Minimizing Distractions

Last week, Elizabeth Lopatto published an insightful article in The Verge. It boasted an intriguing title: ​“Silicon Valley has forgotten what normal people want.”​ “Within recent memory, people who made software and hardware understood their job was to serve their customers. It was to identify a need, and then fill it,” she writes. “But at some point following the financial crisis, would-be entrepreneurs got it into their heads that their job was to invent the future, and consumers’ job was to go along with that invented future.” I certainly noticed this shift when it first began emerging. See, for example, my 2015 article titled, ​“It’s Not Your Job to Figure Ou…

David Epstein, the #1 New York Times bestselling author of ​The Sports Gene​ and ​Range​, has a new book out called ​Inside the Box​. As with all of Epstein’s books, I really enjoyed it. He’s one of the best storytellers currently working in idea writing. There was one chapter in particular, however, that captured my attention as being uniquely well-suited to the themes we discuss here. It focused on the ideas of a somewhat eccentric physicist-turned-management guru named Eliyahu Goldratt, who in the 1980s popularized a framework for understanding industrial productivity that he dubbed the “theory of constraints.” Here’s how a non-profit established to promote Gol…

The second chapter of Genesis poetically describes the beginning of the human story. “The Lord formed Adam from the dust of the earth,” it reads. “He blew into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being.” There are different ways to translate the Hebrew term rendered here as “living being.” Onkelos, a Roman nobleman turned Torah scholar, interpreted it to mean “speaking spirit” (in Aramaic: ruach memalela). As Rabbi Shai Held elaborates in the second volume of ​The Heart of the Torah​, Onkelos’s translation implies that “speech is constitutive of what it means to be a human – a core part of our humanity is our ability to communicate with words.” …

“Something is up in academic research,” ​write​ the members of an AI Task Force convened by the journal Organization Science. As they go on to elaborate: “If you are an editor or reviewer at a journal these days, you probably already know this. The manuscripts are arriving in greater volume, with a particular feel that is hard to pin down. On the surface, the papers look the same as ever, but the writing feels weightless in a way that rarely describes academic writing…you find yourself scratching your head at the meaning the words are trying to convey.” The culprit? The task force crunched the numbers and produced a clear answer. Starting in 2023, after ChatGPT be…