What technology?
Evan BiancoThis is my first contribution to the Accretionary Wedge geology themed community blog. Charles Carrigan over at Earth-like Planet is hosting this months topic where he posts the question, "how do you perceive technology impacting the work that you do?" My perception of technology has matured, and will likely continue to change, but here are a few ways in which technology works for us at Agile.
My superpower
I was at a session in December where one of the activities was to come up with one (and only one) defining superpower. A comic-bookification of my identity. What is the thing that defines you? The thing that you are or will be known for? It was an awkward experience for most, a bold introspection to quickly pull out a memorable, but not too cheesy, superpower that fit our life. I contemplated my superhuman intelligence, and freakish strength... too immodest. The right choice was invisibility. That's my superpower. Transparency, WYSIWYG, nakedness, openness. And I realize now that my superpower is, not coincidentally, aligned with Agile's approach to technology.
For some, technology is the conspicuous interface between us and our work. But conspicuous technology constrains your work, ordains it even. The real challenge is to use technology in a way that makes it invisible. Matt reminds me that how I did it isn't as important as what I did. Making the technology seem invisible means the user must be invisible as well. Ultimately, tools don't matter—they should slip away into the whitespace. Successful technology implementation is camouflaged.
I is for iterate
Technology is not a source of ideas or insights, such as you'd find in the mind of an experienced explorationist or in a detailed cross-section or map. I'm sure you could draw a better map by hand. Technology is only a vehicle that can deliver the mind's inner constructs; it's not a replacement for vision or wisdom. Language or vocabulary has nothing to do with it. Technology is the enabler of iteration.
So why don't we iterate more in our scientific work? Because it takes too long? Maybe that's true for a hand-drawn contour map, but technology is reducing the burden of iteration. Because we have never been taught humility? Maybe that stems from the way we learned to learn: homework assignments have exact solutions (and are done only once), and re-writing an exam is unheard of (unless you flunked it the first time around).
What about writing an exam twice to demonstrate mastery? What about reading a book twice, in two different ways? Once passively in your head, and once actively—at a slower pace, taking notes. I believe the more ways you can interact with your media, data, or content, the better work will be done. Students assume that the cost required to iterate outweighs the benefits, but that is no longer the case with digital workflows. Embracing technology's capacity to iterate seemlessly and reliably is what a makes a grand impact in our work.
What do we use?
Agile strives to be open as a matter of principle, so when it comes to software we go for open source by default. Matt wrote recently about the applications and workstations that we use.
Reader Comments (6)
Very nice post Evan
I really like your idea/analogy of reading a book twice, I often think about it.
And the superpowers question? Great exercise, I can see why it would make one unconfortable. Transparency is a great choice, and what you say about making technology invisible is really making me think about our tools.
So, thanks for another awesome and enjoyable read.
PS Speaking of superpowers, there's a book you should take a look at:"The vision revolution" by Mark Changizi. It describes the four (!!!) superpowers that evry human beeing has: telepathy, X-ray vision, future-seeing, spirit-reading. Seriously...
The Vision Revolution Overturns Everything
@Matteo,
Superpowers: The superpower exercise was uncomfortable, and the fact that we had to announce it in public made it even more so. Uncomfortable things are usually memorable, and that makes them great. But it was also great because it was led by Seth Godin. Seth humbly shared his superpower with the group after the exercise. "I'm Seth Godin", he said, somewhat joking about his larger-than-life presence and heft as an impresario. But he also said, "I'm never late for anything", which is a curious trait to pick out of the pile he has at hand. I can't say I expected that, but now I feel I get who he is. Never-late. That is his principle. What is yours? Two other favorites: a guy who could "see the future", and a girl who could "read minds", an management consultant and an executive coach respectively.
Iteration: I have only read a few novels twice; not as often as I would like. For me, it stems from a attempt to recreate the fleeting emotions and mood from the first pass. It sounds noble at first, but I think that intention is flawed. First impressions will be fixed and clamped down, but repetition soars when one pays attention to alternate experiences each time. Ever watch a plot-twisty supsense thriller at the cinema twice? You watch and anticipate things that you didn't pick up on before. The directors art becomes more nuanced and you get a deeper appreciation of how one scene unfolds into the next. Come to think of it. This act of iteration / repetition is really the exaggeration of observation. Over-observing, because observation is a tenent of science. Don't just observe, Observe again and again. I recall a watching *ahem* a prime-time reality TV singing competition where the coaches force the contestants to sing a cover song in extreme ways. Normally at first, then a second time one-octave above, a third time one-octave below. It occurs to me that messing around within the constraints of the task at hand is where mastery is found. Matt calls this the ability to break things, as you might recall, and it a powerful skill.
Invisibility is a power that some have and some fear. Such is particularly true with the open-source, closed-source software spectrum. Science in general could benefit from more transparency, where even the source code is published. Matt will be able to remind me of the geophysics professor at Stanford that exemplifies this. Matt?
I am going to buy the book that you recommend. You better be right. I am sure you are. Sold!
Thanks for connecting. As always.
(p.s. I edited the URL in your comment to a hyperlink, with the hopes that others will click on it).
Hi again Evan
On iteration: you make some good points there. I could not agree more on repeating of the initial experience: it is an illusion, and it is far more rewarding to be open to the unexpected new. Speaking of a plot-twisty suspense thriller, when I was in my twenties I watched the movie The Usual Suspects over and over again precisely with that objective in mind. It was fantastic to pick up on nuances and little gems by some superb actors (I'm talking mainly of Kevin Spacey and Gabriel Byrne). As for novels, I mentioned on twitter that I've read some novels twice (and one, the Hobbit, more than twice) and sometimes in different languages - mostly Italian translations the first time around - and that accentuates the effect. I recently finished the second read of Jack Vance's Planet of Adventure after a 20+ year hiatus, it is incredible what I did remember, but also how much I enjoyed it anew.
On superpowers: you were right, forcing yourself to that kind of introspection and then sharing it is a tricky business. I would have to say that my superpower is Shapeshifting. As in replicating things' appearance and essence. That is the way I learn things, whether a new skill as a geoscientist, a new technique with my hobby (which is drawing), or novel attitudes in my relationships with people. To learn something, and even more so to share it or teach it, I have to understand its very nature, break it down, copy it over and over again, until it becomes my nature too.
Thanks for starting the conversation.
Matteo,
Firstly, shame on me, for I haven't seen The Usual Suspects. But will do. Promise. Secondly, shame on me for being monolingual. I can imagine you have whole other dimensions for experiencing vocabulary and lyric, of which I know not.
I love not only that you thought long and hard about your own superpower, but also that you described it so eloquently. Some animals use mimicry in order to survive, some in order to grow. It occurs to me that you, perhaps, have found some alignment with this natural behavior. It is very true that as scientists and general observers of human interaction, we can pick and choose which qualities or skills we admire or adore, and then replicate the essence of those things until they become our own.
So the next question is, how do 'we', the indestructible, the freakishly strong, the airborne, the x-ray visionaries, broadcast our superpower talents to those in need? Do we humbly beaver away, minding our own business? Or do we promote and banter in order to flourish? Does the hero go looking for the problem seeking validation, or do problems naturally present themselves to the respectable hero, in peculiar, mysterious, unexpected ways?
Evan
Well, it probably depends on the hero. If you asked (here I'm giving away my real mental age) for example, Wolverine he'd probably say it does not matter: if he's not looking for trouble himself, trouble will find him.
Now, seriously, in my mind there's no question that we should share what we learn through our superpowers. I like Matt's energetic Write, talk and teach paragraph from one of his articles in 52 things. And there's the old adage, if you don't want to do it for other people, do it for yourself (or, to borrow again from 52 things, Publish or perish, industrial style).
HOOOOLD the phone - Evan, you haven't seen The Usual Suspects? I feel like I failed you somewhere growing up...I can't believe my brother doesn't know who Keyser Söze is?!
Before I geek out about superheroes for the rest of my "commessay" (yes, I am using my new term now), I'd like to offer my two cents about iteration:
I work in an industry that is essentially all iteration. People have literally been designing and building buildings for thousands of years, and project to project the process or the technology does not change all that drastically. For all of the amazing technological advancements we've made, especially in the past 50-100 years, when in comes to laying bricks or tile or plastering a wall, we do it pretty much the same way we've done it since the start; one brick, one slab at a time, by hand, with simple tools.
Sometimes you can have too much iteration - things become routine, and you stop thinking about it. This can be a good thing - who wants to think about what shade of white to paint the parkade all over again for each new project? - but this can also be a limiting thing, when you start to work on auto-pilot.
But there are times when iteration is deeply valuable. Really, iteration is just another word for experience, experience linked to a specific task or process.
Actually, now as I think about it for a second, when we approach the same problem a subsequent time, be it book or exam or high-rise, we don't truly iterate the process, which from my comp sci days means simply to repeat the process over again the same way (the bad iteration I mentioned above). Instead, we learn from our previous experience and approach the problem in a different way.
Or at least I believe that we should. I'd agrue that true iteration is a bad habit to get in to, and what we should strive for is to revisit something, but to try it in a new way, approach it from a new and fresh angle. Write a paper from one point of view, then write the paper from the opposing point of view for example.
As you pointed out Evan, technology can handle pure iteration very well - that is it's primary benefit. It's our responsibility to use technology's ability to repeat as a tool (the 'control variables'). Given the same inputs, computers will (should) always give us the same outputs. It's up to us to use the predictability and reliability (and speed) of our technology to vary to input and see what we get. This is the very nature of experimentation, but made simplier and with better results with our tools.
Of course, not many of us have the opportunity to freely experiment in such a fashion, but we do need to try to find the opportunities. Look for the patterns, remember the past experiences.
Now for Super-power geek talk...
It's a wonderful exercise to think about yourself in terms of your super-power. Far too often we deny ourselves the recognition of our best qualities. I know I am particularly guilty of diminshing my accomplishments, big and small. Lately I've been more aware of how often instead of just graciously accepting a "thank you" or "good job" I will reply with something like "it was nothing, it only took 2 seconds" or I'll tell about how I struggled with some part of the task and almost didn't finish it.
It's a strange thing, but I sometimes feel uncomfortable with the praise, I feel like I didn't earn it or don't deserve it somehow. Call it modesty or humility, or just a lack of confidence; what ever it is it's a problem, one caused by me, but easily correctable too. Well, as easy as any change in behaviour I guess.
So, in the spirit of growth and self improvement, I will pick a super-power. If I were to travel into space and/or a secret goverment lab and get struck by gamma rays and/or bite by radioactive animals, I think I would become known as "Resourceful-man". I feel that my resourcefulness is my greatest strength (as evidenced by me getting myself into the secret government spacelab with radioactive gamma monkeys). No cape though, for as we know from "The Incredibles" capes are dangerous. See, resourceful. Knowing that saved me an ugly run-in with a revolving door or 747 turbine.
Conveniently, I think there is a well-known superhero who's primary super-power is his resourceful-ness, and that would be the Batman of course. Yes he is a billionaire which goes a long way to facilitating his crime fighting hobby, and he has some very troubling anger issues, but importantly he is very much human. He does not draw his strength from the sun or from a ring or through some unfortunate accident, but instead he uses his body and his mind in equal measure to solve crime and save the world via Gotham.
Ironman/Tony Stark is a similar character, a self-made superhero without any special abilities (aside from a lot of money again) beyond his human intelligence. Given that I lack a fictional superconductor battery installed into a cavity in my chest powering a magnet that is stopping microscopic shrapnel from reaching my heart and killing me, I'll pretend I'm closer to Batman than Ironman, but as this summer's movies have shown Ironman may be the easier or more fun choice. And I do like my scarcastic quips...
No, I won't be tempted. Batman is cooler. He has a helicopter with twin rotors on the underside of the vehicle! A car that jumps! A bike that can take 90° corners at full speed! Goggles that turn every cellphone in the city into a sonar mapping system! Ninja stuff!