home
on exploration, introspection and creation

Archive for the ‘retrospective’ Category

It comes with age

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010

I have a big issue when somebody tells me that I can’t do something because of my age, or that I soon won’t be able to because I’ll be too old. Usually this has to do with abilities. I should join a startup now because as I get older I will be less able to. I should be creative now because people get less creative with age.

I don’t think this is right. I think there is a correlation, but there is no direct causal link. In other words, if you control for the factors that are usually causing these limitations, you can avoid them despite getting older.

Take joining startups, for example. I actually think that we don’t do it because we’re risk averse, not because we’re old. As we get older we tend to be more risk averse, but the point of noting the actual cause is that you can do something about it (unlike age). For example, train yourself to be less risk averse–lose a bunch of money taking risky bets, quit before you have a new job to hold on to.

After I think about it, a lot of things people tell you you’ll be too old to do have a much better proximate cause than age: experience and commitment. We’re risk averse because we have too much to lose later in life. We don’t go back to grad school eight years after graduating from college not because we get dumb, but because we’ve experienced enough in life to know what we like and don’t like.

A nice thing about that is that while you can’t ignore consequences of age, you can for experience and commitment (although the latter is very hard). When someone tells me that I can’t write a book when I’m 35, I’ll just think about what makes older people less likely to write good books (“Aha! they’ve experienced so much that it’s hard for them to write something new”) and control for those factors.

You don’t know you need it until you have it

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

(I promised my friend I would write this post some day–here you are, buddy.)

A great way to achieve goals is by enumerating problems first and then solving them. However, this method has a blind spot — value can also be added not by solving pain but by making what is good better.

A good manifestation of this is the “you don’t know you need it until you have it” phenomenon. My friend and I would spend hours discussing why I thought he should get a touch phone. “I don’t perceive any problems with my life that a touch phone could solve,” he would say. Well, I used to think that too at the end of my Freshman year in college, as all my friends tried to convince me to buy a cell phone.

So–for the benefit of my friend–here are the things that having a touch phone (iPhone specifically but the argument can easily be used for any touch phones) enabled me to do that I never even thought of being able to do

  • I can figure out how to get from Grand Central to Columbia University by subway. Previously I either had to take a map with me, look for a map at the station, or get on a train that was hopefully the right one and look through the map there. I can even tell how long the trip’s going to take.
  • I can figure out where that restaurant at which I was supposed to meet my friend was–I only remember the name. Previously I would have to call someone or ask and hope they would know.
  • I can mark where I parked my car so I don’t have to worry that I’ll forget the day after when I have to pick it up.
  • I know when the train leaves Grand Central so I can spend more time hanging out with my friends rather than stranded at the train station.
  • I can very quickly resolve these bets that I often make with others, related to some particular factoid that we disagreed on at dinner.
  • I will never, ever forget anything because I can write a note to myself at any point.
  • I will never, ever be bored because I can
    • Listen to radio
    • Play games
    • Listen to audiobooks
    • Read books
    • Listen to music
    • Write a post in my blog
  • I can pretend to be a good cook because I can pull up a recipe anytime
  • I can recommend a restaurant to a group of people based on their recommendations

I’m just going to stop here because, quite frankly, it’s like listing the benefits of the Internet (the “touch” part is incredibly useful because it makes user experience bearable — doing most of the above on a WAP-enabled phone or even a real browser but with a keypad-activated cursor is a pain in the neck).

Of course, one drawback of making good things better is that your expectations are raised. I remember thinking a month after I got my iPhone, “This is the most user-friendly, useful device I have ever used. My life is so much easier and richer right now.”. Now, two years in, I am very frustrated with it. It’s unresponsive, the lack of Flash annoys the hell out of me, I have to spend so long looking up directions. In fact, I’m just a much more discerning customer.

The Encyclopedia-then-Internet generation

Monday, March 8th, 2010

I remember the time, when I was little, when there was no Internet. All my generalist knowledge about the world came from two sources: my parents, and an encyclopedia we had at the house. In a way, the encyclopedia was like the Internet (combined with Yellow Pages). If I needed to draw a picture of a bird, I browsed the encyclopedia for images of birds. If I was bored, I’d open the encyclopedia on a random page.

I think that spending all of elementary school and a part of middle school like that made me appreciate information. I think it is the case that my generation pays closer attention to the quality of information, intuitively comparing what they see to what they would see in an encyclopedia. And I think we are better at finding the more obscure information (since search was linear–no index–I had to be clever about what I looked for). But, on the other hand, we’re probably struggling more with the amount of information (unless we’ve stayed on top of it by following the trend for all these years–still, if I really want to be up to speed I feel the need to read about 200 blog posts every day while back in the day it was a few pages in a newspaper).

On Motivation (part II)

Monday, March 8th, 2010

I continue to be amazed by what motivates me. One day I’d just wake up and want to get stuff done. On another, seemingly identical, occasion, I would feel a deep lack of desire to do anything.

Over the past month I’ve had several discoveries. While I know that they are likely different for different people, I encourage everyone to think about what motivates them. Often the factors seem completely arbitrary and are unlike what many self-help publications purport to convince us of.

  • Sometimes I need to be lazy so that in the medium term I can get stuff done. This, I think, is the most important thing that people overlook. I think that this is partly due to the need for my brain to relax (or stop concentrating on one area such as the area responsible for planning and achievement), and partly due to the fact that the desire to get things done is a function of our overall state of mind: spending some time being lazy makes me more motivated to get stuff done later (the “broccoli and ice cream” effect)
  • The most surprising of all was the discovery that if I get home from work before 7pm, I am significantly more motivated to get “life” work done. I haven’t figured out why that is; but this rule seems to work very well for me
  • Several small successes in a row incentivize me to get more done
  • What reduces my anxiety the most is not (in general) getting things done but having a good grasp of what needs to be done and the priority of these things. One thing I therefore tried to do was not organizing my todo list but instead just knocking things off the list so I don’t become complacent having a well-formed todo list

Terminals

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

It’s interesting that despite having a very similar function, an air terminal looks and feels drastically different from a train station. The former is impersonal (I’d even say dehumanizing), artificial, large but empty. The latter, on the other hand, feels vibrant, crowded, human.

Consider the visual imagery associated with an airport, and that of a train station. When I think of a train station, I see an old platform, rusty steel beams. The platform is crowded, people interact with each other. There is steam. It’s dark and the golden, point lights suffice barely to illuminate the absolutely necessary parts of the platform. The train–the machine–is a prominent part of the scene, it is right there, close to all the passengers. An airport, on the other hand, is made up of long well-lit corridors with conveyor belts that push people along. It’s sunny and bright out, yet the artificial light indoors makes the passengers feel lethargic, purposeless. Nobody interacts with anyone else. The airplanes, although much bigger than the train, aren’t as majestic because they are all far away and by the time of their tour-de-force (the take off) they are only small points on the horizon to the observer at the terminal.

There are many reasons for this difference, the most important ones being structure (physical attributes and constraints), location, and what I’d call cultural and technological maturity. An airport is usually large because it has to accommodate the physical requirements of the gates; this necessitates conveyor belts, and creates the void. The train station can be much smaller because all it requires is enough platform space for all the simultaneously arriving and departing trains. The airport is most often on the outskirts of the city, and its sole purpose is to be a terminal for airplanes. This single purpose makes it impersonal and monotonous. A train station, usually in the center of the city, is usually a hub for other public transportation–people with diverse purposes mingle in one place (which makes it more crowded and increases interaction, as well as allows for more diverse retail areas).

Finally–and this is probably the reason why these two places have such different visual connotations–the trains have been with us (and thus have been part of our culture) for much longer and represent an element of nostalgia (mature, more “human”, reliable and powerful steam technology, as opposed to prone-to-failure and difficult to grasp technology of air transportation).

The surprising origins of things (part IV)

Sunday, February 7th, 2010

I think that modern mass culture is the defining characteristic of the Twentieth Century. It’s interesting to trace its beginnings to the Great Depression.

Swearwords and Society

Sunday, December 13th, 2009

I love swearwords. Not swearing — just swearwords (though I’ve found myself to be swearing more ever since I started being permanently employed. I think it’s partly due to what I inherited from my father–he’s a seaman and thus (curiously, it is a forgone conclusion) swears majestically–and partly the open culture I enjoy at work).

Swearwords make language so much more expressive. They allow one to convey otherwise indescribable emotions. No matter what word you think of, there is another one more powerful than it (and thus more insulting than it). This makes language more useful than it would be without swearwords–more accurate, more engaging.

I used to think that those who are insulted at swearwords are just conservative; backwards-thinkers, in some way. An ideal society wouldn’t have swearwords, all words would be fair game, I conjectured. Now I think that such a society would be an unbearably tedious congregation of automata.

Swearwords address one fundamental problem with language, a problem that no language can solve. A language is–by definition–a convention, a kind of lossy translation from thought. Expletives allow for a momentary disclosure of pure thought; they violate convention and are closer to actual thought than any other word can ever be. They need no definition; they are always accompanied with rich and unique intonation. If swearwords ever die, so will language.

It’s also fascinating to see how swearwords evolve. At any given time (and in any given society), there is a set of words considered offensive. This set changes over time –while we tend to think that it gets smaller (“shit” used to be an offensive word; it doesn’t seem so anymore), but there are always new words being invented that become the new taboo. This shows how dynamic language is, how easily the rules change. And it’s not like there is some group of scientists who decide what should be a swearword and what should not; it’s the society at large that decides.

So even if you don’t approve of swearwords and have never used them, I hope you appreciate their existence. They make language, and with it our civilization, more human.

Uncharted Territory

Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

I have several recurring dreams. One such dream places me back at home, in my home town. I am on a routine trip, say to the grocery store. Suddenly I deviate from the path I always take and find myself taking one I’ve never taken. It is that path that reveals mystical, magical areas of my town to me, areas that clearly exist only in my imagination–for example, suddenly a path I take to the grocery story becomes a narrow passage on the side of the mountain that suddenly appears next to my house. My imagination goes wild, conjuring up places taken from some kind of fable, splicing them into my dream. While such fantastic places clearly are fake, I can’t be sure in the dream because technically I’ve never taken that path.

I think this recurring dream highlights my fascination with unchartered territory, especially places in close proximity to well-known and frequently-visited areas. It’s almost as if my mind wanted these areas to be full of mystery.

I think it’s a natrual response to the world getting smaller. It’s now easy for me to fly all over the world; any two places on Earth are at most twenty-four hours apart, yet there is still so much I haven’t explored, even five hundred yards from my childhood home.

I go back home every year and sometimes am tempted by following one of those alternative paths from my dreams. But I quickly stop, knowing deep inside that I’ll be disppointed if I do so. If I prove to myself that there is nothing out-of-the-ordinary there, where will the mystery, the magic go? With nowhere to go, it will disappear. And life without magic is an uninspiring life.

The most shocking example of unchartered territory is probably my apartment block itself. I live on the eighth floor of a Communist-era block: back in the ’50s, a marvel of engineering and a perfect example of socialism manifesting itself through homogenization and utilitarian mass production; now a dark, ugly reminder of the depressing times that’s way past its effective lifetime and thus unsafe; then–the Burj’s (al-Buruuj) of their times; now–embarrassing pimples in the skyline that desperately wants to be innocent enough.

I have lived in the building for most of my adolescent life, yet I have never taken the elevator past my floor. Not once. The top floor–one I’ve never been to–with its access to the roof, and the terminal stop for the elevator, has only (but prominently) featured in my dreams. For instance, I would frequently dream of mistakenly taking the elevator to the tenth floor. Every time I did, something fantastic happened–for example, the elevator wouldn’t stop and simply blew through the roof (in a puzzling, rather than scary, kind of way); or I’d never actually get to the tenth floor, yet always get closer and closer to it. Or the elevator would suddenly start moving sideways. There were dozens of variations, one for each recurrence of the dream. They weren’t frightening; I remember being intrigued and overwhelmed, like Alice in Wonderland.

They were, however, respectful of the Magic. The tension in the elevator cables made a distinctive set of sounds as the elevator crawled from the ground floor to the eighth (in a kind of signature unique to this elevator). Obviously, the symphony is unfinished; I don’t know the last two bars of it. None of the dreams ever dared complete it for me; the sounds are like a key to the unchartered territory that I never obtained.

There is an animated short that reflects the spirit of my feeling like nothing else; it is one of the shorts of Animatrix, called Beyond. In it, a child discovers a “bug” (the whole world is a computer simulation–there, I spoiled Matrix for you) in his neighborhood that causes the laws of physics to cease to apply momentarily, warps time and space, and allows cause and effect relationship to be violated. It’s a clever way to describe magic. In the short, the bug is corrected; everything goes back to norm. But we can’t stop feeling disappointed, even though we knew it was all unreal.

Will I ever ride to the top floor of my building? Never. Not because I’m afraid, but because if I do, there will be no unchartered territory. The magic will be gone; hefty reality will set in instead. And I find it rather convenient to have an infinite repository of magic two floors above my apartment.

The magic of discovery

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

There is something… magical about making discoveries. It’s one of those very fundamental, profound pleasures that stay with us throughout our life. We never really get tired of discovering things.

One of the most powerful and overwhelming feelings I’ve had as a child was the feeling of finding something unique around my house. Usually these were small things–things other people threw out of their window that landed on the playground I’d spend a lot of time in. They were small gears that were once part of some machine, or tiny tiles used in kitchen walls. There were toy cars that some reckless child threw out of a balcony. Of course, from a rational, adult perspective I shouldn’t have been collecting these things–God knows who handled them before and how they handled them–but we’re talking about a matter of passion here. And since I knew my mom would yell at me for being unhygienic or something (being a pessimist she would come up with all those diseases I could contract by playing with my treasures), they were my little secrets. Something I found and something only I am aware of.

I felt that way because of the sense of ownership I had for the little item I just found. I think this is the most incredible thing about discoveries–the discoverer is almost always the owner of the discovered (even if it’s a more abstract kind of ownership, for example, in form of gaining immortality as the discoverer or something precious). For example, the first dream I ever remember was one in which I found a camera — a nice one at that, an SLR (I didn’t even know what an SLR was, it just looked professional) — and I hid it on the side of my tiny little bed. When I woke up, I looked but couldn’t find the camera. The fact that it made me sad for a minute there meant that I had no intrinsic conception of the difference between a dream and reality, whereas I certainly was aware of the significance of discovery.

As we get older we don’t get any less overwhelmed. The pride of discovery is still there, but the discovery becomes more conceptual. Think about all the times you discovered a great book in a bookstore and felt really good about it. Or all the times you discovered how to put all the Lego bricks together without the user guide. I’d claim that the moment when you solve a problem is a kind of discovery (the aha moment; the kind of epiphany that Gregory House has every week).

Even today I get a warm and fuzzy feeling when I discover a fact that surprises me. Today the feeling is accompanied with a sense of relief: the world is not so small after all; there’s still things to learn, things that lie there hidden just waiting for us to uncover them. And while it’s not too likely we’ll tuck them away in a gap between our bed and the wall, we still feel like we own our discovery.

The greatest moment in my lifetime of interactions with computers

Tuesday, November 24th, 2009

For those who prefer brevity to beauty, here it is: the day I discovered DOS/4GW. For everyone else, read on.

Thanks to my dad’s wonderful prescience, I grew up with computers–and by grew up, I mean grew up. I think the first computer in the house was a Commodore (although for some reason I imputed a memory of my dad owning an Amstrad-Schneider). I was too young to remember much other than sitting on my dad’s lap and staring at the computer screen. Back in the day it was impossible (and I believe also illegal) to own “imperialist” equipment (I know one needed the governor’s permission to get a car) and so I am deeply impressed by my dad’s ability to do magic.

When I was six or seven (again, I don’t remember exactly), I got my very own ZX Spectrum + with a black-and-white monitor. I remember playing with it for hours (the fact that those years spent staring at a CRT screen haven’t made me blind confirms my theory that if you grow up with something you get used to it and it doesn’t harm you; ironically many of my friends who got their game consoles or computers when they were teenagers are nearly legally blind now).

Pretty quickly I started writing programs for it. Looking back, this was crazy–the user manual was in English and so at age seven I knew about eighty words–keywords used in programs I’d write–in English very well but no grammar or vocabulary that kids my age for whom English was their native language knew (a fascinating way to learn the language).

I don’t want to digress too much from the theme of this post; one day I’ll continue the rant. The important thing was that at the time the computer had 48k of memory available (an equivalent to the amount of information contained in the text of the Constitution of the United States of America; to put things in perspective, computers come with 2GB now, which is about 40 thousand times more). I didn’t feel I needed much, though, because the capabilities of the computer were limited and my brain was pretty small, too. Over time, however, I did start bumping into these limits more and more. I could define my own characters and sprites (for which I had to learn to operate in binary; knowing binary before I knew how to divide is a funny thing, now that I think about it) but I could define at most 256 of them.

Fast forward six years, to my first PC (getting close to that ominous greatest moment). Eternally curious how to make games rather than play them I’d continue programming. My brain, now more fully developed, could process more information and so I expected my programs to. The PC was also capable of much more (I think I had 16MB of memory at this point?) yet due to the hardware limitations I could use at most 640kB of it. You may think that a little more than 650 thousand bytes should suffice but that’s how much information is contained in a single uncompressed photo! I felt very constrained–my computer could play sound, display graphics, and perform calculations much faster than anything I’ve seen before. Yet I couldn’t take advantage of any of it. There seemed to be some kind of a rule that stipulated those omnipresent limits–party poopers. There seemed no way around it.

Then, one day, I discovered this utility called DOS/4GW. It wasn’t a discovery as much as a result of an investigation: I’d see more and more advanced games pop up that surely couldn’t have been subject to the 640k limit (they combined music with graphics and seemed to store a lot of information about the virtual worlds they were depicting… my intuition told me that must have been more than the measly 640k). All these games would launch a small application before they themselves started, and that application would simply pop “DOS/4GW” on the screen and disappear. So I started digging.

I found out (at that point I didn’t have any access to the Internet–searching for information was so incredibly painful back then) that this little utility allowed the game programmers to bypass the 640k limit, effectively taking advantage of all the memory that the computer had available. And to my shock it turned out that I could also take advantage of this application when making my programs.

This lifting of the limit was, in retrospect, the single most eventful day in my entire life of interaction with computers. For one, the limit was immediately increased from 640k to 16M (a 25-fold increase!). But, more importantly, it was a soft limit: I could simply buy more memory and have more available to my programs. I felt empowered*. I went crazy–there were finally no limits to my creativity.


* What I didn’t know was that DOS/4GW didn’t abolish the limit altogether; it simply upped it to 4GB. But given that most of us don’t have that much memory even today, that fact wouldn’t have registered with me as something fundamental then. Now it’s part of the sad reality about modern computing–it’s all painfully finite.