Innovation is about finding a better way of doing something. Like many of the new development buzzwords (which many of them are over-used on many business documents), the concept of innovation originates from the world of business. It refers to the generation of new products through the process of creative entrepreneurship, putting it into production, and diffusing it more widely through increased sales. Innovation can be viewed as t he application of better solutions that meet new requirements, in-articulated needs, or existing market needs. This is accomplished through more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are readily available to markets, governments and society. The term innovation can be defined as something original and, as a consequence, new, that “breaks into” the market or society.
Innoveracy: Misunderstanding Innovation article points out that there is a form of ignorance which seems to be universal: the inability to understand the concept and role of innovation. The way this is exhibited is in the misuse of the term and the inability to discern the difference between novelty, creation, invention and innovation. The result is a failure to understand the causes of success and failure in business and hence the conditions that lead to economic growth. The definition of innovation is easy to find but it seems to be hard to understand. Here is a simple taxonomy of related activities that put innovation in context:
- Novelty: Something new
- Creation: Something new and valuable
- Invention: Something new, having potential value through utility
- Innovation: Something new and uniquely useful
The taxonomy is illustrated with the following diagram.
The differences are also evident in the mechanisms that exist to protect the works: Novelties are usually not protectable, Creations are protected by copyright or trademark, Inventions can be protected for a limited time through patents (or kept secret) and Innovations can be protected through market competition but are not defensible through legal means.
Innovation is a lot of talked about nowdays as essential to businesses to do. Is innovation essential for development work? article tells that innovation has become central to the way development organisations go about their work. In November 2011, Bill Gates told the G20 that innovation was the key to development. Donors increasingly stress innovation as a key condition for funding, and many civil society organisations emphasise that innovation is central to the work they do.
Some innovation ideas are pretty simple, and some are much more complicated and even sound crazy when heard first. The is place for crazy sounding ideas: venture capitalists are gravely concerned that the tech startups they’re investing in just aren’t crazy enough:
Not all development problems require new solutions, sometimes you just need to use old things in a slightly new way. Development innovations may involve devising technology (such as a nanotech water treatment kit), creating a new approach (such as microfinance), finding a better way of delivering public services (such as one-stop egovernment service centres), identifying ways of working with communities (such as participation), or generating a management technique (such as organisation learning).
Theorists of innovation identify innovation itself as a brief moment of creativity, to be followed by the main routine work of producing and selling the innovation. When it comes to development, things are more complicated. Innovation needs to be viewed as tool, not master. Innovation is a process, not a one time event. Genuine innovation is valuable but rare.
There are many views on the innovation and innvation process. I try to collect together there some views I have found on-line. Hopefully they help you more than confuze. Managing complexity and reducing risk article has this drawing which I think pretty well describes innovation as done in product development:
8 essential practices of successful innovation from The Innovator’s Way shows essential practices in innovation process. Those practices are all integrated into a non-sequential, coherent whole and style in the person of the innovator.
In the IT work there is lots of work where a little thinking can be a source of innovation. Automating IT processes can be a huge time saver or it can fail depending on situation. XKCD comic strip Automation as illustrates this:
System integration is a critical element in project design article has an interesting project cost influence graphic. The recommendation is to involve a system integrator early in project design to help ensure high-quality projects that satisfy project requirements. Of course this article tries to market system integration services, but has also valid points to consider.
Core Contributor Loop (CTTDC) from Art Journal blog posting Blog Is The New Black tries to link inventing an idea to theory of entrepreneurship. It is essential to tune the engine by making improvements in product, marketing, code, design and operations.
4,523 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
How Positive Thinking Creates More Problems Than It Solves
http://www.forbes.com/sites/janbruce/2013/11/19/how-positive-thinking-creates-more-problems-than-it-solves/
One of the most counterproductive pieces of advice spewed from keynotes, gurus, and motivational speakers of every stripe is this: Think positively. Why? It’s not a one-size-fits-all guide to leadership (or life) and adds considerably to your stress load. Because you not only have to tackle the obstacles you’re already facing; you have to also wrestle any negative thoughts you have about them to the ground.
There is a better and more important way to lead. Because there’s something far more valuable than being simply optimistic, happy, or upbeat—and it’s cultivation of emotional agility . Your ability to be aware of and receptive to all kinds of shifts in thinking and the emotions they create, without getting toppled by them, is what will make you the leader you need to be.
“Effective leaders don’t buy into or try to suppress their inner experiences. Instead they approach them in a mindful, values-driven, and productive way—developing what we call emotional agility. In our complex, fast-changing knowledge economy, this ability to manage one’s thoughts and feelings is essential to business success. Numerous studies, from the University of London professor Frank Bond and others, show that emotional agility can help people alleviate stress, reduce errors, become more innovative, and improve job performance.”
Anticipating the Negative Makes You, Well, Negative
“our constant efforts to eliminate the negative… is what causes us to feel so insecure, anxious, uncertain, or unhappy,” and advocates instead the embrace of a ‘negative’ approach to happiness.
We all want to succeed—but the answer is not spending all our time hunting down and killing fears one at a time; it’s to rise above the negative by recognizing that, come good or ill, our values sustain us in a much stronger way than positive thinking ever could.
Tomi Engdahl says:
4 Reasons Positive Thinking Doesn’t Work (And What to Do Instead)
http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifehack/4-reasons-positive-thinking-doesnt-work-and-what-to-do-instead.html
Don’t you just love how whenever you’re struggling with a goal or problem, the first thing anyone tells you is, “It’s okay, just think positive!”
While the advice is well-meaning, I’m sure most of the time you met it with a grateful, “Thanks for the encouragement. Yeah, I’ll do that.”
Secretly, you thought to yourself:
“That’s a bunch of B.S. I can’t just Vulcan mind-meld myself into conquering this problem!”
You know what? You’re absolutely right.
Below are four reasons positive thinking alone fails to deliver results. To achieve your big goals you need to focus most of your energy on positive action instead.
You Need Feedback
For progress of any kind, you need a continuous feedback loop. Every improvement you experience stimulates and rewards your brain, making you feel good about the accomplishment. When you feel good about something you’ve done, you get more motivated to keep doing it.
You Need Measurable Progress
The ability to track your progress is essential if you are to successfully achieve any goal. There is an explicit set of actions needed to get to your goal. When you complete any of those actions, it becomes a record of your progress towards that goal.
You Need Accountability
The idea of being able to attract positivity and success into your life by simply thinking about it more often than others leaves out an important ingredient for reaching your goals:
Accountability. Without this key ingredient, all the positive thinking in the world won’t help you.
You Need To Be Realistic
Even the most successful people in the world experience negativity in their lives. Less than desirable events can and will happen to us no matter how much energy we spend trying to think positive. It’s naïve to believe that we can positively think away our problems.
Don’t get me wrong. Thinking positive goes a long way in changing your perspective on how to achieve goals in your life.
Tomi Engdahl says:
6 things Back to the Future promised and are here (sort of)
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/serious-fun/4376436/6-things-Back-to-the-Future-promised-and-are-here–sort-of-
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Proto BuildBar is Exactly What it Sounds Like, and it Sounds Awesome
http://hackaday.com/2014/10/27/the-proto-buildbar-is-exactly-what-it-sounds-like-and-it-sounds-awesome/
People of Dayton, Ohio have a new reason to get excited with the opening of what is perhaps the world’s first Bar/Makerspace.
Called the Proto BuildBar, it’s kind of a cross between a 3D printing lab, a makerspace, and a cafe. Hang out, drink, eat, 3D print — sounds like most hacker spaces we’ve been to, but this might just be the first one with a cafe being it’s main business model!
While Dayton has long since been called a technology hub (what with Boeing and other high tech companies in the area), opening the Proto Buildbar is hoped to bring new life to the surrounding area!
Tomi Engdahl says:
Think Negative! 7 Ways It Can Help You
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/living-single/201410/think-negative-7-ways-it-can-help-you
1. If you feel too relaxed and happy and dreamy, you may not be all that motivated to get things done.
2. Negative emotions like anxiety and suspiciousness can act like an attentional funnel that narrows the mind’s eye to important details.
3. “people prone to depressed moods also tend to notice more details”
4. “A furrowed brow or frown warns people off when you aren’t in the mood”
5. “…a little bit of negativity at work can keep people from agreeing too quickly and instead encourage them to focus on getting it right…”
6. defensive pessimism: If that’s your approach, you tend to imagine worst-case scenarios when you have something important in the works (such as a paper or a presentation). How is that a good thing? It’s good if it motivates you to think of the many specific things that could go wrong, then take steps to avoid them.
7. sometimes perfect strangers are better at knowing when someone is lying than that person’s romantic partner is
Tomi Engdahl says:
When you need to get rid of negative thinking:
How to silence negative thinking
It is all too easy to fall into unhealthy patterns of thought, but visualising your inner critic can help
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/11/how-to-silence-negative-thinking
How to Stop Negative Thinking in 7 Simple Steps
http://www.uncommonhelp.me/articles/how-to-stop-negative-thinking/
1) Stop thinking in extremes
2) Stop over-generalizing the negative
3) Don’t minimize the positive
4) Stop mindreading
5) Stop taking all the responsibility
6) Stop forcing your own rules on life
7) Stop making stuff up and believing it
Tomi Engdahl says:
Lucio Lanza to Receive EDA Honor
Phil Kaufman award recognizes excellence and vision
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1324390&
Startups have always been the driving force in Silicon Valley, and Lucio Lanza has inspired innumerable electronic design automation (EDA) and intellectual property (IP) startups for decades. One secret he has seeded the industry with since the 1980s is, namely, how to succeed.
It’s about sharing. “The only way you will win big,” he tells EE Times, “is if you have a strategic advantage. So you should help other people, because a strategic advantage is one thing you can talk about to your competitors that they can do nothing about.”
Build it and they will come?
Even though chip and system makers are not demanding design-for-inspection and design-for-security today, that does not mean these are the wrong things to work on. What innovators have to do first is show something is possible, then the demand shows up on its own.
“If you start showing that you can do it, then demand shows up. Demand does not show up in a vacuum. Demand shows up when people know it is possible. That’s when the positive feedback shows up, when you demonstrate a new area of design capability — of design automation. People will look at this new possibility and say to themselves, wow, if I had that I could do this.”
However, EDA is not the solution to everything.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Are Today’s Designs Bound by the Constraints of Yesteryear?
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=216&doc_id=1324388&
Are there instances of the way in which we design things today being bound by the constraints of yesteryear?
These days, of course, we are used to having access to high-speed, high-resolution printers coupled with software programs that aid in laying everything out “just so.” The days of meter manufacturers using rub-on lettering have long gone, and we are no longer constrained by their limitations, so why do some manufacturers continue to omit ‘+’ symbols? Is it just a matter of taste, or is it a case of “We’ve always done it this way?”
In turn, this led me to ponder whether there are other instances of the way in which we design things today being bound by constraints of yesteryear that are no longer of any consequence. Can you think of any such cases?
Tomi Engdahl says:
In New Structure, Google CEO Page Aims for ‘Faster, Better Decisions’
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/10/27/in-new-structure-google-ceo-page-aims-for-faster-better-decisions/
Google CEO Larry Page says the 16-year-old company is showing signs of age, and Page wants to make sure it stays innovative.
Google’s new organization is “a more common corporate structure,” Page wrote. He said he hopes employees will see “faster, better decisions” from the changes.
The product and business sides of Google’s operations will be separated further under Page’s re-organization.
“In terms of management meetings, we’re going to simplify things too, taking our current main management meeting and splitting it into more focused parts. Sundar will run… product-centric meetings with real focus on excellence. I will run a more business-centric meeting with our functional leaders and Sundar, drilling into sales, partnerships and deals as well as any important legal, finance, HR, government relations or PR issues.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Machine-Learning Maestro Michael Jordan on the Delusions of Big Data and Other Huge Engineering Efforts
Big-data boondoggles and brain-inspired chips are just two of the things we’re really getting wrong
http://spectrum.ieee.org/robotics/artificial-intelligence/machinelearning-maestro-michael-jordan-on-the-delusions-of-big-data-and-other-huge-engineering-efforts
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Agility Edge for Pharmaceutical R&D
https://www.cloudinsights.com/community/nicole/the-agility-edge-for-pharmaceu-680021937.html
When it comes to critical research and development, companies across the vertical spectrum are challenged with freeing the vital internal resources required to push their business beyond the moment. In every major industry, the cloud is being seen as a secure, reliable, and robust option for keeping vital R&D efforts alive.
This trend of conducting mission-critical research and development using Amazon Web Services (AWS) extends to the large, diverse life sciences segment. Some of the most important life science research and development is discovery of and testing new compounds and pharmaceuticals. This is essential to future business, since success hinges on making the most important discoveries and ensuring their viability and safety first.
Pharmaceutical giants, including Pfizer, are among the many life sciences companies that have realized the possibilities for research and development given the limitless access to compute, storage, and robust application tools. The company’s internal HPC software and systems groups are tasked with supporting massive-scale research, analysis, and modeling efforts to push toward more effective, safer drugs. But they need a scalable, on-demand, secure way to push time-critical, data-intensive, and computationally challenging R&D projects into a greater well of storage and compute resources.
Given regulatory, security, and performance concerns, the company has looked to the Amazon Virtual Private Cloud (Amazon VPC) to help handle peak times in their R&D cycle. According to Pfizer’s lead for HPC and R&D, Dr. Michael Miller, “Research can be unpredictable, especially as the ongoing science raises new questions.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
We Are All Confident Idiots
http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/10/28/204240/we-are-all-confident-idiots
If you’ve ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect, you’ll be familiar with David Dunning, professor of psychology at Cornell. He’s written an article on the “psychology of human wrongness,” explaining how confidence in one’s answers tends to be high for people who don’t know what they’re talking about. He says, “What’s curious is that, in many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge.”
We Are All Confident Idiots
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/confident-idiots-92793/
The trouble with ignorance is that it feels so much like expertise. A leading researcher on the psychology of human wrongness sets us straight.
In many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge.
Occasionally, one can even see this tendency at work in the broad movements of history. Among its many causes, the 2008 financial meltdown was precipitated by the collapse of an epic housing bubble stoked by the machinations of financiers and the ignorance of consumers. And recent research suggests that many Americans’ financial ignorance is of the inappropriately confident variety.
Because it’s so easy to judge the idiocy of others, it may be sorely tempting to think this doesn’t apply to you. But the problem of unrecognized ignorance is one that visits us all. And over the years, I’ve become convinced of one key, overarching fact about the ignorant mind. One should not think of it as uninformed. Rather, one should think of it as misinformed.
An ignorant mind is precisely not a spotless, empty vessel, but one that’s filled with the clutter of irrelevant or misleading life experiences, theories, facts, intuitions, strategies, algorithms, heuristics, metaphors, and hunches that regrettably have the look and feel of useful and accurate knowledge. This clutter is an unfortunate by-product of one of our greatest strengths as a species. We are unbridled pattern recognizers and profligate theorizers. Often, our theories are good enough to get us through the day, or at least to an age when we can procreate. But our genius for creative storytelling, combined with our inability to detect our own ignorance, can sometimes lead to situations that are embarrassing, unfortunate, or downright dangerous—especially in a technologically advanced, complex democratic society that occasionally invests mistaken popular beliefs with immense destructive power (See: crisis, financial; war, Iraq).
As the humorist Josh Billings once put it, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” (Ironically, one thing many people “know” about this quote is that it was first uttered by Mark Twain or Will Rogers—which just ain’t so.)
The way we traditionally conceive of ignorance—as an absence of knowledge—leads us to think of education as its natural antidote. But education can produce illusory confidence
Dunning–Kruger effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias manifesting in two principal ways: unskilled individuals tend to suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate, while highly skilled individuals tend to rate their ability lower than is accurate. In unskilled individuals, this bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their ineptitude. Skilled individuals tend to underestimate their relative competence, erroneously assuming that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Getting Lost In the Scientific Woods Is Good For You
http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/10/29/0140241/getting-lost-in-the-scientific-woods-is-good-for-you
Wandering into the woods unprepared and without a plan sounds like a terrible idea. But if you’re interested in scientific exploration at the frontiers, confronting the unknown with whatever you happen to have at your disposal, you have to take that risk. You have to be willing to take those steps
Into the Woods
https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/into-the-woods-f4a7c87c7f70
How wandering into the forest of scientific unknowns can lead to either its greatest rewards, or its most dismal failures.
It’s tempting to see the cautionary tales of Eddington and Hoyle and feel that we would not get so easily lost. But if we were to develop a theory that works in many ways, and truly feels like the right approach, would we really discard it so easily?
That’s why experimental and observational evidence is so central to science. In the end it’s the only thing that keeps us from getting lost in the woods.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Promise Theory—What Is It?
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/promise-theory—what-it
During the past 20 years, there has been a growing sense of inadequacy about the “command and control” model for managing IT systems.
This command and control model is called an obligation model in computer science. It has many problems. One of those problems is that it separates intent from implementation, creating uncertainty of outcome.
Luckily, there is a complementary approach to looking at design that fixes these deficiencies, not in terms of obligations, but in terms of promises.
In a promise-based design, each part behaves only according to the promises it makes to others. Instead of instructions from without, we have behavior promised from within. Since the promises are made by “self” (human self or machine self), it means that the decision is always made with knowledge of the same circumstances under which implementation will take place. Moreover, if two promises conflict with one another, the agent has complete information about those circumstances and conflicting intentions to be able to resolve them without having to ask for external help.
A promise-oriented view is somewhat like a service view.
Electronics are built in this way, as is plumbing and other commoditized construction methods. You buy components (from a suitable supplier) that promise certain properties (resistance, capacitance, voltage-current relationships), and you combine them based on those expectations into a circuit that keeps a greater promise (like being a radio transmitter or a computer).
To offer an example of a promise-oriented language, think of HTML and cascading style sheets on the Web.
The language looks superficially different, but it basically is the same kind of declarative association between patterns of objects and what they promise.
This complementary non-command way of thinking seems unnatural to us in the context of infrastructure, but more usual in the context of Web pages.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Simulated Education: STEM must change!
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/measure-of-things/4436437/Simulated-Education–STEM-must-change-
The linear low-hanging fruit has all been picked and it’s time for STEM (science technology engineering and mathematics) education to leap into the 21st century of complex systems. Why? Because STEM education focuses on archaic problem solving techniques.
The tools used to approach the complex, nonlinear problems faced in modern society don’t fit the educational techniques that have been used for the last few hundred years. Sure, computing devices play a role in the classroom, but test techniques and homework assignments, even projects, no longer resemble the work of practicing professionals.
The problems that will confront scientists and engineers who begin their undergraduate educations this year will be complex. Not just complicated, but nonlinear, complex problems whose solutions can’t be derived through linear approximation.
the behavior of the vast majority of physical systems can’t be resolved into a tidy equation that can be written on a sheet of paper. Back in the 20th century, teachers could guide students through solvable problems and then, if there was time at the end of the term, provide ways to approximate solutions to problems whose solutions can’t be written down in a few equations. Judging by the science and technology developed in the 1900s, the system worked really well.
Linear approximations worked great for Morse code on long cables, but they’re so useful for DP-QPSK (dual polarization quadrature phase shift keyed) signals on optical fibers. All those clever analog approaches to solving electromechanical problems demonstrated unqualified genius, but now we program nonlinear IIR (infinite impulse response) filters on microprocessors that perform dozens of operations in a nanosecond; we use MEMS (micro-electromechanical systems) to light up pixels on movie screens and to switch signals in optical and quantum computers.
From at least 9th grade, students should be simulating systems instead of trying to solve them. Creating a simulation requires more complete understanding of a situation than deriving a mathematical solution. In the old-school pencil-and-paper approach, once you set up the relevant theory and constraints, you just turned the mathematical crank and the solution appeared.
Unfortunately, lots of times students get so caught up in turning the crank that they forget the system their trying to understand.
When a student creates a simulation in software—whether in Python, C, Visual Basic, MATLAB, or whatever—she has to understand each part of the system, how the components interact, the important parameters, and how the pieces combine into a whole. Simulation, backed by the massive computing power available on every desk in every cubicle in America, can solve problems like starling flock behavior, how locusts swarm, and, some day, perhaps even how consciousness emerges from neural interactions—problems thought unsolvable for thousands of years that a 9th grader can easily solve by applying a few simple relationships in a simulation. Okay, maybe not emergence of consciousness, but you get the point.
Now that you’re sold on the idea, we have to face the economic reality.
From early grades, students will use programming environments of increasing sophistication. The software, compilers, all that stuff is, or can be, free. Programming skills are no more difficult than 9th grade algebra. Seriously, if-then, do while, for, …, all that stuff pales in comparison to solving polynomials. Students will need reasonably powerful computers, but most already have them and those who don’t, well, they’re getting ripped off of an education and that’s a different problem.
So, the real problem is twofold.
Every STEM teacher has to be not just a proficient programmer, but damn near a software ace. Software aces cost about twice as much as a teacher.
The second problem is that it takes longer to simulate a system than to work through a typical STEM homework problem.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Larry Page interview: Silicon Valley has become short-sighted; too few investors are chasing breakthrough technologies —
FT interview with Google co-founder and CEO Larry Page
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/3173f19e-5fbc-11e4-8c27-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3HoPUCXMl
Even the search engine’s original mission is not big enough for what he now has in mind
At 41, the co-founder and chief executive of Google is freeing himself up to think big. A reorganisation in recent days has shifted responsibility for much of his company’s current business to a lieutenant and left him with room to indulge his more ambitious urges. The message: the world’s most powerful internet company is ready to trade the cash from its search engine monopoly for a slice of the next century’s technological bonanza.
Even Google’s famously far-reaching mission statement, to “organise the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”, is not big enough for what he now has in mind.
“There’s definitely a lot of capital and excitement, and these things tend to happen in cycles,” he says. “But 100 years from now you’re probably not going to care about that.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Too Many Kids Quit Science Because They Don’t Think They’re Smart
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/11/too-many-kids-quit-science-because-they-dont-think-theyre-smart/382165/
But praising their intelligence can make them feel even more insecure. A self-esteem expert offers a way out of the conundrum.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Why middle-aged entrepreneurs will be critical to the next trillion-dollar business
http://venturebeat.com/2014/10/31/why-middle-aged-entrepreneurs-will-be-critical-to-the-next-trillion-dollar-business/
Steve Jobs was 52 when he announced the iPhone. That was in 2007. Years later, the Apple cofounder introduced the MacBook Air, App Store, and iPad. Tim Cook, who was 51 when he took over from Jobs, is building on his legacy. They both shattered a myth that the young rule the technology industry.
Silicon Valley’s venture capitalists, however, speak openly of their bias toward the young.
“People under 35 are the people who make change happen; people over 45 basically die in terms of new ideas,” Vinod Khosla, a prominent investor, said at a conference I attended.
Referring to the age of entrepreneurs whom venture capitalists fund, investor Paul Graham told the New York Times, “The cutoff in investors’ heads is 32; after 32, they start to be a little skeptical.” He acknowledged that he could be “tricked by anyone who looks like Mark Zuckerberg.” Others go so far as to claim that Internet entrepreneurs peak at age 25.
The cult of youth is so powerful that billionaire Peter Thiel announced in September 2010 that he would pay college students $100,000 to drop out. Instead of “wasting” precious years in school and then being burdened by “incredible amounts of debt,” he said, they could be “focused on breakthrough technologies that will take civilization to the next level.”
There are hordes of young founders in Silicon Valley, some of whom drop out of school to start their companies. Venture capitalists collectively invest billions in them. The vast majority of these startups fail, however, because there is no substitute for experience and knowledge. What makes entrepreneurs successful, as my team’s research revealed, is work and industry experience and management ability.
These come with age. The inexperience — and immaturity — of youth is one reason venture capitalists’ track record is so poor. In 2012, the Kauffman Foundation analyzed 20 years of investment data from nearly 100 venture funds. It found that the vast majority of them produced lower returns than did the public markets.
The experiment by Thiel to pay college students to drop out did not result in any world-changing startups.
The claim that only the young can effect change has been disproved not only by Apple, but also by founders, inventors, innovators, and executives at almost every major technology company, including Google, LinkedIn, Salesforce.com, Qualcomm, and Intel. Qualcomm, for example, was founded by Irwin Jacobs when he was 52 and Andrew Viterbi, who was 50.
Tomi Engdahl says:
while play: learn
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/systems-interface/4436642/while-play–learn?_mc=NL_EDN_EDT_EDN_today_20141103&cid=NL_EDN_EDT_EDN_today_20141103&elq=8094aa114c724f70aedba8f15d7fdc3e&elqCampaignId=19968
The concept of tying games into the education process is gradually entering the mainstream. Few things engage the mind and attention more than the mix of conflict and discovery in games. Games are considered important aids in development of non-cognitive skills such as patience and discipline, which are considered superior to IQ scores in predicting success. Conferences and organizations such as The Institute of Play/GlassLab and the Games+Learning+Society Center attract partners such as AMD, the Gates Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, Microsoft, NSF, and more. But can games help students learn programming or help engineers become better at their craft?
In the context of software education, the concept of playing to learn programming concepts is certainly nothing new. LOGO and its virtual turtle were designed to provide a more accessible platform for children (and older children) to learn about the concepts of programming – bolstered by early personal computers from Apple, TI and IBM. It’s fair to say LOGO never became the killer app for these systems but the lesson it provided went well beyond the classroom and arguably influenced to some degree a generation of students growing up in the microcomputer era and taking the lead in academia, education and industry.
Software education is facing interesting times. We’re living in a period of history caught between tepid economic growth and the smoldering growth latent in software-based industries. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, software employment growth rate doubles that of all other occupations (see figure below). Not surprisingly, software learning itself has become a growth industry.
Today, if you’re interested in learning how to program, how to improve your existing skills or how to program in a different language, you can find many different alternatives to suit your level of skill, interest and job anxiety. Along with software training modules on more general learning sites such as Khan Academy, Lynda and Udemy (among many many others), a telephone-book-size index of companies offer online training in Web or app development.
Games bring an important perspective to software programming education. The difference is learning through games versus a classroom is not unlike learning a language with the Pimsleur method versus the traditional “Foreign Service Institute” method.
Learning coding by playing games offers an important advantage. Students can learn to recite every one of Knuth’s algorithms, never miss a code delimiter and be spot-on with declarations, but if they never learn how to think as a software engineer, it’ll be like landing in Budapest with a Magyar grammar book and no experience actually speaking the language. Yes, you need to know the words and rules of grammar but what’s ultimately of most importance is knowledge of how to use them together in conveying a thought.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Too Many Kids Quit Science Because They Don’t Think They’re Smart
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/11/too-many-kids-quit-science-because-they-dont-think-theyre-smart/382165/
Alexandra Ossola: What sparked your interest in this field?
Carol Dweck: We undertook this research at the height of the self-esteem movement, when the gurus were telling parents and teachers to praise kids to the hills, to tell them how talented, intelligent, brilliant they were. And this was supposed to boost their confidence and set them up for a successful life. And I thought, I don’t think so. When students thought of their intelligence as a thing that’s just fixed, they were vulnerable. They were not willing to take on challenges that might test their intelligence, and they weren’t resilient when they came into obstacles. Would children want to take on challenging things if they think that’s their claim to fame? It would discredit this valuable, permanent quality.
Ossola: What is a mistake that parents and teachers often make when it comes to praising kids?
Dweck: They often praise the ability, the talent, or the intelligence too much. The opposite of this is the good process praise. This is praise for the process the child engages in—their hard work, trying many strategies, their focus, their perseverance, their use of errors to learn, their improvement.
Gender is relevant: The mothers are giving boys more process praise than they’re giving girls. Years ago we found the same thing in teachers giving feedback.
Ossola: What is the right balance of praise? How much is too much?
Dweck: That hasn’t been as well researched as what to praise. But we did some work, which we haven’t published, and we found that when we gave kids lots and lots of praise then discontinued it, they either lost motivation or they did a variety of strange and distorted things to get the adults’ approval back. There is such a thing as too much praise, we believe.
When you praise someone, you are making their actions and performance yours. So they’re looking over their shoulder and not owning their work.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Why Millennials &%#@! Love Science
Today’s young adults see new discoveries both as a source of awe and a means for innovation.
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/10/why-millienials-love-science/382015/
The wildly successful web publication “I F*cking Love Science” currently has over 18 million likes on Facebook. For context, Popular Science has 2.8 million likes, and Scientific American magazine has about 2 million. The publication’s founder, 25-year-old Elise Andrew, has never been affiliated with any mainstream media outlet. She launched her page in 2012, filling it with beautiful scientific images, web comics, and even original articles about the latest scientific news. “IFLS declared, with no hint of irony, that science was amazing,” wrote Alexis Sobel Fitts in a recent profile in the Columbia Journalism Review,” and in desperate need of a digital-age evangelist to spread the word.” Andrew describes her role in a lower-key way: “I’m just telling people things I think are cool.”
By most definitions, a millennial is a person born between 1982 and 2004. And even though we may be reluctant to generalize a generation of about 80 million, Millennials share some common traits that may seem contradictory to their elders. They want their work to be their passion, even though the recession has drastically reduced their job prospects for years to come. They are intricately and consistently connected via social media. They’re less likely to be affiliated with a religious institution than previous generations, but they pray just as often.
“What Millennials like about science is its ability to take an innovation and make the whole world a better place.”
For Millennials, technology is simultaneously an inspiration and a medium for innovation. “Through technology, students are getting exposed to scientific ideas and concepts that 30 years ago would have required a visit the research university or reading a journal. And that early exposure makes [the ideas] more accessible,”
Because of the generation’s global reach, Millennials have a greater need for things that transcend old boundaries and ideologies. Science has become a universal language, a form of information that is available almost instantly and can be shared among people who have nothing else in common.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Professor Wants to Change Engineering Education
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1324429&
Mark Somerville of Olin College of Engineering explains the culture of engineering education and why it no longer works.
You probably recall the pain and suffering you experienced getting through university. Do you remember studying with books and perhaps a few labs for three years, then having to do a senior design project? Did you see many students drop out? If you did, then you’ve experienced a culture that professors Mark Somerville and David E. Goldberg say must change so that bright young people will choose a career in engineering and thrive at school rather than just trying to get though.
the traditional way of teaching engineering no longer works.
Professor wants to change engineering education
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/rowe-s-and-columns/4436498/Professor-wants-to-change-engineering-education
Tomi Engdahl says:
A Whole New Engineer
http://wholenewengineer.org/
A Revolution Is Coming.
It Isn’t What You Think.
This book tells the improbable stories of Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering and the iFoundry incubator at the University of Illinois. That either one survived is story enough, but what they found out together changes the course of education transformation forever:
How trust is key to unleashing young, courageous engineers.
How engineers need to move from a narrow technical education to one that actively engages six minds.
How emotion and culture–not content, curriculum & pedagogy–are the crucial elements of change.
How all stakeholders can collaborate to disrupt the status quo.status quo.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Should Information Be Free?
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1324508&
In the case of trade magazines like EDN and EETimes, readers obtain information for free. By comparison, books can be quite pricey (and possibly unaffordable when translated into foreign currency).
Nevertheless, my experience in South Africa — followed by my discussions on EDAboard, have left me conflicted. Certainly, when you go to an event like the Embedded Systems Conference (ESC), the lecturers are not paid, and they present information for free. The same is true for trade magazines like EDN and EETimes — the readers get the information for free. Yet books can be quite pricey, and — when translated into foreign currency — they can become unaffordable. And as for software …
What do you think?
Tomi Engdahl says:
Next Week in NYC: How the Age of Machine Consciousness is Transforming Our Lives
http://hackaday.com/2014/11/05/free-seminardiscussion-panel-in-nyc-nov-13-how-the-age-of-machine-consciousness-is-transforming-our-lives/
Tomi Engdahl says:
How Parents Teach Children to Tidy Up Toys
Sing Songs, Give Rewards and Make Clean-Up Into a Game
http://online.wsj.com/articles/how-parents-teach-children-to-tidy-up-toys-1415220462?tesla=y&mod=WSJ_article_EditorsPicks_4
Tomi Engdahl says:
As a community, we haven’t addressed the culture of engineering education. Because of that, the existing culture tends to perpetuate itself.
Does that “weed out” culture scare people away from studying engineering?
Yes, a fair number of people in middle school and high school look at the reputation of engineering is, both in terms of what engineers do and what it takes to get an engineering degree, and the decide to study something else. There have been surveys done on what people think of engineering. For example, people think of scientists as saving lives, but not engineers. The reputation of engineering school and the language we use tends to scare people away rather than invite them in.
How do we change the mindset that engineers can also save lives?
It’s going to take a while. There are some great efforts around to try to change the image of engineering. Right now, people think of engineering in terms of Dilbert as where they associate science with the Nobel Prize. How many people know who won the Draper Prize? There is a branding problem.
What’s your impression of the “maker” movement? Do you think things like Raspberry Pi are opening up a new generation of engineers?
The maker movement is very exciting. It has the potential for some real positive change in engineering education. The maker community culture is very empowering. There’s a lot of opportunity in engineering education if we embrace that culture. It gives people a feeling of “I can do it.” It’s all about intrinsic motivation and a growth mindset, giving people the feeling that “if I keep doing this, I can get better at it.”
How do you integrate the maker culture into engineering education?
We can start by questioning some of the premises we have from our own educational background. Engineering educators often make the assumption of “they can’t do that yet, they need more background.” That is, you need to have enough of a math, science, and engineering background before you can design and realize something in the world. That’s clearly not the case in the maker community. People are building things without having the background. In some cases, they’re making some really bad design decisions but they’re learning an enormous amount and raising their self-esteem. Anyone who has designed a product knows that the reason you build a prototype to learn and make a better design on the next iteration.
How do you think FIRST Robotics and other programs help people decide to study engineering?
We see an enormous number of students from FIRST. Those who have done FIRST are really jazzed about building things seeing them happen, and about learning in that mode.
Source: http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/rowe-s-and-columns/4436498/Professor-wants-to-change-engineering-education
Tomi Engdahl says:
Only 11 Real Audio Designers in the World? Do You Really Need a DSP?
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1324522&
Is it true that there are only 11 real audio designers in the world? Are today’s low-cost, high-performance general-purpose microcontrollers pretenders to the DSP throne?
The following graphic provides a visual explanation of why Paul estimates there are only 11 real audio designers in the world:
Audio engineers tend to originate from one of three disciplines — sound engineering, embedded software development, and DSP engineering. As we see in the Venn diagram that Paul constructed, the end result is the magic number of 11.
I’ve seen this kind of data before in a survey undertaken by EETimes. That survey showed that engineers have to work in as many as five disciplines at any point in time, yet they only study one in college.
So, if we accept that it’s incredibly hard to find people skilled in multiple disciplines, what are design teams to do? Paul’s solution was to build a software tool called Audio Weaver for very fast audio prototyping and design. This tool is based on MATLAB and is based on drag-and-drop components.
Audio Weaver looks like with an STM32 Discovery
It really is astonishingly easy to use Audio Weaver — which you can obtain from DSP Concepts — and it’s free to use (with a royalty for production).
Paul’s other heretical question shown in the title to this column was whether you really need a dedicated DSP to do good-quality audio design. The simple answer is “Probably not.
Paul told me that 80% of his consulting work is no longer focused on the use of DSPs, but on ARM-based devices like the STM32F407. This is really good news for designers, because now you can design audio products with lower cost parts that consume less power, all with tools that allow you to prototype in a day.
Audio Weaver™- the Only Cross-Platform Audio Design Platform
http://www.dspconcepts.com/products/audio-weaver
Tomi Engdahl says:
When We Don’t Like the Solution, We Deny the Problem
http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/11/08/1416233/when-we-dont-like-the-solution-we-deny-the-problem
A new study (abstract) from Duke University tested whether the desirability of a solution affects beliefs in the existence of the associated problem. Researchers found that ‘yes, people will deny the problem when they don’t like the solution.
Denying Problems When We Don’t Like the Solutions
Duke study sheds light on why conservatives, liberals disagree so vehemently
http://today.duke.edu/2014/11/solutionaversion
There may be a scientific answer for why conservatives and liberals disagree so vehemently over the existence of issues like climate change and specific types of crime.
A new study from Duke University finds that people will evaluate scientific evidence based on whether they view its policy implications as politically desirable. If they don’t, then they tend to deny the problem even exists.
“Logically, the proposed solution to a problem, such as an increase in government regulation or an extension of the free market, should not influence one’s belief in the problem. However, we find it does,” said co-author Troy Campbell, a Ph.D. candidate at Duke’s Fuqua School of Business. “The cure can be more immediately threatening than the problem.”
“The goal was to test, in a scientifically controlled manner, the question: Does the desirability of a solution affect beliefs in the existence of the associated problem? In other words, does what we call ‘solution aversion’ exist?” Campbell said.
“We found the answer is yes. And we found it occurs in response to some of the most common solutions for popularly discussed problems.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Tesla Truck Wants to Bring The Makerspace To The Children
http://hackaday.com/2014/11/08/tesla-truck-wants-to-bring-the-makerspace-to-the-children/
With so many budget cuts, many public schools find themselves having to cut “unnecessary” programs such as shop, art, and music classes. They simply can’t afford to keep those things running and also teach other important concepts like math, language, and history. The obvious side effect is that kids don’t have a safe place to be creative and learn to make things with their hands.
Luckily, the maker movement has been rapidly growing over the last few years with makerspaces popping up all over the globe. These places are picking up the slack left behind by the budget cuts that hurt our public schools.
The Tesla Truck’s mission statement is “to provide a cutting-edge, mobile, hands-on STEM lab, where students, teachers, and makers can teach, learn, collaborate, create, and innovate.” It’s a noble cause for sure, but how do they plan to do this? This group intends to outfit a truck with the kinds of tools every maker dreams of. These would include a 3D printer, laser cutter, CNC plasma cutter, mill and lathe, electronics bench, and more.
Tesla Truck: A Mobile-Maker Space for the Masses!
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tesla-truck-a-mobile-maker-space-for-the-masses
Tomi Engdahl says:
What an Engineering Education Lacks
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=182&doc_id=1324552&
Reading, writing, and arithmetic: all are important in engineering education.
When I went to college, a very long time ago, I felt the University of Maryland had a great engineering program. But it did suffer from an over-emphasis on theory. We were not allowed to solder, as the school feared we’d burn ourselves!
The school offered too little guidance. I got caught up in too many math classes, finding the subject interesting. But most of those classes, like abstract algebra, were a waste of time. Calculus was worth learning as it is the basis for most of science. I’m glad to have learned it, though it’s surprising how infrequently I have used it in my career. When my son told me he needed help in his high school calculus class I had to re-study the subject to stay a step or two ahead of him. It was humbling to find my skills so degraded.
Circuit design classes were awful. There were only two: one on circuits, and another on transistor theory. Both were highly theoretical, and neither covered much about actual circuits. There was a lot of difficult math, like impulse response, which hasn’t been useful at all over the last 40 years.
Looking over syllabuses today it appears EE requirements are more realistic, though it’s hard to know how practical a class is by the descriptions. But more electronics appears to be taught than in the early 70s.
Today the U of MD requires one English class, on technical writing.
Engineering curricula are packed with too many classes in too short a period of time.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The 36 People Who Run Wikipedia
https://medium.com/matter/the-36-people-who-run-wikipedia-21ecca70bcca
What the weirdest, wildest, most successful participatory project in history tells us about working together.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Thanks, Cameron Diaz: Physics, maths, science boffins given $36m at Breakthrough Prize
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/10/breakthrough_prizes_2015/
Cameron Diaz, Benedict Cumberbatch and Mark Zuckerberg were at NASA Ames research facility at the weekend, where tech biz titans and people paid to pretend to be boffins in the movies were on hand to distribute $36m at the Breakthrough Prize ceremony.
The money was awarded by tech luminaries on the Breakthrough Prize Board including Zuckerberg, Jack Ma and Sergey Brin.
Six different scientists were honoured for their work in Life Sciences, including Alim Louis Benabid for his high-frequency deep brain stimulation treatment for Parkinson’s disease and Victor Ambros and Gary Ruvkun for their work in genetic regulation by microRNAs.
Five mathematicians scooped the $3m prizes in the inaugural maths category for work in quantum field theories and analytics and other less-easily summarised fields.
Over 50 researchers are sharing the Fundamental Physics prize,
Tomi Engdahl says:
Cameron and Chairman opened the innovation seminar in Espoo, Finland
Free-form discussion with the prime ministers involved in dozens of experts from Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the UK.
Nordic, Baltic and British prime ministers moves are underway to start the second day held in Helsinki, Northern Future Forum seminar.
- We tend to long meetings with a pre-established long speeches. It is good to talk freely, to pause and listen to each other, Cameron said.
Cameron states that all European countries have the same basic challenge, which is to achieve economic growth and well-being.
- We all want to win the race to create the growth of well-being. It is important to talk about innovation, and the example of why we must not created the same kind of venture capital in the United States, Cameron said.
Source: http://yle.fi/uutiset/cameron_ja_stubb_avasivat_innovaatioseminaarin_espoossa/7606907
Tomi Engdahl says:
Thank an engineer
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/serious-fun/4437029/Thank-an-engineer?_mc=NL_EDN_EDT_EDN_funfriday_20141107&cid=NL_EDN_EDT_EDN_funfriday_20141107&elq=ab910aebece04ed2b68ce05659814615&elqCampaignId=20087
You may have heard of or even participated in a “gratitude challenge” via social media. The idea of these challenges is to shout out 1 person, place, or thing that you are thankful for, doing so each day for a specified amount of time.
For the next three weeks – through Thanksgiving – we’ll be sharing 1 thing each day that we’re thankful for. That one thing will either be from the minds engineers – like the first one below – or be a thing engineers are thankful for.
Tomi Engdahl says:
What Happens When Nobody Proofreads an Academic Paper
http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/11/12/0213234/what-happens-when-nobody-proofreads-an-academic-paper
Drafts are drafts for a reason. Not only do they tend to contain unpolished writing and unfinished thoughts, they’re often filled with little notes we leave ourselves to fill in later. Slate reports on a paper recently published in the journal Ethology that contained an unfortunate self-note that made it into the final, published article, despite layers upon layers of editing, peer review, and proofreading.
This Is What Happens When No One Proofreads an Academic Paper
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/11/11/_crappy_gabor_paper_overly_honest_citation_slips_into_peer_reviewed_journal.html
Wiley, the publisher, responded by removing the paper and says it will republish it with the line removed and the change noted. “We are in the process of investigating how this line made it to publication,” the Wiley spokesperson said.
Tomi Engdahl says:
The Future of Programmatic: Automation + Creativity + Scale.
http://digiday.com/event/digidayprogrammaticsummit2014/
The media world is undergoing a wholesale shift from manual processes to automated systems that strip out waste and inefficiency. The earliest instances of this shift caused ripples of fear of commoditization, unsafe environments and a depressing lack of art to go with the science of data-driven placements.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Standards lead to modularity
http://www.csemag.com/single-article/standards-lead-to-modularity/f514fb3cc71e70c0dc93ea88b278bf54.html
Standards lead to modularity, which drives speed and innovation. Collaborative standards development uses a consensus process that over the life of a technology and its applications provides; a guide for applying the technology, recommended practices to tighten up the applications, and standards that recommend specific rules for applying technology. The knowledge increases about a technology and application as it progresses through this evolution. There are several reasons why this happens, here are a few:
Standards are developed through a consensus process used by many standards developing organizations (like UL and IEEE) and, as a result of this specialization of talent, the standards display modularity.
During the development of standards, frameworks are used that describe general attributes of technology and its application. This often results in describing the system, subsystem, and interfaces.
Knowledge developed about the operation of complex technologies and systems requires engineers to specialize in technology groupings that align with modules.
Platform engineering is used in many product development organizations. Under this concept, common core components are grouped together and used in a variety of “derivative” products that have different functions or appearance
Tomi Engdahl says:
Keeping tabs on emerging technology trends: professional development in the face of emerging trends
http://www.csemag.com/single-article/keeping-tabs-on-emerging-technology-trends-professional-development-in-the-face-of-emerging-trends/be741d1c740c554dcd80419de45147b9.html
In a consulting-specifying engineer’s career, one’s focus typically is directed at pragmatic engineering challenges arising from a client’s specific project, but emerging issues, disruptive trends and new challenges are all reasons to remain well-informed of emerging technological trends.
Keeping tabs on emerging trends, Part II: Interconnections, revised standards and communication networks
http://www.csemag.com/single-article/keeping-tabs-on-emerging-trends-part-ii-interconnections-revised-standards-and-communication-networks/ea9a909cbc44b5ff34b187a8fcd07492.html
Tomi Engdahl says:
Big Data Goes Unicorn Hunting
Thousands of data scientists needed
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1324509&
In today’s big data era, the U.S. is starving for data scientists, according to panelists at Dell World here. There are plenty of opportunities in data analytics, they said; the big challenge is in finding people who can pluck useful insights from the mountains of information.
“Actually finding people who can extract insight, wisdom maybe, from increasingly diverse real-time sorts of data is truly the bottleneck,” Michael Chui, partner at research firm McKinsey Global Institute, said during a panel discussion. “The set of skills partly around statistics, partly around machine learning, around visualization, around being able to design experiments…these are the scarce resources.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Making the Grade in Industrial Design
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1324571&
Commercial, industrial, and military-grade designs are about more than paper specs. They’re about human nature.
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making them great as metrics but a poor guide to creating a design that will function properly in real-world conditions. Only experience can show you the real requirements a design must meet.
Take the specification categories to which we assign electronics parts and systems: commercial, industrial, and military grade. On paper, these relate to metrics such as shock and vibration tolerance, operating environment temperature, and voltage isolation capacity. In reality, such metrics represent only a small part of what a design must endure. Of far greater significance are the characteristics of the equipment’s human operator.
Beyond the typical MIL-SPEC requirements of wide operating temperature ranges and substantial shock and vibration resistance, the designs had to tolerate military (in particular, US Navy) personnel.
Most of the designs were not for mission- or life-critical systems, so they needed to tolerate rapid setup and breakdown, insufficient (or no) time spent reading operational manuals, and an attitude toward the equipment that often ranged from indifference (at best) to outright resentment. It’s easy to understand why; my equipment mostly represented an additional burden on already overworked users in potentially life-threatening situations.
I learned to do things like making sure no two external connectors were identical (to avoid misconnected cables) and making sure that the housing could double as a stepstool. My project managers further trained me in the “two dumb thing” rule: My designs couldn’t fail unless the user made two simultaneous dumb mistakes
Of course, it’s impossible to imagine all the possible contingencies, much less design for them.
“Doesn’t float,” he observed. “Not sailor-proof.”
Consumer-grade design is a lot more tolerant. For the most part, consumers figure that, if they break something while doing anything much beyond normal use of the equipment, it’s their fault and thus their loss. There are exceptions, of course. The recent buzz about the iPhone 6 bending
Tomi Engdahl says:
Typewriters are back, and we have Edward Snowden to thank.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/11/12/typewriters-are-back-and-we-have-edward-snowden-to-thank/
In writing, music, photography and other areas, “outdated” technologies have initially been valued for their retro, nostalgic appeal in the hipster culture.
Now people are seeing the security benefits of returning to other so-called anachronistic technologies. Typewriters, for instance, are experiencing a revival in politics. Earlier this year, German politician Patrick Sensburg announced that Germany’s government officials might start using typewriters, as they are seen as being an “unhackable” technology.
While this move might be viewed as somewhat regressive, it’s actually progressive. Let me explain.
Following last year’s NSA leaks, the Russian government is also set to return to typewriters in an effort to avoid hacking.
Initially considered obsolete in the digital age, typewriters are experiencing a slow but noticeable resurgence.
American media theorist Henry Jenkins once claimed that old media never die – they simply transform. In contemporary society, it appears that not only do old media and technology never die, but they return.
Technological determinism and the “doctrine of progress” dictates that society must move in a forward momentum toward digitally efficient technologies that operate faster, better and longer.
The use of old technologies is criticized for being anachronistic and pretentious, but people from politicians to artists are acknowledging the benefits of older technological instruments.
Analog technology is not only valued for its nostalgic, retro value, but for its simplicity in an increasingly digitized world that is vulnerable to hacking and privacy breaches. So while digital technology is heralded as the most efficient in terms of speed and productivity, older technologies offer something perhaps more valuable but under-appreciated.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Use Low-Code Platforms to Develop the Apps Customers Want
http://www.cio.com/article/2845378/development-tools/use-low-code-platforms-to-develop-the-apps-customers-want.html
Low-code, rapid development platforms provide a way to incorporate user feedback into apps during development. This improves the turnaround time for consumer-facing applications while ensuring that projects don’t turn into white elephants.
If you’re developing an application for customers, but you only have a rough idea of what they want, then you face a Catch-22: You can’t specify the application’s requirements and develop it until you get feedback from customers, but they can’t provide feedback until you’ve developed it.
Data integration is often underestimated and poorly implemented, taking time and resources. Yet it
Learn More
How do you escape from this predicament? Many organizations have responded by using one of a growing breed of “low-code,” rapid development platforms.
Clay Richardson, an analyst at Forrester Research, defines a low-code platform as one that enables fast application development and delivery with a minimum of hand coding. The platform should be easy to deploy and is likely to be used to develop customer-facing “systems of engagement.” Familiar names such as Red Hat, Software AG and Salesforce.com offer low-code platforms, as well as lesser-known companies such as Alpha Software, Claysys Technologies, Mendix and Mobideo.
Low-code platforms certainly don’t eliminate hand coding altogether. As well as minimizing hand coding, though, they speed up application delivery by providing visual tools for the quick definition and assembly of forms and the rapid build-out of multistage workflows, Richardson says. They also allow the easy configuration of data models that help eliminate common data integration headaches.
These platforms are useful for knocking together applications in a matter of days or weeks and getting them out for customers to try. Depending on how customers receive them, the applications can be abandoned as non-starters or developed in new iterations that incorporate user comments and suggestions.
Low-code Platforms Works for Experienced, Novice Developers
The drive for adopting low-code platforms tends to come from the chief marketing officer or the marketing team, Richardson believes. Nevertheless, the people actually using the tools tend to be existing full-time developers, who might otherwise code in Java, .NET or C#, rather than so-called “citizen developers” in the marketing department.
However, there are low-code developers with a very different skill set to established developers as well. “These tend to be kids coming out of school with no programming background, but who can be trained in days to do this as a full-time job,” Richardson says. “They certainly couldn’t deliver anything in Java or C#, but they can deliver with these platforms – and they can do so at speed.”
“This is important for applications when you don’t know what the business outcome will be,” he says. “In a world of slow, expensive development, these rapid platforms allow you to shorten the front end so you can get something on the table, tune it and get experience with it.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Technology To Automate A Third Of U.K. Jobs Over Next 20 Years, Says Deloitte
http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/11/automation-uk-jobs/?ncid=rss&cps=gravity
Technology, automation and robotics destroys jobs by replacing human work with machines, and demanding workforces change up their skills to remain employable. This we know.
But a new study by professional services firm Deloitte has quantified the rate of destruction for the U.K. jobs market over the next 20 years – predicting that around one-third (35 per cent) of existing jobs across the U.K. are under high risk of replacement via automation over this time period.
The U.K. study links job destruction to rates of pay, with lower-paid jobs (paying less than £30,000) more than five times more likely to be replaced than higher-paid jobs (paying over £100,000).
This link between lower paid jobs and automation suggests technology risks fueling growing wealth inequalities — unless education and training can be successfully reconfigured to upskill populations with the digital, management and creative skills that are at reduced risk of automation.
The study found that lower paid jobs are almost eight times as likely to be replaced than higher paid jobs when looking specifically at London.
A very large majority (84 per cent) of London businesses said the skills of their employees will need to change over the next 10 years, with ‘digital know-how’, ‘management’ and ‘creativity’ identified as skills increasingly in need, and ‘processing,’ ‘support and clerical work’ and ‘foreign languages’ less so.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Google Lifts the Turing Award Into Nobel Territory
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/google-lifts-the-turing-award-into-nobel-territory/?_r=0
The A.M.Turing Award is often called the Nobel prize of computer science. Now, thanks to Google‘s largesse, it will be a Nobel-level prize financially: $1 million.
The quadrupling of the prize money, announced on Thursday by the Association for Computing Machinery, the professional organization that administers the award, is intended to elevate the prominence and recognition of computer science. The move can be seen as another sign of the boom times in technology.
Computing is increasingly an ingredient in every field, from biology to business. College students are rushing to take computer science courses, encouraged by their parents. It’s not just a skill but a mind-set. Computational thinking is the future, where the excitement and money is. Quants rule.
But the Turing Award celebrates the slower and deeper side of computing. It is given, said Alexander L. Wolf, president of A.C.M. and a professor of computer science at Imperial College London, to the “true pioneers” who are “fundamental contributors to the science and technology of computing.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
SatNOGS has won the 2014 Hackaday Prize. The team of developers designed a satellite ground station which can be built with available tools, commodity parts, and modest skills.
SatNOGS Wins the 2014 Hackaday Prize
http://hackaday.com/2014/11/13/satnogs-wins-the-2014-hackaday-prize/
The Grand Prize winner of the 2014 Hackaday Prize is SatNOGs. The project is a thrilling example of the benefits of a connected world. It opens up the use of satellite data to a much wider range of humanity by providing plans to build satellite tracking stations, and a protocol and framework to share the satellite data with those that cannot afford, or lack the skills to build their own tracking station. The hardware itself is based on readily available materials, commodity electronics, and just a bit of 3D printing.
Tomi Engdahl says:
European Commission decides it won’t have a science advisor after Greenpeace pressure
Glover wasn’t institutionalised enough, apparently
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/14/european_commission_clunker_juncker_kills_of_science_tzar/
Yesterday seemed a great day for science in Europe, with the European Space Agency setting down its Philae lander on comet 67P – but even as this took place the European Commission quietly sent a rather different signal, as it hit “delete” on the role of its Chief Scientific Advisor.
The CSA’s job was “to provide independent expert advice on any aspect of science, technology and innovation” to the Commission president.
But according to the Commish, “the mandate of the scientific adviser came automatically to an end with the end of the Barroso II Commission on 31 October”. Glover’s contract will continue until the end of February, but her role will not be continued.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Google’s driving all over Bangladesh to teach students about the internet
http://www.engadget.com/2014/11/14/google-teaches-indian-college-students-about-internet/
Think you’ve been on some epic road trips? You’ve got nothing on Google: the Mountain View company just announced that it’s taking a 3G-equipped bus on a year-long tour of Bangladesh. The program, simply dubbed “Google Bus Bangladesh,” is an educational initiative that aims to expose 500,000 students to new tools and web applications that can help them start new businesses.
Tomi Engdahl says:
What are the professions of the future?
Workplace experts estimated that even if the contents of a job change, job titles are preserved. People are needed to work in the future.
In the future, workers are likely to be drivers for change in their professional title. Professional titles of change in important industrial research Etlatieto Managing Petri Rouvinen keep the content of the work.
ETL published an early report on an assessment of what positions are going to disappear. According to the report tietoteknistyminen takes a third of the current jobs in the 10-20 years.
- We have thought about the things which are difficult to machines in 20 years. These are the people professions or, rather, vocational content in 2030, Rouvinen says.
The attitude that counts
Future employees to be multi-skilled to meet the challenge at work, and specialize finer than before.
- Specialization is needed, but specialization can easily be many. One of the life-cycle of specialization in the labor market may not be very long.
- For example, a specific program for learning the language is a market-time for five years and then must be something else again, Rouvinen describes future work.
He says that in addition to specialist knowledge workers need in the future more and more entrepreneurial attitude.
- They need to think about how to reinvent themselves and to question it, what to do now. Must be curious and active attitude.
Rouvinen has also considered how the school system affects learning. The question is, how much freedom should be learning and how much formal.
- For example, Amazon, Wikipedia, and Google’s founders have been in her childhood Montessori, which encourages self-directed learning. Anyway, the representatives of this school are over-represented in the business at the top.
- Does the fact that the more your curiosity-based learning to prepare formal learning into active life, Rouvinen says.
Editing the education of the future labor market, however, is equivalent to a slow and long process. Rouvinen compares the T-good school with a letter.
- On the other hand need to have a very broad generic skills, and is a T-letter horizontal beam. The problem is, however, that the messing around to anyone of that job with, at least to that of which one pay wages.
He says that the T-letter is required by one or more vertical feet, which is just more specific know-how is available for sale in the labor market. You neeed specfic training in addition to general education.
Helsinki Region Chamber of Commerce briefed about the future of knowledge-based services.
The survey also discovered, among other things, the future of the professions.
The future of the headings were highlighted, inter alia, the following:
Turn to patient: playing laden brains are incapable of any longer.
Data Catcher: receiving information without advertising, time-saving, an increase in the amount of personal information management.
Scanner: the outside world mapper, data parser and views shaper.
Ecopolice: Life Cycle Assessment is a home and business economies, a key indicator gauge
Humanizer: developing technology to “hide” so that services and activities are human.
Source: http://www.iltalehti.fi/uutiset/2014111418764347_uu.shtml
Tomi Engdahl says:
Inventions have the power to change the world of work significantly. Internet rotates all around, and new materials, biology and mechanics pull down the barriers. Sheer learned in matters of flood creates a work of support staff and consultants.
Economic Sanomat explained the experts, what kind of professions new technology may bring forth. A few are still in the distant future, but part of the work is done already.
Home system designer
Internet of Things connects home appliances, automotive, electrical and heating systems, and even the clothes and the walls of the network. It creates the opportunity for a huge number of new applications and services. So huge that the entire spectrum of services is starting to feel like pure chaos of the.
- Up to young people in the overall management becomes more difficult, information and science fiction writer Risto Isomäki says.
Order out of chaos brings home system designer.
The digital environment supervisor
If the walls and electrical and heating system is connected to internet, how to use them to collect information. At the same time, environmental regulations become stricter and do not escape from the new supervision in housing cooperatives, or even playing a summer house.
My editor
In the future, the cost to suppliers may be less work in publishing, but the more ordinary people. The phenomenon of discontinuous work careers, which is why people will be either forced or voluntarily, while the rest of the work.
Occupational Health researcher Antti Kasvio believes that in the future people are more used to ask for help, such as community services. Own projects to find a “personal trainer”, and a by just writing a book could be one example of this.
Airship Engineer
All future work will not change the service and IT work. Risto Isomäki believes that the new material technology allows, for example, airships are making a comeback.
Energy-architect
Finland is already taking place in energy saving design, but in the future it will become even more important. Isomäki believes that energy conservation and management will own their profession.
OTEC Engineer
OTEC will be in the English words to ocean thermal energy conversion. As early as the late 1800′s it was thought that the sea surface and the deep waters of the temperature differences could be utilized for energy production.
By hand
Stem cell researchers have already succeeded in increasing the mice back to the nail and the tip of the toe. In the future it might be possible to grow organs from stem cells
Service Robot Director
In particular, routine sales tasks may switch to robots. However, they are unlikely to operate completely independently. The future of the service professional is likely to become increasingly more frequent, either to monitor the display screen on the back or the service of virtual motion.
3D tailor-
At home, on their own the body is made laser scanner model, which can store over to match the clothes. Perhaps you are using a virtual environment, in which the serving the tailor answer the questions. Before deciding to buy a home may choose to sample kuosista, which is made of 3D printing. Arises because in the end the whole garment.
Serving the tailor is required to 3D e-commerce, software, and technical know-how, and of course the traditional customer service skills. Work can be done anywhere.
Manufacturer of spare parts
3D printing and scanning to challenge the mass manufacturers, since anyone can be prepared, for example, bicycle spare parts, or kitchen needs without a huge number of different tools, or even much of a stocks. This will open up the foundation of the trade to new opportunities.
Source: http://tyopaikat.oikotie.fi/tyontekijalle/artikkelit/16-ammattia-joita-et-osannut-kuvitellakaan