Monday, October 14, 2013

Age, Quora and John Gardner


I’m still in my twenties … just barely.  It’s a complex time to be in your twenties – heck, it’s a complex time and age, period, probably far more complex if you’re still a baby, even more so if you’ve yet to be born.  As Louis Armstrong put it, “I hear babies cry, I watch them grow – they’ll learn much more, than I’ll never know.”

But no matter our age, we humans can’t help but think about our age, its obsessions and its cares, the drive for youth and beauty against stodginess, the loss of brain cells, the gain of wisdom (if we happen to be so lucky) and experience.

For that reason, I’d like to share a couple thoughts on the benefits of age and experience – mostly from others, not my own:

Consider the 162 illuminating answers to this question on Quora:



Thomas Watson, Sr. was a convicted criminal facing federal prison for monopolistic fraud and blackmail, with his firstborn on the way, at the age of 40.  No visible path to success, had just been fired from his 17-year job, just married for a couple months, but with the unwavering belief that he would do "something big" with life, and that he should plan his family's fortunes decades and even a century into the future.

This is 1914, right at the start of World War I.  Watson turns down a number of job offers, looking for that one where he can control the business for himself, and earn a share of the profits -- and that's where CTR - eventually to become IBM - comes in.  Four hundred demoralized salesmen, with an annual revenue of less than $5M ... up to $897M and 72,500 employees at the time of his death in 1956.

The vast majority of successful startups are founded by entrepreneurs over the age of 35 -- this was true fifty years ago, and equally true now.  The exceptions we hear in the news actually emphasize the point.
 

Consider this Stanford Centennial commencement speech, given by John Gardner, who headed the Carnegie Foundation, founded Common Cause and Independent Sector, and led the US Dept of Health, Education and Welfare (heading the launch of Medicare and the CPB – creating NPR and PBS).

particularly this section:

As you settle into your adult lives, you cannot write off the danger of complacency, boredom, growing rigidity, imprisonment by your own comfortable habits and opinions. A famous French writer once said, "There are people whose clocks stop at a certain point in their lives." I could without any trouble name a half dozen national figures resident in Washington, D.C., whom you would recognize, and I could tell you roughly the year their clock stopped.

If you are conscious of the danger of going to seed, you can resort to countervailing measures. At any age. You can keep your zest until the day you die. If I may offer you a simple maxim, "Be interested." Everyone wants to be interesting, but the vitalizing thing is to be interested. Keep your curiosity, your sense of wonder. Discover new things. Care. Risk. Reach out.

Learn all your life. Learn from your failures, from your successes. I know that some of you are a little frightened - more than a little - of what's ahead. You know a lot - perhaps too much - about the ways in which lives get messed up. Bright illusions aren't your problem. But someone said, "Life is an error-making and error-correcting process." When you hit a spell of trouble, ask yourself, "What is it trying to teach me?" Sometimes it's confusing but Irene Peter pointed out that today if you're not confused, you're not thinking clearly.

We learn from our jobs, from our friends and families. We learn by accepting the commitments of life, by playing the roles that life hands us (not necessarily the roles we would have chosen). We learn by taking risks, by suffering, by enjoying, by loving, by bearing life's indignities with dignity.

The lessons of maturity aren't simple things such as acquiring information and skills. You learn not to engage in self- destructive behavior, not to burn up energy in anxiety. You learn to manage your tensions, if you have any, which you do. You find that self-pity and resentment are among the most toxic of drugs. You conclude that the world loves talent but pays off on character.

You discover that no matter how hard you try to please, some people in this world are not going to love you, a lesson that is at first troubling, and then really quite relaxing.

You learn to live along the way. You don't let the nagging pressures of life smother moments of beauty that can never be recaptured. Careless people treat unique moments as throwaways and live to regret it.

Those are hard lessons to learn early in life. As a rule you have to have picked up some mileage and some dents in your fenders before you understand. As Norman Douglas said: "There are some things you can't learn from others. You have to pass through the fire."

You bear with the things you can't change. You come to terms with yourself. As Jim Whitaker, who climbed Mount Everest, said: "You never conquer the mountain. You only conquer yourself." You master the arts of mutual dependence, meeting the needs of loved ones and letting yourself need them. You can even be unaffected - a quality that often takes years to acquire. You can achieve the simplicity that lies beyond sophistication.

I suppose every man and woman with the capacity to face reality - which eliminates most of us at once, including your speaker no doubt - recognizes that humans want meaning in their lives. Robert Louis Stevenson said, "Old or young, we're on our last cruise." We want it to mean something.


Sounds like the greatest & most exciting parts of our adventures are yet to come, so long as we believe that they are – no matter what age we physically happen to be.  True, “when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go” – but what happens in body is only tangentially related to what happens in mind.
 
See the world through rose-tinted glasses, and you’re bound to be a happier and more fulfilled person, while inspiring everyone around you toward joy (and perhaps greatness).  Maybe it’ll even lead to world peace.
continue reading "Age, Quora and John Gardner"

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

The Future of Employment


Two weeks ago, researchers from Oxford published a very intriguing paper.  The Future of Employment explores which jobs in the United States might be automated, and when.  Clocking in at 45 pages + 16 pages of sorted occupations, it’s worth a read – provides a more granular perspective, industry by industry, compared to MGI’s Disruptive Technologies report from May 2013.

Headlines have publicized the percentage – 47% – of US jobs that are amenable to automation; the model suggests a > 70% chance that computers will be taking over these jobs in the “near future”, perhaps 10-20 years.

That’s not to say the paper is perfect – it eliminates 201 of 903 occupations off the bat for incomplete data, the data wasn’t collected to assess automation, and it’s unclear why only 70 occupations were deemed reasonable to hand-label for training, if an entire Oxford workshop were dedicated to the science of subjective labeling.  Such occupations as Models and Interviewers were considered 98% and 94% likely for automation in the short-term – suggesting the O*NET data is unacceptably faulty in its grasp of specific features amenable to automation.  Also, completely new & substitute occupations for AI aren’t considered, being beyond the scope of this paper.

At the same time, this paper generates discussion & debate, which are key as we peel off toward this brave new future.  What will happen to our world as a whole, and to the economies of individual cities, states and nations, as the next 20 years descend on our heads?  Which industries can and will we completely replace, what new human jobs will replace the jobs that vanish, and when will those new occupations be replaced as well?

It’s hard to imagine that Mathematical Technicians (99%) will be one of the first jobs on the chopping block, but the questions deserve thought.  The pace of occupation automation reflects a couple key factors:

1)   Which industries are least conservative, have the least regulation, and demonstrate moderate levels of concentration – with enough competition that every company strives to gain the slightest competitive advantage?

2)   Which industries are primed for replacement?  Where the automated agents (robots or machine learning-driven user interfaces) address a very large consumer or industry pain, or there exists a shortage of cost-effective human labor (whether world-wide, or in a specific region), where political and social battles create roadblocks to any other path?

3)   Which automated agents require the least variety of adaptations or advancements to existing technology?  Where can customized industrial or personal robots be repurposed, and for those eager to find opportunity, which extraordinary university AI research labs provide fewer routes to tech commercialization and more chances for exclusive licensing?

4)   Finally, in which industries and arenas can the largest social impact be measured or described?  In what situations can autonomous agents succeed in addressing the human condition, where purely human efforts have failed?  Where can you tell the heartwarming stories that all of mankind will support – jobs being done that are too hazardous for humans to consider, jobs that protect or save human life, jobs in the public interest?

There are three useful thoughts in the subtle conquering of industries:

1)   Find jobs hidden in the supply chain, buried deep in the ever-turning industrial cycle, or located far in the background – jobs already outsourced, or jobs in the domain of reasonably large competitive conglomerates.  These are occupations whose automation very few consumers and government agencies would notice.

2)   Find cost savings in industries with vast need for cost savings.  I’d say healthcare, if only it were a less conservative industry, one less tightly managed by political alliances and the trifecta of Pharma, Insurers and Medical Devices.  Look elsewhere.

3)   Raise public outcry for highly personable robots – consumer demand is a tricky but extraordinarily powerful thing.  Personable doesn’t simply mean big eyes, a preemptive smile and the remarkable voice talents of Morgan Freeman or Oprah, though each may be key – it requires many of the tips and tricks that have created rabid early adopters and fan bases from Apple to Spotify.  There’s no shortage of advice online, but think Netflix.

We’re still thinking in very human terms – one human job to one robot.  Why not wholescale replacement of entire industries?  This is a seismic shift along the lines of global industrialization – on a smaller scale, consider even Wal-mart and the gradual demise of Small Town USA.  Who says the robots need to be human-like, on-site, or exist in physical form at all?  What if the future is all machine learning-driven software, 2D and 3D user interfaces, and a few humans left over to push the buttons and act as 5th backup for core breaches?  Think of Homer Simpson operating the nuclear plant – isn’t a fully automated software solution, as seen in Gen III and IV nuclear reactors, far safer?

Which parts of the human enterprise can be replaced in one fell swoop, in grand or mini-revolutions of the robotic variety?  When’s the imminent day we wake up and find ourselves entirely dependent on trillions of AI agents, failing to see the full ramifications of a tsunami that swept in as we lived life nearly unawares?
continue reading "The Future of Employment "

Hello, world!


puts “Hello, world!”

console.log(‘Hello, world!’);

public class HiWorld {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println(“Hello, world!”);
    }
}

(princ “Hello, world!\n”)

IO.puts “Hello, world!”

~ nuqneH { ~ 'u' ~ nuqneH disp disp } name
nuqneH
continue reading "Hello, world!"