Generative Systems Design
2.6K views | +3 today
Follow
Generative Systems Design
Complex Adaptive Systems, Process Design, Adaptive Push Back, Self Organization, Emergence
Curated by Anne Caspari
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Anne Caspari from Futurable Planet: Answers from a Shifted Paradigm.
Scoop.it!

Nassim Taleb and Daniel Kahneman discusses Antifragility at NYPL

Nassim Taleb and Daniel Kahneman discusses Antifragility at NYPL | Generative Systems Design | Scoop.it
Nassim Nicholas Taleb's Home Page has a link to the video Nassim Taleb and Daniel Kahneman discusses Antifragility at NYPL. I always find it easy to understand the concept and the value of what he ...
more...
Anne Caspari's curator insight, September 19, 2013 5:35 AM

really interesting conversation. Read Antifragile before you listen! 

Angela Rizner's comment, September 19, 2013 3:37 PM
Half way through. hoping to audit his class in the spring.
Anne Caspari's comment, October 5, 2013 4:46 PM
:-), thanks, and Angela, go for it, would love to hear about it... !
Rescooped by Anne Caspari from Global Brain
Scoop.it!

Understanding Is A Poor Substitute For Convexity (antifragility) | Conversation | Edge

Understanding Is A Poor Substitute For Convexity (antifragility) | Conversation | Edge | Generative Systems Design | Scoop.it

Something central, very central, is missing in historical accounts of scientific and technological discovery. The discourse and controversies focus on the role of luck as opposed to teleological programs (from telos, "aim"), that is, ones that rely on pre-set direction from formal science. This is a faux-debate: luck cannot lead to formal research policies; one cannot systematize, formalize, and program randomness. The driver is neither luck nor direction, but must be in the asymmetry (or convexity) of payoffs, a simple mathematical property that has lied hidden from the discourse, and the understanding of which can lead to precise research principles and protocols.

 

The point we will be making here is that logically, neither trial and error nor "chance" and serendipity can be behind the gains in technology and empirical science attributed to them. By definition chance cannot lead to long term gains (it would no longer be chance); trial and error cannot be unconditionally effective: errors cause planes to crash, buildings to collapse, and knowledge to regress.

 

The beneficial properties have to reside in the type of exposure, that is, the payoff function and not in the "luck" part: there needs to be a significant asymmetry between the gains (as they need to be large) and the errors (small or harmless), and it is from such asymmetry that luck and trial and error can produce results. 


Via Spaceweaver
more...
Anne Caspari's comment, June 17, 2013 4:22 AM
Against popular understanding of what makes the universe go round "(yin/yang") , it is ASSYMETRY in many different realms. Generative systems design can benefit hugely from understanding this and using what Taleb calls convexity in order to desgin for results and success.

And here is another take on assymetries cross posted from Bonnitta Roy, http://alderloreinsightcenter.com/insightful-ideas-blog/  pointing out the different realms where assymetry is the driver:

"That at every level or domain of existence there are exclusionary principles which are the principles which guarantee difference and generate increasing levels of uniqueness. So for example, at the quantum level there is wave-particle uncertainty, at the atomic level there is Pauli exclusion, at the level of abiotic there are things like laws that govern crystals, handedness, etc… at the level of plant there is the exclusion of space, at the level of animals there are incompatible goods, and at the level of humans there are incommensurable beliefs. "

This all makes a lot of sense.
Scooped by Anne Caspari
Scoop.it!

Antifragile system design principles | Beyond The Beyond | Wired.com

Antifragile system design principles | Beyond The Beyond | Wired.com | Generative Systems Design | Scoop.it

*These are rather like the principles of the Joi Ito-era MIT Media Lab, but even scarier. Imagine falling into the clutches of an antifragile justice system

 

“System design principles

 

“(1) Stick to simple rules

“(2) Decentralize

“(3) Develop layered systems

“(4) Build in redundancy and overcompensation

“(5) Resist the urge to suppress randomness

“(6) Ensure everyone has skin in the game

“(7) Give higher status to practitioners rather than theoreticians

Anne Caspari's insight:

I posted the reffered articles by Hagel and Taleb before, but this is a cool summary/overview. 

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Anne Caspari from Futurable Planet: Answers from a Shifted Paradigm.
Scoop.it!

Nassim Taleb's 'Antifragile' Celebrates Randomness In People, Markets

Nassim Taleb's 'Antifragile' Celebrates Randomness In People, Markets | Generative Systems Design | Scoop.it

'Antifragile' is a celebration of risk and randomness and a call to arms to recognize and embrace antifragility.

Many readers misunderstand Taleb’s core message.  They assume that because Taleb writes about unseen and improperly calculated risks, his objective must be to reduce or eliminate risk.  Nothing could be further from the truth. 

 

Antifragile is a celebration of risk and randomness and a call to arms to recognize and embrace antifragility. 

 

Rather than reduce risk, organize your life, your business or your society in such a way that it benefits from randomness and the occasional Black Swan event.

 

Taleb’s own life is a case in point.  He had the free time to write Fooled, The Black Swan and Antifragile because—in his own words—he made “F___ you money” during the greatest Black Swan event of our lifetimes, the 1987 stock market crash.  

 

...Taleb’s trading style is antifragile, had the 1987 crash never happened, Taleb would not have been materially hurt.  His trading style puts little at risk but allows for outsized returns.

 


Via Deb Nystrom, REVELN, Philippe Vallat, Anne Caspari
more...
Deb Nystrom, REVELN's comment, April 17, 2013 2:57 PM
Anne, your layering encourages critical nuanced views beyond the book's "shiny new term" idea. Sometimes the first thing to do is "not do," as in, don't just do something, stand there. Doe we need an "intervention?" What are the other perspectives available, thinking systemically? Re: Iatrogenics: From the "Black Swan Report: "...the argument of Chapters 21 and 22 on the convexity of iatrogenics (only treat the VERY ill): Mortality is convex to blood pressure."
Anne Caspari's comment, April 22, 2013 9:42 AM
Hi Deb, thanks :-). I also reckon there are MANY fresh perspectives on how to handle different systems (or leave them alone), may they be health, financial, socio-political, ecological.... I love it and keep smiling to myself when I see the aha - moments on applied convexity/anti/fragility pop up in daily life, business and otherwise... compliments also on your scoops...
Deb Nystrom, REVELN's comment, April 22, 2013 10:16 PM
Thanks Anne. Systems and org. groupies a bit, maybe. ;-)