Lessons of Boston’s Big Dig

Friday, November 16th, 2007

Nicole Gelinas shares a number of Lessons of Boston’s Big Dig — including this lesson for future contractors:

Massachusetts, after taking a hands-off approach to its project’s risks during construction, is today using its most fearsome power — the power to indict — to push Bechtel and Parsons to settle with the state for hundreds of millions of dollars and avoid criminal charges. Massachusetts’s approach is a warning to future private-sector contractors and consultants: if something goes disastrously wrong with a project in which thousands of critical decisions were made with public and private cooperation, the state may use the criminal-justice system as a cudgel to deflect its own accountability.

Gelinas doesn’t just discuss what went wrong; she discusses all the things that went right, including some truly impressive engineering work:

In retrospect, it’s amazing how much went right after construction started in 1991. Over 14 years, Massachusetts, its consultants, and its contractors carved canyons under Boston while the city hummed above. They designed and built seven and a half miles of highway — 161 miles of separate lanes — more than half of them in tunnels. They built six interchanges and 200 bridges.

One of the innovations that made this work possible was the slurry wall, also used at New York’s World Trade Center, which allowed the state, as Salvucci puts it, to build huge underground tunnels “arthroscopically,” without pockmarking Boston with huge uncovered holes. The slurry wall, in effect, let Boston dig itself up without shutting itself down. The Big Dig’s general reliance on new technology was a major factor in one of the project officials’ biggest decisions: choosing a consortium made up of Bechtel and Parsons Brinckerhoff as the “management consultant.” Parsons was an expert in innovative urban tunneling dating to the early twentieth century, when it built New York City’s subways. Bechtel had constructed the Hoover Dam as well as most of modern Saudi Arabia, and had fabled political connections to accompany its engineering and logistics mystique. Caspar Weinberger and George Shultz, both in Reagan’s cabinet, were Bechtel men — though that connection hadn’t helped Salvucci at veto time.

One of the creative, audacious, and potentially disastrous things that Bechtel and Parsons, as well as the state’s contractors, did right on the Big Dig was jacking up the Central Artery — replacing the half-million-ton highway’s 69 support columns with temporary “underpinnings” so that contractors could remove the columns and make way for the tunnels. “Pinning the Artery” wasn’t the Big Dig’s only never-before-done feat. The striking Zakim Bridge — the one redesigned after community outrage — is the world’s widest cable-stayed asymmetrical bridge, expanding from eight lanes to ten to account for complicated traffic flow.

Elsewhere, underneath active railroad tracks, engineers froze ground too soft to withstand construction and pushed prebuilt tunnel sections through. They erected a huge temporary dam to dry out a basin in which to construct tunnel segments — and then flooded the basin, floating the segments and resinking them in their new underwater homes. They built underground bridges to hold up subways, threading highway tunnels above and below mass transit. And though insurance tables had predicted 40 serious accidents during the project, the Big Dig suffered only a quarter of that total, and three construction deaths — showing how much things had changed since, say, the 1870s, when raising the Brooklyn Bridge took 27 lives.

Why can’t we grow new energy?

Friday, November 16th, 2007

Why can’t we grow new energy?, Juan Enriquez asks:

Our current energy sources — coal, oil, gas — are ultimately derived from ancient plants — they’re “concentrated sunlight.” He asks, Can we learn from that process and accelerate it? Can we get to the point where we grow our own energy as efficiently as we grow wheat? (Less than a month after this talk, his company announced a process to do just that.)

Did a Comet Cause the Great Flood?

Friday, November 16th, 2007

Did a Comet Cause the Great Flood?:

Masse’s epiphany came while poring over Hawaiian oral histories regarding the goddess Pele and wondering what they might reveal about the lava flows that episodically destroy human settlements and create new tracts of land. He reasoned that even though the stories are often clouded by exaggerations and mystical explanations, many may refer to actual incidents. He tested his hypothesis by cross-checking carbon-14 ages for the lava flows against dates included in royal Hawaiian genealogies. The result: Several flows matched up with the specific reigns associated with them in the oral histories. Other myths, Masse theorizes, hold similar clues.

Masse’s biggest idea is that some 5,000 years ago, a 3-mile-wide ball of rock and ice swung around the sun and smashed into the ocean off the coast of Madagascar. The ensuing cataclysm sent a series of 600-foot-high tsunamis crashing against the world’s coastlines and injected plumes of superheated water vapor and aerosol particulates into the atmosphere. Within hours, the infusion of heat and moisture blasted its way into jet streams and spawned superhurricanes that pummeled the other side of the planet. For about a week, material ejected into the atmosphere plunged the world into darkness. All told, up to 80 percent of the world’s population may have perished, making it the single most lethal event in history.

Why, then, don’t we know about it? Masse contends that we do. Almost every culture has a legend about a great flood, and — with a little reading between the lines — many of them mention something like a comet on a collision course with Earth just before the disaster. The Bible describes a deluge for 40 days and 40 nights that created a flood so great that Noah was stuck in his ark for two weeks until the water subsided. In the Gilgamesh Epic, the hero of Mesopotamia saw a pillar of black smoke on the horizon before the sky went dark for a week. Afterward, a cyclone pummeled the Fertile Crescent and caused a massive flood. Myths recounted in indigenous South American cultures also tell of a great flood.

“These stories are all exactly what you would expect from the survivors of a celestial impact,” Masse says, leafing through 2,000-year-old drawings by Chinese astronomers that show comets of all shapes and sizes. “When a comet rounds the sun, oftentimes its tail is still being blown forward by the solar winds so that it actually precedes it. That is why so many descriptions of comets in mythology mention that they are wearing horns.” In India, he notes, a celestial fish described as “bright as a moonbeam,” with a horn on its head, warned of an epic flood that brought on a new age of man.

Among 175 flood myths, Masse found two of particular interest. A Hindu myth describes an alignment of the five bright planets that has happened only once in the last 5,000 years, according to computer simulations, and a Chinese story mentions that the great flood occurred at the end of the reign of Empress Nu Wa. Cross-checking historical records with astronomical data, Masse came up with a date for his event: May 10, 2807 B.C.

The notion of looking to the sky for omens starts to sound like practical advice from our ancestors.

NASA also has a page on Comets in Ancient Cultures:

When people living in ancient cultures looked up, comets were the most remarkable objects in the night sky. Comets were unlike any other object in the night sky. Whereas most celestial bodies travel across the skies at regular, predictable intervals, so regular that constellations could be mapped and predicted, comets’ movements have always seemed very erratic and unpredictable. This led people in many cultures to believe that the gods dictated their motions and were sending them as a message.

What were the gods trying to say? Some cultures read the message by the images that they saw upon looking at the comet. For example, to some cultures the tail of the comet gave it the appearance of the head of a woman, with long flowing hair behind her. This sorrowful symbol of mourning was understood to mean the gods that had sent the comet to earth were displeased.

Others thought that the elongated comet looked like a fiery sword blazing across the night sky, a traditional sign of war and death. Such a message from the gods could only mean that their wrath would soon be unleashed onto the people of the land. Such ideas struck fear into those who saw comets dart across the sky. The likeness of the comet, though, was not the only thing that inspired fear.

Ancient cultural legends also played a hand in inspiring a terrible dread of these celestial nomads. The Roman prophecies, the “Sibylline Oracles,” spoke of a “great conflagration from the sky, falling to earth,” while the most ancient known mythology, the Babylonian “Epic of Gilgamesh,” described fire, brimstone, and flood with the arrival of a comet.

German broadside of comets circa 1600s Rabbi Moses Ben Nachman, a Jew living in Spain, wrote of God taking two stars from Khima and throwing them at the earth in order to begin the great flood. Yakut legend in ancient Mongolia called comets “the daughter of the devil,” and warned of destruction, storm and frost, whenever she approaches the earth. Stories associating comets with such terrible imagery are at the base of so many cultures on Earth, and fuel a dread that followed comet sightings throughout history.

Chinese comet records still exist, some woven into silk:

Unlike their Western counterparts, Chinese astronomers kept extensive records on the appearances, paths, and disappearances of hundreds of comets. Extensive comet atlases have been found dating back to the Han Dynasty, which describe comets as “long-tailed pheasant stars” or “broom stars” and associate the different cometary forms with different disasters.

Although the Chinese also regarded comets as “vile stars,” their extensive records allowed later astronomers to determine the true nature of comets.

Andrew Lawler discusses What To Do Before the Asteroid Strikes — because it is coming, sooner or later:

In 2004, as a massive tsunami roiled through the Indian Ocean killing hundreds of thousands of people, a dozen or so scientists quietly confronted an impending disaster potentially even more lethal. They had inside intelligence that a chunk of rock and metal, roughly 1,300 feet wide, was hurtling toward a possible collision with the most populated swath of Earth — Europe, India, and Southeast Asia. Furiously crunching numbers on their computers, the researchers put the odds of impact in the year 2029 at exactly those of hitting the number in a game of roulette: 1 in 37.

“We usually deal with one chance in a million,” recalls Steven Chesley at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. “This was absolutely extraordinary — I didn’t expect to see anything like it in my career.” By the end of the day on December 27, 2004, to the relief of the observers, archival data turned up trajectory information that rendered the odds of a collision nil. Nonetheless, in 2029 the asteroid, dubbed Apophis — derived from the Egyptian god Apep, the destroyer who dwells in eternal darkness — will zoom closer to Earth than the world’s communications satellites do. And April 13, 2036, it will return — this time with a 1-in-45,000 chance of hitting somewhere on a line stretching from the Pacific Ocean near California to Central America.

Because Apophis was discovered during one of the world’s greatest natural disasters, the worries about the impact went largely unnoticed. But that tense day, December 26, 2004, stunned the small group of astronomers who dutifully detect and plot trajectories of hundreds of thousands of the millions of chunks of rock whizzing around the solar system. Though too small to end civilization — unlike the asteroid that may have doomed the dinosaurs — Apophis could pack a punch comparable to a large nuclear weapon. Traveling at 28,000 miles per hour, it would heat up as it passed through Earth’s atmosphere, turning the dark rock into a fiery sun as it arced across the sky. Then it would either explode just aboveground — as one most likely did in 1908, leveling a vast forest in the Tunguska region of Siberia — or gouge a crater 20 times its size. “If it hit London, there would be no London,” says Apollo 9 astronaut Rusty Schweickart, who had closely followed the discussion of the potential 2029 impact. Slamming into the ocean, Apophis could create a tsunami dwarfing the one that killed more than 200,000 people around Indonesia.

Of course, I can’t write about a comet hitting the earth without mentioning Lucifer’s Hammer and the challenges of bootstrapping society.

Oil God and Other Serious Games

Friday, November 16th, 2007

In a recent NPR interview, Ian Bogost of Persuasive Games walked his host through Oil God, which explores the relationship between gas prices, geopolitics, and oil profits:

You are an Oil God! Wreak havoc on the world’s oil supplies by unleashing war and disaster. Bend governments and economies to your will to alter trade practices. Your goal? Double consumer gasoline prices in five years using whatever means necessary.

Ian Bogost gave a longer interview back in June.

Virulent form of cold virus spreads in U.S.

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

Virulent form of cold virus spreads in U.S.:

A new and virulent strain of adenovirus, which frequently causes the common cold, has spread in parts of the United States, killing 10 people and putting dozens into hospitals, U.S. health officials said on Thursday.

A U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report detailed cases of people ill since May 2006 with a strain of the virus called adenovirus 14 in New York, Oregon, Washington state and Texas.

20-Sided Parenting

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

Wired‘s Geekdad, Jacob Russell — actually, he’s just one of the column writers — recommends some 20-Sided Parenting:

One of the aspects of my geekism, that I’ve never regretted, is my love for role-playing games. No, not MMORPGs. Not Playstation. Good ol’ fashioned paper, pencil, and polyhedron dice role-playing games. Aside from the fact that they promote literacy, social interaction, ethics, and math skills in kids, they’re lots of fun. If you’ve never introduced your kids to RPGs, the holidays are a great time to start.

Is Raising Kids a Fool’s Game?

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

Is Raising Kids a Fool’s Game?:

In her 1994 book Pricing the Priceless Child (Princeton University Press), Princeton University sociology professor Viviana Zelizer describes how in the 19th century, children were “economic assets” that contributed to farm work and other important tasks. Then, during the early 20th century, the U.S. established laws removing many children from hard labor, sparking the “rise of the economically useless and emotionally priceless child,” Zelizer says.

Planning Fallacy

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

When I recently discussed project management — in Critical Chain 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 — I touched on the planning fallacy:

A bigger issue still is that people are notoriously bad at estimating task durations, and they are notoriously overconfident in their ability to estimate. The optimistic and pessimistic estimates are supposed to book-end a range that covers almost all possibilities — 99 percent — but far more than one percent of tasks fall outside those estimated ranges.

Eliezer Yudkowsky discusses the Planning Fallacy in much greater detail:

Buehler et. al. (1995) asked their students for estimates of when they (the students) thought they would complete their personal academic projects. Specifically, the researchers asked for estimated times by which the students thought it was 50%, 75%, and 99% probable their personal projects would be done. Would you care to guess how many students finished on or before their estimated 50%, 75%, and 99% probability levels?
  • 13% of subjects finished their project by the time they had assigned a 50% probability level;
  • 19% finished by the time assigned a 75% probability level;
  • and only 45% (less than half!) finished by the time of their 99% probability level.

As Buehler et. al. (2002) wrote, “The results for the 99% probability level are especially striking: Even when asked to make a highly conservative forecast, a prediction that they felt virtually certain that they would fulfill, students’ confidence in their time estimates far exceeded their accomplishments.”

It gets worse:

A clue to the underlying problem with the planning algorithm was uncovered by Newby-Clark et. al. (2000), who found that:
  • Asking subjects for their predictions based on realistic “best guess” scenarios; or
  • Asking subjects for their hoped-for “best case” scenarios…

…produced indistinguishable results.

So what’s the solution?

Unlike most cognitive biases, we know a good debiasing heuristic for the planning fallacy. It won’t work for messes on the scale of the Denver International Airport, but it’ll work for a lot of personal planning, and even some small-scale organizational stuff. Just use an “outside view” instead of an “inside view”.

People tend to generate their predictions by thinking about the particular, unique features of the task at hand, and constructing a scenario for how they intend to complete the task — which is just what we usually think of as planning. When you want to get something done, you have to plan out where, when, how; figure out how much time and how much resource is required; visualize the steps from beginning to successful conclusion. All this is the “inside view”, and it doesn’t take into account unexpected delays and unforeseen catastrophes. As we saw before, asking people to visualize the “worst case” still isn’t enough to counteract their optimism — they don’t visualize enough Murphyness.

The outside view is when you deliberately avoid thinking about the special, unique features of this project, and just ask how long it took to finish broadly similar projects in the past. This is counterintuitive, since the inside view has so much more detail — there’s a temptation to think that a carefully tailored prediction, taking into account all available data, will give better results.

But experiment has shown that the more detailed subjects’ visualization, the more optimistic (and less accurate) they become. Buehler et. al. (2002) asked an experimental group of subjects to describe highly specific plans for their Christmas shopping — where, when, and how. On average, this group expected to finish shopping more than a week before Christmas. Another group was simply asked when they expected to finish their Christmas shopping, with an average response of 4 days. Both groups finished an average of 3 days before Christmas.

Likewise, Buehler et. al. (2002), reporting on a cross-cultural study, found that Japanese students expected to finish their essays 10 days before deadline. They actually finished 1 day before deadline. Asked when they had previously completed similar tasks, they responded, “1 day before deadline.” This is the power of the outside view over the inside view.

A similar finding is that experienced outsiders, who know less of the details, but who have relevant memory to draw upon, are often much less optimistic and much more accurate than the actual planners and implementers.

So there is a fairly reliable way to fix the planning fallacy, if you’re doing something broadly similar to a reference class of previous projects. Just ask how long similar projects have taken in the past, without considering any of the special properties of this project. Better yet, ask an experienced outsider how long similar projects have taken.

You’ll get back an answer that sounds hideously long, and clearly reflects no understanding of the special reasons why this particular task will take less time. This answer is true. Deal with it.

Surfer dude stuns physicists with theory of everything

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

Surfer dude stuns physicists with theory of everything:

Garrett Lisi, 39, has a doctorate but no university affiliation and spends most of the year surfing in Hawaii, where he has also been a hiking guide and bridge builder (when he slept in a jungle yurt).

In winter, he heads to the mountains near Lake Tahoe, Nevada, where he snowboards. “Being poor sucks,” Lisi says. “It’s hard to figure out the secrets of the universe when you’re trying to figure out where you and your girlfriend are going to sleep next month.”

Despite this unusual career path, his proposal is remarkable because, by the arcane standards of particle physics, it does not require highly complex mathematics.

Even better, it does not require more than one dimension of time and three of space, when some rival theories need ten or even more spatial dimensions and other bizarre concepts. And it may even be possible to test his theory, which predicts a host of new particles, perhaps even using the new Large Hadron Collider atom smasher that will go into action near Geneva next year.
[...]
The new theory reported today in New Scientist has been laid out in an online paper entitled “An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything” by Lisi, who completed his doctorate in theoretical physics in 1999 at the University of California, San Diego.

He has high hopes that his new theory could provide what he says is a “radical new explanation” for the three decade old Standard Model, which weaves together three of the four fundamental forces of nature: the electromagnetic force; the strong force, which binds quarks together in atomic nuclei; and the weak force, which controls radioactive decay.

The reason for the excitement is that Lisi’s model also takes account of gravity, a force that has only successfully been included by a rival and highly fashionable idea called string theory, one that proposes particles are made up of minute strings, which is highly complex and elegant but has lacked predictions by which to do experiments to see if it works.
[...]
Lisi’s inspiration lies in the most elegant and intricate shape known to mathematics, called E8 – a complex, eight-dimensional mathematical pattern with 248 points first found in 1887, but only fully understood by mathematicians this year after workings, that, if written out in tiny print, would cover an area the size of Manhattan.

E8 encapsulates the symmetries of a geometric object that is 57-dimensional and is itself is 248-dimensional. Lisi says “I think our universe is this beautiful shape.”

What makes E8 so exciting is that Nature also seems to have embedded it at the heart of many bits of physics. One interpretation of why we have such a quirky list of fundamental particles is because they all result from different facets of the strange symmetries of E8.

Lisi’s breakthrough came when he noticed that some of the equations describing E8′s structure matched his own. “My brain exploded with the implications and the beauty of the thing,” he tells New Scientist. “I thought: ‘Holy crap, that’s it!’”

What Lisi had realised was that he could find a way to place the various elementary particles and forces on E8′s 248 points. What remained was 20 gaps which he filled with notional particles, for example those that some physicists predict to be associated with gravity.

Physicists have long puzzled over why elementary particles appear to belong to families, but this arises naturally from the geometry of E8, he says. So far, all the interactions predicted by the complex geometrical relationships inside E8 match with observations in the real world. “How cool is that?” he says.

The crucial test of Lisi’s work will come only when he has made testable predictions. Lisi is now calculating the masses that the 20 new particles should have, in the hope that they may be spotted when the Large Hadron Collider starts up.

“The theory is very young, and still in development,” he told the Telegraph. “Right now, I’d assign a low (but not tiny) likelyhood to this prediction.

“For comparison, I think the chances are higher that LHC will see some of these particles than it is that the LHC will see superparticles, extra dimensions, or micro black holes as predicted by string theory. I hope to get more (and different) predictions, with more confidence, out of this E8 Theory over the next year, before the LHC comes online.”

Read An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything.

Game Audience Models

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

Chris Bateman, author of 21st Century Game Design, sees four play styles gamers fit into:

  • Type 1 Conqueror play style is associated with challenge and the emotional payoff of Fiero — triumph over adversity. This correlates with what Nicole Lazarro has called “Hard fun”. We associate Type 1 play with players who aim to utterly defeat games they play — they finish games they start.
  • Type 2 Manager play style is associated with mastery and systems. Victory for people preferring this play style seems to be the sign that they have acquired the necessary skills, not a goal in and of itself. They may not finish many games that they start playing.
  • Type 3 Wanderer play style is associated with experience and identity. This correlates somewhat with what Nicole Lazarro has called “Easy fun”. Challenge is not especially desired, but may be tolerated — what they enjoy is unique and interesting experiences. Stories and mimicry are key draws.
  • Type 4 Participant play style is associated with emotions and involvement. It connects with what Nicole Lazarro calls “The People Factor”. Participants seem happiest when they are playing with people, but they also enjoy play which is rooted in emotion. Any game which allows the player an emotional stake is a potential Type 4 game.

The play-style test easily pegged me as a manager.

The distinctions between hardcore and casual gamers were not quite what Bateman expected:

Unexpectedly, we found these patterns spread across the Hardcore and the Casual market segments — that is, those players who buy and play many games versus those who buy and play few games. This, we had not anticipated. The Hardcore clusters were universally more Introverted and Intuitive (in Myers-Briggs terms), while the Casual clusters were generally more biased towards Sensing and (to some relative extent) Extroversion.

Why superheroes always win

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

New Scientist explains why superheroes always win:

Physicist Pablo Gleiser of the National Council for Scientific and Technical Research in Buenos Aires, Argentina, studied the social web within the fictional universe of Marvel comics, comprising 6486 characters in 12,942 issues. Taking two characters to be linked if they appeared in the same issue, he found a superficially realistic social network. A small fraction of characters – notably the superheroes themselves – had far more links than most others, acting as key social hubs. “The Marvel universe looks almost like a real social network,” says Gleiser (www.arxiv.org/abs/0708.2410).

However, even prominent arch-villains always played marginal social roles at the periphery of the network, says Gleiser.

(Hat tip to Collision Detection.)

Modern Marvels: Environmental Tech 2

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

The most recent episode of Modern Marvels, Environmental Tech 2, looks at a number of “sustainable” technologies.

One of the smaller, simpler products reviewed is the NatureMill automatic indoor composter, which serves as a kitchen garbage can:

NatureMill uses 5 kWh/month of energy — or about $0.50/month — less than a garbage truck would burn in diesel fuel to haul the same waste.

And, of course, it provides fertilizer for your home garden.

PacWind‘s vertical wind turbine also got plenty of coverage, with a segment on Jay Leno’s Green Garage:

But for the 17,000-sq-ft. garage, which uses, um, quite a bit of energy each month, the PacWind team recommended their brand-new, top-of-the-line Delta II turbine. It can produce 10 kw at around 28 mph and has a cut-in wind speed of 6 mph. These turbines don’t need a braking mechanism and can self-start at very low wind speeds — something similar designs in the past could never do.

As the Popular Mechanics video explains, these new turbines rely on rare-earth magnets, which are much more powerful than the magnets we all played with as children.

The episode also looked at a potentially enormous project by EnviroMission of Australia to build a solar tower, or what used to be known as a solar chimney:

The power station will be based on German designed Solar Tower technology. It will look like an enormous greenhouse canopy with a very tall hollow ventilation Tower located at its centre.

The sun’s radiation will be collected and trapped under the transparent canopy, creating a massive force of air heated to around 35°C greater than the ambient temperature. The laws of physics will make this air move at 15 metres per second towards the cold air at the top of the Tower located in centre of the canopy. The powerful updraft will force the rising air to pass through large turbines positioned at the base of the Tower. The movement of the hot wind through the turbines will generate up to 200MW of clean, emission free electricity — enough electricity for 200,000 typical Australian homes.

Addendum: I neglected to mention one other interesting technology, a towing sail from SkySails, which can cut diesel fuel expenses by 10 to 35 percent, because the kite-like sail rides above the ship, where the wind is stronger.

For Memory to Last, Cats Need to Do, Not Just See

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

For Memory to Last, Cats Need to Do, Not Just See.

(Hat tip to Collision Detection.)

How I Work: Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO

Wednesday, November 14th, 2007

Fortune‘s latest How I Work column shares some hints from Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, the legendary Palo Alto design consultancy:

Control e-mail: I hate PDAs. When I’m in a meeting with someone, I want to be with them. I get more insight if I’m engaged in the moment. I consciously use a phone that doesn’t have a full keyboard on it. Now I’m using the Nokia n95. It takes great pictures.

Clear your mind: I love music. I think I have every generation of iPod ever made. I carry a Nano when I go running. It has a couple hundred songs, not much, and I always have it on shuffle. I use the Nike+ [a wireless pedometer channeled through the iPod Nano] when I run, which is about three times a week for an hour. I like the end result. I travel much better when I am fitter, and I find I have better ideas.

Take good notes: I always carry a Moleskine single-lined five-by-seven-inch notebook. I replace it when it gets full — about every six months. I have a half-dozen or so now. They’re on a shelf in my office in Palo Alto. I’ll use any pen, but I prefer my Pilot Bravo black one. It’s good for writing, sketching, and drawing. I go through the finished ones and highlight the big ideas so they don’t get lost.

Flee your time zone: I like when I’m out of sync timewise with San Francisco — especially in Europe. I do e-mail in the morning and forget about it the rest of the day. It gives me time to think. When you’re traveling, it’s important to be in the place you’re in. I’ve had wonderful trips where I’m learning about innovation and design, and if I’m answering e-mail, I’m not in the place.

Try to stage accidents: I loved the library at the Royal College of Art because it didn’t have a logical system, at least none I could figure. When looking for a book on Islamic decoration, you’d find it by one on seashells. And you’d find all sorts of things with it. That’s the value of an accident. The more you encourage serendipity — say, by bringing together different people — the more you’ll get rich answers. The more you put a group together that sees the world the same way, the more conventional the outcome. We try to put teams together that have varied backgrounds — not just disciplines, but life experiences.

Unleash a Craze for Girls

Tuesday, November 13th, 2007



Peter Adkison, of Magic: The Gathering and D&D fame, hopes to unleash a craze for girls this time — with ponies, unicorns, and secret codes:

He has already introduced America to a boy-oriented trading card game (Magic: The Gathering) and one with unisex appeal (Pokémon). Now, Peter D. Adkison is hoping to find new success with a line of collectible cards aimed at girls.

This time the product may be a tougher sell because girls in the desired age group — 6 to 12 — have never driven a trading card craze.

The cards, called Bella Sara, are clearly more girl-friendly than the latest set of hockey cards or Dragon Ball Z cards. They have pastel colors, fanciful pictures of unicorns and virtual horses to groom, along with girl-power sayings like “Have the courage to trust yourself” and “Use your love to bring peace to the world.”

But history is against Mr. Adkison. “Is it possible a trading card product could catch on primarily with girls?” said Alan Narz, a columnist for Card Trade magazine. “Yes. Has it ever been done? No.”