Are We Increasingly Imagination-Challenged?

A failure of imagination - how getting everything handed to our senses - is fueling a generation of rusty brains. By this I mean, technology is delivering most everything to us, which requires little of us - in terms of thinking or imagining.

Take a science fiction book, for example - preferably a book with few pictures. As you read the words on the page, you brain engages to create images, sounds, smells, etc. in your mind. Yes, you are being entertained, but you are also "in the moment," and making it real by virtue of your imagination.

Contrast that with a high-action motion picture that does all the imaginative work for you. It requires very little in the way of our creativity. It satisfies our sense of sight, hearing, etc.

I theorize that that effortless feeding of our senses actually dulls our imagination, making it more difficult to be creative and think outside the box.

In an environment of effortless stimulation, would it be possible for another Einstein to flourish in creativity. Food for thought. Assume nothing.

The Internet of Things and Pro-active Engineering

It seems that everybody and their mother is plunging headfirst into the "Internet of Things." I see very few stopping to ask "should we" or "what if" questions that, at the very least will slow us down enough to contemplate consequences rather than forging ahead with blind faith in technology. A little bit of foresight can go a long way towards avoiding some really bad outcomes.

As wonderful as technology can be, it has demonstrated that problems it sometimes creates, is often patched in ways that serve more as a Band-Aid than a fix. The Internet is prime example of this. The Washington Post ran a story a few weeks ago explaining how one of the most critical functions of the Internet (routing) is insecure and susceptible to hacking; and gives a history of how it came about and how "solutions" have been laid upon themselves to serve as a "temporary" work-around.

It wasn't planned this way, of course. And, the numerous network designers and engineers had positive intentions; and they accomplished the work set out before them. But, alas, we have a serious problem, burdened under 30-years of its own weight, nearing a breaking point with data demand increasing at an astonishing rate. The problem is so ingrained, that nobody is really sure how to go about fixing it as it would likely be very disruptive to do so.

Would more planning and foresight have prevented this? Of course, it's hard to know. However, at each point where a Band-Aid was applied (when data demand was more manageable), provided an opportunity to step back and ask what was done right and what was not done quite right and how to go about making it whole. Granted, it's not fair to be too critical of past decisions as it's not always easy to know the context, priorities, politics, etc. that drove those decisions.

But, the point is still valid that we should ask hard questions of a technology before it is deployed widely. And, the Internet of Things, while a great project for engineers and a fantasy for gadget-eers, we should ask what it means. For example, just because we can put our thermostat on the "web" (or in the cloud), should we? And, if we should, how might it be abused (hacked)? This isn't a matter of being a negative-Nelly on technology. Rather, it's about employing one's imagination to anticipate serious problems in order to drive pro-active design decisions. It's about being smart rather than being reactive. It's also good business, as the key to success is happy customers and fewer field problems.

Yet, time and again, I see either a failure of leadership to see proactive engineering as having value; and/or I see a failure of imagination among designers and engineers to envision possible failure points. I have a theory about this, too, but I'll save that for another blog. It's not about anticipating all potential problems; or even about designing to avoid them. It's to "put them out there" for inclusion in design discussions.