Systematic Experiences

In all the discussions revolving around search, social networking, knowledge management, I always ask the question of what does the internet really provide. What makes us log on to a site, or send an email, or im a friend...

I think there are a few things that we seek.
1.) Communication
2.) Knowledge
3.) Transactions

Today, you can use search to find information, sign up for rss feeds to have news pushed to you, or log into a social network site of your choice to learn from others. But as i watch my kids learn, I see differences b/w the natural systems with our electronic systems.

My kids learn by observations, mimicry, trial and error, practice, and finally, by focusing on things that are interesting and fun.

I think it translates into this, they experience with all of their senses, then they interact with all of their senses.

Our systems today, are an interaction through a box that you sit in front of. You interact with a keyboard and a mouse, a very limited interaction, and you only sense through a small screen, you have limited view of what is going on around you, and you are limited to sight and to an extent sounds.

How does that need to change? There are a lot of loosely coupled technologies that are focused on experience.

1.) Surface
2.) iPhone
3.) Second Life
4.) Nintendo Wii

These new technologies are changing the way a user interacts with traditional PC/internet tools. They allow you to experience a web site, or experience a transaction, or play a game, or meet with your friends. And these new ways of interacting are being met with huge demand.

It comes down to the user experience. That brings me back to my kids. What is their experience going to be five years from now, ten years from now, and then 20 years from now. It is not going to be keyboard/mouse/monitor driven, it will not be logging on to a website and puching in the site url, and it will not be email threads that have to be managed and searched for.

It will be a complete experience, one that lets them interact fully with their tools. When they want to learn what is going on in the world, it will be part of their waking up experience in a seamless fashion, when they want to know what is on the agenda for the day, it will not be reviewing their PDA or checking their project plans, it needs to be complete live, and video, sound, and tactile experience.

Here are some examples of what will be possible soon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLhMVNdplJc

http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/26/technology/futureoftech_kirkpatrick.fortune/index.htm

http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/26/magazines/fortune/futureoftech_quantum.fortune/index.htm
I can't wait for this reality to arrive.

Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/04/24/exoplanet.reut/index.html

This article brings up an always interesting topic. With all of the focus on looking for life outside of our world, and with the exponential leaps in technology, it is a matter of time until we come across some type of life outside of our planet. When that day occurs, there will obviously be an impact to humanity that I can't fully grasp.

But if we look beyond the philosophical and religious impacts of such an event, I wonder what impact that will have on the way we live? Will it shake us to our core, what will it change?

What if we were to be able to test the theories of nature vs. nurture, the theories of evolution, the theories of intelligence, origin of life, and on and on in a completely different environment, where the controls were completely different. How much of an impact would that have on us?Would it be like exposing a man from the Roman empire to Wall Street, or to a child from the dark ages to FAO Schwarz, or would it be so much more?

When something changes something that we believe is absolute, does it weaken us or make us that much stronger? Does it allow us to change our paradigm and allow us to tap into those things that we didn't' even know we didn't know?

I hope to be there when this type of occurrence happens and see how it changes me.

Tax Time

As I'm completing my taxes for this year, it dawns on me that although there have been great strides made in software solutions to help a taxpayer file their taxes, there is still a long way to go.

For example, we receive all of the taxable events that were reported to the IRS via different forms from the tax reporting entity (it could be your employer, your bank, etc). These forms are generated by different payroll companies and/or financial institutions. Many of them now offer the ability to pull their records directly into tax programs such as Tax Cut and TurboTax, but there is still a need to know which entity reported the taxable event for you, and then there is the need to authenticate every company's website.

Wouldn't it be easier to directly interface with the IRS and be able to pull all of the tax liabilities that have been reported to them for the tax year? From that point, you would be able to reconcile all of your income that has been reported and then work to itemize your deductions against those reported events.

I find that managing your paper work that has been sent to you and then having to attempt to download it if you're lucky from your broker, your bank, your employer, and potentially your mortgage company is tedious at best, and a exercise in futility at worse.

I don't know what the risk to pulling all of your financial data from the IRS would be, if they can provide a secure method in getting access to your data, then this would be a huge timesaver and avoid unnecessary auditing of all records and the extra time to manage all of the different sources of tax forms that you have to work with.

Negative Inertia

I think all of us have been in this situation. You're on a project that has a ridiculous schedule, massive scope, and grandeur expectations. Going into a project like this, everyone realizes the complete and utter futility in tackling the project and yet the troops march on.

I don't know if its a drive in many of us that loves a challenge, thrives on the impossible, and the ego in us that says I can make it happen.Then reality sets in. You realize you don't have the right number and/or the right quality of resources. You find that collaboration and communication is becoming a nightmare to manage. You start to raise flags to management to let them know that things are not going well. Often times, that results in a period of all hands on deck where everyone from every group in the company pitches in and tries to help.Of course the people that are pulled in are more than likely looking to come in and save the day. They want to take control and play the general,; meanwhile, you just need the right soldiers to help get the project back on track.

Why is it that this happens so often? Why is it that we take on more scope on a project than can realistically be delivered in a humane way. In the end, the project makes it to the live date, but there are huge quality issues, or massive corrections after the scheduled project is complete, and in the end, either the budget has been completely blown, or the return that the stakeholders had originally expected, does not materialize.I call this negative inertia. Instead of stopping a project like this early, and slowing things down to make sure that you look at the priorities, reset expectations, and ensure that you can achieve success, the project keeps driving forward at full speed. It has negative inertia...

I'd like to hear stories on projects that have stopped the train wreck from occurring, and that have stopped a project mid stream and made difficult decisions that felt very painful to everyone involved during that process, but due to the corrections being made, the project benefited from that correction.