Computer adventure games were possible in the 1980s because of a bit of code called a ‘parser’. You could type, “pick up the axe” and the computer would understand the phrase and follow your commands. In italics, because it didn’t understand anything, it simply broke your sentences into bits and changed the state of your inventory accordingly.
When faced with a parser, even a primitive one, many people did that homunculus thing and decided that the computer could understand every single thing you might type, like, “I’m thinking that having an axe in my inventory would be helpful,” or even, “let me tell you about my cousin…”
My first gig, at Spinnaker, was leading the team that built the original generation of illustrated computer adventure games (I got to work with Arthur C. Clarke and Ray Bradbury, which is a great story). We discovered early on that the parser was magical but not nearly as powerful as people hoped.
Sounds a bit like LLM and ChatGPT, forty years later.
The solution was to offer a convenient and simple approach, which is almost always the solution to a problem of confusion.
We created the WordWindow™ button. The gratuitous trademark symbol made it more powerful, apparently.
When you clicked that button, it gave you a list of the 25 most common or useful things you could type.
I think this is going to be a powerful bridge even now. For example, a “Summarize” button is going to lean into ChatGPT’s strengths, but it’s not something people might immediately jump to.
Broadening this concept, whenever you find the folks you seek to serve appear to be hesitating or confused, consider offering them a multiple choice option.
I went to Brooklyn and worked with Dan at the Arm to create a set of five handmade letterpress posters. They’re 12 inches square, available framed or unframed, and all sales directly benefit Newborns in Need. It’s hard to describe just how magical paper and ink can feel in the hands of a pro. They’re each signed on the back, limited to 100 each. Many thanks to my friends at Scribe for making all of the fulfillment possible.
Next up are a pair of durable, soft, handmade t-shirts that capture some of the energy of the book. They’ll look better on you, promise. Made by the Cotton Bureau, all profits go to BuildOn.
And then there’s the legendary bee mug, made by independent craftspeople working with Bread and Badger in the Pacific Northwest. I can confirm that tea tastes significantly better in these mugs, with or without honey.
Book launches are always fraught, but now it’s the book’s job to spark and amplify the conversations that make change happen. Thank you for your support and for caring enough to make a difference.
PS bonus letterpress footage:
Double debossed, shot in gratuitous slo-mo, with AMSR sound as recorded live
When the gas car was first introduced, it couldn’t compete with horses. After all, we’d had thousands of years to optimize our systems around horseback, and this new technology was still nascent. Roads were rare, gas stations were scarce and the cars themselves were unreliable.
The same thing happened again when electric cars made a comeback a hundred years later. At first, they had limited range, limited space, low acceleration and charging was a hassle.
When a new technology arrives, it is almost always at a systemic disadvantage. If we wait until the new thing is better than the old thing, we’re taking a big risk.
That’s because we have competitors who will spend the time to learn the new tech, and more importantly, build systems around it. They will gain customers you may have trouble getting back. They have a head start that can last a generation.
Herbie Hancock started experimenting with electronic instruments a decade before many of his peers. That enabled him to create not one but two of the most successful jazz singles of all time.
If the local landscaping contractor sneers at electric weed whackers and leaf blowers because they’re not quite as cost-effective in the short run, they’ll probably lose some customers, and won’t develop what they need to know when the technology and systems catch up. And the new systems will catch up.
The same goes for media companies that are defending a model of expensive content that’s ad-supported, refusing to consider that it might not last. How much longer will Vogue matter?
When there’s an iterative cycle of new technology, the systems can’t help but improve, and the tech is likely to as well.
When a new tech or system is 50% as effective as the old one, it’s our job to learn it and understand it.
And when it hits 77%, we ought to consider creating a new division, a new product line or a new approach that adopts it.
By the time it catches up, we’re either part of it or we’re too late.
A question we don’t ask ourselves very often, but a choice we make every day.
It’s tempting to not care. If you choose to not care, you’re off the hook. It’s simply to do as little as possible, avoid too much trouble, ask if it will be on the test, try to stay off the hook, so what…
On the other hand, caring can lead to heartbreak. Caring is the chance to make a difference, to actually be involved in what happens next. Caring puts us on the hook and caring offers a chance to contribute.
When we care, we get to make a difference, and that creates meaning, the path to significance.
No matter how big your backpack is, you can’t carry a bonfire with you when you go on a camping trip.
A match is sufficient.
Conversations are like that. Conversations are the tools that change our culture. Someone who cares talking with and teaching and learning from someone who was ready to engage.
My new book is out today. It’s the most urgent, most personal and most timely book of my career.
A few people will raise their hands and go first. They’ll engage in the conversation I’m hoping we’ll have about industrialism, humanity, false proxies, connection, dignity, productivity, connection and imagination.
If you’re ready to help make things better, I hope you’ll check out the book and share with others.
You’re entitled to it, and we will do our best to help you find what you want.
But it’s unlikely that what you want is what everyone wants. It’s hard to believe that there is only one appropriate standard for value, observance, speed or performance.
The easiest way for us to help you is to not waste time arguing about whether you’ve uncovered a natural law that we’ve been ignoring and instead, let’s simply find out what you want.
“I like it when…” is so much more productive than, “everyone wants…”
Mike Schur, co-creator of Parks and Recreation, said of his career, “This is not stuff you can read in a book,” he said. “This is stuff that you have to experience.”
I think it’s also useful to flip it around. There are things you will have trouble experiencing until you read them in a book.
A useful non-fiction book is a map, not the territory. It’s a chance to safely experience what might be, to experience it before it happens.
And a book makes it easy to talk about what you’re doing. It gives you the structure and the words to explain to someone else why they might want to come along with you on the journey.
An asteroid has never destroyed the Earth, therefore an asteroid never will.
This brand has been involved in scandals before, and it has always come back stronger, so there’s nothing to worry about.
There have been technology changes before, but we’ve always managed to find clients for what we do.
Survivor bias is the trap of only considering the successful entries when thinking about risk. For example, if you look at the performance of mutual funds after ten years, most of them seem to do pretty well. But that’s partly because the ones that did really poorly didn’t make it to ten years.
We are lucky enough to live on a planet that hasn’t been destroyed by an asteroid. But that doesn’t mean that other planets haven’t had their life forms extinguished–we’re simply unaware of them.
Past performance is no guarantee of the future. Sorry.
But how can ChatGPT use the word “I”? And when we talk about ChatGPT, is it “he” or “she” or “they” or “it”? Because anything that is an “it” shouldn’t be able to say “I”.
We probably need a form of “it” that can be used by ChatGPT when it is talking about itself or on its behalf. Because “I” brings emotional and intellectual weight that confuses or deceives us.
As Kevin points out, the regulation to lead to this fix is really simple and easy to implement. When I say “we” I think we know what I mean. But when ChatGPT or other LLMs say “I”, what is being communicated here?
When we built the bot for this blog, I insisted that the bot not say “I.” Because it’s not me. It’s a bot.
Inventing new rules for how language works is fraught and regularly fails. But it’s only been a few months, and it sure seems like we’re getting comfortable with not distinguishing between text from a person and text from “it.”
It might be as simple as IT, with the second t being capitalized. Or ix, which is fun to say and will help my Scrabble game…
Just because the computer says “I” doesn’t mean that we’re not interacting with a computer. The uncanny valley is real and perilous.
May 25, 2023
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here:
Cookie Policy
