Innovation in the workplace

In class the other day, a guest speaker came to talk to us about technological entrepreneurship.  One major theme that I took away from his presentation was that it is OK to think outside the box.  Most companies have a set of norms, both implicit and explicit, that employees are expected to follow.  These norms are important, but like Eliot Jacobsen, I believe that sometimes there are exceptions.  There are times when it is OK to break the mold.  I believe that some ground rules are necessary to maintain order and uniformity.  On the other hand, I fully support establishing guidelines.  These guidelines should be followed when the situation reasonably allows.  But some hurdles require improvisation and unconventional methods.  I think employees should be empowered.  If they feel that they can't exercise creative liberty, they will not reach their potential.  Conversely, if an employee feels trusted enough to innovate, he will be more productive.

Here Comes Everybody - book post

In reading Clay Shirky's Here Comes Everybody, I was able to identify with many of the themes presented.  One theme that stuck out to me was that there are different levels of awareness in a society.  This reminded me of an article we read earlier in the semester, but Shirky limits the concept to three level: "when everybody knows something, when everybody knows that everybody knows, and when everybody knows that everybody knows that everybody knows" (Shirky).  He applied this concept to East Germany in the late 1900s.  When the whole society knew that everyone was aware of the social unrest, mass public demonstrations arose and brought an end to the regime.  When the government resigned, the people brought Berlin Wall to the ground.  Applying this to a modern online community, what walls are there that we can tear down?  This is a hard question for to answer.  There are so many voices on the internet, each expressing its own opinion for a given matter.  While many of these can be grouped into similar categories, it is often difficult to determine which side is correct.  Therefore, it is practically impossible to define a wall on a particular issue and determine how it is to be handled.  It is very hard to solve social problems on the internet.  While the internet can help people to be exposed to foreign ideas, it also has great potential to damage relationships and cause negative impressions.  Thus, I believe that we must be careful in the way we use social media to attempt to solve social issues.

Shirky, Clay.  Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations.  New YorkL Penguin, 2008.  163.  Print.

Free software

Several days ago in class, we watched a video about the free software and open source movements.  The first thing about the video that struck me was how blatantly anti-Microsoft it was.  To some of the speakers, it seemed that Microsoft's concept of copyrighted software was a mockery to all they held dear!  A major theme of the presentation was that software should be free to distribute, modify, and redistribute without charge.  I believe the entire concept to be impractical.  Can hordes of people afford to devote so much time to large-scale software projects that will generate no revenue?  Most people hardly have time to balance work, continuing education, family, and other demands of life!  Who would be capable of funding these projects?  The government?  If so, which government?  I think we'd have a plethora of shoddy programs floating around the nets.  Paying for software gives a person or a company the time and resources necessary to build a product worth using!

Women in computer jobs

In preparation for class, we read a series of articles about women in computer and technical jobs.  It seems that there are too many factors involved to pin the blame on any one influence.  In contemplating this phenomenon, I have turned to my own experience both at BYU and with people I have known throughout my life.  Indeed, there are fewer women in the computer science program here.  On the other hand, most of the women I have known haven't been interested in computer programming.  I believe that this trend is common in society today.  I believe that people should follow their interests, and if they're not interested in programming, we shouldn't force them to be.  On the other hand, maybe our society subliminally tells women that these types of jobs aren't right for them.  I think that more exposure of boys and girls to computer science early on in school will help change some of the stereotypes society places upon the subject.  Knowing a lot about computers is just as nerdy as knowing a lot about any other subject, no more or less!

Reverse-engineering and ethics

Several weeks ago, we talked in class about how Compaq reverse-engineered the IBM-PC's BIOS.  Supposedly, they did so in a way that did not violate copyright laws.  Was it ethical for them to sell their product after having done that?  They didn't have to put as much time or resources into their product, so they were able to produce it more cheaply and save money on development.  Granted, they did spend a bit of money to reverse-engineer the BIOS and to hire lawyers in order to ensure that they weren't violating copyright in any way.  However, it seems that they benefited unproportionally due to their reverse-engineering.  They didn't create anything new - they just replicated someone's idea.  I suppose ethics of a society are defined by the laws governing that society.  So while they may not have acted unethically, I think their course of action was wrong.  They should have used their creative energies to produce a new product that would contribute to the advance of the technological front.

Cuckoo's Egg Analysis

One of the major themes that stuck out to me in The Cuckoo's Egg's was how ignorant people were about security issues people in spite of the potential damage that could be done.  When Stoll would notify the system administrators of servers that had been hacked and explored, some of them didn't seem too alarmed, and some expressed no concern at all!  What most surprised me was the government's lack of interest in hackers, considering that the hacker targeted a number of military servers.  Even if they had complete confidence in the security of their systems, it seems like new trend of trying to break into computers owned by a branch of the government would warrant some sort of investigation.  Even if not for the purpose of protecting sensitive information, I think we should always be curious and open to learn and improve.  If there is a way for me to improve the security, performance, or user experience of my server, program, or product, I believe it is in my best interest to discover or invent and implement it.  That is how advances come in any field.  New good ideas do not come when we are satisfied with keeping the status quo.  In a society where some are content to stick with what they deem "good enough," development of newer and better technologies is held back.  In groups where all members are encouraged to think outside the box and innovate, great ideas and solutions will gain mainstream acceptance and serve as a base off of which newer creations can be forged!

How far is too far?

Article

The article attached above addresses Microsoft's plans to release Windows 10.  Critics tout the new operating system's increased simplicity; it will be a multi-device OS, able to adapt to its hosting hardware.  It will be more intuitive than its predecessors, and some confusing aspects of Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 will be eliminated.  As interesting as this is, it reminds me of a topic we discussed in class.  As computers become simpler, and easier to operate, they become more tightly integrated in society.  But are these technological advances proportionally beneficial to all of us?  They certainly benefit us by allowing us, for example, to plan our outfits and schedules according to the daily weather forecasts.  But what are the costs of integrating these computation machines in our lives?  Certainly we have reached the point where we cannot remove them from society, but we should carefully consider how much of our lives they take over.