4 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2020
    1. Ericsson claims (2016, p. 98) that there is no deliberate practice possible for knowledge work because there are no objective criteria (so, poor feedback), because the skills aren’t clearly defined, and because techniques for focused skill improvement in these domains aren’t known.

      According to Ericsson deliberate practice for knowledge work is not possible because the criteria are not objective (you don't know if you're doing well).

      This collides with Dr. Sönke Ahrens' contention that note taking, specifically elaboration, instantiates two feedback loop. One feedback loop in that you can see whether you're capturing the essence of what you're trying to make a note on and a second feedback loop in that you can see whether your note is not only an accurate description of the original idea, but also a complete one.

      Put differently, note taking instantiates two feedback loops. One for precision and one for recall.

  2. Aug 2019
  3. Sep 2016
    1. The success of Arduino has had the perhaps retrograde effect of convincing an entire generation that the way to sense and actuate the physical world is through imperative method calls in C++, shuffling bits and writing to ports, instead of in an environment designed around signal processing, control theory, and rapid and visible exploration. As a result, software engineers find a fluid, responsive programming experience on the screen, and a crude and clumsy programming experience in the world.
    2. But the idea that you might implement a control system in an environment designed for designing control systems — it hasn’t been part of the thinking. This leads to long feedback loops, inflexible designs, and guesswork engineering. But most critically, it denies engineers the sort of exploratory environment that fosters novel ideas.

      On short feed back loops and modelling, this talk from Markus Denker, one of the main architects behind Pharo Smalltalk, can be enlightening: Perfection & Feedback Loops, or: why worse is better