Get Acquainted with Us
- So what can or can't you do?
First off, I'm a "jack of all trades", not a specialist. That is, unless you're looking to solve a problem that does lie within one of my areas of
experience. I excel most when dealing with new fields and non-mature technologies and sciences. If you want to know the difference between a 'mature' and 'non-mature' science, read here.
If you want to make a faster silicon chip, or tweak a little more power out of a gasoline or steam engine, then you've probably come to the wrong place. But if you want to expand the potential of a new trend of science, or do something that few people have tried to do, then there's a really good chance you've come to the right place.
But if there is a lot of interest and time, "common knowledge" and "specialized knowledge" of something tends to grow exponentially. As opposed to my own ideas which tend to grow as I give the situation thought, not as others do.
I'm a innovator, inventor, engineer, creater, and objective thinker. By looking at problems objectively, I look more at the basics of situations than the wealth of knowledge associated with any specific trade or field.
Secondly, I'm not a "people-person". So don't expect me to write convincing advertising text, or come up with the "perfect line" to fix your love-life.
The solution to most "people-problems" starts with an understanding of how the other person thinks. I pride myself on thinking differently than other people. If you want to solve a "people-problem" you probably want an expert that has more in common with your target audience.
The answer to "people-problems" is usually to look within oneself, and imagine how the other person will feel, think, or react in a given situation. If you're looking for someone who thinks like the average person, there are probably millions, if not billions, of other people who would probably make better consultants than myself!
- How did you get so creative?
By nature, my mind just doesn't absorb what "everybody knows." So I'm left to try to figure out the universe myself.
I make an assumption based on observations, which is pretty typical. But then I try to make statistical estimates as to whether or not my assumptions are consistant. By nature, my thought processes are unusually objective, but I also try very hard to find increasingly objective ways of looking at things.
Instead of having the intuition to understand things in the same way most people do, I have my own way of thinking things out, slowly and objectively, to try and figure out "why" and "how" every aspect of something works.
Then with this "from the ground up" understanding of the situation, I can slowly and methodically consider a huge number of approaches to a problem. Eventually, I usually can come up with a few approaches. Or sometimes I've thought about a problem similar enough that the answer comes to me suddenly.
The task then is to compare possible solutions and figure out if any of them are likely to work, or which ones are likely to work best. By then the answers are still pretty much concepts. So I'll usually need to tweak that idea(s) until I get something that works.
- How do I tell you my problem?
Fill out our request
form and we'll get back to you.
- A Few Words on Overspecialization
- How come you keep switching from "we" and "I"?
I, David Zelin, founded this company which is now dedicated to the solving of problems that might otherwise go unsolved. Most of the thinking and contemplating, and the ability to think uniquely and originally is mostly my own (although it would be nice to locate people like myself sometime in the future.)
But I've learned from experience that I'm best at doing things that are new and exciting, and not so good at doing tasks where the solution is already known to myself or others and it just needs to be done without reinventing and re-re-re-inventing solutions over and over again.
I'm very appreciative of the "helpers", people who help me and my company, whether they be friends, family, employees, suppliers, contractors, investors, lenders, voluntary contributers, or even the person on the street willing to listen to me when I wanted to think aloud. So everyone involved is encouraged to use the term "we" whenever appropriate, because I appreciate the contributions of others.
But because so much of this particular endeavor centers so much around the exploitation of my own unique abilities, it became obvious that we needed to refer to me, myself, specifically, more than I would have otherwise liked to do.