Hello!
I've stumbled upon this short article, an opinion piece: "How to Tell When a Digital Technology Is Not Ready for You" ( https://www.cell.com/patterns/fulltext/S2666-3899(20)30001-5 )
The author presents his insights into judging the readiness of given digital technology for specific usage.
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteIt's simple. The long time between the invention of technology and its dissemination is due to the fact that at the time of its invention no one has an idea for its use. All the described cases just exactly testify to this. Historically. A plane was invented that flew at a distance of 1 km. Just why fly it? But when this plane flies 1000 km, 10,000 km already makes sense. If not one person can fly it, only 100 or 400, it's even bigger. So it was with the phone, sms and every "new" technology. It becomes famous at the moment when we start using it for "something".
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
I get the impression that the questions arise from life experience. From philosophical considerations about which classics have been discussing and discussing for years. On the other hand, the questions are right. The author had to think about them for a moment.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
I don't know such organizations in Poland. I've never been interested in this. Maybe it's bad, maybe it's good, I don't know. In general, Poles are wise and life-experienced people. Their advice would probably be valuable. But as I wrote at the beginning. I don't know such organizations.
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteI think it is similar with every technology, regardless of whether it is digital or "analogue" technology. At first, something may seem useless or unnecessary to us, but as it develops, it may prove necessary for life. Nowadays, we are surrounded by technology from all sides and I think that some who do not want or cannot adapt will become more and more difficult to function and will be "digitally excluded". That is why I think that as humanity we will be able to adapt to new solutions faster and faster.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
These questions are specific and give us the opportunity to wonder if what we do really makes sense and is needed. If someone really wants to revolutionize some area of life I think they should be able to ask such questions and all options. I do not know if there is any way to learn it, but it seems to me that for many such considerations all you need is willingness to learn and curiosity about the world.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
Unfortunately, I've never heard of such an organization in Poland, if it exists, I've never heard of it in any mainstream media.
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteBecause after the invention of technology, the practical component is not always invented. And after some time, it’s starting to gain momentum and when it becomes more necessary for the world, it improves and “goes onto the conveyor” An example of mobile phones - after their invention, there were no mobile operators, mobile networks and few people who could afford a mobile phone
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
I think these are more philosophical questions. But I think the society is improving and today the spread of technology is much faster than before
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
Unfortunately, I never heard of anything like that in Poland (
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteTechnology is developing rapidly changing the lives of every generation beyond recognition. In principle, it takes 2-3 years to develop new devices conquering the market. The last 30 years are a real technological leap forward. I think it depends on the type of technology. The demand for a given technology is also important. For example. Digital technology is developing very fast. There has been a sharp increase in capacity and at the same time a decrease in the price of data carriers. Nowadays, the memory of even small devices is counted in tens of gigabytes, while printing technology has practically died out. In addition, the ease of use of the technology is also important. Easy-to-use frameworks are used more often than more complex ones. The same is true of the pharmacy. In the past, drugs were tested at random. Nowadays, genetic models are built first. Then the effects of drugs on cells are modeled using computational clusters.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
It seems to me that in discoveries that were growth points in technology development are ruled by chance. One of the most famous and perhaps most groundbreaking discoveries in the history of humanity was penicillin. The discovery of Alexander Fleming. But he noticed the substance by accident. While looking for a typhoid vaccine, he noticed a raid of mold on one of the plates where he grew bacteria. The bacteria disappeared around her stains. So did the rendgen rays. Maybe now the scientists will discover something that will change our world.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
In my opinion, the M. Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology of the Polish Academy of Sciences started its activity in 1918 and is currently one of the largest non-university biological research centres in Poland. As a result of the parametric evaluation, the Institute obtained the category A+. The research priority in the Institute is the following areas: neurobiology and the works carried out often have an interdisciplinary character. Their subject is systems of varying degrees of complexity in terms of both morphological and functional aspects, but also proteins and genes. Currently, the Nencki Institute is the only scientific institution in Poland where research in the field of neurobiology is conducted at all levels - from molecular to systemic.
Hello!
DeleteI checked Institute's webpage, noticed "Tygodnik Nenckiego".
Great! Long-ish list of issues.
But it died off somewhere in '18...
Great! Each issue is like slightly under one megabyte - there must be lots of interesting things to read!
No, not really, it's single page each.
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteI think it could be extended to all kinds of technologies. There are many projects created in laboratories. Researchers test them to prepare for global productions. This take time. In first step a small group is using this technology and then it’s available for everyone.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
I think all this questions try to help us to decide about using this technology or not. We need to think forward to take a good decision. New technology could be problematic for companies. Some of them use old technologies because they have experience with them. A good example are old computers with old software. Today we have fast and powerful computers but some companies don’t used them because they don’t need them.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
Unfortunately, I don't know or remember any of Polish organizations. I decide on my own which technology I prefer. I read many articles about new technology, watch videos which her tests. At last I try to answer questions: Do I really need this? What can I do with this technology? What about compatibility? How long this device will work?
Those last questions look like generic set of questions worth asking in many contexts related to technology.
Delete1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, every new technology should be thoroughly tested in many ways before it is commercialized. First of all, I mean safety, meeting expectations, etc. I suspect that most of us would prefer to buy something proven from the beta version (although it may be different in the case of games :-).
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
In addition to the short historical outline, the author also focuses on specific questions. They mainly concern the usefulness of a given system, its operation, servicing and meeting the manufacturer's assumptions. In addition, the author draws attention to the flexibility of a given solution, for example in terms of using third-party applications or components. The questions asked relate to the future use of a given technology and its subsequent application.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
Unfortunately, I do not know or have heard of such an organization. In choosing the right technology, I try to read a lot about it, listen to the opinions of other users and make decisions based on the suitability of a given technology or product.
ad3, In today world You never know if what You're reading is genuine opinions of users or persons knowing their stuff, or just a product of marketing departments and troll farms?
DeleteHello,
ReplyDeleteThank you for an exciting subject. According to your questions:
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
I think that every science field has the same issue even when we take into consideration the amount of time that is required to review your scientific article. From the idea to implementation and breakthrough, commercialization is a long way in the end which final consumer decided if she/he is thrilled by the technology or not.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
I think the questions that the author asked were specific because of the hype. Currently, a lot of companies that I am connected with are craving a little bit of AI and blockchain, but they have no idea how to use them. And that works on shareholders! Do you remember Kodak going with the blockchain? https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/9/16869998/kodak-kodakcoin-blockchain-platform-ethereum-ledger-stock-price
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
No, I am not familiar with this kind of organizations that would help you with the advice. Maybe OPI would help? https://opi.org.pl/
This OPI thing looks quite interesting! I'll keep my eye on them.
Delete1. I think so. There is always a concept at the beginning, and only then tests are carried out that check the usefulness and capabilities of the new device and if it is ok, then it hits the market. Then customers have a chance to see if they liked the product or not. Often, the time from concept to customer opinion is years. I think that with many technologies it is the same whether it is new consoles or graphics cards, cameras, telephones. This is not only the case in the digital industry. It takes a long time from concept to testing, certification, etc. before any medicine or toy enters the market.
ReplyDelete2. Experience is often useful, but I think these questions are intended to direct us to certain aspects of a given technology that we would not think about ourselves. Some questions are structured in such a way that we think about whether we really need a given technology. Often, companies decide to choose new technologies just because they are new without going into their specifications. It's like phone users who change their phone every six months, if only it was the latest. I know a few specific programs that work on a given hardware and technology such as Windows XP and they cannot be transferred to a newer operating system or the cost of moving is horrendous and it would be cheaper to find something new, but why, when everything works?
3. Unfortunately, I do not know any such organizations operating in our country. If I want to buy some new equipment, I am asking for help from a colleague who can compare hardware parameters and knows his skills better than me and I take his advice for granted.
Sometimes when I hear the radio somewhere, I notice "media markt"'s (I think) commercials, it's like "new laptop X, five hundred giga, i-five, only ZZZ pln" - whole device reduced to 2-3 parameters, they don't even bother to give unit names for those parameters, we have to make it out out of context that it's 500Gb of disk space, not 500GHz of CPU clock :->
DeleteThat makes hardware parameters comparison super-easy.
In general I think that majority of "technologies" that are already in use are not fully ready yet it terms of their flawlessness. Example from a digital world would be bluetooth that may turn a comfort of wireless headphones into a nightmare of pairing issues. From outside the digital world mechanical engines are still quite inefficient.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the questions supporting the evaluation of a given technology I can refer to the ML example as it's the closest one to me. I wouldn't say that those questions are based on a history of ML/AI development. Those are rather common sense questions. What's more they all can be answered in favor of ML/AI and I wouldn't say that they help to assess the readiness of the technology. There are use cases when AI can be successfully applied as it is and cases where some General Artificial Intelligence would be required. The author could have some specific example in mind when writing those questions but if you would think about the use case from gmail - "propose users the most probable reply to the mail they received" we wouldn't even think about explainability of a whatever ML model is used for it.
To me there is only one universal question "if the technology works [it also means that it doesn't explode in the process] for a use case it's applied to then it's ready".
That is very utilitarian.
DeleteFor Your gmail example, I'm assuming You write from gmail authors p.o.v, they might be forced to provide explanation of the model by external forces, like court or congressional hearing.
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteI don’t think this is an attribute of digital technology, rather new technology itself. In their nature people are unwilling to changes even when they are intrigued by it, they don’t like to change their routine or compromise their data security. It is different situation when the technology is common and people don’t have other option like adjust to new standard, for example digital banking.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
The questions are specific, they show deep understanding of a subject and practical knowledge in a field by the author.
I think you can learn how to ask proper questions, but experience is invaluable to became expert.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
Aren’t the ministry of digitization apply at this role, at least for state / social projects. Also there are plenty of social groups for specific technology's enthusiast where you can share your idea or concerns, counting on advise and discussions.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, we can successfully extend “the long time between inception and given technology being widely used” for any type of technology not only to the digital one.
A very interesting case is the electric vehicle, which thanks to Tesla company is experiencing its renaissance. Electric vehicles were one of the first cars used to transport people. Between 1832 and 1839, the Scottish businessman Robert Anderson built the first electric carriage. They were replaced by vehicles with internal combustion engines. The efficient development of vehicles with an internal combustion engine and the weaker development of electric vehicles should also be mentioned. An interesting factor here was also the conflict between the genius Tesla (inventors, not companies) and the Thomas Edison, who himself contributed to the death of electric vehicles for over 100 years by insisting on direct current in his inventions.
Following this lead, very large and influential companies can kill ideas - like a company that invents new textiles and produces paper from woods, murdered the entire hemp industry in the world, because hemp products competed with it.
As you can see, science and technology can lose to the stupidity of influential people - another excellent example is created in 1970 by Eng. Jacek Karpiński Polish minicomputer K-202, invention ahead of its time destroyed by the authorities of the Polish People's Republic because its creator was not associated with the party.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
I would say that the questions appear to be asked by an investor checking whether a given idea is useful / profitable.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
Hmm... probably every company while selling their products will gladly advise you on their purchase and explain why you should buy this product :)
1. Do you think the long time between inception and given technology being widely used/hyped is specific to digital, or can be extended to all kinds of technologies? If it's specific, why do You think is that so?
ReplyDeleteI believe that any technology that is approved for public use should be well tested and examined, for example, in terms of security. Sometimes it happens that the company X releases another model / version on the market that has not been thoroughly tested and people prefer to use older models / versions because they are already well tested. I think this applies to all types of technology.
2. For each example of evaluated technology, author presents short historic context, and asks couple of important questions. Those questions seems highly specific, but can You see any patterns? Is it possible to somehow learn how to ask such questions, or all is needed is just 40 years of experience?
I think that in order to evaluate a technology well, you need to know its history, i.e. what were the beginnings of a given technology, what are the greatest achievements, etc. and above all what else we expect from this technology. I believe that experience in such an issue is undoubtedly an advantage. The more questions we ask, the more thoroughly we can analyze the area.
3. In final section, author points to specialized organizations offering advice, Royal Society being one of examples. Do You know any of Polish organizations whose advice You value?
I've never been interested in this subject before, so I don't have any experience in it. I have never used the advice of such an organization. If you need to make a choice of a technology, then I read information on the Internet and also take into account my problems associated with the type of technology.