“Asking why teaches you to see how things got to be the way they are. Asking why also puts us on the hook – it means that we’re also open to being asked why, and it means that at some level, we’re now responsible for doing something about the status quo.” | Seth Godin, The Practice
The reason this is so is because a good discussion about “why” inevitably leads us to ask – “why not?”
And, the “why not” question is the precursor to change.
How much we have to say when making an argument – in both written and verbal communication – is often inversely proportional to the depth of our thinking on the subject.
Clarity flows from rigorous thought and examination. And, brevity flows clarity.
As a general rule, there are very few things that move the needle on things that matter.
Investing upfront to ensure they’re the right set of things has a very high return-on-investment. So, pick them with care and consideration.
And, where possible, aim to work on those with people you like and respect.
Sometimes, it is just that simple.
But, of course, simple is hard.
Proteins are fascinating. They are long and complex molecules that perform numerous tasks in the body like building tissue/muscles and fighting disease. Their purpose is dictated by their structure – which folds like Origami into complex and irregular shapes.
Understanding protein structure would enable researchers to synthesize proteins that can do all sorts of tasks. We could design better medicines, create virus-resistant crops, or break down waste.
But, protein’s complexity made it very hard for researchers to understand a protein’s shape. Determining a protein’s structure sometimes was the fruit of an entire researcher’s P.hD. If they got lucky. So, after decades of work on protein structure, we only had 180,000 protein structures in the public domain.
Then, Deepmind announced that their AI was able to product accurate predictions of DNA structure. They then released 350,000 protein structures across 20 organisms – for free. And, the kicker was that these structures include predictions for 98% of all human proteins.
That. is. insane.
This is such a giant step that it will take a few years for researchers to make sense of this data and figure out practical uses. But, make no mistake, this is a massive leap.
In ten years, we’re going to look back at two leaps over these two years – with the coming of mRNA and the advent of protein folding – as leaps that changed medicine.
I loved this note from Deepmind’s CEO – “From the beginning, this is what we set out to do: to make breakthroughs in AI, test that on games like Go and Atari, [and] apply that to real-world problems, to see if we can accelerate scientific breakthroughs and use those to benefit humanity.”
Well played.
Happiness = (Time spent being grateful for what we have) / (Time spent thinking about what we don’t have)
Implications of this theory:
(1) The more the gratitude, the more the happiness. This follows the idea that it isn’t happy people who are thankful, it is thankful people who are happy.
(2) Reducing time spent thinking about what we don’t have can have an infinite impact on our happiness if we can bring it down to zero.
Nitin sent along this article about the health benefits of strawberry leaves a few months ago.
He explained that he, like most people, used to remove the leaves of the strawberry before eating it. After he learnt about all the antioxidants in the leaves, he now eats them whole and has grown to love how they taste.
It got me thinking about how I learnt to remove strawberry leaves. No one taught me how to eat a strawberry. At least not that I remember.
I must have seen someone else remove the leaves at some point and just assumed that’s the way a strawberry must be eaten. And, now that I’ve become aware of the assumption, it has changed how I look at the leaves of a strawberry.
So goes the process of learning. We start with some assumptions about ourselves and the world. Someone or something makes us aware of them and then helps us understand that we can change them. And, if we choose to do so, we learn.
It isn’t easy to change assumptions. It is much easier to attempt to find information that confirms them.
That’s what makes learning hard.
Why for instance should I be called “Professor Cowen,” but few people would address the person fixing their toilet as “Plumber Jones”?
For a long time I have insisted that my graduate students call me “Tyler.” My goal has been to encourage them to think of themselves as peer researchers who might someday prove me wrong, rather than viewing me as an authority figure who is handing down truth.
This post from Tyler Cowen about titles resonated.
There’s something about forced titles that annoys me. I don’t like introducing myself with my title because it signals a place in the organization. And I abhor terms like mentor and mentee.
It is an idea a good friend shared with me a decade ago when I asked him if he’d be my mentor. “Let’s just be friends” he said. If he was wise enough, he reasoned, he’d share perspective that was useful. He didn’t need to be called a mentor for that.
Exactly right.
But of course it won’t.
Acting surprised or cursing our luck isn’t useful. There’s no fighting this. It’s like fighting gravity – good luck with that.
The better approach is to simply expect that to be the norm and allow ourselves to be (positively) surprised when things do work.
We’ll make more progress that way.
Form Energy, a Boston-based startup, announced a fascinating breakthrough in battery technology recently (WSJ article – paywalled). They claim to have built an inexpensive “Iron-air” battery.
Iron-air batteries are attractive for several reasons. We have plenty of iron and know how to extract it cheaply ($200/ton of ore compared to $12-15k per ton for Lithium salts).
While these will be too heavy for electric cars, they will help solve a much bigger problem – energy storage on the electric grid. These batteries will enable us to store large amounts of renewable electricity. Current estimates are that Form’s batteries should be able to operate at around $20 per kWh, sufficient to compete with fossil fuel systems.
The progress on this one felt is similar in nature to the likes of mRNA. It is technology that has been in development for nearly 50 years. But, progress in nanotechnology and catalysts have enabled the path for Form.
This could be huge. Fingers crossed.
(H/T: Azeem’s Exponential View)
The problem is never the misstep. Missteps are guaranteed – it is impossible to learn to walk without making missteps.
The problem is our response to the misstep.
Missteps can either be demoralizing or a catalyst for further learning or growth.
Our choice.
A Learning a Day 