I like the sound of such a sign. Who’re we excluding then? Lawyers? Yeah, lawyers. Seriously, with so much medical news right now, people losing benefits, maybe…
I saw my personal physician today. She sees lots of patients and doctors know best what it’s like to have a procession of people in orbit. See some frequently. See some not that often. We intuitively know this model from cosmology. Some asteroids visit infrequently, yet predictably. Hale-Bopp. Mark Twain.
The number crunching community is happy about a new breakthrough, called machine learning by many, with “gradient descent” a core algorithm, and akin to tuning a violin, but to a spectrum our senses don’t detect.
Our mathematics does though. They found a way to ratchet down a linear algebra approximation.
Combine continuous and discontinuous maths, in a hybrid, and you may hit a sweet spot.
A farm, of a bazillion GPUs, feeding off open source best of breed Apache Foundation projects (most likely), shape the “wind tunnels” or “acoustic response columns”… these are but metaphoric suggestions of sculpted shapes, molded by data too high-dimensional to visualize, so why not try sound?
Once molded, these sculptures might be handed into your cell phone, like flutes, there to vibrate in response to your new data. What does it recognize? What triggers it? That all depends on how it was trained.
The GPUs were “finding a way down” (off a Error Mountain), by organizing tournament after tournament for “getting it right”. Every time a set of weightings ranks high, it gets rewarded. Committees that guessed wrong, get demoted. Before long, a skyscraper of decision-makers, holding meetings, gets it right more often then not. The CEO is in business.
By “doctors only” I might mean to include Doctors of Philosophy, who’ve distinguished themselves by not being “of Psychology” either (they didn’t collide or collude enough to conjoin?).
A discipline so elusive might deserve its own degree, and any lingering bigotry towards the legal profession is likely to alleviate over time.
Any upstart school of coders coding in code is likely to focus on distinguishing characteristics at first, simply to establish there’s actually a difference.
First rule of branding: be a brand.
Where computer science meets medicine is something of a sweet spot. The good doctors are always spiraling in on significant data, getting glimpses into the grand patterns. The data scientists have the GPU farms with which to do the number crunching, to see what patterns might be recognized.
Speaking of patterns…
Christopher Alexander, the architect, is widely recognized among architects for his Pattern Language studies.
Around the same time, the Gang of Four (software engineers) teased “design patterns” into the foreground withing software engineering. How curious: architecture in the real world, and in Cyberia, appeared to be making parallel discoveries.
Christoper would be invited to Silicon Forest geek conferences, to figure out in what sense a natural bridge was occurring. I’ve watched a couple of these events on Youtube. Recommended.
A pattern in architecture might be “the nook” or “the doorway” or “the hallway”.
Of course each of these has many variations. Patterns intersect.
The hallways have doorways. The nook is down the hall.
A pattern in software involves Event Listeners, which the coder sets up to detect occurrences, say of mouse clicks or key presses. Before we decide how to respond, there’s the earlier matter of who cares.
Those who care, who have some responsibility, if only for monitoring and logging, will then “subscribe” to the event monitoring service. When the mouse clip happens, all subscribers to the mouse click detection service are then notified.
Publish & Subscribe is but one of many design patterns, which in some dimensions derive from operations research and the design of parallel workflows to design ships, even spaceships. Critical path management was feasible with only primitive computer power.
Getting things to happen, such as steel making, and car making, is the province of the manager, industrialist, workflow engineer.
Where workflow and architecture cross is in the realization that any structure has a life cycle, which includes ongoing maintenance and perhaps even re-purposing, to use a geek term.
Especially when we think of cities, or settlements, we’re able to accept a kind of variation over time. Street cars roll people out to the hinterlands, then rubber tired buses come along.
Some freeways in Europe now feature overhead catenary wires, for electrified trucks able to tap them. What you build today may be used in other ways tomorrow. That makes for a living architecture, one able to adapt or be adapted.
Doctors who see patient after patient after patient, develop a sense of the phenotype, the generic animal. The human. Veterinarians get generic bird, generic pig. I’m in awe of all these archetypes and am not making the mistake of thinking the tubular recognition sculptures, the multi-dimensional violins, the trained flutes, are actually “essences” in Platonic space.
They’re “educated about” (these models are) more than they’re defining the “essence of” anything. Wittgenstein showed that this last step is inessential to establishing meaning. Overemphasis on essences was a delaying superstition.
“Social engineer” was a dystopian-sounding title in a lot of science fiction. That was before “social media” started eating up our time. We value our time, which is brief.
Having engineers stay sensitive to our personal experience, and thereby keeping their systems humane, would seem the better course, over having them run amuck, while out of touch.
I’m thinking “social engineers” need to reach out to the medical community, as fellow non-legislators. So much about a GUI is purely elective, up to you, the user. We don’t force you to stay healthy.
The mindset of making behaviors mandatory, and punishing deviants, is not on the brink of disappearing. On the contrary, the moralizing language of the law establishes it as a branch of religion in many cases. The challenge is one of preserving some balance, not eliminating some enemy.
The term “social engineer” sounds less threatening these days precisely because of the more exaggerated religious elements, extending back to Nine Eleven and before. Lets not forget the religious tensions (many of them positive) incited within the United States by Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali.
I’m bringing up religious tensions in contrast to an engineering mindset which might stay coolly ecumenical even while designing rock concert venues, theme parks (mostly temporary) and other folk festivals.
The social engineers might bring religions together in ways the experts within each of those religions, might find more difficult to pull off.
Think of all those people making the circus happen. It’s only here for a few days.