Member Login

Lost your password?

Registration is closed

Sorry, you are not allowed to register by yourself on this site!


Do you really know what’s happening around you?

March 22nd, 2012 by joe

The inter­est­ing thing about real­ity is that we don’t notice it until after it has hap­pened, if we notice it at all. At a fun­da­men­tal level we are expe­ri­enc­ing the world as a flow of envi­ron­men­tal data; things hap­pen and reg­is­ter with our ner­vous sys­tem through our senses. And, we notice.

Or do we?

The inter­est­ing thing about real­ity is that we don’t notice it until after it has hap­pened. Each sense is pro­cess­ing a con­stant stream of stim­u­lus, whether we notice it or not. And, it’s all com­pet­ing to be noticed by our con­scious­ness. Most of it sim­ply passes us by, as if it didn’t hap­pen, but a small amount of it bub­bles through our thoughts and aware­nesses to cause us to direct our atten­tion. By the time we do, the orig­i­nal event reg­is­tered by our senses has gone, and been replaced by what­ever is hap­pen­ing now.

The inter­est­ing thing about real­ity is that we some­times don’t notice it at all. A sen­sa­tion bub­bles through our ner­vous sys­tem and we become con­scious of it, and then we notice what it means; a sound becomes a plane pass­ing over­head, and we no longer notice the sound just the plane; the sen­sa­tion in our stom­ach becomes our hunger, and we only notice the hunger not the mus­cu­lar ten­sion. The colour, tex­ture and sound in front of me becomes you, and I no longer notice the indi­vid­ual sense data that makes you up, I just notice some­thing that I call you. I stop pay­ing atten­tion to what is going on, and instead pay atten­tion to the abstrac­tion of it, and in that moment I can cease to notice when you do some­thing sub­tly dif­fer­ent from what I expected you to do.

We mostly don’t notice what’s going on in the world, instead we notice what we notice about what’s going on, and then act as if that is what is going on. We replace real­ity with our model of real­ity, and real­ity as it is actu­ally hap­pen­ing fades into the back­ground. Once some­thing has a mean­ing, that mean­ing replaces the some­thing, and the raw some­thing ceases to exist.

This has a pro­found impact on the way that we respond to each other in envi­ron­ments where feed­back defines how we work and what are are doing.  Are we respond­ing to what is actu­ally hap­pen­ing, or what we think is hap­pen­ing? How does some­one respond to our response, do they respond to what we are doing, or what they think that we are doing?

How often do you notice that the per­son talk­ing to you was actu­ally talk­ing about some­thing other than what you thought they were? If the answer is rarely, then I sug­gest you stop and actu­ally pay atten­tion to what’s really going on around you. Do you notice real­ity as it actu­ally is, or could be that you’ve been pay­ing atten­tion to your imag­i­na­tion instead?

(Image: Idea go / FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Can you write software by planning everything up front?

March 13th, 2012 by joe

Image: nut­takit / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Tra­di­tion­ally soft­ware was designed as a large up-front plan­ning task, using tech­niques such as the water fall model of soft­ware devel­op­ment. In these approaches the entire sys­tem was analysed and the soft­ware and hard­ware com­po­nents archi­tected up front, cul­mi­nat­ing in a com­plete design that just needed to be acted on by pro­gram­mers to deliv­ery the entire work­ing system.

This is actu­ally the way that most projects are planned in the non-software world, for exam­ple, when a build­ing is con­structed the plans are approved up front, the mate­ri­als are cal­cu­lated and plan for the con­struc­tion is pro­duced. Then it is just a mat­ter of fol­low­ing the plan, with the right indi­vid­u­als for the job, with the right mate­ri­als, in the right order, and the build­ing gets built.

Of course, inevitably prob­lems that occur in the deliv­ery phase; some­thing wasn’t thought through prop­erly, some mate­ri­als don’t per­form as planned, the envi­ron­ment doesn’t behave as expected, the exter­nal depen­den­cies don’t come in on time. This means that even when all the plan­ning has been done in advance, even to a high qual­ity, there is still a large uncer­tainty around deliv­ery dates, and over­all cost of the project. It is rare that a project can be deliv­ered with­out some form of re-evaluation of the design axioms emerg­ing from knowl­edge encoun­tered dur­ing delivery.

Things get inter­est­ing when you begin to really take on board that how­ever much you believe it can all be planned in advance, the real­ity is that you moment you make any changes to the sys­tem, new infor­ma­tion emerges that wasn’t present when the orig­i­nal plan was made.

I chal­lenge you to recall any cir­cum­stance in which you planned every­thing first, and then imple­mented the entire project with­out mak­ing any changes to that plan on the way. I bet you can’t!


Stop Stealing Dreams

March 7th, 2012 by joe

Seth Godin is a lead­ing voice in area of mar­ket­ing. He write a daily blog with has a huge fol­low­ing, and has writ­ten sev­eral books. His main view­point is that the social con­tract that brought the mass mar­ket into exis­tence had a key com­po­nent around the con­struc­tion of schools and edu­ca­tion for all. The fac­tory own­ers not only needed a mar­ket for the prod­uct that the indus­trial rev­o­lu­tion made pos­si­ble, but they needed a sup­ply of work­ers edu­cated suf­fi­ciently to enable them to be good fac­tory operators.

The world we live in today is no longer that world. The man­u­fac­tur­ing sec­tor has dis­ap­peared and we no longer need to edu­cate our kids with the knowl­edge that they will need for a fac­tory job. In fact, the social con­tract said give us your kids and we will train them and guar­an­tee them a job. They will then have income and also become our cus­tomers. And, you will gain by hav­ing prod­uct avail­able and an improved stan­dard of living.

The world in which those rules were made, and the world we live in today have diverged, but the struc­ture of edu­ca­tion hasn’t. It still com­pul­sory and we are teach­ing our kids and prepar­ing them for a world that no longer exists. We are lying to them.

Seth has just fin­ished writ­ing a man­i­festo on edu­ca­tion: Stop Steal­ing Dreams. Please take a few min­utes and take a look, and share your com­ments with me. What are we going to do about it?


Defining your own job.

February 24th, 2012 by joe
Image: Master isolated images / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Image: Mas­ter iso­lated images / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

When most peo­ple look for work they pick from the menu of jobs that are already on offer and enter a “career” based around already estab­lished roles.

Another way is to write the menu for your­self, and develop a meal that’s never been tasted before. It’s a harder job, because you’ve only got your intu­itions guid­ing you, and the rela­tion­ships you have in place with oth­ers sup­port­ing those direc­tions that you want to move it.

How­ever, I reckon that ulti­mately it’s more reward­ing, as you get to define your own role and iden­tity, instead of liv­ing your life through roles defined by oth­ers. At the end of the day you get to say “I lived my own life”.


Beginning to think about feedback in agile software development

February 23rd, 2012 by joe
Image: Stuart Miles / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Image: Stu­art Miles / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

I thought that as an exer­cise it would be inter­est­ing to explore in a series of small blog entries the nature of feed­back in dynam­i­cal sys­tems, and the impli­ca­tions that that has for an agile deliv­ery method­ol­ogy. So, stay tuned if you’re inter­ested, as that’s what I’ll attempt to do over the next few days and weeks. Feel free to chime in, so I’m not just talk­ing to myself Smile.


Thoughts about the nature of learning and education.

February 22nd, 2012 by joe
Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

When some­one learns what has to be present for them? Is it a teacher? Is it con­tent? Is it a subject?

How do they know that they are learn­ing? How do they know when they have learnt?

Is the learn­ing in the form of knowl­edge or is it skills? Is it expe­ri­ence of doing some­thing, or think­ing something?

What is pos­si­ble for them hav­ing acquired the learning?

Is it impor­tant how edu­ca­tion is deliv­ered? How does the way that it is deliv­ered affect the qual­ity of what is learnt? Is it pos­si­ble to deliver edu­ca­tion in such a way that pre­vents the acqui­si­tion of fur­ther edu­ca­tion? Is it pos­si­ble to deliver edu­ca­tion in such a way that it enhances the future acqui­si­tion of fur­ther education?

What are the lim­i­ta­tions present in the cur­rent way the edu­ca­tion is deliv­ered to our chil­dren? Which of these are are inten­tional and which are unin­ten­tional? Which are acknowl­edged and which are not noticed?

 


Seeing things again, as they really are.

January 9th, 2012 by joe

The moon has always been a flat disc, invari­ably wax­ing and wan­ing through the illus­tra­tions in the story books of my youth. And, so as I grew up, that’s how I saw it — up in the sky, a mix­ture of bright light and sil­hou­ette, mys­te­ri­ous but unques­tion­ably there.

I’m not sure when I became aware that the moon was a ball, in strange oscil­la­tion around our home planet. I think that that was from an early age too, when for me the solar sys­tem was first full of plan­ets and lumps of rocks. But all I saw when I looked up as a child was the stars and a slice of the moon look­ing down on me in the night.

Sud­denly, I remem­ber when as a teenager it hap­pened; the first time I looked at the moon and a voice in my head revealed in con­text, “that’s not a shape, that’s a vol­ume!” And instan­ta­neously, I became aware of the enor­mity of a mas­sive orb encir­cling in the night sky. A thin slither of light high­light­ing a mostly dark, invis­i­ble globe, hid­ing in plain sight. The sur­prise of it still lives me with today, how some­thing so old and famil­iar can sud­denly become new and mys­te­ri­ous again.

Today as dusk threat­ens to break, I see my friend the moon again. This time it has a com­pan­ion, a small bright star to keep it com­pany; the only star in the sky. As a child I saw all points of light as stars, but this one is Jupiter; our hum­ble moon and a majes­tic planet, own­ing the sky. Only now am I becom­ing aware that I have been look­ing at the plan­ets all along, not all stars are stars, and what I thought was hid­den was hid­den in plain sight.

It is easy to get lost in the famil­iar and well known, the well heeled grooves of life. We take our rela­tion­ship to the things in the world for granted, and over time they become com­fort­able and unchang­ing; we never think to ques­tion them or notice whether our ideas about them need updat­ing. The same is true of our rela­tion­ships with each other. Most indi­vid­u­als that we meet are pigeon­holed into some cat­e­gory or other, after a very short time in their pres­ence, and it is then sub­se­quently very rare for a rela­tion­ship to change dra­mat­i­cally, and for two indi­vid­u­als to get to know each other again as if for the first time.

I am reminded as I recall this child­hood inci­dent that it’s even pos­si­ble for the most fun­da­men­tal things, to become more than they were. That, quite lit­er­ally, as sure that I am of what is real and what it means, I must hold open the pos­si­bil­ity that at some level my work­ing assump­tions are wrong, and some deeper truth and under­stand­ing could be revealed to me.

As I find myself enter­ing this new year, full of aware­ness that not so far beneath the sur­face of what I take for granted are rela­tion­ships and inspi­ra­tions star­ing me in the face but not pre­vi­ously seen, and I pon­der on which of these will reveal them­selves first.


On technology, time machines, and imagination

October 6th, 2011 by joe

A long long time ago, when the land was owned by dinosaurs and man had not started breath­ing yet, times were sim­pler. There were no mobile phones or com­put­ers, no lasers or global posi­tion­ing satel­lites, no steam engines, cars, planes, clocks, radios, toaster waffles.

But here’s a pro­found thought: our under­stand­ing of physics tells us that the Laws are Nature immutable; they’ve been the same since the Uni­verse began (or for­ever, if you believe that it’s always just been). That means that any of our mag­i­cal and rev­o­lu­tion­ary devices that we’ve invented today with our clever mod­ern know-how would have just as eas­ily worked back in time, mil­lions of years ago, aeons before they were conceived.

Imag­ine then that we have a time machine (prob­a­bly a Tardis, so that it’s big enough on the inside to hold all our junk). We could load it up with radio tow­ers, diesel and gen­er­a­tors, and a load of mobile phones, and take them on a ride back in time. Set it all up and switch it on, and it would work! We’d be able to make phone calls, and sell monthly con­tracts to tyran­nosaurs so that they could keep in touch with the Daily Fossil!

Why is this excit­ing, I guess you are ask­ing? Hmm indeed.

Well, project your­self now to the future, the dis­tant future, maybe over 10,000 years from now. It’s plau­si­ble to expect that we would have solved many mys­ter­ies. We’ll know what dark energy is, and dark mat­ter too, and the Uni­verse will be our slave. We’ll have dis­cov­ered new phe­nom­ena, and devel­oped new tech­nolo­gies and mate­ri­als; our clothes will all have nano-scale detail­ing and we’ll all drive around in vehi­cles with the new Ubbba-Drive-4S, pow­ered by our own sense of satisfaction.

So then, what if one of our future selves dives into their Tardis-4S, packed with good­ies, and descends on our time­line? Arthur C. Clarke said that any suf­fi­ciently advanced tech­nol­ogy would be indis­tin­guish­able from magic, and so it would seem when your future-ganger switches on their 4D-Quanta-Viddy and holo­grams of your­self from all the adja­cent par­al­lel real­i­ties appear instan­ta­neously beside you. Magic indeed!

But the point is that their tech­no­log­i­cal toys would work in the here and now, rather nicely too. (Just imag­ine how much you could flog them for on E-Bay!) That is to say, that the only rea­son that we don’t have such mirac­u­lous fac­ul­ties avail­able to us today is not because the Uni­verse doesn’t sup­port such non­sense, but because no one has thought of it yet! It’s a lim­i­ta­tion of our imag­i­na­tions, not a limit of nature.

It is pos­si­ble for some­one, right here right now, to invent some amaz­ing tech­nol­ogy so amaz­ing that we would not recog­nise it in rela­tion to the world that we already under­stand. And the only thing stop­ping us from con­ceiv­ing of such things is our imag­i­na­tion, and the lim­i­ta­tions that we hold in place that pre­vent us from see­ing and under­stand­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ties that are poten­tial­i­ties in the sys­tem that are avail­able to be harnessed.

So, how do you relate to the pos­si­bil­i­ties that are avail­able to you right now? My point is that there are known pos­si­bil­i­ties and unknown pos­si­bil­i­ties (apolo­gies to Rums­feld). Unless you hold a space avail­able in your imag­i­na­tion for the unknown ones you might never gen­uinely do any­thing that will sur­prise you, or aston­ish you, and the world will never ben­e­fit from that won­der­ful thing that only you could give birth to.


Don’t lose your right to vote…

October 2nd, 2011 by joe

20111002-121348.jpg


A few conversations.…

September 30th, 2011 by joe

It’s not unusual for me to have exten­sive con­ver­sa­tions with strangers. These days I’m spend­ing a lot of time on trains, and have a lot of oppor­tu­nity to par­take of the com­pany of many an inter­est­ing person.

In recent days, as well as the usual ban­ter and jokes with the ticket staff, and ran­dom quips with fel­low table shar­ers, I’ve man­aged to get myself embroiled in deep con­ver­sa­tions about the design and influ­ence of every day objects (with a mar­ket­ing guru); the nature of the edu­ca­tion in the school sys­tem, how it was con­structed to pre­vent free think­ing indi­vid­u­als and how the gov­ern­ment is unable to redesign it in terms of its his­tor­i­cal con­text (with a regional school coor­di­na­tor); and the nature of con­scious­ness, how it is affected by lack of sleep, and how every­day real­ity is shaped by ran­dom events and the atti­tude you have as you make your self present to it (mostly with myself.)