There was a great interview of Nassim Taleb on the BBC Daily Business broadcast that very succinctly summarizes his concept of anti-fragility. As an industrial engineer, I have always promoted system robustness so seeing a fundamental flaw in it is a great piece of learning. I find this rewarding for two reasons. Most importantly, I am a better engineer and consultant as a result. But also, experts have a notoriously hard time giving up ideas that have been a core part of their world-view so it is great to know I can.
So what is anti-fragility? Contrasting it with robustness is the best way to explain. Systems are made up of many components. Fragile systems are those where the failure of one of these components causes a failure of the whole system. So robustness is an approach where you try to make each component resistant to failure. If you prevent these small failures, you don't get the system-wide failure. But this is where you get Taleb's Black Swan. When you get a problem big enough to fail one of your robust components, the whole system fails so completely that it becomes a disaster. The 2007 banking crisis is the example that made Taleb famous. We also see it in modern forest fire prevention. The more we prevent small fires from breaking out, the more disastrous the eventual state-wide wildfires we get.
So anti-fragility takes the opposite approach. Let's design the system components so that they fail easily, but so that the system as a whole gets better as a result. Small and frequent forest fires made the whole forest safer. The more companies that go bankrupt in a country, the less risk there is that the whole economy will crash.
Here is an example I have been considering in my personal life. Many new parents are trying to prevent their infants from getting sick in any way. Don't let them anywhere near a peanut, piece of dirt, germ . . . But what seems to be happening is that the kids grow up to be more fragile rather than less. They are more likely to have allergies, asthma, and other immune-system related diseases. I like the old way better. Let our kids grow up playing in mud, eating dirt and 15-second rule Cheerios. I read somewhere that the Chinese have such a low incidence of peanut allergies because their kids start eating boiled peanuts at such a young age they haven't had a chance to develop an allergy yet. Plus, this seems like a less stressful way to live.
Where else should we anti-fragile rather than robust?
My musings about human behavior and how we can design the world around us to better accommodate real human needs.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Saturday, December 08, 2012
The solution to climate change - rapid evolution
If a species becomes threatened with extinction due to rapid
changes in its ecosystem, is it possible for evolution (natural selection) to
speed up? In the past, researchers have
used microbes and yeasts because they can test many generations in a small
period of time. They hoped to apply what
they learned to things like islands after tsunamis, forests after fires, the
earth after the meteor impact that killed the dinosaurs, and that kind of
thing.
It is now getting personal because of the impending climate
change. Will humanity be able to evolve
through the changes that are looking more and more inevitable? A special issue of Philosophical Transactions
of the Royal Society summarized the findings on what researchers have termed “rapid
evolution” (RE). This is not my area of
expertise, but I think I can adequately summarize the basics.
Here are the factors the help a species evolve rapidly:
·
Starting with a large population. I think seven billion is pretty large!!
·
Genetic diversity. I think we have that too, There are some real bizaros out there.
·
Rapid intrinsic mutation rate. Thanks to all the
crap we now put into our bodies, I think we got that too.
·
Strong natural fitness. Definitely not all of us, but there are some
incredible specimens out there.
·
Space in the ecosystem. Since we are killing off the other species in
advance, I think we have done this for ourselves.
·
Some luck.
Hmmm. Maybe there is
hope for us. Well, some evolved version
of us. I wonder what that humanity would
look like . . . .
Friday, December 07, 2012
Cognitive Resonance in a funny comic strip
I have
blogged before about the phenomenon of cognitive resonance. This is when we explain something we have
done so that it makes rational sense, even when the real reason might not have
been all that rational. This is not a
conscious thing (well, at least it doesn’t have to be). It is just a natural way our brain works.
This makes
sense from a long term adaptability perspective because we often make decisions
or behave in ways that are based on emotion, instant gratification, and other
suboptimal reasons but it is better not to think of ourselves as
irrational. For our brains to naturally
do this and not even let our ego know about it works pretty well.
The most
famous (at least among us behavioral science geeks) example is a study where people
were asked to do a really boring task, either for free or for $20. Then they asked them about the
experience. Which ones do you think
thought it was most boring? Their
hypothesis was that the $20 people would because of the reward. But the opposite happened. The $20 people knew that they did it just for
the money so it was OK for it to be boring.
But the people who got nothing had no justification. So their
unconscious cognitive resonance retroactively convinced them that the task was
not so boring, allowing them to feel better about having done it.
As a
behavioral engineer, my job is to figure out how to use research results like
this to design better systems, jobs, consumer products, or whatever. And as usual, a comic strip says it better
than I ever could.
Usability of post office delivery cards.
Usability of post office delivery cards.
I received a package through the US Postal Service that was
sent Certified Mail. It was delivered
while I was at work (as I imagine happens a lot), so when I got home there was
a postcard in my mailbox with an “Attempted Delivery” notice. It seemed clear enough. It gave me a few options:
- They would redeliver it, again requiring me to be home (for security).
- They would redeliver it without requiring me to be home (more convenience, less security)
- I could pick up the package at the Post Office (the most security but the least convenience).
So why am I writing about this on a Human Factors blog? Simple,
I signed the card, left it in my mailbox, and . . . . nothing.
What day are they supposed to deliver it?
I could imagine that it would take a day or two because the
Post Office doesn’t know what my choice would be ahead of time. They could have kept the package at the PO in
case I came to pick it up, but then not been prepared for options 1 or 2. But then they can’t deliver it. Alternatively, they could have sent it with
the carrier to cover either options 1 or 2 and not been prepared for option 3.
Better service would have allowed me to log onto the USPS
web site in the evening, input the package tracking number, and let them know
in advance what to do with it. Then I
would have it just one day later. But
they don’t have that.
So it should have come the next day, right? But for some reason, it did not. Did they return it to sender? That would be crazy to do so quickly, but you
never know (it has happened to me in the past).
Is it being held at the Post Office despite the fact that I signed the
card? That would suck because I returned
the card and so I have no tracking number.
Can I pick it up at the PO just with my ID? No way to know.
And on the original postcard it didn’t even say who the
package was from, so I couldn’t call them to see if they could help. Did they have a tracking number as part of
their receipt? Probably. But who was it? And since I returned the card, I may not have
been able to check that for the sender contact info anyway.
This is not a hard UX problem. The card could have more information. They process could be simpler. There could be a web solution for everything.
UPS and Fedex seem to have these problems
solved. I hate to say it, but no wonder
the USPS is going out of business. They wouldn’t
be losing such market share if they could just get the basics down.
Guest blogging on EID
I was asked to guest blog for the Ergonomics in Design journal, which is a publication of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. These should show up about once a month and will be a little more specifically focused on human factors issues. My first one is here. I know I range a little wider on this blog.
I am looking forward to getting some new readership and I will cross link those posts here to get some good discussion going. Don't worry, you won't miss anything by following me here :-).
I am looking forward to getting some new readership and I will cross link those posts here to get some good discussion going. Don't worry, you won't miss anything by following me here :-).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)