How To Break Anything

Innovation + experience-minded design strategy. The pieces of a working model for understanding culture + change in an increasingly complex world.

  • About
  • Weak Signals
  • nanotrends & links
    • 0
      29 Dec 2010

      from: The Future of Money - New Lenses Of Wealth

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      Media_httpwwwemergenc_yrwwf
      via emergence.cc

      Spot on. Lately I've been quite fond of saying something like "economics isn't about money, it's about value.

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 2
      27 Dec 2010

      The beginnings of a rough thesis on limitation/value/meaning/evolution/complexity

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      My mother wrote me an email on Christmas, and since it's been awhile since talking about I've been working on I decided to explain, captured below:

      Hmmm what about myself. Well, I'm working on this lofty thesis of how people come to define 'value.' The direction I'm taking begins with an understanding of fundamental human limitations, and using those to help illuminate why one thing might be more valuable [in some cases] than another thing.

      So an easy example is: why are data visualizations suddenly so popular? Well, we now have lots and lots of data available thanks to people sharing information of all sorts online - it makes sense that it's more valuable to us as charts as opposed to numbers, because 25% of our brain is occipital lobe dealing specifically with vison, and significantly less of our brain is devoted to dealing with more abstract things like numbers. 

      (That said, I like this one project I ran into recently, a team a MIT that made a prototype machine that takes in weather data from the internet, and depending on the change in temperature from the day before, mixes and dispenses different flavors of toothpaste. The idea is that if your toothpaste is minty as you brush in the morning, you'll know it's colder than the day before. If it's cinnamon, you'll know to dress for warmer weather. I call this 'data tasteualization.')

      So the limitation is that biologically we're built to navigate the world in certain ways; a natural extension of that reality is that we find certain things useful/meaningful/valuable and other things less so. Ultimately my hypothesis is "limitation is meaning." Basically in the way rules create meaning. Do you remember Second Life? It was a virtual world circa 2002 or so (still is, actually), where the premise was that you create a digital second self.... and then you can do anything in that world. As you might imagine, the problem is that if you tell people they can do anything...they do nothing. No one knew what to do.

      This is why games are fun, and Second Life was not fun: games come with rules that limit you to doing a certain number of things. And from that limitation comes meaning, and value. Hmmm, in fact, sometimes I think about that button Dad made when we had the button-making machine, it said "no keys, no lock; no rules, no game."

      It's all started with trying to understand decision-making, which lead me to this notion that humans are notoriously and consistently bad at thinking about time. That got me thinking about our capacity for thinking about time as a natural limitation on the way we make decisions. The quintessential example is illustrated by the following:

      1) Which would you rather: $50 now or $300 now? (easy)
      2) Which would your rather: $50 now or $50 in one year? (easy)
      3) Which would you rather: $50 now or $300 in one year (difficult)

      So that limitation got me thinking about what some loosely call "feedback loops." That is the notion that in order to feel like you're impacting the world, you need to intuitively see some kind of feedback from your actions. That's easy enough with turning on a light switch, or putting your hand on a stove (or deciding to take the money now), but not as intuitive when it comes to eating less and losing weight later, or translating the value of reading a book into future wisdom.

      So "intuitive feedback" has become a kind of value to me, because of our limitations in the way we interpret causality. $50 seems like a causal agent when I put it into a bank and get interest 5 years later (money is intuitive because it easily translates into numbers), but it doesn't *seem* like a causal agent when I use that $50 to buy a smart book (even if 5 years later I have an intelligent and meaningful discussion with someone important because of it). 

      Obviously, *seeming* is the critical term here. Lately I'm fond of saying "reality is just reality, and it doesn't really care if you understand it or not." Aldous Huxley said something similar, although somewhat pessimistically toned: "facts don't cease to exist because they are ignored." So because of that I've grown to really like illusions and paradoxes (I consider all paradoxes to be illusions). That's why I put "[in some cases]" in brackets up there in the first paragraph; the interesting thing about studying value is that you find all sorts of seeming paradoxes.

      So an example: why is Katy Perry so popular? Well, because she sings about things everyone can relate to. If "popular" is valuable, it's because there is value in accessibility. But then think about a deeply complex work of art, a literary masterpiece. These things are valuable in the esoteric complexity, their ability to be accessed only by a few. Put more simply: scarcity is value.

      So, scarcity and accessibility are at odds. This is a paradox, but I suspect it's just an illusion. 

      To get a bit more complicated, that thesis is actually just kind of a starting point for thinking about how the universe has solved complex problems. Something like "how nature, humans, and technology have been working over time to solve different kinds of the world's complex problems - almost in a passing of the torch sort of way, like relay racers." It's pretty rough thinking right now, but I think about how we only have to solve problems like cancer, because evolution already took care of the simpler problems like basic diseases. Kevin Kelly (co-founder of Wired) recently wrote "What Technology Wants," and has been talking about he doesn't worry about what some might call "the rise of technology" because maybe the world needs other kinds of minds, maybe kind of like how different kinds of human cultures enrich the world. 

      The notion seems somewhat lofty on its face, sure, but then I think about things like the Eureka Machine. It was first most known for being able to watch a swinging pendulum, and from studying the movement mathematically, it was able to determine the fundamental laws of classical Newtonian physics.

      They then put it in front of one of our mathematically toughest current challenges: the double pendulum problem. That is, attach a pendulum to another pendulum, and the motion that results is - for all human purposes - chaos. There was a point where the Eureka Machine was studying the double pendulum problem and defined it mathematically. I don't think any human had done the same to that point. Although I might have that confused with another example, one concerning cell biology. As you know, cell biology is *astronomically* complex. We're talking sub-atomic complexity, the preciseness of which determines exactly how cells and cell parts function. The Eureka Machine had at some point predicted the behavior of cell development or replication or something to that effect, to such a degree that the researchers observing it ran into a critical problem: they knew the end formula, but they themselves couldn't explain the formula. Thus they couldn't publish it; it'd be like writing a dissertation and when asked to show your data responding with "it was magic."

      Last I remember, I think the researchers are still struggling with that problem. And it makes me think: someday a problem much more complicated than cancer is going to present itself to the world, and it seems plausible that our natural limitations inhibit us from solving them as humans. That's not such a bad thing; after all, even the force of evolution is limited as well, primarily by time. But if you take a step back and think of evolution as just one part of reality, and humans as just another (that evolution created), then it's not such a "scary" prospect to think of technology as just yet another part of reality (that humans created). It might be that this problem is in fact the *result* of human limitation/biases/shortsightedness - climate change and the upcoming challenge of food production come to mind, but I'm sure reality can think of many other things that I can't. 

      Long story short, I'm thinking of putting this all into a book at some point as it brews in my head. I expect to do lots of research on this that will sometimes validate but more often challenge my thinking, and I expect the results to point me in an entirely new direction. I'm collecting all the cognitive pieces at http://www.howtobreakanything.com. Or maybe I'll nurture some relationships at Columbia while I'm here and maybe do a nice formal thesis/dissertation or something. I don't know, I'll figure it out as I go along - I'm not very good at thinking about time ;)

       

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      6 Jul 2010

      Proverbial Wallet: Technology to increase the cognitive impact of increasingly abstract exchanges of value

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost

      Behavioral economists and psychologists have long been discussing the cognitive implications that naturally come with the abstraction of currencies. Cash is a more abstract form of exchanging value than physical barter/trade, and the credit card is an even more abstract form of exchange than cash. Generally speaking, the more abstract the exchange, the less cognitive impact it has on our long-term thinking and decision-making – often with negative results, as indicated by the rates of credit card debt in the US and elsewhere. As we move into virtual currencies where value is increasing exchanged via SMS, mouse click, or natural gesture motion, many design and cognitive thinkers are expressing their concern about the implications of these even more abstract methods of exchange.

      The Proverbial Wallet series of concepts have these thoughts in mind, developed by a tangible interaction team at the MIT Media Lab. These concept wallets incorporate elements of physical and social feedback into the act of spending, bringing a level of cognitive impact back into the purchase process. Each gives a nod to the principles of at-a-glance information and immediate feedback, and their importance in giving people the tools to make better decisions. See below for the team’s description of these concepts:

      Peacock: The wallet appears to grow and shrink using a servo to reflect the balance in your accounts. Your assets will be on display to attract potential mates.

      Mother Bear: The wallet protects the money within it when you need to be thrifty with a shorted motor in the hinge that resists opening. It promotes saving to weather out financial winters.

      Bumblebee: The wallet buzzes through a vibrator motor whenever your bank processes a transaction. This encourages a conscious connection between handing over your credit card and your hard-earned money being harvested from the bank, and alerts you to fraud when you get a buzz without making a purchase.

      Proverbial Wallet

      [via @carlablumenthal | img via Boston.com]

      this post originally appeared on psfk.com

       

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      2 Jun 2010

      A collection of related videos discussing gaming and modern educational challenges

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      IBM's upcoming CityOne game is like SimCity evolved to collect scenario and interaction data that will help solve real problems:
      </object>

      Saw the above video today and thought of two others:

      Jane McGonigal, Gaming Can Make a Better World:  "Games like World of Warcraft give players the means to save worlds, and incentive to learn the habits of heroes. What if we could harness this gamer power to solve real-world problems?":

      Dan Meyer, Math Class Needs a Makeover: Thoughts on how school systems encourage simplistic, straightforward (as opposed to patient) problem solving:

      I'm part of a generation of gamers who were all told games were negative distractions. We're now entering a world that's beginning to think twice about whether the capacity of the straightforward, rational, direct guides to solving problems in traditional institutions and models is really helpful when approaching modern challenges. 
      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      19 May 2010

      Better financial decisionmaking through contextual data feedback

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      Merry Miser map

      Merry Miser is a mobile application that helps its users to make better decisions about spending. The application uses the context provided by a user's location and financial history to provide personalized interventions when the user is near an opportunity to spend. The interventions, which are motivated by prior research in positive psychology, persuasive technology and shopping psychology, consist of informational displays about context-relevant spending history, subjective assessments of past purchases, personal budgets, and savings goals.

      via web.media.mit.edu

       

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      20 Apr 2010

      Market dynamics vs social dynamics - quick primer video (behavioral economics)

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      via mondaydots.com

      Excellent primer in these first couple of minutes on behavioral economics as it applies to market dynamics vs social dynamics.

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      8 Mar 2010

      How games/reward mechanisms work, and an interesting perspective on the definition of "game"

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      Media_httpcdnwwwcrack_dopgj
      via cracked.com

      5 Creepy Ways Video Games Are Trying to Get You Addicted

      This article is fascinating and of course hilarious, being Cracked (though I'm not prone to calling these types of things "creepy"...). Some things it calls to mind:

      • Sheena Iyengar's The Art of Choosing, a brief section where she makes a bit of a case analogous to the "you're in a prison" idea of The Matrix
      • Skinner Box? There's an app for that.
      • Seth Godin's Linchpin, and the work culture we've created to indoctrinate employees. From the Cracked article:

      Why do so many of us have that void? Because according to Everything Expert Malcolm Gladwell, to be satisfied with your job you need three things, and I bet most of you don't even have two of them:

      Autonomy (that is, you have some say in what you do day to day);

      Complexity (so it's not mind-numbing repetition);

      Connection Between Effort and Reward (i.e. you actually see the awesome results of your hard work).

       

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      16 Feb 2010

      "Why can't you just *tell* someone about the meaning of something (presumably important)?"

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost

      GS: Why can't you just tell people what the meaning of, say, polluting is?

      GN: You can. It's called propaganda.

      GS: Why shouldn't we use propaganda then? Why do you have to let people discover the meaning of such things for themselves?

      GN: The discovery of radical alternatives happens in smaller steps and in individual minds and hearts. For example, I love baking and I used to do a lot of it in my big old gas oven. Then I put a sensor in my kitchen and learned that a lot of CO2 gets produced. Even after I turn the oven off, hours afterward, CO2 was still sitting in my kitchen to a tune of 2,000 parts per million. The cookies were long gone and I was still sitting in a soup of gas. Once I became aware of that, my wife and I got  a convection oven instead, and now we bake with that. I bake less and the oven is a little smaller, but I don't have a CO2 lake in my kitchen anymore. It became actionable to do less because of harm reduction, essentially.

      via citris-uc.org

      Greg Niemeyer is an artist and game programmer working with interactive art at UC Berkeley. He integrates game mechanics and behavioral economics into projects that get people to change their behavior. I love the above quote from his interview with CITRUS, referencing one of his latest sensor projects that allows people to easily monitor their own air quality.

      We try to force meaning onto people all the time. It's not just called propaganda. It's also called advertising.

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 1
      13 Feb 2010

      Economics is about value, not about money

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      Media_httpfarm5static_lyztd
      via annoyinglyboring.com

      It's generally assumed that economics is about money, which is incorrect. Economics is about value; it just happens that sometimes money is valuable. This is why behavioral economics has little to do traditional financial dynamics with and more to do with traditional social/psychological dynamics.

      I was talking not too long ago about how it tends to be frustrating to get dollar coins back from change machines.

      You'd think a dollar coin would be just as valuable as a dollar bill, but it's not. This is because it's easier to lose small metal coins. I was telling my friend that I'd gladly change my dollar coins for bills instead, were I able to find someone who'd find the exchange of equal value (not bloody likely).

      Economics is about value (irrational), not strict numerical comparison (rational).

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • 0
      8 Feb 2010

      "Choice," engineered and constructed like a well designed building

      • Edit
      • Delete
      • Tags
      • Autopost
      Behavioural economics is described (by Thaler himself) as ‘ libertarian paternalism’. This is the idea that while people should be able to live their lives as they want, “it is legitimate for choice architects to try to influence people’s behavior in order to make their lives longer, healthier, and better”.
      via wearesocial.net

      I find the counterintuitive reality of how we make decisions compellingly beautiful.

      If you'd like, there's a rather wordy explanation of behavioral economics below:

      • views
      • Tweet
      • Tweet
    • Search

    • Tags

      • perspective
      • value
      • metasocioculture
      • culture
      • long-term thinking
      • decisionmaking
      • offline inspiration
      • cognitive fallacies
      • future
      • time-orientation
      • limitation
      • perception
      • causality
      • definition
      • irrationality
      • art
      • game mechanics
      • emergence
      • experience
      • exposure
      • observe everything
      • philosophy
      • programming
      • human insight
      • illusion
      • paradox
      • privacy
      • reactionary
      • want
      • worry
      • adaptation
      • advertising
      • behavior
      • design strategy
      • evolution
      • identity
      • metaphors
      • networks
      • optimization
      • shortsightedness
      • social interactions
      • weak signals
      • connections
      • counterintuitive
      • doomsday
      • feedback loops
      • indirect
      • meaning
      • tangible data
      • context
      • glanceable
      • motivation
      • seeming
      • trends
      • utopia
      • cognitive environments
      • complexity
      • control
      • cyborg anthropology
      • gaming
      • happiness
      • human programming
      • information art
      • memory
      • nostalgia
      • rationality
      • scarcity
      • technosocial
      • time
      • timeline
      • Entrepreneur
      • PSEA
      • chronological proportionality
      • classification
      • cultural narratives
      • data
      • deception
      • design thinking
      • filter theory
      • games
      • information theory
      • intelligence
      • levels of abstraction
      • linguistic programming
      • metaphysics
      • nonlinear
      • optimaization
      • organization
      • patina
      • pattern recognition
      • truth
      • wisdom
      • wonder
      • youth
      • Artist
      • MTurk
      • ROI
      • Scientist
      • adversity
    • Archive

      • 2012 (15)
        • February (2)
        • January (13)
      • 2011 (188)
        • December (14)
        • November (6)
        • October (6)
        • September (9)
        • August (9)
        • July (26)
        • June (21)
        • May (12)
        • April (17)
        • March (21)
        • February (25)
        • January (22)
      • 2010 (214)
        • December (22)
        • November (14)
        • October (8)
        • September (7)
        • August (13)
        • July (17)
        • June (16)
        • May (16)
        • April (22)
        • March (36)
        • February (31)
        • January (12)
      • 2009 (95)
        • December (6)
        • November (9)
        • October (9)
        • September (8)
        • August (6)
        • July (2)
        • June (9)
        • May (17)
        • April (7)
        • March (8)
        • February (7)
        • January (7)
      • 2008 (47)
        • December (10)
        • November (12)
        • October (7)
        • September (7)
        • August (4)
        • July (3)
        • May (1)
        • April (1)
        • March (1)
        • January (1)
      • 2007 (4)
        • October (1)
        • September (3)
    • Contributors

      Kyle Cameron Studstill
    • Obox Design
  • How To Break Anything

    Hello friends and collaborators. I deal in innovation, working to build fantastic experiences enabled by the digital world. As part of this I track cultural change, primarily through observations guided by models and filters calibrated over years to sort out the cream.

    These pieces of thoughts here reflect concepts that are elements of those models: ecosystem thinking, long-term value, information filters, and pattern recognition.

    ("How to break anything" is an abstract notion that reflects my background in observation and analysis. Rules are meant to be broken, but only through understanding the rules - observing them with an empathetic eye - can they be broken constructively.

    So how to break anything? Observe everything.

    [You can't observe everything so how do you know what to observe? That's another project that I call Filter Theory - see the About link above.])

    254067 Views
  • Get Updates

    Follow this Space »
    You're following this Space (Edit)
    You're a contributor here (Edit)
    This is your Space (Edit)
    Follow by email »
    Get the latest updates in your email box automatically.
    Loading...
    Subscribe via RSS
    TwitterFacebook