Embracing Complexity

This is a collection of information that seems important. Most of this is from a LinkedIn post by Tony Seale.

This is not about creating complex things. This is about looking at things as a system. This is about embracing and managing the complexity.

A kluge is a term from the engineering and computer science world, it refers to something that is convoluted and messy but gets the job done.  Anyone can create something that is complex.  Anyone can create a kludge.  But it is hard work to create something that is simple and elegant.

It takes hard work to create something that is simple.  Not simplistic, simple.  Simplistic is dumbing down a problem in order to avoid complexity.  Simple is about embracing complexity, but then understanding the complexity and then hiding complexity from users.

Simplistic is dumbing down a problem in order to make the problem easier to solve.  Simplistic ignores complexity in order to solve a problem which can get you into trouble.  Simplistic is over-simplifying.  Simplistic means that you have a naïve understanding of the world, you don't understand the complexities of the world.  Removing or forgetting complicated things does not allow for the creation of a real world solution that actually work.

Simple is something that is not complicated, that is easy to understand or do.  Simple means without complications.  An explanation of something can be consistent with the real world, consider all important subtleties and nuances, and still be simple, straight forward, and therefore easy to understand.

Per the Law of Conservation of Complexity; inherent complexity cannot be removed from a system, but the complexity can be moved.  Is the platform dealing with the complexity, or the software application, or the user of the software application?

Irreducible complexity is explained as follows: A single system which is composed of several interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.

So for example, consider a simple mechanism such as a mousetrap.  That mousetrap is composed of several different parts each of which is essential to the proper functioning of the mousetrap: a flat wooden base, a spring, a horizontal bar, a catch bar, the catch, and staples that hold the parts to the wooden base.  If you have all the parts and the parts are assembled together properly, the mousetrap works as it was designed to work.

But say you remove one of the parts of the mousetrap.  The mousetrap will no longer function as it was designed, it will not work.  That is irreducible complexity: the complexity of the design requires that it can't be reduced any farther without losing functionality.


An area of knowledge can be characterized in a spectrum with two extremes.  This article calls the two ends of the spectrum "kind environments" and "wicked environments":
  • Kind area of knowledge: Kind environments, characterized by clear rules, repetitive patterns, and unchanging tasks. Specialists whose jobs are at risk fall under this category.
  • Wicked area of knowledge: Wicked environments, characterised by obscure data, no rules, constant change, and abstract ideas. Generalists who can adapt and excel across different skillsets fall under this category.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Getting Started with Auditchain Luca (now called Luca Suite)

Image
(Note that a newer, production version as opposed to only the development version , of Luca Suite is available) The Innovator's Dilemma points out that disruptive innovations often look like toys that are doing everything wrong. Auditchain Luca , which is part of the Auditchain Suite , is a unique approach to creating a knowledge graph .  To experience using Auditchain Luca, have a look at the Getting Started with Auditchain Luca instructions. Be sure to grab the Excel and JSON import files used for this getting started exercise.   This getting started exercise uses one of several different approaches to getting information into a tool for constructing and viewing professional quality knowledge graphs .  Additional getting started guides will be made available over time. Auditchain Luca might not make sense to you if you don't understand the paradigm shift that is occurring and if you have not shifted your mental map. For the next step in your journey, consider t...
Read more

Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS)

Image
Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS) is an interesting idea that combines the relational paradigm and the knowledge graph paradigm.  This documentation, Why RKGS , explains the idea. This gets even more interesting with the notion of "relational AI".  RelationalAI is described as follows by the company of the same name, Relational.ai : “RelationalAI is a cloud-based relational knowledge graph management system, with state of the art probabilistic processing and declarative reasoning at scale to make developing Data Applications a superpower for your business.” This notion of knowledge graphs represented in relational databases fits into my belief that knowledge graphs have two aspects: the expression SYNTAX and the logic of what is expressed or SEMANTICS. While the LOGIC of a knowledge graph is always the same regardless of technical syntax used to express that logic; there are many, many different technical syntaxes that can be used to represent a knowledge graph. There...
Read more

Professional System for Creating Financial Reports Leveraging Knowledge Graphs

Image
The document Professional System for Creating Financial Reports Leveraging Knowledge Graphs explains a new approach, a new paradigm, for creating financial reports.  The document provides a practical, nontechnical description of a professional system for creating provably high-quality financial reports where the report creator is using financial reporting schemes (such as US GAAP and IFRS) where report creator is permitted to modify the report model which leverages global standard knowledge graphs represented using XBRL. This new approach is useful, it is highly novel, and the details were highly complicated to pull together.  This is certainly not an incremental innovation.  It is definitely a disruptive innovation and it could very well be a foundational innovation. You can decide which for yourself. Foundational technologies have two dimensions that need to be considered: novelty and complexity. The more novel the technology is, the more effort needed to ensure users ...
Read more