Raise Creators of Technology, Not Just Consumers

The lonely creator. From Moby's recent video criticizing our obsession with Smartphones.

Once upon a time, children played outside, at parks, in the neighborhood and in the schoolyard. I know, seems like a fantasy from some twentieth century dream, but they honestly did play, lots of them, screaming, yelling, falling down, running and laughing. Yes, they got hurt, but they slept well. 

Evidence of 20th Century children playing

There was a time when children slept? I swear to you it's true. They went to bed after a hot bath and a good story and slept till the sun came up. Sometimes nine hours.

This of course, is a legend, almost a myth, from a time before the Smartphone. In 2001, the year my second son was born, the iPod was invented. It was pretty cool, but storing 10,000 songs on one small device wouldn’t be the game changer here. Six years later, the iPod grew into the iPhone, and this invention would disrupt the life of the child more dramatically than anything else since the invention of electricity.

Kids these days?

There are plenty of articles written about the issues that can arise when kids and technology mix. One of the best articles I’ve ever read is a Medium article titled, "Porn is Not the Worst Thing on Musical.ly" by Anastasia Bell. A must read for all people with kids. With over 22K claps, it appears she really hit the nail on the head. The data is still out, but the rise in pre-teen suicide, FOMO anxiety, and self-harm have all been linked to a blend of too much time online and lack of sleep that comes with screen time. Put a kid to bed with his iPad rather than a hot bath and a story, and he’s very likely to Snap or play games till the wee hours, only to be awakened to go to school, whether he likes it or not. Adolescents and children are vulnerable to everything they see, hear, touch, taste and smell. This is because their sensory experience of the world is literally nature's way of programming their brains. The way they think as adults will be determined by their experiences during this critical time of brain development.

However, there’s one aspect about kids and technology that doesn’t quite get as much attention—the consumerist nature of the culture they are literally immersing themselves in. Our world is less safe when too many of our kids are in mental agony, the increase in suicide, self-harm and mass shootings point to this. Yet our world is even more dangerous when too few of them are unplugged for another reason as well—as our minds consume more and more ideas from others, fewer of us are actually creating anything ourselves. 

We may think watching an arts and crafts channel on YouTube is creative, but if you never make the craft and just watch others do it, then nothing has happened at all. If the online community is more about logging in and letting others do the thinking for us than it is about sharing ideas back and forth within creative groups, with time there will be fewer and fewer content creators, and those few will be the ones with the real power.

It’s important that a healthy percentage of the next generation unplugs and creates, otherwise the world will become one big YouTube unboxing episode, and do we really want our creative capacity as a species to devolve in such a way?

The job of parenting is to create a nurturing space for our children to mature so that one day they can join us in the work of the world. To make civilization, we need creators, not just consumers. This used to be a natural part of growing up—the kids played, built things, did their chores and imitated the adults around them. In this technological age, parents now have to be conscious of the online world their children are so drawn to, and step-in, so to speak. Not only to save their childhood, but to also teach them about the real power of technology. For those who know how this network is built and can create new content in the Information Age will shape the future for us all.

So how do we do this? There are plenty of books and TED Talks on this subject, but honestly, the method for raising creators is fairly simple—delay the introduction of personal technological devices until they’re old enough to drive, play with them until then and make learning about technology a family affair.

Let’s break these three things down.

Delay Personal Devices (i.e. gaming systems, computers and Smartphones) Till the Kid Can Drive

I’m sure most people think this is counter-intuitive, this is after all an article on how to raise content creators in the 21^st century yet my first suggestion is to become Amish? However the fact is plain and simple, the moment you put your iPhone in your children’s hands, you have lost them to the content already created by someone else online. Some of this content is inspiring, but most of this endless data stream is blather and unworthy for most adult human beings, much less our children. I’m not kidding here. Perhaps if we'd listened to the Buddha and trained our minds in the practice of right thought, things would be different. Even if you set your children’s accounts to private, they’re still online, CONSUMING EVERY BYTE of information that any old person throws out there. Ms. Basil says this best:

"Pretend you can turn your kid invisible. Pretend you drop your invisible kid off at a warehouse in downtown LA. You have no idea who’s inside — fingers crossed it’s packed with Nobel Peace Prize winners, board certified pediatricians, and J.K. Rowling. Pray it is not packed with the worst of humanity. No one can see your kid, but your kid can see everyone and hear everything.

Would you do it?

Of course you wouldn’t. Most parents are careful about who and what their child is exposed to. Setting your child’s account to private may make him invisible, but he’s still there, fully present, taking it all in."

She goes on to suggest the #16by16 plan, where you tell your kid that if they can make it without a smartphone and computer in their room till their 16, you’ll pay them $1600. It’s not a crazy idea. My own sons were 15 when they got computers, 16 and 18 respectively when they got their first Smartphones. They survived without and I didn't even have to pay them. 

Delaying the technology forced them to wire-up their minds to the world around them BEFORE they linked up to the hive-mind of the internet. During this time, they learned to play with others, manage their time and institute good study habits. How in the world did I keep them entertained? It’s not really my job to entertain them, it’s my job to love them, feed them and drive them to school. Just as they’re not responsible for my happiness, I’m not responsible for their entertainment. However, there were a few things I did to make their lives enjoyable without electronics…

Play With Your Kids

Ms. Basil suggests that, “Kids should be watching witty cartoons, riding bikes, making slime, doing art, playing Minecraft, learning chess, and boring us with bad magic tricks. They shouldn’t be stopping other kids from killing themselves.”

Childhood is about play!!!! And Ms. Basil’s suggestions are exactly the things we can do with our kids. Make slime and playdough, ride bikes and learn bad magic tricks. Teach them to juggle or ride a unicycle. What are you good at? Can you tumble? Then buy a mat and give them that skill. Can you build structures? Then get them at your side while you build a shed. Can you knit, or write, or put on a good puppet show? Essentially play to your strengths and invite the other adults in your lives to do the same. What our kids learn from their grandparents is precious, and the children will cling to those memories of learning from grandma as the elders pass away.

Kids also need to play with each other, even if it gets rough sometimes. But small kids love nothing more than being with you, so read books together, build blocks and Lego sets together, and play board games. This is fun and all of them build social as well as problem solving skills. Family dinners are also wonderful when no Smartphones are at the table. Want to go out to dinner but you have a two year old? Leave them at home with a sitter. Wait till they're four, then bring them to the nicest restaurants and start teaching them manners. But don't put the phone in their hands so you can have a moment to talk as adults. You have a lifetime to be with adults and you will regret it when they're teens and refuse to talk to you, because that's going to happen no matter what. But when they're small, they're open to learning to communicate and want nothing more than to tell you their latest knock-knock joke at the dinner table. Give them a phone instead of your attention and you miss the best chance you have for building a line of communication between you.

I mentioned that our kids learn by imitating us, so this means that in order to play with them in this way, we too have to be unplugged. I myself didn’t get a Smartphone until the eldest was 16 and they never used it. I did however share my computer with them because while it’s important to build up their minds and bodies spatially and through their experiences in the real world, there does come a time where kids need to learn what exactly makes the Information Age tick…

Make Learning About Technology a Family Affair

My father was a geek who spent a lot of time in his office either on his Ham Radio or building electronic Heathkits. One day when I was about ten, I wandered in from playing with the kids, tired and sweaty and looking for a break from the summer heat. I found him soldering together a bunch of electronic parts. I asked what it was and he told me he was building a binary clock. For work? I asked. No. For fun.

Fun?

I asked him to show me how and by dinner I had not only built my first computer, I’d also learned to count in 1’s and 0’s. It was thrilling and from that day on, my father did everything he could to share technology with me. No, he didn’t run out and get me an Atari. Instead he gave me a TI-99 and I taught myself to code in Basic and thus began a life-long interest in computers and how they worked.

My totally adorable first computer. I still have it, in case the Smithsonian calls.

And note, this wasn't a computer in my room. I had to hook it up to the family TV in the living room and only got to use it in a public place. This meant I could easily ask for help, because Dad would often walk by and ask me what I was doing.

I think it’s important for everyone to know how information systems work. From coding to network protocols to the hardware behind the gadget in your hands, we all need to ask, How? So don’t be reluctant to teach your kids how to program if you don’t know how. It’s never too late, so start yourself!

Play Minecraft with them. Don’t plug them in without you, sit with them, build worlds with them, maybe even build modpacks with them. There are a few cute visual programming languages like Scratch. Instead of giving them an iPad, get an Arduino Lego project going. Take them to a Maker Faire. Build their first computer with them. Please don’t think of these activities as only for those who are “smart” or “geeks.” In this century, we’ve got to know how to make our kids tech savvy, so that means we should learn it as well. The more informed our citizenry is about the network that now governs the very political discourse of our democracy and controls the Electoral College, the better.

Most of All, Be Worthy of Imitation

Is this what we want to share with our children?

The most powerful thing you can do as a parent when it comes to raising a creator is to become a creator yourself. So close the Facebook app and make your own chatbot. Look up from your phone and instead look at what’s under the hood. It’s a powerful world inside of there, trust me.

Go on, take a peek. Then share what you've discovered with your kids.

Calling All Parents: Don’t Let Calculus I Be the End!!!!

In a recent article published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), author Maggie Kuo wrote,

“Female college students are 1.5 times more likely than their male counterparts to leave science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) after taking the first course in the calculus series, new research finds. The study, published last week in PLOS ONE, supports what many educators have observed and earlier studies have documented: A lack of confidence in mathematical ability, not mathematical capability itself, is a major factor in dissuading female students from pursuing STEM.”

Even though I’ve been fairly busy coding a conversational AI and trying to figure out just what it means to be a CTO in a Silicon Valley startup, I’ve honestly thought about this almost every day. Just how can it be that one class, one simple yet important class, would drive any students from a career in science, technology, engineering or math? And why would females be more likely than men to do this?

The article went on to explain the study behind this theory and it has the data to back it up. Since then, I’ve read many different articles and opinions, all offering up solutions to academia, while also trying to figure out the female brain. After spending a bit of time mulling it over, I realized something very important: I’m a female, I struggled with the first calculus course in college, and NEVER once did I think it meant that Computer Science wasn’t for me.

When I was a senior in high school, I decided to pursue Computer Science and applied to three Big Ten schools (I grew up in the Midwest and loved football, so Big Ten it was.) I ended up at Purdue University in West Lafayette, IN merely because they sent me my acceptance letter first. That was the extent of my college application cycle. I also had a bad case of senioritis and despite my father telling me I was being a fool, I dropped pre-calculus and went math free my last year of high school. I loved writing software, but didn’t like math. You see how already my narrative is different?

Fast forward to the next fall and I failed the entrance exam for Calculus I. Failed it. I had to take a remedial math class for computer science majors, which was basically the pre-calc class I should have taken in high school. Worse, because I wasn’t in Calculus I, I couldn’t take the first computer science course in the sequence, CS 180, and instead had to take a FORTRAN class with the IT students. Better yet, NEITHER of these classes counted towards my computer science degree. Basically, I was already a semester behind and I hadn’t even started college.

Yet never once did I think I should quit or change majors. Why in the world would I give up a career in software just because I wasn’t a genius at calculus? The thought never occurred to me. Instead, I took the remedial semester and entered Calculus I, as well as CS 180 in the spring and aced them. The remediation set me up for success. It enabled me to become a stronger student. Four years later, I graduated on time and headed out to work for Motorola. I’d forgotten about the whole thing until I read Kuo’s article. Now I’m wondering why I was so blessed, not because I chose CS as a degree, nor even for the chance of remediation, but blessed because I didn’t consider it a failure. Was I embarrassed?  A bit. But walk away from my CS degree? Never.

Now, I don’t consider myself special, but obviously the idea that anyone would quit a STEM degree simply because Calculus I is a pain in the ass doesn’t equate in my mind. And I don’t think this is a result of academia coming to the rescue, but a direct result of my upbringing.

The state of your mind is what paints the reality around you. Something is boring, hard, interesting, easy, or logical based on your viewpoint. Somewhere along the line, our kids are being taught that math is hard. Or only for special people. It also appears that males are better able to overcome this idea and push through, even if they’re not that great at it themselves, yet females take it personally. As if a lack of skill in calculus means you won’t be a good scientist. That’s absolute nonsense.

The issue probably lies somewhere between societal bias and poor math instruction in our schools. There are plenty of articles that make suggestions for improvements in these areas, but in my experience both society and the academia are slow to change. There’s really only one place where girls, and boys for that matter, can be taught that math is for everyone and that a love of science isn’t determined by one’s ease with higher mathematics—the home.

Yes, home is where the heart is, and home is where the future scientists of this world are born. It matters to me that more women enter computer science, not because I love it, but because this is the career of disruption. We’re in the middle of the transition from the Industrial Age to the Information Age and the end result will be what our children make of it. If most of our women, and many of our males, avoid technology because they see Calculus I as a deterrent, then I see a much bleaker view of the future.

The current crop of Silicon Valley hotshots isn’t too impressive when it comes to using technology to improve human lives, but that topic is for next week’s blog. Right now I want to share a few things that parents can do to help their daughters get past the Calculus I gate and into the rich and rewarding world of science and technology.

1.       Starting 5^th grade, get your girls to play hacker/math minded video games.

The first time kids start to hate math is 5/6^th grade. I call this Wall Number 1. Honestly, this is completely reasonable because who really enjoys converting mixed fractions to improper fractions and then subtracting them with denominators as different as night and day? Oh, and include borrowing in that, will you? Yuck. Everyone, except those in love with numbers, hates it. Yes, schools could improve the process, but this is the time where parents need to encourage their kids to not judge math as horrible and instead to see it as the practice of teaching the mind to solve puzzles. Puzzle and logic are the keys to science careers, not irregular fractions.   How to help them believe in themselves? Get them to play video games that use math in a not so obvious way. This is the perfect age to do so. Games like Minecraft, Portal Two and “else Heart.Break().” Many girls like these games, so encourage them to play! This is the age when my dad gave me my first computer and I taught myself how to code in Basic. But today’s children can use beautifully written software to play with mathematical concepts in a real way, in addition to the horrible decimal to fraction lessons. Yes, they still need to learn math in school, but now is the time for parents to help them understand that math is not boring, rather it can also be filled with story, drama and problem solving. Click here for a list of hacker/programming types of games.

2.       Starting middle school, teach them to code

You may have done this sooner, but for those parents who have a girl who’s interested in science, get her to code by eight grade. Why? Because this is just before Wall Number 2: Algebra II—the second mathematical course where many kids fall out of the system. Algebra II isn’t easy, but if you’ve had them playing Minecraft since they were ten, the abstract math course might not feel so horrible. But more importantly, now is the time to teach them that good programming is independent of being super smart at math. Should you study math if you wish to be a part of the scientific community? Yes. But do you have to love it or be a genius to code well? No. When I was in 8^th grade, Apple donated several Mac II’s to my school as well as the money to hire a teacher. As a decent math student, I was invited to take part in the afterschool program and I loved it! I continued coding in Basic all the way through High School, until I took a Pascal class from Sr. Mary Newhart, the sister of the one and only Bob Newhart. (Yes, this is sadly the closest brush of fame I’ve ever had.) It was an all girl’s class, and even though I didn’t even take pre-calc because math bored me so much, I aced programming.

Puberty is the time to let girls know, that success in programming doesn’t mean you have to ace math. Instead it means you must be able to see connections within systems, to follow the problem down the rabbit hole to its solution, and put the pieces of the puzzle back together. Is this mathematical thinking? Yes. Is it Algebra II? No.

Encourage your science-minded daughter to take a programming class by age 12. If there aren’t any at school, send her to the Alexa Café summer camp program, then send her to the other ID Tech camps, or anything similar. Girls Who Code is also a great resource. Use summer to be a time of exploring her mind. Take it into your own hands and show her that programming is more than Algebra II.

3.       Encourage them to take AP Calculus as seniors, but don’t make the grade that important

I know this is hard. College is so difficult to get into and many are tempted to just avoid any classes that might make the GPA go down. It’s too bad you can’t take an AP class as pass/fail. If your high school has that option, then go for it. If not, then encourage your daughter to take the class her senior year, even if it risks lowering her GPA. If she’s applying for a STEM related degree, the college will want to see it in her course schedule anyway.

Have her take it, but don’t force her to sit for the AP exam, unless she’s really gung ho. Do whatever you can to support her. Teach her now that her grade in this class, unless it’s a complete failure, doesn’t reflect how great she’ll be as an engineer, or a food scientist, or a neurobiologist. Taking it now will help prepare her for Calculus I in college, there’s no way around it. Every science degree demands it and for good reason. The study of higher mathematics shouldn’t be reserved only for the brightest among us. Everyone deserves to study it, if not to understand the fundamentals of matter and nature. Furthermore, scientists need the mind training—but you don’t need to get an A in it. Probably not even a B. Again, grades seem to make a millennial tremble with fear and our current generation of females tends to be more perfectionist than in the past, but don’t give in. A “B-“ in AP Calculus will be the thing that enables your daughter to go into her first year of college prepared and ready to study. She can get through that Calculus I requirement with ease and then blow on by to the good stuff. There’s no reason she can’t.

So don’t give into the fear. Encourage her to go for it. Get her tutoring if she needs it. Do whatever it takes to show your daughter that she’s more than that grade, that instead she’s a critical thinker, and has every right to pursue a career in science and technology, even if she doesn’t love math.

Come On Girls, Code With Me!

“Computing has seeped into every corner of the economy. It is the new literacy. A basic understanding of how computers work and what they can do is becoming increasingly important in landing a 21st century job.”

 

“The dearth of women in computing has the potential to slow the U.S. economy, which needs more students in the pipeline to feed its need for more programmers.”

~ Mike Cassidy, Mercury News Columnist

It’s been in the news a lot lately. Women make up 50% of the users of technology, but hold only 17.6% of Computer Science degrees. Why is there such an imbalance? I’ve been reading about it and find myself stumped…it doesn’t make any sense.

As a woman who pursued Computer Science in the early 90’s, I’m often asked what it’s like to be the only female in the room. I’ve heard that many women experience sexism at the workplace and feel left out in the career. But I did not experience that. Yes, I was often one of the only women in the room, and I noticed it, but never one did I think I shouldn’t be there, or that my ideas wouldn’t be heard. Never once did any man in the room tell me that I didn’t belong.

Never once did I look at a professor and think, “He isn’t like me, I’m not sure I belong here.” Instead I thought, “I’m here to learn what he knows, and use it to make a living.”

As I’ve moved from programming to writing, I find myself again in the male dominated worlds of film and science fiction. And again I’m asked, “What’s it like to be a woman in a field full of men?”

I’m going to be honest in this blog—for me, it isn’t strange at all to be a woman working with men. Men are human, just like me, and many of them happen to like the same things I do. Often people try to blame the lack of women in STEM on the fact that it’s a men’s club, and perhaps that’s true, but no one has ever pulled me aside and said, “Hey, Lady, you don’t belong here.” Instead I found myself writing code, debugging, system testing, drinking beer and playing softball with my colleagues, who happened to be mostly men, and I enjoyed all of it.

Here in Silicon Valley, the tech firms are trying to figure out how to create a sense of workplace parity. They often point to the lack of women to hire. Truth is, the pipeline is pretty empty in general at this moment.  As Mike Cassidy states in his article for the Mercury News,

“The damage starts with a problem that is already being confronted by the tech industry and other companies that rely on computing talent (which means practically all of them): The economy is creating far more computing jobs than U.S. schools are creating computer science graduates.”

We will experience a slowdown in our economy if we can’t fill these jobs, which means the current generation of kids needs to be encouraged to at least look at careers in computing. And this, of course, should include women. Why not? Girls are just as capable as boys in this realm. And these are high-paying jobs—all of our children ignore them to their peril.

Jocelyn Goldfein, sees this as a historic moment in history, where women could flock to careers in computer science like women flocked to the factories in WWII. “I really think this is kind of a Rosie the Riveter moment," says Goldfein, a director of engineering at Facebook.

Which is why so many organizations and colleges are trying to get more women into their ranks. Yet so many of the solutions being tossed around weren’t necessary for someone like me, a sorority girl, to jump into programming. However, there are some things I experienced that might help recruit more girls into this career, and it's all about education.

First of all, I began coding at age 12. I think this is important for all children. In my case, my first computer science teacher was female, hired to teach those of us identified as “excellent” in math twice a week. In addition, my math teacher at the time, who was also my Mathcounts coach, was female. According to research, because I saw myself in these women, it wasn’t much of a stretch for me to think I could be good at these subjects.

So perhaps one solution is to have more women teach math and computer science to middle schoolers. I can’t say for sure that worked for me, but it was my experience. Yet my work with strong women didn’t stop there. I went on to attend an ALL GIRLS high school, and I firmly believe that this is what makes me able to be in a room of mostly men and work alongside them, without feeling different.

My teachers at my ALL GIRLS high school were women. My Trigonometry and Pre-Calculus teachers, my Biology and Chemistry teachers and, best of all, my Computer Science teacher. There were only eight of us who took her class, but Sr. Newhart (yes, she was Bob Newhart’s sister) was a great instructor and under her tutelage I learned Pascal and Fortran. What a woman!

Truth be told, I love computers and I love men. I love working with both and have always found the experience enjoyable. Perhaps then, the issue isn’t that men don’t want women working with them, but rather for some reason women somehow think they can’t. Perhaps having females teach me math and computer science from age 12 – 18 shaped my confidence.Do most boys see men in those roles and follow them in the same way? If this is true, then would replacing women with men as teachers to this age group make men less interested in math and science? What good would that do?

Maybe separating the sexes during puberty is powerful for both of men and women? Perhaps letting us learn from our elders, without the need to be attractive to the opposite sex, frees our intellect in a way that builds confidence that can never be taken from us? That once we’ve mastered our minds, we can integrate in college and the workplace in less stereotypical ways? If so, this might just be the case for single-sex education, which is something I NEVER see in the list of ways to get women interested in technology.

But it might just be the answer.

***In the meantime, I've begun speaking to middle and high schoolers about the creative career of coding. If you're looking for someone to share her experiences in this field, and how this has helped me launch a career in science fiction, contact Brighter Brains. I'd love to share my professional journey with your kids, boys and GIRLS!

How To Survive the Robot Apocalypse

It’s in the air.

It’s in the news.

Our struggling economy. Our struggling democracy. The income gap. Technology and artificial intelligence. At first glance, these things might not seem connected, but upon closer inspection, I find they’re all part of one impulse, and together they create the web of humanity—and our future.

Many would have you believe we’re near the end of civilization as we know it. Their case is quite compelling. Even though our economy is showing signs of recovery, most employment improvements are in low-wage jobs—the very jobs our technology seeks to replace. We might be at a 5.8% national unemployment rate as of October of 2014, yet according to Paul Bucheit in his recent article for Common Dreams, “Nine out of ten of the fastest-growing occupations are considered low-wage, generally not requiring a college degree, including food service, health care, housekeeping, and retail sales.”

Not coincidentally, the job gains that are currently making our employment numbers look good, even though they’re low paying, were found on another list recently—the ones most likely to be replaced with robots in the next twenty years.

The coming “Robot Apocalypse” is such a big deal right now that Standford University has announced a “…century-long study of the effects of artificial intelligence on society, including on the economy, war and crime.”

There are two sides to every coin. One side would suggest that a world of extreme and growing wealth, paired with the technology to free up humans from low-wage jobs, will usher in the long awaited period of “Heaven on Earth.” Others suggest that since those with the wealth don’t want to share, the projected 50% unemployment rate will lead to extreme poverty, uprisings and the deterioration of humanity.

What now lies before us is a choice, which side of the coin do we wish to nourish? The future where technology finally lives up to its promise, or the future where most of humanity lives in dire straights and the elite have to take to the skies, as they do in the movie Elysium? It is a serious choice, and one from which we can't hide.

Here’s the catch, we have to make this choice together. Yet it seems that we're polarized as a people. How in the world can we move forward?

There are many ills in society, but in my observation they all boil down to one—xenophobia.

It’s our fear of others that drives us to let the poor suffer, because they didn’t work as hard as we did. It’s our fear of others that encourages the wealthy to horde their gifts, because no one else deserves them. It’s our fear of others that encourages war, or the withholding of life saving technologies from those who need them, simply because they’re uninsured. It's our fear of others that creates a national budget where 60% of resources are dedicated to the military industrial complex, and a mere 2% is invested in science and technology.

The truth is, until we can look one another in the eyes and see nothing but the dignity of our humanity, the future can and does look dire. For unless we can find compassion and a desire for all of us to thrive on this planet, the replacement of humans with robots in the economy can and will lead to extreme poverty. That is a bleak world for most.

Yet there are things you can do as an individual to choose to thrive not just survive, the Robot Apocalypse, turning the event into the next great leap forward for humanity.

1.     Learn to code. I’ve said this many times before and I’ll say it again: LEARN TO CODE. This is the language of machines, technology and power. Being a mere user makes you vulnerable. At a minimum, schools should be teaching all 7/8^th graders basic coding skills and high schoolers should be required to pass a programming class for graduation.

2.     Invest in your creativity. Humans are inventors. Yes, a truly learning machine will be able to create, but we’re unique in the way we see pictures in our minds. It's been said the Nikola Tesla could see his inventions in his imagination and even test them, making sure they worked, before committing to build them in the material world. We are storytellers, dancers, innovators, entertainers...Robots can of course assist us, but we’re the ones who see the world in bigger pictures, stories and humor. I’m not sure Watson could ever be as funny as George Carlin.

3.     Invest in your judgment, aka your thinking skills. Our minds are not merely if-then-else statements, but more like recursive loops calling upon themselves as the states around us change. In other words, we’re not nodes on the network, we are the network. Humans can make decisions by filling in the blanks. No one has to program us, and we can change our minds given new circumstances and situations. The human learning system is truly complex and dynamic. Nourish this by stretching beyond your comfort zone. Study a new language, or an entire field, to keep things fresh. Shake up your life on a regular basis to expand your ability to process information.

4.     Read “The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know is Possible,” by Charles Eisenstein. Sure, you could read books on the singularity, AI and technology by leading experts, but as long as you still think the future is bleak, grim and full of starving, jobless people, that's exactly what we'll get. We need to open our own hearts and minds to a new possibility, a new story of how humans work, love and live on the Earth. Charles’ book is a fantastic place to start. Better yet, taking the time to read this book is also an investment in your creativity and judgment, making you more competitive in the robot workplace.

5.     Get to know yourself. What do you hate? Whom do you mistrust? What parts of humanity are beneath you? What belief systems do you mock? What do you call evil? We often spend time thinking about what we like and saying that defines us, but in reality it’s the things that make us want to run away that really make the difference. The things we disdain color our ability to co-create. They block us from our potential. Robots and artificial intelligences won’t have this issue. Unless we give them personalities, theirs will be a clean logic. Nothing is loved and nothing is hated. Hate is what makes us act out, hurt and horde. If we want to thrive we’ll need to clean up our emotional state, so that we can join with technology to shape a cleaner, more beautiful world, rather than be dominated by it—and abused in entirely new ways.

The goal here is to become resilient to a changing marketplace that no one entirely understands at this point. But we’ve been here before. In the mid 1800’s no one could truly understand what the invention of the factory would do to shape our world. Entirely new skills and economies were created. It’s about to happen again. Rather than fall into ruin, we can be prepared to take part in the story, in whatever way possible, even if the plot line isn’t yet clear. What is clear is that similar to Charles Dickens’ time, the chance for many to suffer during this change is high. Unlike Charles Dickens’ time, we have the ability to join together and communicate our goals and dreams as one. Let’s use our technology to inspire one another to evolve past our fear and hate, and be worthy of the world we’re building.

Can You Teach a Computer Common Sense? .PART TWO.

I love software design. Society has been forever changed by those who have created great software products housed in machines that fit easily within the palms of our hands, and have thus seamlessly become an important part of our lives. For example, the Smartphone and the human are now almost inseparable. But are these machines truly "intelligent?" A reader recently sent me a great article from the New Yorker by Gary Marcus about Hector Levesque, a University of Toronto computer scientist who studies AI and the questions used to determine the intelligence of our machines. Marcus writes,

"Hector Levesque thinks his computer is stupid—and that yours is, too. Siri and Google’s voice searches may be able to understand canned sentences like “What movies are showing near me at seven o’clock?” but what about questions—“Can an alligator run the hundred-metre hurdles?”—that nobody has heard before? Any ordinary adult can figure that one out. (No. Alligators can’t hurdle.) But if you type the question into Google, you get information about Florida Gators track and field. Other search engines, like Wolfram Alpha, can’t answer the question, either. Watson, the computer system that won “Jeopardy!,” likely wouldn’t do much better."

As I mentioned in Can You Teach A Computer Common Sense, Part One, software is only as good as the programmers are, therefore if the goal of the next generation of AI is to be able to work seamlessly within society, engineers will need to go beyond the limited view of how things should work and focus on how things will work once in the customer's hands.

 In his article, Marcus writes that Levesque thinks the Turing Test is useless because it's too easy to game. "Every year, a number of machines compete in the challenge for real...But the winners aren’t genuinely intelligent; instead, they tend to be more like parlor tricks, and they’re almost inherently deceitful. If a person asks a machine “How tall are you?” and the machine wants to win the Turing test, it has no choice but to confabulate. It has turned out, in fact, that the winners tend to use bluster and misdirection far more than anything approximating true intelligence…The fakery involved in most efforts at beating the Turing test is emblematic: the real mission of A.I. ought to be building intelligence, not building software that is specifically tuned toward fixing some sort of arbitrary test."

Perhaps creating intelligent software isn't about meeting the requirements set out in some documentation. Perhaps it requires a desire on the creator's part to understand human behavior in order to design software that can begin to think like a human--that is to be able to link unrelated possibilities and come up with an answer. Or in other words, perhaps we need to teach AI how to solve rational problems with an irrational mind.

When I was a newly minted Lead Engineer, I was given the job of managing Maintenance On the Line, aka MOL, for my first assignment. Every engineer's nightmare. Except for me, it wasn't. I loved working with the customers and understanding how my product interacted within a system. More than that, I found the process of defect management and repair enlightening. A few months on the job and I'd learned more about software design than all four years in college combined.

Time after time, the software would glitch in the field due to a failure on the designer's part to consider how the software might work in a real world environment. Over the course of managing the MOL team for my product, I met a lot of software engineers. The ones that still stand out in my mind were the ones who understood the entire system--how every "box" worked within the system, what happened if part of the system went down, and how a human would use the system on a daily basis.

Like Mace Windu in "Star Wars," they understood the system's "shatterpoints"--opportunities where key events came together that just might destroy the way the entire system functioned. There's no way to predict every possible failure and use case, but those engineers and programmers who understood how humans interacted with their products, wrote the most resilient software. Even more important, when an issue came up in any byte of code, these same engineers could fix it immediately--watching them debug was like attending a Vegas show; flashy, exciting and entertaining. I'm not kidding, it was mastery.

To be truly of service, the next generation of AI needs to be designed and coded by those who see the "shatterpoints" of human interaction with technology. For AI to enhance our lives, it can't be designed by engineers who simply follow instructions and code to the requirements without considering the various ways humans might use it. Imagine an implant monitoring nanobots in your blood stream stuck in some glitch because you had Indian food for the first time and it didn't recognize the effects of curry on your glucose levels, because it wasn't in the requirements to do so! 

This isn't work for the lighthearted, for it requires an interest in humanity, as well as software. When people and technology meet, the magic begins.

Computers can have common sense, if their creators have common sense. AI can serve humanity, if software designers and architects also serve humanity. It's the duty of the mothers and fathers of AI to embrace the world wide webs of both of human nature and technology, in all of their nuances and beauty. Common sense isn't simple logic, it's understanding that when technology and life meet, there are complex consequences.