Network Connections by phoenixkeyblack

Last February I wrote the following but left it as draft for some reason.

Last year I was able to connect with my classmates and childhood friends at the Russian Odnoklassniki.ru which some claim is used by successors of the KGB to keep tabs on overseas connections of Russians and others. Before that I signed up for LinkedIn hoping to never lose contact with colleagues. Then came Facebook for yet a few more friends and relatives. Some time has passed and I can see the usefulness of these “social networks” but while they all have continually improved their user interfaces and the network sizes, they have failed in one area. They can all list the connections but so far I have not been able to find one that tries to gauge the strength of the relationship.

Is it fair to treat all relationships the same? The best we have evolved to is grouping of relationships (friends, coworkers, close friends, etc.). Whoever unlocks the method of gauging the strength of the relationship will have discovered the next generation of social networking. Who is in a position to do this? Not the Facebooks and LinkedIns of this world, IMHO. I would place companies like Apple and Google on the map along with Verizons and AT&Ts but even these will have quite a struggle. A light read of the interpersonal relationships page will help understand the magnitude of the challenge.

Not all parent-child relationships are the same just as not all marriages are created equal. These are the easy ones. LinkedIn Outlook Toolbar will scan one’s e-mail to suggest contacts (based on numbers of e-mails exchanged). Does having frequent contact with someone result in a stronger relationship than having very infrequent contact? Is it even possible to quantify and digitize something as complex as human relationships? I think it is but will require capture and analysis of even more information.

Capture of on-screen (technology based) information is easier (and Googles, Apples and Verizons may be able to do that). The really hard part is the capture of the wink, the nod, or the smile that can make or break someone’s day. How about computing the trustworthiness and reliability of someone? I guess we are able to compute credit scores… but wait these are based on transactions. So maybe we can capture transactional relationships but what about the transformational ones (completely outside of systems)?

Sometime ago I wrote this post. I had no idea that Apple was working on the iPad. Perhaps someone out there is spending their days, weeks, and years trying to decode that which we value most – our relationships. I just hope the KGB doesn’t get a hold of that technology…

Mac-Man by ~blindguard

Every couple years I take stock of the latest developments in computer operating systems. It helps me get an overview of  innovations in computer technology and get up-to-speed in terms of what the “world” considers important for computers. Here are my impressions.

Apple and Google have done a lot to change the way we (the world) view computers and their roles in our lives. Apple’s operating system Mac OS X is elegant in simplicity and power. As a newbie I was able to get it up and running quickly (on an iMac) and within days felt right at home with advanced tasks available on Unix-like systems. From concepts like disk partitioning and file synchronization to simple tasks like chatting on Skype and syncing contacts, the whole system is designed to simplify life. Google has done the same with e-mail, pictures, searches, maps and many other areas, all in an effort to simplify life. In case of Google, the services are “free” but the motives are unclear (outside the obvious ad business). Apple does not suffer from this but has a high premium for its products (which warrant every penny when compared with the competition, IMHO). One could argue that while these companies have simplified our life in some ways, they have indirectly increased the demands placed on our time but this is for a separate discussion (some hints in Technological Revolution).

Microsoft changed our lives in the last couple decades. Windows Vista was a total disappointment. Windows 7 is much better and is probably the best Windows yet. Amazingly, most people I know (including myself) still use Windows XP. Many programs I use have a hard time running on 64-bit Windows 7. It consumes a lot of memory (for what?) and still has quite a few areas to improve. The simplicity of Windows 2003 was more acceptable but that was a server operating system (with a high price tag). Why Microsoft is all over the place is hard to understand but the results will eventually show it.

Linux has come a long way. I tried Ubuntu 9.10 and 10.04, Fedora 12 and 13, Debian 5.04, Oracle Enterprise Linux 5, and a few others. Of these I like the install of Fedora 13 and the usability of Ubuntu 9.10. Apple’s OS X is a far more polished Unix variant than all of these. What’s amazing about the Linux world is the global community’s efforts to enhance it and the corporate efforts to milk it, all with good intentions. It will be a while before these become mainstream enough to displace Microsoft and Apple. A simple task of getting Skype to work took quite a bit of research and modification of runtime parameters, for example. Apple knows this and requires its Unix variant OS X to run on its hardware. Try to run OS X on anything else and Linux will look like piece of cake.

A few other operating systems support their stated goals well but since most of us do not interact with them directly we often do not even know that they exist. Solaris, for example, is solid but is made for business servers. RedHat and Suse have their versions of enterprise Linux servers. There are the BSDs, and many others. While these may run systems that help change our lives, they do not directly change our perceptions about computers and their roles.

A lot has changed from a decade ago but the players seem to be the same. The question is whether a new player will emerge in this space to completely change the game. What disruptive innovation will completely displace all of these operating systems in the same way that these have displaced the prior generations (CP/M, DOS, VMS, so many more)? Will the inventions be in hardware land or incremental improvements on what we have today? Pages could be written on this topic, but let me stop here for now.

Mirror Mirror by `Fredy3D

A few weeks ago, I had a fantastic meal with my good friends at Massimino’s, a nice little Italian place in the North End where we gather once a year to catch up and remember the past. This is a group of truly special people.

Eight, maybe nine years ago I was assigned to help implement a financial system at StateStreet. Little did I know about the true complexity of the project and the history prior to my assignment to the project. To sum it up, it was a mess! A multimillion dollar implementation on the brink of failure, this project seemed impossible and probably would have been scrapped. Multiple weekly status meetings with 40-50 people (at least 30 consultants @ ~$300 /hr), half dozen project managers with their assistants, an entire floor in the most expensive building in Boston, the best hardware costing over a million dollars, and much more didn’t seem to matter enough. Yet somehow this team of special folks managed to successfully roll out its piece of the project. It’s a nice annual surprise to hear that the system is still in use globally.

Even though  I have worked on many projects since then, I haven’t been in a similar team. It is even more troubling to see some of the latest currents that seem to sweep across this great society. Here are some observations.

We have all of the great communication technologies yet we’re less connected. I am certainly not talking about efficiency of transactional communication or the productivity gains from instantaneous dissemination of information. We seem to be less connected with transformational life-long relationships. At work, many of us stare at computer screens all day long with little time to actually talk to people outside the transactions we conduct. On Facebook, as a close friend pointed out, we see status updates that scream of loneliness and boredom. Instead of bowling or golf, many have the living room computerized “equivalents.” We have everything yet we have nothing.

To contrast this, I remember life back in Armenia back in the dark days when we had no electricity, no telephone, no running water, nothing! My father would joke that of all systems of communication/infrastructure only the sewer system worked (and even that froze one day in the dead of winter). We had hardly any food and I had to go for a daily fight for a loaf of bread. Yet in that environment we were (incredible to imagine) happy, never bored or lonely. The space/time for those days is no longer; only memories remain.

Today we are well connected exchanging / processing hundreds of e-mails, instant messages, text messages, tweets, phone calls, video chats, blogs posts and comments yet so many seem to be lonely, alone and feeling completely disconnected and alienated. TV commercials scream about depression and insomnia drugs and other remedies to address anxiety disorders. Netflix, OnDemand, and YouTube bring thousands of channels of passive “entertainment” yet it seems people need even more despite some of the videos and programming being pure trash.

The industrial revolution has ruined our external environment. Technological revolution seems to be ruining our internal environments. Or is it just a mirror?

The Kitchen Sink by ~rmsk8r05

A user interface (UI) is the set of means by which we interact with a system. I have probably mentioned in the past that I view almost everything as some type of a system or a component within a system. These systems all have UIs. In many cases, the UI is all we get to see from outside. The best systems have exceptional foundations and inner-workings in addition to their simple, clear, and easy-to-learn user interfaces. Let me give you a couple examples.

Every house has a UI. A coat closet in the wrong place, a door swinging the wrong way, or a light switch across the room all contribute to minor annoyances we typically get used to in an older home. Inside the house system, key components of the UI of the plumbing sub-system are faucets and sinks. Does the refrigerator have a user interface? Of course!

Take the system of government. Does that have a UI? Certainly! Move from one state or country to another and you may feel as helpless in dealing with basic tasks as in moving from one computer operating system to another. The frustration grows when the new UI is worse (less intuitive, with more flaws, lacking in features, etc.) than the prior one (even if the inner structures are better). Our frustration also increases when an interface to which we are accustomed changes for the worse over time.

Our impressions of the experience of interaction are hinged upon the interface presented. A beautiful and delicious meal at a nice restaurant with outstanding service creates an impression of an organized and efficient kitchen. Is this always the case or is it an illusion created by the restaurateur?

Here are some questions I cannot seem to be able to answer:

1. What allows one group of people to create a system superior to those created by other similar groups? Why is Apple able to create a computer that’s perceived to be easier to use than that created by Dell/Microsoft? Why are the founding fathers of America able to create a system far superior to that created by Lenin and his friends? Why is one town in Massachusetts able to govern itself better than another?
2. When we perceive the system to be superior to an alternative, do we really know everything about its internal structures, or are we just impressed by the user interface? Does the internal structure and foundation really matter? Example of this is “slapping a coat of paint before putting the house on the market.”
3. Is the user interface at all indicative of the underlying structural excellence? Can a system last the test of time if most effort (and investment) is toward the interface?
4. Why are some people able to create nice interfaces (such as beautiful web sites) while others cannot even maintain a system that’s given to them? Some people and groups seem to exist to run innovations into the ground.
5. Have we come too far? In contrast to our simpler beginnings when we had fewer systems and user interfaces (and fewer points of failure), have we created a monster by creating interdependent systems with complex interfaces in every corner of our life?

I suspect the answers depend on the perspective but it is clear to me that we are riding an interesting long-term wave of systems and interfaces. The transformation is faster than ever and the results more spectacular than ever yet basic humanitarian questions are far from finding their answers. Maybe the interface is getting more attention than it deserves in some departments of our life and not enough in others.

Wolfram|Alpha’s long-term goal is to make all systematic knowledge immediately computable and accessible to everyone. We aim to collect and curate all objective data; implement every known model, method, and algorithm; and make it possible to compute whatever can be computed about anything. Our goal is to build on the achievements of science and other systematizations of knowledge to provide a single source that can be relied on by everyone for definitive answers to factual queries.

Wolfram|Alpha aims to bring expert-level knowledge and capabilities to the broadest possible range of people—spanning all professions and education levels. Our goal is to accept completely free-form input, and to serve as a knowledge engine that generates powerful results and presents them with maximum clarity.

So I asked the age-old simple Armenian question and this is what I received:

Ինչ կա չկա

Let me ask in Armenian.

Ինչ կա չկա – Հայերեն

Looks like they had been expecting my question. It seems they have built a machine that answers most complex questions but fails at simple ones. Give it a try anyway, it could become your new favorite toy.

I couldn’t resist and tried Google which gave me its usual list of useless links that answer every other question but mine.

Ինչ կա չկա - Google

Technological innovation has a long way to go before it reaches any kind of maturity or saturation. We are still only just at the very beginning.

Footsteps Into The Sky by ~oruwu

Friday night is finally here. As usual, I am exhausted and completely drained and feel the need to write a few words to get my energy back. First, earlier this week my son taught me another lesson already learned many times. After much thought he decided to spend his entire savings of almost $100 on a Lego Star Wars kit with over 900 pieces. The cashier at the store counted quite a few pennies, dimes, nickels, quarters before handing over the kit to him. On the way home, I asked him how long he had been saving this money. “Three years!” he answered without hesitation. He had built many kits but this one had more pieces than all others. With fascination and excitement he started on this new project just as soon as he could but not long after displayed much frustration and stress from being unable to find the right pieces in the oddly shaped multicolored piles in front of him. I “helped” him by sorting the pieces in piles by color but that helped little and he grew even more frustrated in the process. I checked today and he had completed three quarters of the project. Stress and discomfort are relative to our capabilities and the complexity of the challenges we face. I remind myself – that which was a challenge yesterday is no longer a challenge today and that which is a challenge today will not be a challenge tomorrow.

The second thought I wanted to share is the total frustration I sometimes feel regarding many world events, American and Armenian politics, history and the present but the discomfort and the stress come from my inability to fix the problems and worst of all my inability in some cases to determine the best solution as in most cases all the solutions along a spectrum have been tried throughout history and have failed for different reasons. This is an issue from global politics, to local town and workplace issues, to family issues, and internal conflicts. The chess game is known, has been played before but one is unable to come up with a new creative set of moves and even if s/he can make the game changer move someone will invariably lose. I find that there is urge to give up or care less just because I cannot fix the problem. I also notice that sometimes the problem doesn’t bother me so much for me to drop all else and devote a life to it which is what I believe it would take in most cases. Multiply these personal views by hundreds, thousands, and millions of people and you have the true nature of our problems. One person’s contribution or lack of contribution makes little difference but when we all feel unable to make a meaningful difference, we end up watching TV or writing a blog post instead. I admire people who despite the above challenges wake up in the morning and devote their days to making this world a better place for the rest of us. In the roles given to me I do my best.

The third thought I wanted to share is that of the final outcome always being determined by the series of very small insignificant unimportant decisions and steps along the way. We tend to want to find one collosal mistake or one great step that changes the course of history of one life or the world. We want to place blame on one person or a group of people or one of the decisions or one set of actions which we label as the crucial ones. Even in making/losing money, we are more excited by big bangs and get-rich-quick thoughts rather than by pennies saved and earned and not lost in our daily lives. The great news is that aside from major accidents and other environmental issues, most missteps can be corrected, most issues can be overcome with small incremental steps in the right direction. Failed products and projects do not fail overnight. Booms and busts are not overnight events. Children do not excel or fail because of one thing we did or didn’t do. It is that constant steam of decisions, actions, events, stimuli and responses that determines what we have, what we do, and what we are.

Progress by ~gursesl

When I catch myself thinking about something worth sharing, I take down a few sentences to come back to them in a future post. A few days ago, I wrote “An interesting longer term cycle seems to be repeating. We all learn something new every day but from time to time I find myself having the urge to learn a new discipline, new subject, or a new profession. The learning process is very exciting as it brings renewal and new ways of understanding the world. One such wave caused me to start learning English. Who would have thought where that effort would lead years later…” This morning I saw a comment from GM Davies where he says “Well I think that one very good thing to do right now is to invest in oneself. Whatever comes out of this people with certain skills and know-how will always be needed.” I couldn’t agree more but will take that comment a bit further by replacing “right now” with “ALWAYS.”

I have been working on a small project recently. I’m “writing” a small piece of software to automate one of my Excel spreadsheets with a goal of learning four or five new web technologies. The outcome may be less useful than the Excel spreadsheet but the learning will be worth it. If in addition, others find value in the outcome, then I’ll have more than achieved my objective. I won’t go into the details of it until I have something to show. But wanted to mention a couple points.

Learning does not happen overnight. This project is progressing very slowly and the result so far is nothing exciting or spectacular but I continue to spend a few minutes here and there as much as I can. Inch by inch, one small improvement at a time, I learn a new option, a new method, and a new statement. I often learn something new and find myself hitting the proverbial brick wall discovering that I need to redo a lot of what I have already created. Obviously, if I had all the knowledge up front, I would avoid the mistake in the first place, but that is the price to pay for learning the lesson. This process in many ways is similar to value creation and research, one step at a time with frequent setbacks but never getting discouraged to the point of quitting due to personal limitations. Learning lifts those limitations but does that in slow subconscious way.

The other thought I wanted to share is that of digesting knowledge created by others. I often have to refer to a web site or a sample created by someone else to figure out how to accomplish my task. It takes me ten seconds to find and use the knowledge that someone spent hours creating. Very often I jump from one site to another in fifteen minutes “digesting” many hours of the work of hundreds of people. Imagine that! How many people take a moment to think about the hundreds of people and the months / years of their life that go into creating a two hour movie? I said this to my father who after devoting most of his life to astronomy expressed some regret that “… all that work was for nothing …” It is not for nothing! His work is all over the Internet, referenced in many recent papers. We can never predict how the value we create will be compounded by others. The lightning speed by which new information, new knowledge, new thought (this post for example) gets absorbed by others and becomes part of them is absolutely fascinating. Credit is not always given, the source is often forgotten, but humanity progresses and we all fullfil our individual role in that constant march toward our combined ideals.

TOOBS for stock by ~Mydin

I was thinking during my commute how quick the integration of new discoveries is these days. Perhaps it’s another side effect of easy information that new products, new inventions, new processes and new methods are analyzed, internalized, and digested so fast. Take the iPhone, for example. It has been around for a couple years, yet there are thousands of little programs for it already. I am sure that in another year or two, it will be added to the list of ancient technologies such as floppy disk, MS-DOS, short-wave radio, light bulb, screws, wheels, etc. To be sure, most technologies are still in use today but they have been internalized by us to the point where we rarely consider the human efforts, sacrifices, and trials that went into their initial births.

Three thoughts come to mind. First, never give up. It may take years to develop a system, a product, or to study a new force, new genetic mutation, new cancer cell, or write a great book. It may take a lifetime. People may argue, disagree, dismiss your work. They may misunderstand, misrepresent, take credit, discredit what you do. But from my history lessons, nothing major and meaningful was ever born overnight. One thought leads to another, one work makes it feasible to create another. That’s the process of development. What we see in the rear view mirror is the mature internalized, accepted, perfected result of many lifetimes of hard work.

Second, we all have some talents. My father says that great people are born with these special talents. He says although we can go to schools to learn how to write like ՎԱՀԱՆ ՏԵՐՅԱՆ, very few will be gifted with that special fragrance that he breathed into his poetry. Sure, but I also believe we each have our own unique gifts. It is a matter of early discovery and a lifetime of hard work. Again, in hindsight all we see are the jewels left behind by the greats. We do not always see all of the trials, failed attempts, discouragement, disagreements, and the hard work they endured. A classmate from elementary school writes beautiful poetry almost daily (who would have ever expected) but also lives a routine that would seem impossible to most. With God’s gift, and lots of hard work, I can envision a book in the horizon. I am sure it will be anything but easy.

Third, when you make it do not be disappointed when it’s quickly integrated into the civilization or the culture. The new method that was developed after years of hard work may become a standard routine so elementary that is taken for granted and almost forgotten. Sometimes the greatness is not appreciated for a generation or two. Often the impact is profound in many other areas of life not imagined initially. I am thinking of the Internet Protocol, for example.

As for me, I’ll be busy thinking much, learning much, observing much, experiencing much and, of course, expressing much…

Grass Typewriter by ~supertim

First, keyboards have been around for over a century. However, in that time, we have seen (I’m sorry to say) little to no evolution. It is time for these monsters to be replaced by softer alternatives. Replace the keyboard with a software keyboard that shows up when needed just as it does on the iPhone. Improve the keyboard so that it’s not just a rectangular alignment of keys (as in the case of the iPhone) but rather an automatically adjusting set of circular keys that appear based on a person’s typing stile and hand size and the placement of the screen. I’ve learned to type on my own. It would be nice if the keyboard would adjust to minimize strain on my hands based on the way I type. Touch screens have become very advanced and there is no reason why the keyboard should be separate from the screen any longer given most actions are carried out via the mouse today. I’m describing a tablet computer of some sort except without a stylus. When placed on a table keys would be placed, in a certain way. When upright, hanging on a wall, in a different way. Furthermore, with technologies to guess the word being typed, I’m sure typing would become many times faster.

Second, computer mouse should become a historical artifact. Its precision pixel pointing features are no longer critical in a world where screens can be as large as needed and there is little harm on eyes from close proximity to the LCD screen. Software needs to be designed for the new system to work completely without the mouse allowing hand gestures to control all operations that a mouse would perform. I guess I’m describing the Star Trek computers but we’re close to seeing these become reality. There is no reason why the screen couldn’t adjust completely to expect the actions that a user would want to perform at any given time. The piano application would show piano keys.

Third, the screens should be made to sense the existence of other screens so systems with dual monitors would be as easy as plugging a monitor into the power outlet and placing it next to an existing screen. Adding any number of monitors would simply expand the computer display area for large scale work tables or applications requiring the display of massive amounts of information.

Finally, these tablets need to be modular requiring only a power source with all inter-device communications handled via wireless networking (WiFi) or Bluetooth. So, a tablet in our living room wall would have the same functionality as another tablet in a home office. A similar tablet would be available in the car. In all these cases the only difference would be the screen size. The home entertainment system would be replaced with one of these. The TV in the bedroom would be replaced with a larger sized model, the iPhone, iPod and work PC with others of varying sizes. The dashboard on the computer would be yet another version.

I have seen every component of this system already but haven’t seen the overall system coming together yet. Microsoft, Apple, Google, HP, Dell and others could create a new revolution in computer technology by bringing together already existing components with the vision described above. The computer user interfaces of today (Windows, Mac, Linux…) would all appear ancient and difficult to use.

The applications of the touch based tablet with the smooth user interface of the future are simply endless. Instead of flying TVs around, I’m sure JetBlue would switch to flying tablet computers around. Disk space you ask? There is no reason why disks couldn’t be sold on subscription basis held in many redundant data centers around the globe. Cloud computing is not anything new. Why not bring it all together? Any thoughts?