4 ms·
I love to do this, keep iterating on n-th order thoughts, figuring out emergent behavior etc etc (systems mapping is actually a quite useful technique to do thi
by vincentmarle 8y ago
I love to do this, keep iterating on n-th order thoughts, figuring out emergent behavior etc etc (systems mapping is actually a quite useful technique to do this) but at some point you need to scale it back down to the 1st order to actually get things done.
It's fun to fantasize where the industry will be heading 10-30 years from now, but figuring out what needs to be done tomorrow is more important.
- kaycebasques 8y agoHonest question, just for the sake of respectful debate, not trying to be obnoxious: Can you actually derive emergent properties from nth-order thinking? I think they're both fascinating topics, but when I think about emergent properties of human biology, I struggle to imagine how I could have derived them from nth-order logic. To me, emergent properties seem like something you have to observe first, not something that you can reach from any kind of reason. Emergent properties are so awe-inspiring precisely because you can't predict them when you go down a level or two.
- vincentmarle 8y agoI see emergent behavior as something that we didn't think of before (maybe because we didn't think about it enough), rather than something that is inherently impossible to predict. Did Mark Zuckerberg know in 2003 that his dorm room creation would affect elections? Probably not, but I also wouldn't say it was impossible to predict. A complex system is chaotic for sure, which definitely makes it hard to predict emergent behavior, but it's also not completely random. I wouldn't claim that you can figure out all emergent behavior beforehand but you can definitely reason about some emergent behavior just by doing some nth-order thinking and systems mapping. One example that I thought of recently: Today most innovation with food is about innovating on logistics. It's all about getting your food faster and cheaper to your door. Let's say, in 5-10 years from now we live in a world where on-demand groceries are instant and cheaper than anything else, maybe even powered by autonomous drones or what not. Would we still be going to restaurants and grocery stores? One emergent behavior may be that we get everything delivered with a snap of our fingers straight from warehouses and delivery kitchens. So is it wise to put all our money into Instacart and Doordash now that we know this? Maybe not, because what's the next step beyond delivery? What if there's a new technology to print your food, 20-30 years from now? Will Instacart and Doordash still be relevant in a world like that? Emergent behavior would then be that innovation will be more about what you eat than when you get it (the innovation vector that we focus so much on today). The company that learns your taste profiles and can figure out exactly what you want/need will probably win in that scenario, so maybe companies that are solving logistics today (Instacart/Doordash) are not the companies that will win in the end (Google has a better shot when it comes to AI and data collection).
- ellius 8y agoI doubt that anyone frequently predicts emergent properties precisely, but I still think that thoughtfully considering them is beneficial. There is a line in "Clean Architecture" to the effect that every architectural decision is akin to a shot in pool: you aren't merely trying to sink the ball, you're also trying to line up the next shot. This is true of decisions generally, and I think it's infinitely easier to do if you're thinking of navigating complex, dynamic systems rather than simply imagining "I'll do A because A –> B."
- cellular 8y agoYou might like this video that shows emergent behaviour that I find fascinating: https://youtu.be/gaFKqOBTj9w https://youtu.be/gaFKqOBTj9w