Sometimes the old ways work best.
In an age of free flow of investment to any idea that has the potential to disrupt an industry or a sector people are rushing to “disrupt” everything that they can. This may be beneficial in some cases but could also possibly be disadvantageous or detrimental.
Consider this excerpt from “Life in the Market Ecosystem”.
“Marvin Harris cites the taboo against eating pork that is shared by Middle — Eastern Jews, Arabs, and Persians. Harris adduces that the religious rationale that Middle-Eastern people’s provide for their aversion to pork have no basis in any conscious, rational decision-making process. Yet this aversion to pork nevertheless assisted Middle Eastern People’s in preserving their germlines for several millenia predating the Industrial Revolution.
According to Harris, the practice of farming hogs in the Middle Eastern desert environment was too ecologically unfeasible to sustain before industrialization took hold. A familial clan of Middle Eastern people’s that permitted some of it’s members to raise hogs found that this enterprise had depleted much of the clan’s resources. This substantially enlarged the probability that most members of this familial community would perish.
This, in turn, significantly jeopardized the familial community likelihood of proliferating. Likewise this shrinking of the familial community also cut down the number of survivors able to teach the next generation to raise hogs on the terrain” (Hayashi,2014).
In conclusion, although, sometimes we may not understand why some structures, rules, or regulations are in place we shouldn't be quick to judge until we study it and understand the reasoning behind it. So, before disrupting, take some time, examine the issue, understand the solution you are proposing, and then, go about the disruption process.
“It is almost always up to us to determine whether the technology is good or bad.”