Five Levels of Hype

https://johannesklingebiel.de/2022/01/12/hype-as-a-scale.html

by snailletters • 5 years ago

150 101 5 years ago

yakattak• 4 years ago

I prefer Gartner’s Hype Cycle[1] way of displaying this. This post seems pretty inspired by it but the removal of the graph really makes it harder to grok quickly.

Still, the trend seems to be: 1. New technology, over promises 2. Marketing latches onto the overpromise and bolsters it, regardless of lack of research 3. Companies built around the technology fail, until a few find the niche the technology fits into.

Makes you wonder how much money is wasted on just trying to capitalize on new tech. The last company I worked for wasted loads chasing the latest and greatest.

[1] https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/3887767/understanding-g...

WA• 4 years ago

Gartner‘s hype cycle is what many products go through and they settle at some kind of normal utility. This post describes the amplitude (y axis) of Gartner‘s chart imho.

jollybean3• 4 years ago

There are many products, indeed, entire categories, that never come out of the 'trough of disillusionment'.

umvi2• 4 years ago

This doesn't just apply to new technology but also social/political/economic ideas too. I would have liked to see levels beyond 5 (i.e. the part where reality catches back up, the hype collapses, the backlash starts, etc)

nerdponx• 4 years ago

Maybe "collapse" isn't itself a "level of hype", but something separate from hype.

But I agree that this applies to things other than technology. Sometimes it seems like most political movements lie somewhere between levels 3 and 5.

h2odragon• 4 years ago

Nicely observed. This has more to do with how people think than how the world works; which means that no step of the hype train here needs to be connected to reality in any way. The product doesn't have to even exist to benefit from hype; that's how religions and dancing plagues happen.

PebblesRox• 4 years ago

More on dancing plagues for the unfamiliar: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_plague_of_1518

ryandrake• 4 years ago

Kind of similar to this Conspiracy Levels chart that was making the rounds a few months ago[1], including the crucial “departure from reality” tipping point, and the “XYZ as your group identity” level. No doubt promoters of major conspiracies have studied marketing, as they are are adept at generating belief and hype out of nothing.

1: https://m.imgur.com/XY5PAvd

celdon252• 4 years ago

The difference is that chart you linked is actually reasonably well-made.

password54321• 4 years ago

Covid coming from a lab is 'leaving science"? Well I'm glad whoever made that chart has it all figured out.

jollybean3• 4 years ago

Yes, they need to update that list.

Jamie Metzel [1] makes a very rational case that the Lab Leak theory is very likely. Check out is interview with Lex. It's more than 4 hours long (!), but worth a listen.

[1] https://jamiemetzl.com/origins-of-sars-cov-2/

mynameishere• 4 years ago

George Soros is a conspiracy theory? No, he's a real guy who has spent many millions to influence politics. How does somebody put together something so stupid as that chart? It's really impressive.

jsrcout• 4 years ago

The conspiracy angle here is not that he's spent a lot of money to influence politics, which is a fact, but that conspiracy types have rounded that up to "Soros is one of the shadowy puppet masters pulling the strings behind the scenes, like the Illuminati".

Here's one example, but the rabbit hole is deep.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90247335/a-timeline-of-george-so...

mberning• 4 years ago

The worst offenders in recent memory are self driving cars, block chain, VR, and “the metaverse”.

marginalia_nu2• 4 years ago

NFTs, Theranos, AR, AI/ML, No/Low Code.

"No Man's Sky" is also an interesting case study.

password321• 4 years ago

Not sure how AR, AI/ML or even No Mans Sky belong to the same list as NFTs. No Mans Sky has delivered on many things over time and chances are you used AI for something today even if you aren't aware of it. Maybe you mean AGI and how near in the future some promised it to be. AR is too early to even judge, with only Microsoft investing into it out of the reputable companies AFAIK.

Mezzie• 4 years ago

"No Man's Sky" is a fascinating example. I was really worried that was going to be a repeat of Spore.

Ostrogodsky2• 4 years ago

Cyberpunk 2077

codebolt• 4 years ago

Self-driving cars, yes, but I'd say AI/ML in general reached at least level 3/4 at some point over the past few years. Seems to be cooling off a bit these days, though.

Semaphor2• 4 years ago

“the metaverse”

I’m probably in some kind of bubble, but is that hyped? I mainly hear about it on HN, maybe a bunch of joking off-hand comments on Reddit. No one else seem to care about it at all. So, my bubble in Germany, or is it actually a thing in the USA?

detaro• 4 years ago

Even fairly mainstream news already went on about how the Microsoft acquisition of Activision is all about Microsoft getting ready for metaverse.

k__• 4 years ago

I gave up on German tech news 5 years ago.

They're always behind.

slightwinder• 4 years ago

Metaverse is something that is happening for a long time now. The Zuckerberg-Metaverse is just the latest step in this development that gave the fire new fuel. Maybe because of this slow burning hype the general impression of it is rather low.

boucher• 4 years ago

One of the largest companies in the world has recently renamed itself Meta (verse is strongly implied), so on some level it must have a decent amount of hype.

pessimizer• 4 years ago

3D TV.

dopidopHN• 4 years ago

What about 3D printing ? It’s tame now but I remember how it was supposed to change a lot of things in our every day life.

torginus• 4 years ago

I know a few people who make movie props - for their use case, 3D printing has basically displaced other ways of making practical props.

I think it has also revolutionised the industrial/product design/small batch manufacturing processes.

Another huge potentiality is metal 3D printing. Many aerospace companies consider 3D printed parts the future of rocketry/aircrafts.

bregma• 4 years ago

This chart should be rewritten in Rust.

ferdowsi• 4 years ago

Hah I was also thinking how neatly these categories fit into the worst examples of language evangelism. Some are definitely at this stage!

Examples here are (again) the cryptocurrency scene which has been pretty good at othering critics as “no-coiners” or lately with the phrase “have fun staying poor”.

ksec• 4 years ago

That should be Level 6.

Wronnay3• 4 years ago

I don't agree with the categorization of “full self-driving” as "LEVEL 2: EXAGGERATED CLAIMS".

There is no proof that self driving cars will ever be able to navigate in e.g. European cities with narrow streets and without lines on them.

Full driving would mean driving autonomous everywhere and between a highway with visible signs and lines and streets without any markings is a big difference.

its more like "LEVEL 3: UTOPIAN FUTURES" because there is the potential for it but no current systems can handle difficult situations in streets without clear markings.

inglor_cz• 4 years ago

Narrow streets can be equipped with some kind of helping beacons one day, much like they were equipped with street lamps and canalization in the previous centuries.

Anyway, this is a fairly low percentage of the total street network. Even in Prague the medieval center is smallish (and many of those streets are off-limits to regular car traffic).

boopboopbadoop4• 4 years ago

Narrow streets can be equipped with some kind of helping beacons one day

That changes the goal posts in my opinion. The “self” part of “self-driving” no longer applies.

Retric2• 4 years ago

There is no proof

That’s an odd requirement. There is no proof Intel will ever put out a faster chip. There is in general no proof for any new technology because it hasn’t been built yet.

Narrow city streets aren’t vastly different than normal city streets, and people used to constantly say sure operating on highways is easy, show me self driving cars inside cities. I think people underestimate how long self driving cars are going to take, but they are already good enough to be useful which means companies will continually invest in being just a little bit better.

Looking back automatic transmissions took decades and where seriously flawed for most of that time, but just a little bit better every year and eventually they became the default. Cruse control and every other major innovation went through that same cycle, it’s just that once something is good enough to be the default it has been around so long nobody wakes up and says “wow it’s finally ready” because it’s been in use for a long time.

IMO, take everything people are generally expecting self driving to be in 2030 and it’s going to be ready in 2060 and the default by 2090.

Wronnay3• 4 years ago

I agree with your comment, but I understood the author's level 2 as something which can be realized with existing technology. Meaning there is already a prototype.

There is no prototype for complete full driving, including very difficult situations - so I see that as level 3.

Animats2• 4 years ago

Here's WeRide testing in an urban village area of China.[1] The system is being very cautious, but is doing fine.

Here's Waymo, dealing with San Francisco streets.[2] Right now, Waymo is offering some rides in SF on a trial basis. Fully autonomous. No safety driver. 29 cameras, some radars, multiple LIDAR units. Full hemisphere coverage for each sensor.

It's getting steadily closer.

[1] https://twitter.com/i/status/1400772458991407113

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CVInKMz9cA

hiptobecubic4• 4 years ago

Honestly, small streets where there's really only one thing you can do (go straight forward but don't drive into anything) are not as hard as where cars are already driving today because the speeds are very low and the distances you have to consider are are pretty short. This is not like making unprotected lefts across 6 lanes of traffic in Beijing.

The hype around "full self driving" is exaggerated because today it's not even "limited self driving," let alone SOTA.

Wronnay3• 4 years ago

Did you ever drove through e.g. city centers in Europe or Asia?

There are not only missing lines but it's often also used by many people which walk on it. A self driving system doesn't only have to figure out where the steet ends and walkways begins but also has to correctly detect many moving people and animals.

Additionally, there are frequently side streets or walkways which are not mapped in every map database...

kkoncevicius• 4 years ago

I am not sure if there is a linear trajectory. With some hypes the "othering" starts early and itself acts as a booster for hype, by creating the "initiated" group that everyone wants to be a part of.

Also, unrelated, but for some reason, while reading, I kept thinking that COVID-19 vaccines fit all these levels quite well.

MeteorMarc• 4 years ago

Quantum computing scores high as well on the hype scale.

thriftwy2• 4 years ago

Why would having a technology as a part of group identity lead to utopian claims? Unless the group/technology feels threatened.

Linux is an important part of my identity and I will happily watch how infidels struggle with their malware-ridden proprietary tech, knowing most of them can't be saved anyway.

pram• 4 years ago

Linux already went through its hype cycle like 20 years ago. I'd say the high water mark of that cycle was around the release of Cathedral and the Bazaar and the destruction of the VA Linux stock.

Now it's deeply in the plateau of productivity.

umvi2• 4 years ago

I'm a Linux fanboy too, but let's not fool ourselves. If Linux ever went "mainstream", then the amount of malware targeting it would rise precipitously. See: Android

thriftwy2• 4 years ago

Desktop is falling out of favour anyway, so its potential impact is debatable.

nexuist2• 4 years ago

Linux doesn't need malware because what use can scammers get out of someone who can't even afford a MacBook? /s

celdon252• 4 years ago

I feel like this article itself is overhyped. I don't really see anything ground-breaking here, and the author doesn't really elaborate on why the examples fit into the arbitrary categories given.

This categorization is intended to help people better understand which form of hype they‘re confronted with.
I hope this categorization is helpful for you to understand which form of hype you‘re confronted with.

But to what end? No mention of what you can actually do with this information. I guess it's useful if you want to try to sound like the smartest person in the room when explaining it to average people who only dabble in keeping up with tech trends. They probably won't question you. The fact that the draft image went viral on Twitter is case in point.

I'd even venture to say that this probably deserves a flag.

derbOac• 4 years ago

I like this for several reasons, mostly because I like people trying to be somewhat concrete and quantitative about ideas that have a lot of saliency but tend to be thrown around only conceptually. The scale also makes some sense to be based on experience.

I'm not sure the ratings of all the examples are quite right; some of them I think might be over or underhyped more than the author proposes. This isn't too big of a deal to me though, as it seems more like misapplication of the scale rather than the scale itself.

The other thing I might suggest is that I'm not sure the 3-4-5 levels are all that distinct, especially 4 and 5.

Most importantly along these lines, my experience is that the "othering" level can happen well within the realm of 3 and 4. so although I agree that the "othering" phenomenon occurs, I don't see it as distinct from 3 and 4, it's just that the magnitude of it increases as you go up in hype. "Othering" seems like another component dimension, along with present vs future focus and empirical basis for claims.

So something like this with levels 3-5 compressed, or maybe just 4-5, makes a lot of sense to me, like it's something you could maybe actually apply in some kind of scientific study.

eric_cc• 4 years ago

Examples here are (again) the cryptocurrency scene which has been pretty good at othering critics as “no-coiners” or lately with the phrase “have fun staying poor”.

I’m somebody that spends a good deal of time thinking deeply on cryptocurrencies and the implications to society. I believe they a positive, revolutionary step in the right direction of human liberty. And I’ll gladly acknowledge that it’s still speculative until it’s not.

But crypto, like any other movement, attracts total scumbags. It’s unfortunate because people who speak negatively only serve to undermine their group - whether it’s crypto or a social cause group etc. and often they, themselves, are the insecure ignorant one that don’t even deeply understand what they’re fighting for.

zepto3• 4 years ago

Crypto is different because the scumbags are motivated by the currencies themselves.

elefanten• 4 years ago

I suppose this was supposed to sound like a snappy argument? It’s a bland, impactless statement. Even if scumbags are infatuated with something, it can still have legitimate and beneficial uses / users.

And the comment’s wrong too… the scumbags probably want to cash their gains out to traditional currencies, they’re least likely to be in it as technology true believers.

Comevius• 4 years ago

Crypto is not practical or fair by design. It needs a steady supply of greater fools to operate, and the only future it's capable of creating is one where everything is monetized, corporatized and the wealthy is in charge, with no recourse for the rest of us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_xWvX1n9g

tarsinge2• 4 years ago

I really did not like that video. There are some interesting ideas but the tone is insufferable for me, not a fan of superficial punchlines and logical fallacies wrapped as deep thoughts, no matter if I agree or not with the point.

anonporridge2• 4 years ago

All of civilization needs a never ending supply of greater fools to keep operating and reward the early investors.

We call them children.

If you don't want to participate in this ponzi, then chop wood and carry water until you can't anymore and let your body return to the earth.

sepiasaucer3• 4 years ago

IMO the technology blockchain has only demonstrated success in 1 application which is cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrency has only demonstrated success in 2 applications: speculative investment and illegal online purchases. I would include NFT’s under the speculative investment category.

These applications are obviously problematic for 3 main reasons: it wastes enormous amounts of energy, the investment is often at the expense of less tech/financial savvy people, and most people don’t want it to be easier for criminals to conduct financial transactions.

IMO, it is not a few bad apples spoiling the bunch. It is a bunch of bad apples with a few good apples mixed in. Even if your motivations in working in this space are good (not simply for your own technical stimulation/amusement), you are trading off furthering/enabling real world harm now against optimistic speculation about future positive outcomes.

maxilevi8• 4 years ago

I disagree. I use crypto to protect against high inflation in my country and mantain the value of the fruits of my labour. Where does that fit in your categories?

Crypto and DeFi have a lot of applications, especially in third world countries with bad financial systems.

sentrysapper• 4 years ago

airhorns

winphone1974• 4 years ago

The tech industry has always been bullish on "the future" so I don't think this is different today; what does feel different is it seems hype is now the end product vs. hype about the underlying advancement. This may be inevitable in the highly commercialized, mature space that the internet has become.

claaams• 4 years ago

Ah, the El*n M*sk model of marketing.

Hyperloop? Cybertruck? Fully self driving cars?

jimkleiber3• 4 years ago

I wish the chart had a negative dimension as well, or if not a negative one, then increase the number of levels of hype.

I say this because as I read it, I think how little hype I put into some of my work, so little that it may not even register on the base level of hype. The downplaying, even discounting successes or achievements I've attained with products and such.

Perhaps such things don't belong there as they're almost the opposite of hype, and yet I think it would help me see the full spectrum of promotion and help me navigate it more confidently.

rambambram• 4 years ago

Good idea.

I was also thinking about 'negativity', but more along the lines of: I'm missing the author saying what the legal gray areas are. I mean, in level 2 he already talks about "fraud". ;)

jimkleiber3• 4 years ago

Ah yea, I like that idea of maybe talking about the legal risks or overall cons (pun intended) of the different levels :-)

ismail• 4 years ago

As someone who used to have a similar level of "humility", i always felt uncomfortable doing self-promotion. You will also notice that others are much more serious about self-promotion. To the level where there is not much substance when you investigate. I have resigned to the view that, this is the society we live in. Things may always not be as they seem, one has to look closer and recognize the diamonds in the rough.

Five Levels of Hype

Related Stories