4 ms·

Six Levels of Interaction with a System

89 points by based2 6y ago

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
metalliqaz 6y ago
This is a great article and it's a nice model for understanding users. I think I would add at least two levels beyond 5: (6) extend (7) design (8) invent Admittedly level 8 is going beyond the useful purpose of this model. Still, it's how I think of things.
- asciimike 6y ago
  I called 6 re-purpose, but I think I like your extended naming better!
  - agumonkey 6y ago
    upcycling is also used I believe
- whatrocks 6y ago
  I love these extensions, and completely agree. If I write a follow-up, I'll definitely add these levels. Especially because, right now, my article doesn't talk at all about where these systems come from in the first place. They are not invented by gods, but real people who have traveled this journey. By adding these levels to the model, the notion of making a "Claude Shannon-like" invention or discovery (something at its core that is simple yet powerful, and obvious-in-retrospect) becomes more approachable for a mere learner.
  - metalliqaz 6y ago
    I always like this quote: What I can't create I don't understand -Richard Feynman
- exmadscientist 6y ago
  I like your extensions. It's interesting to consider where everyone's personal "wall" is: the stage at which they have trouble going beyond. Many people, for example, are passive consumers who can barely use systems (Level 1), let alone monitor them (Level 2). (If that seems harsh to you, remember that you're on Hacker News, a highly non-representative sample of the population.) I work in R&D, and so I spend a lot of time designing things (Level 7) and improving on existing products and concepts (Level 6-ish). I even like to think I'm good at it, some days. But I rarely have good, new ideas of my own (Level 8), and I don't think I've ever had an actionable one: certainly, I've never had an idea or plan worth founding a startup over, or worth quitting my job to become an author. It's surprising how wide the chasm separating those two levels seems, at least for me.
asciimike 6y ago
I'd like to go one level further add what I believe is one of the most important ways of interacting with a system, which is what I'll call "re-purpose". To carry on with the automotive analogy, I've likely achieved "level 5" of a car: I've done several clutch replacements, rebuilt a suspension, and my living room is full of car parts turned art pieces. But there are still things I want to do that extend the functionality of the car, so it can do things the original designers never intended, but that suit my needs better. I think this is the critical step in innovation: taking something as it is and being able to extend traditional "mastery" of the subject and create something new and valuable. At that point, the cycle starts over: most people won't use the thing, or some will use it for its first order purpose, but some dedicated group of folks will dive deep and build on what you did to create something new. Educationally, I used to chat with my professors about how the theory they used to write tests, and the best ones always fixed 100% at something we had not yet learned, but could be derived from what we had been taught. You could still get an A (90%) by regurgitating information by rot memorization, but that extension was what showed you could move the field forward. Not only did it make the tests more challenging, it also made the tests more fun.
- whatrocks 6y ago
  OP here. I love the concept of "re-purpose" - I was thinking that Level 5 meant that you could build/re-build the system however you choose. But there's definitely a difference between re-building to a spec versus building something new from same components or, as you say, designing something the designers never intended. Would love to hear your ideas for what you want to re-purpose on your car! My economics professors in college followed the same school of thought for our midterms and exams. So many students couldn't handle the idea that we were going to see things on the test that "hadn't yet been taught" to them. The tests were brutal, but felt like real learning was happening.
  - asciimike 6y ago
    > But there's definitely a difference between re-building to a spec versus building something new from same components or, as you say, designing something the designers never intended I think this is where I like the distinctions below on extension vs invention. Sometimes you're just taking what's there and re-arranging it; sometimes, you're adding new things to replace the existing ones, sometimes you need to clean slate using what you learned from the previous steps. > Would love to hear your ideas for what you want to re-purpose on your car! Here are a few examples: - https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1675296 https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1675296 - https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?p=26245043 https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?p=26245043 It's a surprisingly good intellectual exercise during quarantine :D I think that the other critical piece you mention is "having a goal". Most people are only interested in getting from point A to point B, so they stay at level 1 of cars (or computers, or investing). Once you set a goal for yourself, the incentives shift and you're willing to dive deeper into the levels mentioned here. I often get asked for recommendations on "what programming language to learn" from people interested in learning to code, at which point I ask them "what do you want to do?" Having a goal for which programming is a solution is far more important than learning a language, and the intrinsic motivation will push people to discover the solutions vs the people just doing it because they've been told they should.
GuiA 6y ago
It's interesting to compare and contrast e.g. a F1 racer driver vs a pit stop mechanic in this model (or an airplane pilot/mechanic/aeronautic engineer).
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
pmw 6y ago
The more you understand the system, the more you can influence it. Donella Meadows proposed Twelve Leverage Points to Intervene in a System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_leverage_points https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_leverage_points
dingo_bat 6y ago
Oil change needed every 100 miles?! What kind of car is this?

89 points by based2 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

This is a great article and it's a nice model for understanding users. I think I would add at least two levels beyond 5: (6) extend (7) design (8) invent Admittedly level 8 is going beyond the useful purpose of this model. Still, it's how I think of things.

asciimike 6y ago
I called 6 re-purpose, but I think I like your extended naming better!
- agumonkey 6y ago
  upcycling is also used I believe
whatrocks 6y ago
I love these extensions, and completely agree. If I write a follow-up, I'll definitely add these levels. Especially because, right now, my article doesn't talk at all about where these systems come from in the first place. They are not invented by gods, but real people who have traveled this journey. By adding these levels to the model, the notion of making a "Claude Shannon-like" invention or discovery (something at its core that is simple yet powerful, and obvious-in-retrospect) becomes more approachable for a mere learner.
- metalliqaz 6y ago
  I always like this quote: What I can't create I don't understand -Richard Feynman
exmadscientist 6y ago
I like your extensions. It's interesting to consider where everyone's personal "wall" is: the stage at which they have trouble going beyond. Many people, for example, are passive consumers who can barely use systems (Level 1), let alone monitor them (Level 2). (If that seems harsh to you, remember that you're on Hacker News, a highly non-representative sample of the population.) I work in R&D, and so I spend a lot of time designing things (Level 7) and improving on existing products and concepts (Level 6-ish). I even like to think I'm good at it, some days. But I rarely have good, new ideas of my own (Level 8), and I don't think I've ever had an actionable one: certainly, I've never had an idea or plan worth founding a startup over, or worth quitting my job to become an author. It's surprising how wide the chasm separating those two levels seems, at least for me.

asciimike 6y ago

I'd like to go one level further add what I believe is one of the most important ways of interacting with a system, which is what I'll call "re-purpose". To carry on with the automotive analogy, I've likely achieved "level 5" of a car: I've done several clutch replacements, rebuilt a suspension, and my living room is full of car parts turned art pieces. But there are still things I want to do that extend the functionality of the car, so it can do things the original designers never intended, but that suit my needs better. I think this is the critical step in innovation: taking something as it is and being able to extend traditional "mastery" of the subject and create something new and valuable. At that point, the cycle starts over: most people won't use the thing, or some will use it for its first order purpose, but some dedicated group of folks will dive deep and build on what you did to create something new. Educationally, I used to chat with my professors about how the theory they used to write tests, and the best ones always fixed 100% at something we had not yet learned, but could be derived from what we had been taught. You could still get an A (90%) by regurgitating information by rot memorization, but that extension was what showed you could move the field forward. Not only did it make the tests more challenging, it also made the tests more fun.

whatrocks 6y ago
OP here. I love the concept of "re-purpose" - I was thinking that Level 5 meant that you could build/re-build the system however you choose. But there's definitely a difference between re-building to a spec versus building something new from same components or, as you say, designing something the designers never intended. Would love to hear your ideas for what you want to re-purpose on your car! My economics professors in college followed the same school of thought for our midterms and exams. So many students couldn't handle the idea that we were going to see things on the test that "hadn't yet been taught" to them. The tests were brutal, but felt like real learning was happening.
- asciimike 6y ago
  > But there's definitely a difference between re-building to a spec versus building something new from same components or, as you say, designing something the designers never intended I think this is where I like the distinctions below on extension vs invention. Sometimes you're just taking what's there and re-arranging it; sometimes, you're adding new things to replace the existing ones, sometimes you need to clean slate using what you learned from the previous steps. > Would love to hear your ideas for what you want to re-purpose on your car! Here are a few examples: - https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1675296 https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1675296 - https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?p=26245043 https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?p=26245043 It's a surprisingly good intellectual exercise during quarantine :D I think that the other critical piece you mention is "having a goal". Most people are only interested in getting from point A to point B, so they stay at level 1 of cars (or computers, or investing). Once you set a goal for yourself, the incentives shift and you're willing to dive deeper into the levels mentioned here. I often get asked for recommendations on "what programming language to learn" from people interested in learning to code, at which point I ask them "what do you want to do?" Having a goal for which programming is a solution is far more important than learning a language, and the intrinsic motivation will push people to discover the solutions vs the people just doing it because they've been told they should.

GuiA 6y ago

It's interesting to compare and contrast e.g. a F1 racer driver vs a pit stop mechanic in this model (or an airplane pilot/mechanic/aeronautic engineer).

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

pmw 6y ago

The more you understand the system, the more you can influence it. Donella Meadows proposed Twelve Leverage Points to Intervene in a System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_leverage_points https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_leverage_points

dingo_bat 6y ago

Oil change needed every 100 miles?! What kind of car is this?