Get Your Weekly Digest

Receive the best podcast summaries and insights delivered to your inbox every week.

We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe anytime.

TED Talks Daily

How do you rethink how the world works? An entrepreneur and an engineer answer | Yancey Strickler and Jenny Du

with Yancey Strickler, Jenny Du

Published September 19, 2025
View Show Notes

About This Episode

Host Elise Hu introduces a conversation between writer and former Kickstarter CEO Yancey Strickler and engineer-chemist Jenny Du about how feeling like an outsider can shape unconventional careers and systems-level innovations. Strickler reflects on lifelong feelings of not belonging, how that pushed him to question institutions, and how his thinking about punk labels and the Royal Society led to his artist corporation idea. Du describes how a shocking statistic about global food waste set her on a mission to extend the life of healthy foods, and together they discuss resilience, working within entrenched systems, and staying optimistic and truth-focused in a world that often feels "doomy."

Topics Covered

Personal Development Identity Perspective shift Resilience Food systems Sustainability Systems thinking Problem-first invention Science communication

Disclaimer: We provide independent summaries of podcasts and are not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by any podcast or creator. All podcast names and content are the property of their respective owners. The views and opinions expressed within the podcasts belong solely to the original hosts and guests and do not reflect the views or positions of Summapod.

Quick Takeaways

  • Both guests trace their work back to feeling like they did not belong in conventional paths or institutions, and eventually turning those differences into strengths.
  • Jenny Du's company grew from confronting a single disturbing fact: roughly a third of the world's food is lost or wasted before it is eaten, especially fruits and vegetables.
  • Approaching a problem with a beginner's mind outside of industry norms allowed Du and her colleagues to ask very basic but powerful questions about why food spoils and how plants naturally protect themselves.
  • Yancey Strickler's concept of the artist corporation emerged from noticing a shared pattern between DIY punk record labels and the Royal Society: purpose-driven umbrellas that legitimize and grow a worldview.
  • Strickler connects his work to the hero's journey, arguing that true change comes from finding "doors of transcendence" hidden between apparent opposites like artist and corporation.
  • Du frames opposition and systemic inertia as tests of conviction, emphasizing doing good, improving collective quality of life, and accepting that some problems may not be solved within one's lifetime.
  • Strickler argues that even opponents are acting rationally within their "local maximum," and that change is easier when you empathize and move forward together from inside their worldview.
  • Despite acknowledging a broadly "doomy" cultural mood, Du remains optimistic by looking at long timescales, where she believes what is good and better for all tends to prevail.
  • Both emphasize intentionally navigating through societal noise by orienting toward truth rather than being passively pulled by whatever information is most visible.

Podcast Notes

Show introduction and framing of the conversation

Host introduces TED Talks Daily and TED Intersections

Elise Hu describes TED Talks Daily as bringing new ideas to spark curiosity every day[2:28]
• She identifies herself explicitly as the host, Elise Hu
Framing of this episode as part of TED Intersections[2:48]
• TED Intersections is described as an original series of unscripted conversations between speakers and experts
• The series focuses on subjects at the intersection of the guests' expertise

Introduction of guests and central question

Yancey Strickler and Jenny Du are introduced with their roles[2:41]
• Strickler is described as a writer, entrepreneur, and former Kickstarter CEO
• Du is described as an engineer and chemist
Host poses the guiding question: what happens when following the right path leads you to the wrong place?[2:36]
• The conversation is framed as exploring how each person finds unique purpose
Preview of themes around loving one's own "weird" way of being[3:06]
• Hu notes that Strickler and Du will discuss how they found the spark that led to their success and the importance of embracing their differences

Initial reflection on motivation and impact beyond the self

Emphasis that it is not just about personal ideas

A speaker notes that their work is not about "me or us and our beautiful ideas"[3:11]
• They emphasize focusing on why they want to do the work and who else it is for
Belief that successful efforts benefit many others if done right[3:23]
• They express confidence that there can be broad benefits if they "find a way to get it right"

Yancey Strickler's sense of not belonging and drive to disrupt institutions

Jenny Du highlights Strickler's history of disrupting the status quo

Du praises Strickler for breaking structures down at Kickstarter and with his new artist corporation structure[3:55]
• She frames his career as focused on shaking institutions and "normal ways of working"

Strickler explains his lifelong feeling of not belonging

He states that his first thought about why he disrupts is that he's never felt like he belonged anywhere[4:20]
• He mentions growing up in the country on a farm and loving books, feeling misaligned with his environment
Not belonging produced hyper-awareness and anxiety[4:36]
• He describes a "hyper-awareness" of himself and his actions, also naming anxiety as another word for it
• He notes he has never really been part of any institution or "blessed" by them
Lack of institutional access pushed him to find his own path[5:00]
• Strickler says he went to a high school in the middle of nowhere in a rural area and had no connections
• Because established opportunities were not for him, he always had to figure out his own "weird way"

Childhood desire to fit in and eventual reframing of difference as strength

Strickler recalls wanting desperately to fit in as a child[5:45]
• He shares a story of going with his mom to the mall before seventh grade to buy the exact clothes worn by other kids
• Despite matching their clothes, he says classmates "still could tell" he was different, which he calls a ripoff
Traits that hindered him when young became strengths later[6:11]
• He suggests that what holds you back when you're younger can become your strengths when you're older
• He likens his tendency to go against norms to his gait, saying it is simply how he walks through life, even if often annoying

Rethinking school, conformity, and the role of misfits

Critique of school as enforcing conformity

Du observes that school expects students to conform to a set framework of what a good student looks like[6:38]
• She characterizes school as encouraging students to "be a robot" and simply repeat information back
She suggests current time and place may not suit those who stand out[7:15]
• Du mentions a belief that those who do not fit or who struggle in school might later make the greatest change
• She notes that for such individuals, the school environment was simply not the right time and place for them

Obstacles and "coming out wrong" as pathways to depth and originality

Strickler argues that confronting obstacles deepens understanding[7:30]
• He compares extra steps, like learning guitar left-handed, to situations that force deeper engagement with a field
• He believes that such extra difficulty accelerates a person's "ceiling" or potential
Distinction between conventional professionals and entrepreneurs[8:13]
• He contrasts someone who follows the path to become an SVP at a big company with someone who builds their own company
He jokes that some people "come out wrong" and then force their way through the world[8:13]
• That process of forcing your way through teaches you how the world actually works

Jenny Du's origin story: tackling global food waste with science

The shocking food waste statistic as a catalyst

Du traces her work back to hearing a fact that one-third of global food production is lost or wasted[8:44]
• She notes this estimate came from a 2012 UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report
• Her founder, James Rogers, heard this statistic and reacted with "wait, what?"
The idea of something you cannot unhear[9:07]
• Du describes the statistic as one of those things you hear and cannot unhear
• She says it sits with you, nags at you, and compels you to ask what you can do about it

Connection to place and visualization of waste

Du situates the problem in their local context of Santa Barbara, California[9:16]
• She notes they are surrounded by fruit and vegetable fields and see food being grown all around them
She invites the listener to imagine removing half the fruits and vegetables from the plate[9:38]
• She calls it "pretty crazy" to consider that, especially for perishable produce, so much is effectively taken off the plate
• She questions how, in the 21st century, this could be the best we can do

Using a beginner's mind: fundamental questions about spoilage

Material scientists and engineers approach food waste from first principles[10:18]
• Du describes their team as material scientists, chemists, and engineers asking basic questions
• They ask: why is there food waste, how do plants decay or spoil, and how do plants protect themselves?
Value of not coming from food or agriculture[10:44]
• She emphasizes that they do not come from food or agriculture industries
• She sees this as an advantage, as they are not trapped or blinded by accepted ways of doing things

Aligning love of science with meaningful impact

Du expresses gratitude for a journey that blends her interests and values[11:05]
• She says she loves science and engineering and appreciates having a technical problem to work on
Mission to help healthy foods last longer[11:20]
• She wants to put her skills toward what she deems meaningful and impactful use
• She frames their work as helping healthy foods last longer, which she says she wishes everyone ate more of for health and benefit
Commitment despite uncertainty of success[12:12]
• Du admits she did not know if their effort would work but felt it was worth trying

Yancey Strickler's search for meaning and the emergence of the artist corporation idea

Starting from personal unhappiness despite doing what he loved

Strickler says his work often begins with asking "why Yancy sad"[11:52]
• He labels this a kind of "dumb self interrogation" that initiates his projects
He describes having external success but feeling lonely[12:12]
• He was a writer building an audience, running a community, and having success, yet felt lonely all the time
• Attempts to elevate people alongside him did not fix the misaligned dynamics
He took a month-long pause to read and reflect[12:43]
• Strickler says he paused for about a month and did what he does when at loose ends: read widely, including older and random texts

Punk labels as self-created institutions that manifest a worldview

He read a history of hardcore and punk bands[12:46]
• He notes these bands made such weird music that no record label would sign them
DIY strategy: inventing labels to self-legitimize[13:03]
• Bands created a fake record label name, logo, and P.O. box to release their own records
• By the time the first record came out, other bands would ask to be part of the label
He concludes that punk labels manifest more "punkness"[13:18]
• He reframes a punk label not just as a distributor of music but as a vehicle for spreading a worldview and teaching others how to adopt it

The Royal Society as a parallel purpose-driven institution

He read about the history of the Royal Society in 17th-century London[13:24]
• He explains it began in 1660 when Christopher Wren and other natural law scientists started meeting in a pub on Thursday nights
• They were frustrated that facts were determined by the church and the king, so they formed a club with the motto "take nobody's word for it"
Philosophical Transactions as an early experimental "zine"[13:43]
• He notes that in 1664 they published Philosophical Transactions, which he calls the first zine
• People were experimenting with the idea of experiments and sharing results through this publication
Royal Society's role in major scientific developments[14:05]
• He says those pages funded the Babbage machine
• He notes that Isaac Newton and Benjamin Franklin published there, and peer-review and the scientific method were created through that process

Identifying a shared pattern and moving toward the artist corporation idea

He came to see punk labels and the Royal Society as essentially the same kind of project[15:25]
• He defines them as umbrellas or organizations that stand for a purpose, are open to anyone who meets certain criteria, and have some economic or rule-based structure
He believes this model is a powerful form of culture creation across history[15:26]
• He calls it the most powerful form of culture creation ever, historically speaking
He tested his ideas by sharing a draft with five people[15:00]
• He wrote up his observations, was unsure what to do, and sent the document to five people who run similar projects
• All five responded saying they had never seen this "meta story" before, which validated the idea for him
That validation led to building tools and imagining legal structures for such projects[15:25]
• He says the process led to building a tool for this type of project to exist today and to imagining how such projects could legally become powerful and wealthy
• He frames all of this as starting from trying to understand his own unhappiness with a situation he had created and ostensibly wanted

Hero's journey, opposites, and "doors of transcendence"

Kickstarter as building a door in a wall

Strickler references his TED talk analogy of turning a wall into a door[16:02]
• He says that when starting Kickstarter there had been a wall and they built a door, a line that had been in his talk for some time

Summary of Joseph Campbell's hero's journey framework

He read Joseph Campbell's "The Hero with a Thousand Faces", which developed the hero's journey idea[16:10]
• He recounts that in the hero's journey, the hero gets "the shit kicked out of" them, is called to return, initially denies the call, and must go deeper before returning
Pivotal moment is achieving transcendence[16:28]
• He notes that Campbell says the pivotal moment is that the hero finds transcendence
• He says Campbell found similar story shapes across every society's myths

Doors of transcendence and the role of opposites

He describes transcendence as going through metaphorical doors[16:56]
• According to Strickler, Campbell writes that doors of transcendence are everywhere, including metaphorically between the speakers
These doors are locked by pairs of opposites[17:33]
• He lists traditional opposites like light and dark, life and death, and adds his own example of artist and corporation
• Opposites make it seem there is no space between them, obscuring the door
The hero's suffering allows them to perceive the crack[18:20]
• He explains that because the hero has been beaten down and changed, they can now see the crack between opposites
• The final stage is to identify and open the door, then return and tell others about it
Opening the door is both an honor and a responsibility[18:06]
• By opening the door and sharing that fact, the hero opens doors for everyone
• He calls this the point of the journey and says that deepest truths lie in finding these hidden doors
He sees the universe as harmonizing with itself[17:58]
• Strickler refers to the "glory of the universe" and says it all harmonizes with itself, with these patterns giving hints about what is at play
• He describes a mix of honor, responsibility, and duty involved in this kind of work

Facing opposition, systemic entanglement, and the need for resilience

Recognition that visionary work meets opposition

Strickler notes that hearing about Du's work, he thought everyone would love it[18:50]
• He expresses surprise that she faces opposition and that some people may not care or may struggle to see the world as she sees it
He asks Du how she carries that opposition[19:30]

Du's motivation: doing good and elevating collective quality of life

Du connects her response to why she loves science[19:55]
• She says science has always been about finding ways to do good
She emphasizes finite time and the desire to use it well[20:18]
• She notes that we are all here on borrowed time and that our time is finite
• For her, making the most of that time means serving or doing good
She frames her goal as elevating collective quality of life[20:18]
• She explicitly mentions wanting to elevate "our collective quality of life" if possible

Opposition as a test of conviction amid entangled systems

Du sees opposition as testing whether she stays her course[20:47]
• She says opposition tests conviction about whether or not to remain on the path she is on
She acknowledges "entanglement of systems or incentives" that trap people[21:07]
• Du describes an entanglement of systems or incentives that has "got us all trapped"
• She insists we should not accept these entanglements as inevitable
Commitment to action even without guaranteed resolution in her lifetime[21:30]
• She says it will take commitment to action and a willingness to proceed even if the problem is not solved within one's lifetime
• She calls that the path that is worth walking

Resilience through community and shared stories

She stresses it is not about personal glory but about the "why" and "who"[22:02]
• Du repeats that it is not about her or their beautiful ideas but about why they want to do it and who else it is for
• She believes many others will benefit if they can get it right
She acknowledges resilience is challenging but strengthened by others' journeys[22:34]
• She calls it a challenge of resilience and notes other people encounter similar struggles
• She says it is inspiring to meet others with their own version of the fight and to draw energy from their stories to avoid letting "the hard days win"

Creating a new legal structure and working within others' local maximums

Du's curiosity about the artist corporation legal process

Du calls the artist corporation an impressive example of working beyond normal legal bounds[22:39]
• She says most people work within legal bounds as common people, while he has created a whole new legal structure
She has numerous questions about practical steps[23:13]
• She asks where he started, who he needed to convince, and what else needed to change to accommodate the structure
• She asks whether someone today can actually register or incorporate as an artist corporation
She frames it as carving out room within laws that are shaped a certain way[23:16]
• As a self-described rule follower, she sees laws as shaped in particular ways and wonders where there is room to carve this new form out

Strickler on empathy, local maxima, and gentle change

He believes it helps to empathize with opponents[22:52]
• He says even when people oppose you, it helps to empathize with them
He describes people as operating rationally within their "local maximum"[23:14]
• He suggests that people behave rationally according to their local maximum, and the challenge is whether you can change that maximum
Strategy of entering another's "bubble" to move together[24:28]
• He describes it working best when you can crawl into someone's bubble with them and look at the world together
• He imagines that by the end of the conversation, their perspective has moved forward eight steps
He notes resistance to being wrong and need for gentle approaches[25:16]
• He says people are resistant to being wrong because change implies being wrong, so these shifts must be gentle

Learning from the public benefit corporation precedent

Strickler situates the artist corporation against the backdrop of corporate law history[25:00]
• He notes that the last time a new corporate structure was created in the United States was 2012, the public benefit corporation
Kickstarter engaged early with the public benefit corporation model[25:10]
• He says Kickstarter was one of the first companies to become a public benefit corporation
• They closely followed the process as the structure was passed into law by states
He observed that the process was technical and esoteric but real[26:12]
• He recalls that the process registered to him as very technical and esoteric, but it nonetheless happened
• He suggests that because it is so technical, it operates at a different frequency and few people care enough to dive into it

Timing, experience, and networks enabling the artist corporation concept

A personal wall triggered him to recall the possibility of new structures[26:28]
• He says that when he later hit a wall with something he wanted to do and could not see a clear option, his brain remembered that precedent
• He thought, "could you do that thing on that thing," or "add that to that," combining ideas
He credits experience with helping him navigate complex processes[27:21]
• He calls experience a blessing and says it lets you know how to roll with such things
He believes the idea arrived at his most capable moment with strong support[26:58]
• He says the idea arrived when he was at his most capable moment as a human being up to now
• He also felt fortunate to know many great people who could help with aspects he did not understand

Optimism amid a "doomy" mood and navigating truth in a noisy world

Perception of a "doomy" global mood and Du's general optimism

Strickler characterizes the current world mood as "quite doomy"[27:44]
• He asks Du if she is an optimistic person and whether that mood gets her down or if she can see beyond it
Du replies that she is mostly optimistic, depending on the day[26:41]
• She says she is mostly optimistic and that it depends a bit on the day
She stresses giving herself grace and looking at long time horizons[26:51]
• She notes the importance of giving herself grace and suggests that over a long enough period, the things that matter bubble back up

Belief that what is good and right tends to prevail over time

Du acknowledges possible naivety but trusts in long-term correction[27:57]
• She admits it may be naive but believes that what is good, right, and better for all of us prevails in the end
She uses a pendulum metaphor for history[28:10]
• She says history offers many examples where the pendulum navigates back and forth
• She notes she does not feel it has gone in one direction forever without recalibrating or finding its way back

Societal malaise, noise, and intentional focus on truth

Du wonders about the root of societal malaise[28:56]
• She asks what is at the root of our malaise as a society that it can devolve to such a state
She identifies pervasive noise as a major issue[27:21]
• She says there is a lot of noise and poses the question of how to navigate according to truth
She calls for a conscious, intentional mindset[27:27]
• She argues it requires a conscious mindset and intentionality to avoid being pulled by what we merely see

Outro: TED Intersections and TED curation

Closing of the conversation and reference to the series

The conversation between Yancey Strickler and Jenny Du formally ends[27:44]
• A speaker thanks the other and calls the conversation a treat and "awesome"
Host identifies the conversation as part of TED Intersections[27:51]
• The outro states that this was a conversation between Yancey Strickler and Jenny Du for the original series TED Intersections

Pointers to TED.com and TED curation guidelines

Listeners are invited to watch this and other conversations[27:51]
• The outro directs listeners to TED.com to watch this conversation and others from the series
Brief mention of TED's curation guidelines and production credits[28:04]
• Listeners are told they can learn more about TED's curation at ted.com/curationguidelines
• The outro notes that the talk was fact-checked by the TED research team and lists several production staff before Elise Hu signs off

Lessons Learned

Actionable insights and wisdom you can apply to your business, career, and personal life.

1

Feeling like an outsider can become a powerful advantage if you use it to question assumptions, deepen your understanding, and create your own path instead of forcing yourself to conform.

Reflection Questions:

  • • Where in your life do you feel like you "don't belong," and how might that perspective actually help you see things others miss?
  • • How could you intentionally lean into one of your so-called weaknesses and explore how it might become a strength over time?
  • • What is one area where you are currently trying to conform that you could instead approach in your own "weird way" this month?
2

Start with the problem that you "cannot unhear"-a fact or injustice that nags at you-and let that guide where you apply your skills, rather than beginning with a solution in search of a problem.

Reflection Questions:

  • • What issue, statistic, or experience have you encountered recently that you just can't shake from your mind?
  • • How might your current skills or training be repurposed to address that specific problem in a small but concrete way?
  • • When could you carve out time in the next two weeks to research the root causes of that issue and list a few basic questions to explore, as Du did with food waste?
3

Approaching entrenched systems with a beginner's mind and empathy-seeing people as acting rationally within their "local maximum"-makes it more likely you can shift those systems without triggering defensive resistance.

Reflection Questions:

  • • In a current conflict or institutional constraint you face, how might the other side be acting rationally from their own vantage point?
  • • What would it look like to "crawl into their bubble" and view the situation from their perspective before proposing any change?
  • • Which specific conversation this week could you approach more gently and collaboratively, aiming to move forward a few steps together instead of trying to win outright?
4

Resilient, mission-driven work often requires accepting long time horizons, recognizing entangled incentives, and committing to a path that may not be fully resolved within your own lifetime.

Reflection Questions:

  • • What long-term problem in your field or community feels important enough that you would still work on it even without guaranteed success in your lifetime?
  • • How might reframing setbacks as tests of conviction change the way you interpret opposition or slow progress?
  • • Who else is on a similar path whose stories you could learn from or connect with to strengthen your resilience when "the hard days" show up?
5

In a noisy, pessimistic environment, deliberately orienting toward truth and looking at longer timescales can sustain a grounded optimism that what is better for everyone tends to prevail over time.

Reflection Questions:

  • • Which information sources in your life are adding the most "noise," and how could you reduce their influence to see more clearly?
  • • How would your outlook on a current challenge change if you deliberately evaluated it over a 5-10 year horizon instead of the next few months?
  • • What daily or weekly practice could help you pause, check in with what you believe is true and important, and avoid being pulled along by whatever is loudest in the moment?

Episode Summary - Notes by Parker

How do you rethink how the world works? An entrepreneur and an engineer answer | Yancey Strickler and Jenny Du
0:00 0:00