The Buck Stops Here

Computer systems can be very complex. So complex, in fact, that no one person understands everything about the system. When something goes wrong the question is inevitably asked, "who's fault is it?" Human Nature's answer: "it obviously wasn't me." This is often the case, no one person can be blamed, but it is so much easier to fire one person, or sue one company than to rationally consider the many contributing factors.
Quality assurance may be the hardest part of designing good systems. Depending on the nature of the application, there may be an infinite combination of inputs or scenarios. One can only hope to create tests that will catch most problems. Sometimes they don't.
In these cases someone will be reprimanded, and they will likely not make the same mistake again. This scapegoat allows everyone else to feel like their knee-jerk human nature response was right and continue doing what they were doing. The problem is the blame often should be shared.
Perhaps a better response, as an engineer or developer, would be to assume that the problem was my fault. I would ensure that if a similar mistake was made above me in the process I would discover it. This increased self-accountability may make me the ideal scapegoat, but it may save property or lives. The buck stops here.

See The Gimli Glider Case:
http://ms.radio-canada.ca/archives/2002/en/wmv/tdgimliglider19830729et1.wmv
http://www.teamdan.com/archive/gimli.html
http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/flying/gliding_into_infamy.htm

Lincoln 2008

Not much these days escapes the sprawling reach of technology. Politics is no exception.
The Good: An informed electorate will be better able to choose the candidate they feel is best for the job. Voters do not have to depend on official speeches and televised events to know the views of those running for office. Moral faux pas are also often caught by the media. Some argue politician's personal lives should be off limits. I disagree. I want to know about the character of those who represent me. Technology and the media make this information readily available.
The Bad: Short-attention-span-itis makes for boring elections. If a candidate says or does something perceived to be controversial, we can be sure to be informed immediately by the media. Unfortunately, the controversial remark or situation is rarely considered in context. Candidates realize this, and to avoid controversy, avoid saying anything interesting.
The Ugly: I wonder if Abraham Lincoln could win an election today. Suppose his stove-top hat was out of style. If Lincoln and Clinton (the first) were to run head to head today I have little doubt that we would fail to elect arguably the best President in the history of the United States (no, I'm talking about Lincoln).
Now this time around I would have no problem with the most handsome, smooth-talking candidate winning. Hopefully once he gets in office voters will be pleasantly surprised to learn of his organizational prowess and ability to reverse the fate of world events (see the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics), even if it is his hair that gets him in.
Inspiration for this post: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm;jsessionid=9a30ea5c5ef966187942?articleid=1806

The Church 2.0?

I was an assistant ward clerk my freshman year of college. I had the privilege of using a DOS-based program to record financial information. This was 2002 and I was using DOS! My tendency to complain is subdued when I consider the plight of ward clerks just a few years previous. To calculate and record all of this information at a ward level would be daunting. I imagine it would take all afternoon. That precious DOS program allowed me plenty of time to get to the cafeteria before it closed and enjoy my much anticipated chicken cordon blue. This time savings can be multiplied thousands of times as we consider all of the wards and stakes as well as Church headquarters. Technology allows Latter-day Saints the world over to throw data at computers and get home to Sunday dinner.
Technology has fundamentally changed the way the Church operates. Interestingly enough, however, worship services remain largely unchanged. I have yet to see a Sacrament Meeting speaker with a clicker and laser guiding us through a Power Point presentation. So, while there have been significant changes to the operations of the Church because of technology, there have not been significant changes to the Church itself.
The decision of what technology to use and when is guided by the same principles that have guided the Church since the days of Adam. The goal is to bring as many people unto Christ as possible. The Church does not use technology for technology's sake. Technology is a means, and an effective means, to an end. Elder L. Tom Perry puts it this way, "Salvation is not in facilities or technology, but in the word."
The Church will continue to embrace new technology insofar as it allows individuals more time to spend living the message that these innovations deliver.
Articles inspiring this post:
http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1984.htm/ensign%20june%201984%20.htm/the%20church%20and%20computers%20using%20tools%20the%20lord%20has%20provided.htm
http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/2002.htm/ensign%20april%202002.htm/mormon.org.htm
http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/2000.htm/ensign%20may%202000.htm/thou%20shalt%20give%20heed%20unto%20all%20his%20words.htm

Angles on Technology

I am a (future) computer scientist and employee of my university's IT department. New technology is not something that just happens. To me new inventions are a form of art. I work with, learn from, and read about individuals who solve difficult problems every day. They use creativity to accomplish tasks that would be taxing or impossible without modern technology. To me teaching a computer to effectively process information is an art. Technology allows other artists to spend more time in their desired medium, whether it be painting canvas or molding the lives of children. Technology is a good thing.

I am a (want-to-be) economist. Technology is the magical (often exogenous) force that allows output to increase while holding inputs constant. In other words, technology allows society to get more for less. Economic growth means either increased consumption, leisure, or likely a mix of both. Technology is a good thing.

I am a (always trying to be better) Latter-day Saint. People in remote parts of the world have access to the words of their spiritual leaders. The printing press makes scriptures available to all. Time saved by modern conveniences allow more family time. The Internet brings pornography, terrorism, and hateful comments.
Technology can be used for good or it can be used for evil. Just as in any age of the world, life is largely what we make of it. Perhaps the mere availability and speed of information magnify our virtues and vices, but it is up to me to make the best of what is available, just as much in this Information Age as it would have been in Ancient Israel. Technology can be a good thing.

These articles illuminated my post: http://search.epnet.com.erl.lib.byu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&an=1460672 http://itrs.scu.edu/tshanks/pages/Comm12/12Postman.htm http://search.epnet.com.erl.lib.byu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=8637555 http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/2001.htm/ensign%20may%202001.htm/focus%20and%20priorities.htm

Purpose

The initial purpose of this blog is to fulfill the requirements for a CS 404 class at Brigham Young University. Maybe it will turn into more. We'll see!