David Chappell

  • September 2020
  • November 2017
  • April 2017
  • October 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • August 2015
  • April 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003

Opinari

Get the Feed! Subscribe

Change, and Then Change Again, and Then . . .  
# Thursday, December 22, 2011
 
A friend of mine is a therapist, with a graduate degree in counseling and years of experience. All of this helps her be good at what she does. The thing she's working with--the human brain--doesn't change, and so the older she gets, the more she knows about how her clients think and feel.

But suppose the people she worked with today were twice as smart in two years--their brains could process twice as much information in the same period of time--and their memories also became twice as good. Then suppose their intelligence and memory doubled again two years later, and then two years after that. Would her training and experience be as valuable? I don't think so. These quantitative changes lead to qualitative differences. The way she worked with her clients would need to change enormously over time, and she'd constantly be trying to adapt to the growth in their capacity.

This is exactly what happens in our world, of course. Things that were impossible--incredibly capable smart phones, say, or cheap cloud platforms--become possible, then common, then part of the foundation we rely on, all within a few years. And we're just getting started--there's still a long way to go. Mark Andreessen's essay on why software is eating the world paints part of this picture, and it's well worth reading.

For an even better discussion, read Race Against the Machine by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee. (It's a Kindle Single, so it's short and cheap.) One of their key points is the hard-to-comprehend power of exponential growth. Borrowing from Ray Kurzweil, the authors refer to the second half of the chessboard (read it to find out what they mean--it's worth it), their metaphor for the impact of continual doubling. The point is clear: We ain't seen nothing yet.

I wonder what my therapist friend's world would be like if her clients were software rather than people. How could she keep up with their endless evolution? Yet that's exactly the challenge all of us face in our careers. We're obligated to keep up with the relentless evolution of information technology--there's no alternative.

And there's only one way to do it. We have to change, and then change again, and then . . .


2 comments :: Post a Comment

 


Comments:

An evolving human brain is part of science fiction now, but nobody knows if, in the future, neuroscience will have this in conmon with software/hardware development.
 

Great post David. I was just watching a documentary on Ray Kurzweil the other day. I think eventually we will have some form of hardware installed in us to expand our brain power. Ways to increase its memory and computing power.

And yes technology seems to be evolving at such a rapid pace and its getting harder and harder to keep up with all the changes. Take in to account all the vast information bombarding us from all angles and its easy to see why the human brain is getting overwhelmed these days.
 

Post a Comment


<< Home