GNU social JP
  • FAQ
  • Login
GNU social JPは日本のGNU socialサーバーです。
Usage/ToS/admin/test/Pleroma FE
  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Featured
    • Popular
    • People

Conversation

Notices

  1. Embed this notice
    Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:09:42 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell

    Less about tools that boost productivity, more about tools that reduce total workload.

    In conversation about a year ago from hachyderm.io permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:16:06 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      Specific line of thought to illustrate my general point:

      Consider an LLM that helps manage email correspondence. It writes emails! It summarizes emails! Less reading! Less typing! More messages faster! Productivity boost!! Except:

      - You have to babysit the LLM, guide it and check it to make sure it’s accurately preserving human intent (which is, after all, the whole point of communication…right??). That’s new work, and likely cancels out the slim time savings of reduced reading and typing.

      2/

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:19:47 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      - But it's an LLM, so it’s still often wildly, convincingly incorrect. Miscommunication increases. Miscommunication has costs. Miscommunication generates new work. Which now gets done faster! And generates yet more work!

      - IT staff has to administer the LLM, support the LLM, evaluate vendors, yada yada.

      - People have to maintain the LLM itself, and the infra that supports it. Those costs are •large•.

      3/

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:24:19 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      And if by some magic all of this actually spins up and gets working, then (1) the barrier to communication decreases (why not just send another email if it’s automated?), (2) individual communication load increases (because you can answer emails at a faster rate), and (3) the net efficiency of communication decreases (because of everything in the previous two posts).

      Sound and fury, signifying nothing.

      4/

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:26:25 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      I severely doubt many real orgs measures actual desired large-scale outcomes well enough to spot that net efficiency decrease. All this is going to look like increased productivity. Will •be• increased productivity in the ways that most folks actually measure it.

      But here, with the bird’s-eye view of a hypothetical, it’s clear: the total amount of work happening to achieve the same ends has •increased•.

      5/

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:31:50 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      I said “reduce total workload.” What are some thing that accomplish •that•?

      “Do we really have the problem we think we have?”

      “There’s a simpler way.”

      “Work from home!”

      “Hmm, I’m going to think about my reader, and edit for clarity and emotional impact before sending this email.”

      “We’re willing to pay for experience / expertise.”

      “Things are going well. No need for you to stick around!”

      “Maybe we don’t need to do this thing anymore. We can just choose not to have this problem.”

      /end

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Pyperkub (pyperkub@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:36:56 JST Pyperkub Pyperkub
      in reply to

      @inthehands Yeah, during a particularly bad CA budget year I was introduced to the tech concept of:

      Do less with less.

      Sometimes it's what layer 8 requires.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:52:27 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      A lot of things that get billed as a productivity boost sound suspiciously to me like recipes for reducing operational slack and thus “going solid:” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cook_(safety_researcher)#%22Going_solid%22

      /7

      In conversation about a year ago permalink

      Attachments

      1. No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.
        Richard Cook (safety researcher)
        Dr. Richard I. Cook (1953 – August 31, 2022) was a system safety researcher, physician, anesthesiologist, university professor, and software engineer. Cook did research in safety, incident analysis, cognitive systems engineering, and resilience engineering across a number of fields, including critical care medicine, aviation, air traffic control, space operations, semiconductor manufacturing, and software services. Biography Cook graduated Cum Laude from Lawrence University in 1975 from a customized program that included physics and urban planning. After completing his bachelor's degree, Cook took a position as a lead systems analysis at Control Data Corporation, working with finite element analysis programs such as ANSYS and NASTRAN on the CDC STAR-100, and managing teams of programmers and support analysts. In 1986, Cook received his MD degree from the University of Cincinnati where he was a General Surgery intern. In 1994, he completed his Anesthesiology residence at the Ohio State University. Cook served in the Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care at the University of Chicago as an associate professor...
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:56:33 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to
      • dogzilla

      @dogzilla
      Existing systems •are• what I’m comparing against. I am assuming here, based on (1) emperical observation and (2) the underlying principles of these systems, that LLM email assistants will generally lower communication accuracy on both the transmitting and receiving side versus unmediated human-human interaction. “Worse communication but faster” is what this tech can offer.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      dogzilla (dogzilla@masto.deluma.biz)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:56:34 JST dogzilla dogzilla
      in reply to

      @inthehands Fair points, but you seem to be comparing an LLM-based system against one with perfect efficiency, instead of the existing human-based system (which I’m certain has its own set of failings).

      While it’s useful to know how an LLM system deviates from the ideal, I’d be far more interested in how it compares against the existing system. Personally, I don’t need a system to be perfect - I just need it to be better

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 04:58:44 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to

      As both a software developer and a teacher, I’m increasingly interested in figuring out which costly things are avoidable, or can be simplified, or •just don’t matter•…and then doing less of them.

      Less about tools that boost productivity, more about tools that reduce total workload.

      /end

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 05:04:22 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to
      • Sean Boots

      @sboots
      Thanks. Thoughts on this one still forming; I feel like there’s a kernel in here somewhere that I haven’t found yet.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Sean Boots (sboots@mastodon.sboots.ca)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 05:04:23 JST Sean Boots Sean Boots
      in reply to

      @inthehands This is such a good thread. 💯💯

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 05:35:44 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      • datarama

      @datarama
      Process tools and social tools •are• tools in my book. And yes, that’s where much of the action I’m talking about is at. You’re picking up what I’m putting down.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 12:14:05 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to
      • brinnbelyea

      @brinnbelyea Sounds like we’re singing each other’s tune!

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      brinnbelyea (brinnbelyea@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 12:14:06 JST brinnbelyea brinnbelyea
      in reply to

      @inthehands David Graeber's book BS Jobs explains why we will have more "productivity" that produces nothing. It's all about the churn that achieves nothing, justifying more churn.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 12:32:30 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to
      • brinnbelyea

      @brinnbelyea Well, I’m not an academic, so… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      His thesis that a lot of modern work is bullshit seems compelling. The details of his analysis don't; they seem facile, more geared to entertainment than explanatory analysis. The first flaw: his need to categorize whole jobs as bullshit (administrative assistants? useless? really?!) rather than identifying BS as being something marbeled through all jobs.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      brinnbelyea (brinnbelyea@fosstodon.org)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 12:32:31 JST brinnbelyea brinnbelyea
      in reply to

      @inthehands That's surprising. If Graeber's thesis holds water anywhere, it would be academia. It's a very hard case to make that businesses carry multitudes of unproductive employees because management conspires to build fiefdoms despite this lowering profits. In academia, though, the explosive growth of admin and the war on faculty would seem to the the one place where Graeber's thesis is indisputable.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 22:20:31 JST Paul Cantrell Paul Cantrell
      in reply to
      • GinevraCat

      @GinevraCat
      My spouse works at an elementary school, and it’s a similar story. The way the district abuses her time is horrifying.

      In conversation about a year ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      GinevraCat (ginevracat@toot.community)'s status on Thursday, 23-May-2024 22:20:32 JST GinevraCat GinevraCat
      in reply to

      @inthehands So much this! At the high school I teach at, if you complain about workload / suffer stress / miss deadlines etc, the general administrative response is to allocate you to an online course on "efficient time management".
      Thus adding yet another burden on your time. It's the budgeting in poverty problem - my problem is not how I budget my time, it's the fact that I need more time!

      (Not in my department, though. My HOD understands this.)

      In conversation about a year ago permalink

Feeds

  • Activity Streams
  • RSS 2.0
  • Atom
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.