Signal to Noise

UPDATE: This article from Science News agrees with my notions but it uses facts gained by doing MRIs on people driving in a simulator (and the author even reserves a special place in hell for multitasking drivers).

If there was a single idea or phrase that was drilled into me when I was a child it was “any job worth doing is worth doing right.” There is my work ethic. This does not mean that I work all of the time; it just means that I take some pride in the fact that most of the jobs I undertake end in a way that makes me feel good about what I have done.

To ensure that I feel like I have done a job well is to give it my attention when I am doing it. I try very hard not to “multitask.” I am not a computer. My brain does not operate on the same principles as the increasingly powerful processors that are used to control cell phones, automobiles, and personal computers. Even in these processors the switch between tasks is not free (in some it is quite expensive–even discounting the amount of human effort that it takes to ensure that task switching is appropriate). As a human, my brain is not “wired a certain way” and I cannot “multitask.” These are analogies and they are only useful if they hold some semblance of truth. Just because a modern processor is capable of multitasking does not mean that a human is capable of the same thing because computers have a central processing unit and humans have a brain and these things are similar. In fact, it was the CPU-is-a-brain analogy that helped people understand computers in the first place, not the other way around.

But the dream of being able to do many things at the same time (with the unstated benefit that all of the things can be done without degrading the quality of any of the tasks) that has come from the equating of a brain with a CPU is a fallacy. We are humans and our brains are not CPUs.

The opening quotations from “The Autumn of the Multitaskers” in The Atlantic would give one the impression that modern man expects multitasking to be the norm and ancient man was only capable of doing one thing at a time.

I think your suggestion is, Can we do two things at once? Well, weíre of the view that we can walk and chew gum at the same time.
óRichard Armitage, deputy secretary of state, on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, June 2, 2004 (Armitage announced his resignation on November 16, 2004.)

To do two things at once is to do neither.
óPublilius Syrus, Roman slave, first century B.C.

The article goes on to suggest that the multitasking of modern man is more of an illusion that is leading to a lower quality of work being done and a great waste of effort in switching between individual tasks. I agree. Is it really so bad to admit that a human being is unable to simultaneously manage the stimulus input from more than three sources at the same time? Maybe DaVinci would have been just as talented if he had been composing a sonnet while painting the Mona Lisa and building a water screw at the same time. But, again, I doubt it. It is possible to be variously talented and not employ all of the talents at the same time. Worse still, we should not be ashamed that we are unable to be simultaneously talented.

I continue to hear how people are proud of their ability to do many things at once. I even “failed” a job interview because I suggested that I was a very good planner and preferred to do a single task instead of trying to do many tasks at the same time. That is what my interviewers wanted. And the truth is that some people are better at this than others. There are thousands of people who think that they can drive a car and talk on the telephone … and shave or put on makeup … and have a snack … and listen to the weather. With any luck they will be able to have just enough energy to dial 911.

What is wrong with doing a job well? The expectation of increased productivity resulting from less attention to individual tasks is a dangerous fallacy. Humans work better when they concentrate on a task. Humans need rest. We invented computing devices to do the unending menial tasks for us. We even made the devices able to do more than one task at a time. This was supposed to give us the chance to be more human with time for loftier pursuits, not make us jealous for the abilities of the machines we created.

I have spent the last few days working to be a candidate for the upcoming trustee election. This has meant getting people to nominate me for the position and then submitting the nomination papers and some personal information to the electoral officer for Zone 10 in the Eastern School District (where my children go to school). If you need to know your school district and zone you can use the Elections PEI District and Zone Locater.

Taking a quote from the election notice above,

The role of the school trustee is to oversee the work of the boards and ensure that standards and regulations are met. Trustees represent communities, participate in school board decisions and contribute to student achievement through the development of good public policy.

I have created a site where I can discuss school board issues and the upcoming election. This election is very under-represented in terms of voter turnout. We are hearing a lot about the school system; a school trustee has a voice in the operation of our schools. Make the effort to go out and vote and then make your views known to the people you elect to guide our children’s education.

Money cannot buy happiness but apparently it can make you hurt less. Adding to the list of things that suck about being poor is the fact that chronic pain is a (statistical) consequence of poverty, at least in America. It makes sense that menial jobs would lead to more repetitive strain injuries but finding that people making less than $30k spend one day in five in pain is a bit of a shock. It is almost insulting that those above $100k, on top of being in pain much less, seem to welcome the pain as a result of exercise.

Of all descriptions, I find those given in terms of the negative to be the most useless. This is a generality, of course, but I would rather describe what a person or thing is rather than what it is not. I prefer to have others do this as well. With this in mind, I am going to say that I am not a Buddhist. I do not practise meditation in any real sense and I am about as mindful as a nervous coffee junkie that has just learned that Tim Horton’s staff has unionized and gone out on strike. While I am on the subject of not being things, I do not like the feel-good books of pithy over-generalized snippets of pseudo-wisdom that purport to delve the mysteries of life’s many facets. Perhaps somebody should write a book targeted to my soul and I can recant all of my cynicism while weeping at my past ignorance.

Now that I am disclaimer-ed I want to mention Thich Nhat Hanh. I first heard of Thich Nhat Hanh a few years ago when I saw a copy of Peace Is Every Step: The Path of Mindfulness in Everyday Life appeared in my house. I promptly ignored it and figured that the publisher just left the words “Chicken Soup” off of the cover as a misprint. I pride myself in being able to judge a book by its cover, even if I have to alter the cover in order to make my judgement. The book is good–touchie-feelie, but good. I am embarrassed to write my praise of such a book that contains a statement like “[i]f a child smiles, if an adult smiles, that is very important. If in our daily lives we can smile, if we can be peaceful and happy, not only we, but everyone will profit from it.” If you meet me on the street and tell me that I can change the world with a smile do not be surprised if I back away quickly or suggest you manipulate yourself into a very uncomfortable position.

Neither did Peace is Every Step appeal to the logical (as in argumentative logic) side of my personality. Rather, it repeated a very few fundamental ideas in dozens of different ways. At some point the notion that being nice to other people is a good idea became as obvious as it really is and I decided to give it a try. There is a difference between “believing” something to be true and “doing” something that reflects this belief. I suspect most people can find a reasonably large number of contradictions in the way they believe life should be led and in the manner in which they lead their own lives. This notion has been around for a while.

This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
– Hamlet, act I, scene iii, lines 78ñ80

So I have come to try out a few of the ideas in Pease is Every Step and I seem to be happier for it. Of course, it might be a placebo.

I will leave you with The Fourteen Precepts of Engaged Buddhism as presented by Thich Nhat Hanh. I find these hard to argue with, some more than others.

Foremost in ideas (to me) is the importance of open-mindedness. Being wrong should not be a shameful thing. If ideas cannot be changed, especially in the face of new information, we are destined to be reflections of the first person who tells us something–even if it is conflict with our own experience. I had initially intended to write a commentary on each of the fourteen precepts and how they applied to my life. It is more than a little arrogant to annotate the sayings of a Buddhist teacher when I am not Buddhist and far from a religious (philosophical) teacher. I will suffice it to say

• doing things to help society is better than doing things to harm society;
• ignoring bad things does not make them go away;
• excessive possessions does not equate to excessive happiness;
• and it is possible to make yourself happier.

You can find precepts in religious and philosophical (and scientific) texts that express very similar ideas. If great thinkers keep telling us these things we might want to give them a try from time to time.

Many years ago I was a yacht-club wannabe and learning to sail and race sailboats. That makes me sound every bit as pretentious as I was. I got myself one of the original windsurfers (it was actually made by Dufour before they were bought by Bic so it was not a Windsurfer) and wanted to be cool. It was during this period that a very nice yacht came into town from some exotic location in the Caribbean and an exceptionally beautiful teenage girl came ashore for a couple of hours before moving on to some other location.

I remember this very clearly. Small-town boys do not often get the made-for-movie moments that often and this sort of beauty walking off of that sort of luxury was not an everyday (or any day) occurrence. This was the epitome of cool and class and all sorts of other good things that I had heard about. Now, whoever she was (and I have forgotten every significant detail about her except one, which I will get to in a moment) she has fallen into the idealized vision that is only possible through age and the realization that idealized things are best left idealized and not realized. The one thing I remember particularly about her was the shirt she was wearing. Of the shirt, I only really remember that it was a shirt that was bought at a concert (a rarity back then) in London a couple of months previous when the Kinks were touring supporting their Give the People What They Want album.

It is somewhat embarrassing that this was the beginning of a change in my life (it was probably a delayed puberty, but I will give it a more romantic and deeper meaning in this post). It was not the girl; she was vapid and barely worth talking to (and every boy at the place talked to her–of course talking was not our final purpose). It was the album by the Kinks that I went out and bought under the guise that anybody that was so rich and cool must know what I should be listening to. Given the time in my life I found all of the hidden meaning that could be found in the album. I plumbed the lyrics and found soul and beauty. I still have it around here somewhere.

A person could be forgiven for thinking that this little story would be about advertising and propaganda after that introduction. That is, however, exactly what that shirt and that girl inspired. The fact that seeing a pretty girl in a shirt caused me to buy an album that (I had determined after many brain-altered listening sessions) contained a message that decried and made blatant the power of advertising and the desire to fill the needs of a hungry populace, regardless of nature of the hunger was quite profound to my young mind.

The result of all this was that I became self-righteous instead of pretentious (well, probably keeping the pretencion but redirecting it against the fools who did not see they and their desires were being manpulated rather than trying to be a rich-wannabe preppie). And that was pretty much the end of my time at the yacht club.

I have been thinking about how much I am manipulated ever since. It is amazing to me how much I can want an iPhone when I barely use my cell phone now. I have moments of wanting to drive a Porsche, wear Ray-Ban, support or decry a politician, the whole gambit. I have many more moments when I am amazed that this is happening to me. Today I viewed two web sites that brought all of this (rambling) memory back to me: PhotoshopDisasters and a top-ten list of Famous Quotes About Propaganda from Alternative Reel. Our world is a place where we are constantly challenged to determine the truth and the sources from which we determine the truth. The PhotoshopDisasters site has dozens of examples of the manner in which the pictures we view are altered to present us with a reality that does not exist and often cannot exist. Coupling these images of distortion used to sell us things we do not need in our (real) reality is the top-ten list of observations on propaganda. If Photoshop can help us see product realities in a particular way, judicious use of propaganda can help us see political reality in a particular way. Propaganda is a wartime term. It exists mostly in the negative as something that an enemy does to tell lies to a vulnerable public (or soldier). As a tool, it is far more insidious when used by somebody we trust.

That is where I get fooled the most often. It is in a politician’s refusal to answer a direct question. It is in being repeatedly told the same thing in absence of acknowledging alternatives. It is ignoring inconvenient facts. It is in the assumption that I cannot forgive a mistake made with good intentions. Most of all, I get angry that it works on me and those around me.

Give the people what they want. If they do not know what they want, tell them. They will be happy.