By Peter Cochrane, 27 November 2006 10:55
COMMENT
Written on the Ipswich to London train and dispatched to silicon.com via a free wi-fi service in a London hotel later that day
Ever since I started work in 1962 I have seen my effective output increase year on year. Before the explosion of ICT, I used all manner of techniques to minimise paper, cut back on duplication and improve my overall efficiency and effectiveness. These measures very nearly doubled my productivity each decade but with the arrival of ICT this figure gradually rose to tenfold per decade.
By merely taking advantage of the continually increasing processing, storage and communication power, I achieved a substantial increase. But it was by using a continually evolving raft of applications, coupled with adapting my working practices, that the whole really took effect. Through the latter half of the 1980s, all of the 1990s and until recently my progress was relentless - tenfold every 10 years.
Unfortunately I am now approaching stasis. Any amount of basic machine upgrading, and it continues apace, won't make a jot of difference, as I am now the fundamental slowdown agent. I just can't work any faster; I just can't find any new tricks to get another big productivity hike. It seems I'm to be stuck in a 2004/05 mode for some time.
So if raw processing power, storage and bandwidth can't help, what will? What is it I need to leap forward by another factor of 10? In a word: intelligence. In two words: machine intelligence. I need something that monitors my activities, anticipates my next move and automatically satisfies my needs.
Search engines are impressive and often useless at the same time. Knowing that there are 64,431,000 references for the term 'artificial intelligence' isn't a whole lot of use! What we need is a cognitive approach with search material retreated and presented in some context relative to our current end-objectives at the time.
When will we see such technologies? They are around now and in use by people engaged in companies, security and legal systems who have to be able to search vast numbers of documents quickly. Some of the technology is based on statistical inference techniques with some extended by artificial life. For the time being they remain far too expensive for most but sooner or later they will appear to a wider audience.
The other big winner is in the area of decision support based on modelling and prior history.
For my part, I'd like to start with a system that manages all my interfaces and remembers all my habits. An effective search engine would be next followed by modelling and decision support. I really do need symbiotic support!
Comments
There are 19 comments. Join the discussion
1. Ryan Grobins
In the visual effects and animation industry this is not the case. Technology is never fast enough to produce the results we need. I am sometimes waiting for many minutes to see outccomes of test renders to make further decisions upon. This has been the case ever since the industry began, and the thrist for CPU power and large amounts of RAM shows no sign of abating. So much time of my day is wasted on waiting for my computer to compute what it needs to for my line of work.
2. Marc Richardson
Peter,
There is a lot of research happening around the "Semantic Web" at the moment.
I think some of the problems you mentioned will be addressed with Semantic Web technologies, although it’s a few years away from maturity.
3. R. Oakley
Socially, we've reached another end point. There is only so much disconnect we, as a species, can bear. Logical, rational technology tries to impose logical, rational rules on irrational people, who then become frightened that the computer will decide what they do, and there's no recourse.
This is not unlike dealing with any given person at the Department of Motor Vehicles.
The transaction is one-way. "Do what the computer says, or be fired" is the fear. We abdicate the human element because it's messy and inefficient.
Leveraging our "insight" through technology will result in the same effect as shaprening a digital picture: eventually there are unwanted artifacts and the operator has to compensate, often sacrificing overall quality for a given, small, localized effect.
Human beings ARE messy and inefficient, so there's only so far we can "sharpen" them before we get weird effects.
Let's skip that and jump right to the part where maybe if you need more productivity there needs to be more properly motivated and trained people involved?
4. Jason Williams
It seems to me that hardware upgrades have been relatively useless for 4 or 5 years now to the average information worker. What we need is software that makes us more efficient, or new paradigms of hardware. AI isn't necessarily the way to go (in the short run). What about applications that are more context sensitive and can rely on fewer mouse clicks. The video game industry has been doing this for years, based on the limited number of buttons you can fit on a controller. I believe Microsoft is doing this in Office 2007 with their new 'ribbon' toolbar, but I haven't seen it for myself. And yes, I'm sure there's someone who has beaten MS to the punch, but that example comes to mind first.
5. Louis Lemaire
This is based on the premise that we use our computers in the same way every day, and that we will continue to do so forever. A computer that can predict our moves based on past history is great, but we also have to remember that this is past history. As we come up with different ways of interacting with our systems - past history will become irrelevant. And we must also remember that by asking our computers to anticipate our actions we are effectively fueling the need for faster computers that are able of doing this kind of computing.
6. Graham Storrs
The technology you're looking for already exists. It is called a 'PA'. PAs learn your likes and dislikes, anticipate your needs, digest, filter and summarise your communications, dealing directly with most of them, and they do the tedious grunt-work on all that research. They even make the coffee.
True they're a little bit expensive, but worth every penny.
7. Richard
Four options:
- Work faster;
- Simplify each task;
- Extend useful working time;
- Do more in parallel.
Apparently, you've "plateaued" on speed & simplification.
There may be some margin for increasing useful working time:
It's strange that senior executives involved in technology still have to spend so much time & energy travelling to face-to-face meetings.
The most promising option is to do more in parallel - using extra technology or even extra *people* to do some tasks.
Perhaps the next step is the "Cochrane Franchise"?
8. J. Lambrecht
I'm stunned by this article.
An individual willing to submit 'itself' to the ever increasing need for economic expansion by centralisation, or in it-speak one could argue 'kernelisation'.
Why not offer some people a job, create a whole new 'structure' around yourself to increase your productivity.
You are not the center of the economy, your environment is. Please, also acknowledge that all you put into a digital system is 'available and networked', what you put into a person is in-a-way, decentralised and thus more robust, receptive to change then those 'systems' wich in turn get too you instead of it serving you.
I hope this brief comment is both illustrative and consistent to point out the need for 'human interdependability' instead of 'human-digital-integration'.
Thank you for your consideration.
J. L.
9. Richard
An effectiveness “master class” please:
Few have achieved such impressive improvements in personal effectiveness: Many are bogged down by restrictive company policies, increasing regulations & “security” concerns.
What lessons should (and could) we implement?
- Presumably you've invested more in technology; and also devised clever ways of using it?
- You seem to have acquired the technology you need rather than the “standard” technology selected by someone else.
- You seem less affected by restrictive company policies or stifling regulations & security concerns.
- Presumably you invest more in support staff (unusual in UK industry) and delegate whenever possible?
There is very little training or advice about how to make effective use of IT; most training teaches only how to use it – ie. which button to press.
How can we learn? How can we gain the freedom to use IT effectively?
10. Peter Cochrane
Richard = Yep - doing a lot of this too - exhausted this line! Peter
11. Peter Cochrane
Richard = Yep - doing a lot of this too - exhausted this line! Peter
12. Peter Cochrane
J L out of Belgium.
Done that already - what I do I can only do, anything someone else can do for me I outsource! Peter
13. Peter Cochrane
Richard = Absolutely correct - I have done all you cite plus a deal more. And I give a lot of lectures and presentations. If I thought the numbers of interested parties out there were sufficient I'd be happy to teach a master class. This would of course include sessions on circumventing the company rules and especially the IT Dept! Peter
14. Peter Cochrane
Graham = I've tried all of these devices and techniques, and if I were running a conventional business and leading a conventiona life they might work for me. But I'm not and the don't! Peter
15. Peter Cochrane
Louis = My point and experience exactly! Peter
16. Peter Cochrane
Jason = Exactly! Peter
17. Peter Cochrane
R Oakley = Yep it all needs humanising! Peter
18. Peter Cochrane
Marc = I am hoping that that is indeed the case. BUT a lot of the time we may well be off line. Soon we shall sse! Peter
19. Peter Cochrane
Ryan = That aspect bugs me too, but unlike you Video and 3D is a small % of what I do. But even for you and your industry an increase in machine intelligence would remove an awful lot of graft! Peter