J.P. Morgan withdrew support. Morgan feared that if electricity could be transmitted wirelessly, it couldn’t be metered and sold. The project collapsed, and the tower was eventually dismantled for scrap, leaving one of history’s most daring visions unrealized.

2. Philo Farnsworth vs. Corporate Giants

Philo Farnsworth invented the first fully electronic television system in the 1920s, envisioning it as a tool for education and enlightenment. But his work ran headfirst into the might of RCA, whose president David Sarnoff launched lengthy legal battles over patents. The court fights drained Farnsworth’s resources, and by the time he prevailed, the commercial television industry had moved on, without him.

3. The Electric Car’s First Death

In the late 1990s, General Motors produced the EV1, a sleek, fully electric vehicle decades ahead of its time. Drivers loved it, but the car threatened oil industry profits and the traditional automotive business model. GM abruptly ended the program, repossessing and destroying most EV1s, citing “lack of demand.” Many believe the real reason was pressure from oil companies and a reluctance to invest in infrastructure that would reduce gasoline sales.

4. Renewable Energy Before Its Time

In the 1970s, inventor Frank Shuman’s earlier solar thermal power concepts from 1913 were rediscovered. Shuman had built a functioning solar power plant in Egypt long before the oil boom. His vision could have reduced reliance on fossil fuels, but with cheap oil flooding the market, investors saw no profit in solar energy. His work was shelved for decades, only reemerging when climate change forced a rethink.

5. Stanley Meyer’s Water-Fueled Car

Stanley Meyer claimed in the 1990s to have developed a car engine powered by water through a process of splitting hydrogen and oxygen using minimal energy. His technology remains disputed, but his invention drew enormous attention, but also resistance. Meyer faced lawsuits, was labeled a fraud, and died suddenly after a meeting with investors, fueling speculation that his ideas were intentionally buried to protect the oil industry’s dominance.

The Double-Edged Sword of Funding

While these stories show how money can suffocate innovation, it’s also true that funding is often the lifeblood of progress. The same financial resources that can block change can, in the right hands, accelerate it. Visionary backers have turned obscure ideas into global revolutions, consider how the Wright brothers’ modest bicycle business funded their experiments in flight, or how early venture capital propelled companies like Apple and SpaceX from garages to the global stage. The difference lies in the motivation of the person holding the purse strings. If their goal is short-term profit, disruptive innovation becomes a threat; if they value long-term progress, money becomes a powerful catalyst for change. In this way, financial influence is neither inherently good nor bad, it’s a tool, and the outcome depends entirely on the wielder.

These stories of failure share a common thread: innovation that threatened established financial power met swift resistance. Ideas with the potential to disrupt profitable industries are often silenced, delayed, or discredited. Science moves forward not just through discovery, but through the courage to resist the forces that would rather see the status quo remain intact.

August 4, 2025

Is AI killing or saving innovation?

Artificial Intelligence is often seen as the driving force behind a new industrial revolution. It can be very helpful in various fields, from medicine to marketing, but is it moral to use AI for everything, especially innovation?

Is AI Fueling Creativity or Replacing It?

At first glance, AI seems like the ideal partner for innovation. It can analyze data at incredible speeds, identify patterns that escape our notice, and take over mundane tasks, allowing humans to concentrate on supposedly more important creative endeavors.

But here’s the harsh reality: AI doesn’t create. It enhances.

AI reorganizes what we already know. It takes existing information and mixes it into new, yet unoriginal results. For instance, GPT models aren’t envisioning the future, they’re forecasting the next likely word based on historical data. That’s helpful, but not true originality.

Genuine innovation often arises from conflict, gut feelings, wild ideas, or even mistakes, elements that AI tends to eliminate. If we’re not careful, AI could make our results quicker but less impactful.

The good in AI

It would be a mistake to brush off AI as just a copycat. When utilized effectively, it acts as a catalyst for innovation.

Take drug discovery, for example; AI can model billions of molecular interactions in just a few days. In climate modeling, it generates scenarios that no human team could ever calculate. In language translation, it removes barriers and makes knowledge accessible to everyone.

But maybe the most significant aspect is that AI fosters inclusivity in innovation. Tools that used to need technical knowledge are now available through user-friendly AI platforms. A high school student can now produce a short film with professional quality. In these situations, AI doesn’t just accelerate processes. It opens up opportunities—and that’s genuine innovation.

The bad in AI

Now, here’s a more concerning angle: As AI systems improve at providing answers, we’re getting worse at asking the right questions.

There’s a quiet decline in human judgment taking place. Professionals in various fields are increasingly leaning on AI’s recommendations and placing their trust in them. This isn’t merely a technical problem, it’s a cultural shift. We’re gradually moving being problem-solvers to just prompt-writers.

In the future

The discussion shouldn’t be “AI vs. humans,” but rather “AI alongside humans.” The true frontier is in co-creation, using AI to uncover paths we couldn’t see on our own, rather than having it do the walking for us.

AI shouldn’t be the one innovating. It should be a booster. It can enhance our tools, broaden our horizons, and speed up processes. The twist is that as AI gets stronger, the value of human creativity increases. Innovation isn’t solely about what we can create. It’s about the choices we make in what we create and the reasons behind those choices.

AI isn’t killing or saving innovation. It’s reshaping it. And it’s up to the user to reshape it in their own way.

July 28, 2025August 18, 2025

Tennis clubs must go digital

The lack of digitalization in tennis clubs is not just a matter of convenience, it’s a critical roadblock to growth, relevance, and community engagement.

Old systems in a new world

Even with the global shift towards digital transformation, many tennis clubs still operate in a surprisingly analog manner. Court reservations are handled by phone calls or paper sheets, payments are collected in cash, and communication happens mostly through word of mouth. Few clubs track player data, run engaging online platforms, or provide visibility for their programs.

This absence of digital tools is not just an inconvenience for players, it’s a major missed opportunity for growth. In a time when consumers expect quick access, personalized experiences, and smooth digital interactions, clubs that resist modernization risk losing younger players and falling behind innovative organizations.

What tennis clubs should digitalize

To stay relevant and competitive, tennis clubs need to adopt digital solutions that enhance operations, and improve the member experience. Here’s what that looks like:

1. Online Court Booking Systems

Why: Players want to book courts anytime, without calling the front desk.
Benefits: Reduces scheduling conflicts, improves court utilization, and saves staff time.
Example: Clubs using ClubSpark in the UK allow members to book courts in seconds via mobile apps.

2. Digital Payments & Membership Management

Why: Cash payments are outdated, members expect online transactions.
Benefits: Secure, faster payments, automated invoicing, and better financial tracking.
Example: The USTA’s digital platform allows members to manage subscriptions and renewals seamlessly.

3. Player Data Tracking & Analytics

Why: Data-driven training keeps players engaged and motivated.
Benefits: Coaches can tailor sessions, monitor progress, and organize fairer competition formats.
Example: Elite clubs use PlaySight Smart Courts to track performance stats and provide instant video replay.

4. Communication Platforms & Match Notifications

Why: Players want instant updates on schedules, tournaments, and social events.
Benefits: Stronger community engagement, fewer no-shows, and increased participation.
Example: Many European clubs use WhatsApp integration with booking platforms to notify players of last-minute availability.

5. Social Media & Online Presence

Why: New players, sponsors, and local communities find clubs online first.
Benefits: Expands visibility, attracts younger audiences, and showcases club culture.
Example: The All England Lawn Tennis Club (Wimbledon) runs digital-first campaigns that boost global visibility and inspire local clubs to do the same on a smaller scale.

6. Automated Tournament & League Management

Why: Manual brackets and paper scoreboards are inefficient.
Benefits: Faster organization, live score tracking, and easier ranking updates.
Example: Many U.S. clubs use TennisLink to run USTA leagues fully online, from registration to results.

7. Community-Building Apps

Why: Players don’t just want matches, they want connection.
Benefits: Encourages networking, easier partner-matching, and higher retention.
Example: Platforms like TennisPAL or Slinger App let members find hitting partners and organize games instantly.

The urgency of digital adoption

Digitalization is no longer optional, it’s the foundation of a modern tennis club. Automating repetitive tasks allows staff to focus on coaching and building community. Data insights improve training. Online platforms make clubs more attractive to both new members and sponsors.

The longer clubs delay, the larger the gap grows between what’s possible and what’s real. And the more opportunities they risk losing.

July 23, 2025July 23, 2025

Symbiosis of democracy and innovation

Although democracy and innovation aren’t a perfect symbiotic pair, their relationship is deeply intertwined and they greatly depend on each other.

What are democracy and innovation?

Democracy is a system of government in which power is held by the people, who exercise it directly or through elected representatives.

Innovation is the process of creating and applying new ideas, methods, or technologies to improve or transform products, services, or systems.

Democracy and innovation together

Democracy and innovation are always tied together because democratic systems create the freedom, openness, and diversity of ideas that help drive innovation, while innovation can strengthen democracy by solving problems, improving lives, and encouraging all participation. The link between democracy and innovation is very complicated, changing, and often supportive of each other. Democracy creates a space of freedom, diversity, and responsibility. Those are the elements that encourage creativity and the open sharing of ideas, both vital for innovation.

Innovation in democratic countries

In democratic nations, people are more inclined to challenge current systems, suggest new ideas, and explore unconventional routes without the fear of government oppression. Institutions like independent courts, a free press, and academic freedom help ensure that fresh ideas can thrive and be evaluated. Public involvement can enhance problem-solving through shared knowledge and inclusive decision-making. A good example of a democratic country that is full of innovation is the USA. With the freedom that its citizens have, anyone and everyone can start a business and succeed, it doesn’t matter who you are, or where you are in the country, it you want to succeed you can. That equal opportunity for everyone creates a ton of business down the line. More business, more people who want to succeed in the same market, more competition, more people want to beat their competition, more people think of ways to stand out, more people innovate.

Innovation in non-democratic countries

Innovation can also happen in non-democratic settings, though it tends to be more centralized or restricted. For an example, China has achieved swift technological progress in fields like artificial intelligence and e-commerce, even with limited political freedoms. However, critics point out that issues like a lack of transparency, censorship, and the suppression of dissent could delay or even stop sustainable innovation and ethical oversight.

Emerging democracies or nations with democratic shortcomings often find it hard to innovate effectively due to corruption, weak institutions, or insufficient investment in education and infrastructure. India, the largest democracy in the world, showcases both the advantages and challenges of democratic innovation: while its IT and startup industries are thriving, systemic governance issues and inequality still restrict broader innovation.

Although democracy is not essential for innovation, it frequently creates the conditions needed for sustainable, inclusive, and ethical technological advancement. The relationship between open governance and creative growth indicates that democracies, when operating effectively, possess a distinct advantage in promoting innovation that benefits the many rather than just a select few.

July 14, 2025July 23, 2025

Art or ad

In today’s world, the line between artistic expression and commercial interest is blurring faster than ever, raising important questions about what art truly means in a consumer-driven culture.

Authentic expression of art

Art has historically been regarded as one of the most genuine forms of human expression, serving as a medium for emotion, observation, and creativity. However, in the contemporary world, the distinction between art and commerce is becoming increasingly indistinct. The commercialization of art has transitioned from being a mere consequence of cultural appeal to a fundamental aspect of its production, consumption, and valuation.

The good in commercialization

On one side, this commercialization has provided numerous artists with the chance to sustain themselves financially through their creations. Social media, digital platforms, and international markets have unlocked opportunities that were previously dominated by galleries and institutions. Artists now have the ability to sell directly to their audience, partner with brands, or establish their own enterprises. Consequently, art has become more accessible, more visible, and arguably, more democratic.

The bad in commercialization

But on the other side, this expanding market influence often reduce the original value of art. The demand to create profitable work can overshadow genuine expression. Instead of fostering innovation, we witness a trend towards repetition, and copying other artwork that you know is definitely profitable . Originality is frequently sacrificed in favor of following trends. The focus shifts from authentic expression to engagement metrics, product placements, and revenue generation.

This transformation has also altered our understanding of artistic value. Previously, art was evaluated based on emotional resonance, technical proficiency, or social critique, and now it is increasingly assessed through likes, and popularity.

Now it’s not exactly that commercialization ruins art, numerous beautiful works throughout history were commissioned, by churches, monarchs, or patrons, with the entire point of the artwork to be sold. The distinction in the present day lies in the magnitude and rapidity of the marketplace, along with the prevalence of a consumer mentality that prioritizes immediate satisfaction over deep reflection.

July 11, 2025

Biennale Architecture

The Venice Architecture Biennale has historically served as a platform for the display of architectural innovation from across the globe. However, in recent years, particularly in its latest, it appears to have lost its focus on the true essence of architecture. What should have been a celebration of the discipline’s problem-solving creativity has increasingly devolved into a confusing showcase of poorly conceived artistic expressions masquerading as significant commentary.

Architecture is distinct from art. While it may draw inspiration from artistic fields, and can indeed be aesthetically pleasing or emotionally resonant, its core lies not in metaphor but in functionality. Architecture is fundamentally about addressing tangible issues within physical spaces, for actual individuals. Yet, the presented exhibitions at Biennale aren’t buildings, systems, or solutions, but ambiguous installations, and conceptual exhibits that seem more suited to an art biennale than the architecture one.

Rather than plans, elevations, and sections, we are presented with fabric drapes, films, and sculptural abstractions. Instead of concepts rooted in engineering, social infrastructure, or climate resilience, we encounter metaphor-laden discourses on identity, decolonization, or environmental issues. The issue is not with the exploration of these themes, it’s with the medium they are presented through. Architects who attempt to adopt the role of conceptual artists provide gestures in place of strategies, moods instead of mechanisms. In doing so, they aren’t doing the job of an architect.

This is not to suggest that architecture must always be literal or inflexible, but when architecture strives too earnestly to emulate art, it forsakes its primary purpose. The discipline does not require more vague metaphors; it demands a vision grounded in reality. Architecture should be straightforward. It ought to confront human needs and spatial challenges directly. A well-designed building speaks.

At the core of this issue lies a rising inclination to merge architecture, and design in a broader sense, with art. However, architecture is not art. Neither is design. The persistent assertion that they are is undermining the strength and intent of both.

Art is inherently subjective. It represents a personal expression of an artist, their thoughts, emotions, and identity. Its purpose is to provoke, to question, and to evoke feelings. It is not limited by functionality. A painting does not have to shield someone from rain. A sculpture does not need to ensure access to clean drinking water. Art exists for its own sake. It poses questions but rarely provides answers.

In contrast, architecture and design are objective fields with real impacts. They focus not on the creator but on the user. They are not mediums for self-expression but instruments for communal use. A building must endure. A chair must support weight. These characteristics are not optional, they are fundamental. If a building does not fulfill the requirements of its users, it is not a misunderstood masterpiece, it’s a failure.

Effective design and architecture are grounded in functionality. They aim to resolve issues, not to convey emotions. They cater to a diverse range of individuals, not merely a singular perspective. Certainly, beauty and creativity play a role in the process, but they are never the primary focus. A well-constructed bridge or a thoughtfully designed school may be aesthetically pleasing, even inspiring, but their value is determined by their functionality, not by their emotional impact.

The current trajectory of Biennale is particularly disheartening for this reason. Instead of showcasing buildings, infrastructure, or systems that address the pressing issues of our time, such as housing, climate change, and urban density, we are presented with abstract installations that aim for poetic expression but ultimately come across as empty. The work fails to resonate because architecture is not a medium for individual narratives. It is a collective endeavor. It must respond to the community, not to individual egos.

When architects attempt to play the role of artists, they frequently ignore the discipline and accountability that architecture needs. In doing so, they not only bewilder the audience but also undermine the integrity of the field.

June 25, 2025June 25, 2025

Mercedes vs BMW

When it comes to luxury automobiles, few rivalries are as iconic as that between Mercedes-Benz and BMW. Both German giants have carved out powerful global identities, yet they approach branding, marketing, and customer perception in very different ways.

Mercedes-Benz

Brand Identity
Mercedes-Benz has long positioned itself as the pinnacle of automotive luxury and engineering excellence. Its slogan, “The Best or Nothing,” isn’t just a tagline it’s their mission and guarantee. The brand emphasizes heritage, status, and timeless design. Mercedes is often associated with sophistication, comfort, and prestige.

Marketing Strategy
Mercedes marketing leans heavily into heritage and elegance. Campaigns often focus on innovation (like their safety technology or electric vehicles) while reinforcing the brand’s luxurious image. They frequently use sleek visuals, classical music, and authoritative narration in their ads, targeting successful professionals, executives, and those who want to project affluence and refinement.

Public Perception
People often see Mercedes as a symbol of success. It’s the car of diplomats, CEOs, and those who’ve “made it.” The brand is often associated with classical luxury, making it appealing to an older, more conservative demographic, although this has been shifting with newer models and the introduction of sportier variants and electric models.

BMW

Brand Identity
BMW markets itself as a driver’s brand. Its longstanding slogan “The Ultimate Driving Machine” is all about performance, agility, and connection to the road. BMW emphasizes the thrill of driving, precision engineering, and a sportier lifestyle. It’s less about being chauffeured, more about being in the driver’s seat.

Marketing Strategy
BMW’s marketing campaigns highlight emotion, performance, and dynamism. They often feature winding roads, sharp turns, and the sound of an engine revving. The focus is on you, the driver, and your experience while driving.

Their ads tend to feel younger, more energetic, and often more adventurous than Mercedes. BMW also uses tech-savvy features and digital experiences to appeal to a slightly more youthful, urban, and active customer base.

Public Perception
BMW is often seen as the choice of enthusiasts, those who love the act of driving itself. It’s considered stylish and sporty, with a slightly more rebellious or assertive attitude. While it’s still a status symbol, it appeals more to youthful ambition than old money elegance.

Mercedes and BMW are not just car brands, they’re lifestyle brands that reflect different philosophies. Where Mercedes represents calm power and refined luxury, BMW is about dynamic control and passionate driving. These distinct branding strategies have helped both companies create loyal fan bases and clear market positions.

June 16, 2025

How Company Culture Affects Innovation

Innovation is one of the most important factors in companies. It can affect company culture, but company culture can affect innovation just as much. A culture that supports innovation empowers teams to take risks, experiment, and challenge the status quo, while a rigid or fearful culture often leads to stagnation.

Psychological Safety and Risk-Taking
In innovative cultures, failure isn’t punished—it’s seen as a step toward success. This mindset creates psychological safety, where employees feel confident sharing bold ideas without fear of embarrassment or retribution. Companies like Google and 3M are famous for encouraging experimentation, even allocating time specifically for side projects that can lead to breakthroughs.

Openness and Collaboration
Innovation is rarely a solo act. A culture that values open communication and cross-functional collaboration tends to produce more creative outcomes. When people from diverse backgrounds and roles are encouraged to exchange ideas freely, new solutions often emerge at the intersection of different perspectives.

Purpose and Vision
When employees understand and believe in a company’s purpose, they’re more motivated to contribute ideas and go beyond the minimum. A clear and inspiring mission gives innovation a direction and a reason. It aligns individual creativity with collective goals.

Agility and Adaptability
In fast-changing markets, innovation depends on a company’s ability to move quickly. Cultures that embrace change and remain flexible are better equipped to pivot, test new approaches, and adopt emerging technologies. Bureaucracy and rigid hierarchies, on the other hand, tend to slow innovation down.

Leadership and Role Modeling
Leaders play a crucial role in shaping culture. When leadership encourages curiosity, rewards initiative, and celebrates learning from failure, it signals to the entire organization that innovation is a priority—not just a buzzword.

A company’s culture can either fuel or block innovation. Businesses that want to stay competitive in the long term must build a culture that actively nurtures creativity, embraces change, and empowers people at every level to contribute their best ideas.

June 10, 2025

Innovation around the world

Innovation is a global force, but its nature, drivers, and outcomes vary significantly across different regions. Cultural values, economic structures, education systems, and access to resources all shape how innovation takes place, and what problems it seeks to solve.

Europe

Europe tends to focus on sustainable and regulatory-driven innovation, particularly in sectors like clean energy, health care, and digital infrastructure. The European Union plays a strong role in funding research and creating common standards. Countries like Germany and Sweden excel in industrial and technological innovation, while nations like the Netherlands and Estonia are leaders in digital government and green tech.

Asia

Asia is a powerhouse of technology-driven innovation, but it’s far from homogenous. Japan and South Korea lead in robotics and advanced manufacturing. China has become a major global innovator, especially in e-commerce, AI, and fintech, supported by a vast market and heavy government investment. Southeast Asia is emerging rapidly in digital services and startups, often leapfrogging legacy systems with mobile-first solutions.

Africa

Innovation in Africa is often resourceful and socially driven, addressing local challenges in creative ways. With limited infrastructure in many regions, mobile technology has become a central tool—especially in finance, agriculture, and education. Kenya’s mobile money platform M-Pesa is a standout example. Innovation here is typically frugal, practical, and aimed at community-level impact.

America

The Americas present a wide spectrum. The United States is a global leader in cutting-edge innovation, driven by Silicon Valley’s ecosystem of venture capital, research universities, and tech entrepreneurship. Latin America, on the other hand, focuses on adaptation and inclusion, with Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia fostering vibrant startup scenes in areas like e-commerce, transport, and financial inclusion.

While innovation is a global phenomenon, it is deeply shaped by local needs, opportunities, and constraints. Understanding regional differences helps highlight the unique value and creativity that each part of the world brings to solving problems and shaping the future.