When I was younger, I took several courses in systems design. I heard a lecture, and I do not remember the source, in which the speaker emphatically said that if you want to change the output, then you need to control the inputs. In his view, systems were based on this simple concept. There was this black box of hidden mystery, which was the system itself. The user  and consumer populations did not need to know about the interior of the black box. Rather the greatest impact to those populations would be what the required to input versus what was output. Focus on the streams. This is an older way to view systems, because back in the early days of computing, this was effectively true. You input data, you got a result back. Systems have got much more complicated since then and the interplay between subsystems has certainly made this a less applicable model.

However, there is still some truth to the concept. Nowadays we use different metaphors to create models for how systems function, but the black box concept is interesting and surprisingly powerful. Imagine if you will that your mind, body, and everything else going on with you is a black box as well. Imagine that you are no longer in that black box, but rather a remote observer of your own system. What would you have available to analyze? You would have the inputs and outputs. You could see what was going into “you” and what was going out of “you.” Now from a food consumption perspective, this would be a rather disgusting interpretation of the black box theory. However, it would still apply. If you want to know what is wrong with your nutritional “system” then take a look at the inputs. What result does the input produce? If you do not like the result, then the only thing you really have control over is to change the inputs. So extend that to your entire life. What is going into your black box? This mysterious thing called you.

Can you take a dispassionate view of yourself as a ‘black box’?

What are your inputs? Can you identify them? Who and what is providing input into your system? If you could look at yourself from afar, could you actually view this stream of input (data) flowing into you from large corporate entities? Netflix, Disney, Comcast, Newscorp? Would you see how the information they control flow into you? Would you see the influence certain people have on you? Family, Friends, Work Colleagues, Congregations, and other People? Who is providing you input? Where is it coming from? Back to the black box theory. If you want to control the outcome, you have to control the inputs. We can have the greatest intentions in the world, but when you have a constant flow of bad intentions flowing into you, even the strongest minds will fail. Perhaps you should consider stemming the flow of nonsense, or perhaps even influence trying to manipulate you to buy, consume or believe a certain way.

Anyway, not sure if the black box theory is relevant to modern systems design, but I think it absolutely can help us see the truth of our own situation. If we have no control over the inputs in our life, then we will no control over the outcome.

Guy Reams

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Share the Post:

Recent Blogs

Day 309 – The Price Tag of Automation

The author recounts his frustrating experience with home automation after Google abandoned its Nest architecture, leading him to build his own system. He highlights the significant time and effort required for maintenance and the eventual abandonment of his automation efforts due to the high ‘economic life’ cost. However, with the advent of AI, the cost and effort of automation have decreased, making it more feasible and renewing his interest in deploying future automations.

Read More

Day 308 – Speed is The Champion

This article explores the concept that speed often leads to success in various fields, from business to technology and sports. It argues that systems capable of rapid action, feedback, and adjustment tend to outperform those focused on avoiding errors. The author highlights the importance of fast feedback loops, citing John Boyd’s OODA loop and its application in AI systems. The piece also discusses the speed-accuracy tradeoff, noting that while speed can lead to more mistakes, these are often recoverable, and the compounding effect of rapid learning ultimately drives better results.

Read More

Day 307 – Iterative Could be Insufficient

This article explores the contrast between iterative and linear thinking, highlighting their respective strengths and weaknesses. It argues that while iterative thinking is beneficial in many fields, it can sometimes be an excuse for insufficient upfront planning, and proposes a hybrid approach for more robust decision-making.

Read More

Day 306 – The Zeigarnik Effect

The article explores the psychological relief gained from writing down unfinished tasks and concerns, linking it to the Zeigarnik Effect. It explains how externalizing thoughts through writing can free the mind from constantly remembering and worrying about unresolved issues, allowing for greater mental peace and the ability to conclude the day effectively.

Read More
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x