Discussion Forum > The Perfect Time Management App
Seraphim:
"Would the perfect task-management app be something like the "Manna" system in Marshall Brain's short story?"
... No. That's a complex routine-checklist app. An auto-pilot system for people in repetitive mundane jobs. It's useful for sequencing and ensuring follow-through on recurring tasks.
My experience speaking with some very "black and white" thinking, extremely-punctual, very driven business owners is that they want employees working in a driven, micro-managed, extremely-punctual way, and for every second they are being paid.
Basically they want themselves working for themselves (but without fear of competition).
That would be a reasonable desire if people were machines for whom energy levels never varied and emotions never came into play. In reality, employers who require every non-official-break-second be filled with tightly-sequenced work are neither reasonable nor realistic.
No doubt then that this Manna system would be a dream for those people and a nightmare for workers in repetitive jobs. Especially if there were no localized access to its settings by individual employees, that when adjusted, would add more "white-space" between tasks and not report back to headquarters how much "white-space" was used.
I don't see that happening though. I believe the system would be used to maximize efficiency, squeeze every drop of work from the workers, and if any worker used "too much" "white-space" they would get a cold "form email" letting them know they have received a warning for "slacking off" (read: being human) and may soon be fired.
So at the end of the day, it's not the robots or the system that's evil, they're just tools; it's the employers who are evil — for whom a love of money and lack of humanity has blinded to the future horror they have created. But that's okay — as long as the business owners or stock holders don't have to interact with employees and the cash keeps rolling in off the backs of miserable factory-farmed animals and quasi-robotic human-numbers, everything is golden! We're really not too far off from that with the busier automated fast-food chains.
If a tool or system can be used to increase profits at the expense of people, those who love money will find a way.
"If yes, then where is the value of creativity, inspiration, response to the needs of the moment, to the unanticipated?"
... All of that is outside the scope of the above routine-checklist auto-pilot system.
"If no, then what exactly DO we want a task management system to do?"
... I would like to say to a task management system:
• Here's what my friends want
• Here's what my work wants
• Here's what will keep me financially sound
• Here's what I want to do for fun
• Here's the routine things I must do to maintain my things and environment
• Here's my dreams, goals, and personal projects
• Here's all the messages to reply to, calls to make, appointments to schedule, future tasks to be reminded of, things to pick-up, drop-off, buy, return, and ship-out
• Here's all the research to be done
Now... according to a wheel of balance representing the major areas and roles of my life, the urgency level of each project or task according to the importance I've assigned and the time of day and current date, and the current level of balance in each area of my life (ie: finances area is severely neglected):
1. What is the most effective thing to do right now?
2. How long do I have with that task until it is no longer the most effective thing to be doing?
3. What is "likely" to be the next task in line after that?
4. If I enter in a new urgent task, does it qualify to replace my current task or be the next most effective task?
5. Show me all the areas of my life with their related tasks and visually graph the balance of each area like a bar chart and show me which one I'm currently working on and which area is the next most effective to work on.
"Would the perfect task-management app be something like the "Manna" system in Marshall Brain's short story?"
... No. That's a complex routine-checklist app. An auto-pilot system for people in repetitive mundane jobs. It's useful for sequencing and ensuring follow-through on recurring tasks.
My experience speaking with some very "black and white" thinking, extremely-punctual, very driven business owners is that they want employees working in a driven, micro-managed, extremely-punctual way, and for every second they are being paid.
Basically they want themselves working for themselves (but without fear of competition).
That would be a reasonable desire if people were machines for whom energy levels never varied and emotions never came into play. In reality, employers who require every non-official-break-second be filled with tightly-sequenced work are neither reasonable nor realistic.
No doubt then that this Manna system would be a dream for those people and a nightmare for workers in repetitive jobs. Especially if there were no localized access to its settings by individual employees, that when adjusted, would add more "white-space" between tasks and not report back to headquarters how much "white-space" was used.
I don't see that happening though. I believe the system would be used to maximize efficiency, squeeze every drop of work from the workers, and if any worker used "too much" "white-space" they would get a cold "form email" letting them know they have received a warning for "slacking off" (read: being human) and may soon be fired.
So at the end of the day, it's not the robots or the system that's evil, they're just tools; it's the employers who are evil — for whom a love of money and lack of humanity has blinded to the future horror they have created. But that's okay — as long as the business owners or stock holders don't have to interact with employees and the cash keeps rolling in off the backs of miserable factory-farmed animals and quasi-robotic human-numbers, everything is golden! We're really not too far off from that with the busier automated fast-food chains.
If a tool or system can be used to increase profits at the expense of people, those who love money will find a way.
"If yes, then where is the value of creativity, inspiration, response to the needs of the moment, to the unanticipated?"
... All of that is outside the scope of the above routine-checklist auto-pilot system.
"If no, then what exactly DO we want a task management system to do?"
... I would like to say to a task management system:
• Here's what my friends want
• Here's what my work wants
• Here's what will keep me financially sound
• Here's what I want to do for fun
• Here's the routine things I must do to maintain my things and environment
• Here's my dreams, goals, and personal projects
• Here's all the messages to reply to, calls to make, appointments to schedule, future tasks to be reminded of, things to pick-up, drop-off, buy, return, and ship-out
• Here's all the research to be done
Now... according to a wheel of balance representing the major areas and roles of my life, the urgency level of each project or task according to the importance I've assigned and the time of day and current date, and the current level of balance in each area of my life (ie: finances area is severely neglected):
1. What is the most effective thing to do right now?
2. How long do I have with that task until it is no longer the most effective thing to be doing?
3. What is "likely" to be the next task in line after that?
4. If I enter in a new urgent task, does it qualify to replace my current task or be the next most effective task?
5. Show me all the areas of my life with their related tasks and visually graph the balance of each area like a bar chart and show me which one I'm currently working on and which area is the next most effective to work on.
July 7, 2012 at 20:02 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Interesting. But if we are talking about individuals, rather than a team, don't we already have a computer telling us what to do next? It's called the brain and is actually in many ways immensely more powerful than Manna. This is the job it is designed to do, isn't it?
So the question is why would we need a relatively primitive electronic computer to task the immensely more powerful biological computer? And why would the immensely powerful biological computer find it necessary to design a much less powerful computer in order to tell it what to do next?
And how did it decide to design a computer to tell it what to do without having the computer to tell it what to do?
Odd, really.
So the question is why would we need a relatively primitive electronic computer to task the immensely more powerful biological computer? And why would the immensely powerful biological computer find it necessary to design a much less powerful computer in order to tell it what to do next?
And how did it decide to design a computer to tell it what to do without having the computer to tell it what to do?
Odd, really.
July 8, 2012 at 11:40 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
Did you get to the end of the book to the Vertebrane system? That's the answer to the Manna system and allows each person to live the life they want to live to the utmost.
The hero of the book uses the immensely sophisticated Vertebrane system to get back to a "Walden pond" type existence.
(I've always meant to look Walden pond up and see whether it's now been transformed into a theme park in the middle of some sprawling urban development.
Later: I checked and yes it has. Somehow I wish I hadn't done that!)
Did you get to the end of the book to the Vertebrane system? That's the answer to the Manna system and allows each person to live the life they want to live to the utmost.
The hero of the book uses the immensely sophisticated Vertebrane system to get back to a "Walden pond" type existence.
(I've always meant to look Walden pond up and see whether it's now been transformed into a theme park in the middle of some sprawling urban development.
Later: I checked and yes it has. Somehow I wish I hadn't done that!)
July 8, 2012 at 13:00 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
The hero ends up as "Peas" in "a community set up to mimic many of the features of the original town of Williamsburg". I don't quite catch how that relates to "Walden Pond" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walden_Pond .
July 9, 2012 at 6:54 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
Sabre
Compare:
"But with all of this technology available, I choose to live my life by setting time back 300 years and living a very simple, completely physical lifestyle. I grew my own food and built my own simple house with my own hands."
with
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived."
Compare:
"But with all of this technology available, I choose to live my life by setting time back 300 years and living a very simple, completely physical lifestyle. I grew my own food and built my own simple house with my own hands."
with
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived."
July 9, 2012 at 8:23 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Michael B -
Your comments triggered a memory of one of Bernie's ideas: The goal of a TM system should not be to "tell us what to do", but to provide a "dashboard" of all the decisions we currently need to make and tasks we currently need to complete, in such a way as to facilitate the best decision-making. It's still up to the individual to make the decisions and decide what to do with the items presented on the dashboard.
Your comments triggered a memory of one of Bernie's ideas: The goal of a TM system should not be to "tell us what to do", but to provide a "dashboard" of all the decisions we currently need to make and tasks we currently need to complete, in such a way as to facilitate the best decision-making. It's still up to the individual to make the decisions and decide what to do with the items presented on the dashboard.
July 9, 2012 at 21:33 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Mark Forster wrote:
<< So the question is why would we need a relatively primitive electronic computer to task the immensely more powerful biological computer? >>
Substitute the word "algorithm" for "computer" and that's basically what most of your systems are, Mark. In your systems, following the algorithm is designed to engage the brain's own power and characteristics and facilitate the best decision-making possible.
<< And why would the immensely powerful biological computer find it necessary to design a much less powerful computer in order to tell it what to do next? >>
Left to its own devices, the human brain doesn't always make the best decisions, and sometimes needs some kind of external discipline or system to help. Isn't that what all your systems are about?
A "computer" is basically a device that executes algorithms. I would argue the brain is more than that. Sometimes the algorithms that drive a computer (or a TM system like FV or AF) can be very helpful to a brain.
The "Manna" system isn't like this, of course. It doesn't engage the brain and try to bring out its best decision-making ability. The Manna system itself makes all the decisions.
If a Manna system were designed to engage the mind and help support the individual's decision-making process, wouldn't that be a useful kind of device?
<< So the question is why would we need a relatively primitive electronic computer to task the immensely more powerful biological computer? >>
Substitute the word "algorithm" for "computer" and that's basically what most of your systems are, Mark. In your systems, following the algorithm is designed to engage the brain's own power and characteristics and facilitate the best decision-making possible.
<< And why would the immensely powerful biological computer find it necessary to design a much less powerful computer in order to tell it what to do next? >>
Left to its own devices, the human brain doesn't always make the best decisions, and sometimes needs some kind of external discipline or system to help. Isn't that what all your systems are about?
A "computer" is basically a device that executes algorithms. I would argue the brain is more than that. Sometimes the algorithms that drive a computer (or a TM system like FV or AF) can be very helpful to a brain.
The "Manna" system isn't like this, of course. It doesn't engage the brain and try to bring out its best decision-making ability. The Manna system itself makes all the decisions.
If a Manna system were designed to engage the mind and help support the individual's decision-making process, wouldn't that be a useful kind of device?
July 9, 2012 at 21:42 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Mark Forster wrote:
<< Did you get to the end of the book to the Vertebrane system? That's the answer to the Manna system and allows each person to live the life they want to live to the utmost. >>
Yes, I read to the end. I think the author has a vision of freedom, such that the machines take care of all the necessities so as to allow the individuals complete freedom to pursue whatever they want. It's an old theme in science fiction, and I think it fails to address something fundamental about our human condition. The chief things restraining our freedom lie within our own souls: our passions, that "bridgehead of evil" that Solzhenitsyn describes, that is never really eradicated even in the best of people. Like one of the desert fathers said, the monk may leave the world, but nonetheless brings the world with him into the cave in the desert. The world has taken hold inside him. The true freedom is liberation from the passions, freedom from the internal demands that our sinful inclinations assert upon us. If we have attained such freedom of the soul, then all the external things that encroach upon us can never take away or impact our freedom in the least.
Evgeny Zamyatkin explored this theme in the short story, "Prosthetics". All the new arrivals had to check in their prosthetics when they were being processed into the gulag. One man laughed at the guards: he had no prosthetics. "What do you want from me? Do you want my soul? Well, you can't have it! Just try and take it." Even in prison, he was free.
I wish Marshall Brain had explored this theme a bit more, but he's more of a technology guy, not a "what are the spiritual implications" kind of guy. :-)
<< Did you get to the end of the book to the Vertebrane system? That's the answer to the Manna system and allows each person to live the life they want to live to the utmost. >>
Yes, I read to the end. I think the author has a vision of freedom, such that the machines take care of all the necessities so as to allow the individuals complete freedom to pursue whatever they want. It's an old theme in science fiction, and I think it fails to address something fundamental about our human condition. The chief things restraining our freedom lie within our own souls: our passions, that "bridgehead of evil" that Solzhenitsyn describes, that is never really eradicated even in the best of people. Like one of the desert fathers said, the monk may leave the world, but nonetheless brings the world with him into the cave in the desert. The world has taken hold inside him. The true freedom is liberation from the passions, freedom from the internal demands that our sinful inclinations assert upon us. If we have attained such freedom of the soul, then all the external things that encroach upon us can never take away or impact our freedom in the least.
Evgeny Zamyatkin explored this theme in the short story, "Prosthetics". All the new arrivals had to check in their prosthetics when they were being processed into the gulag. One man laughed at the guards: he had no prosthetics. "What do you want from me? Do you want my soul? Well, you can't have it! Just try and take it." Even in prison, he was free.
I wish Marshall Brain had explored this theme a bit more, but he's more of a technology guy, not a "what are the spiritual implications" kind of guy. :-)
July 9, 2012 at 21:50 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
"...he was free."
... Those were Illuminating observations. It reminds me of "chop wood, carry water".
"...he was free."
... Those were Illuminating observations. It reminds me of "chop wood, carry water".
July 10, 2012 at 2:00 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Seraphim:
<< Substitute the word "algorithm" for "computer" and that's basically what most of your systems are, Mark. In your systems, following the algorithm is designed to engage the brain's own power and characteristics and facilitate the best decision-making possible. >>
Well, that was kind of my point. But it's still a basic puzzle to me why my brain, which is so powerful in many ways, needs the crutches of a time management system. Why doesn't it just know what to do next?
I've always been pretty certain that the brain does in fact know exactly what the right thing to do would be. The reason I believe that is because it shows stress symptoms when it doesn't do it. That was the basic idea behind my "Resistance Principle".
So my question is why does the brain need to construct external systems in order to get it to do what it knows perfectly well it should be doing? Why can't it act as its own Manna?
<< Substitute the word "algorithm" for "computer" and that's basically what most of your systems are, Mark. In your systems, following the algorithm is designed to engage the brain's own power and characteristics and facilitate the best decision-making possible. >>
Well, that was kind of my point. But it's still a basic puzzle to me why my brain, which is so powerful in many ways, needs the crutches of a time management system. Why doesn't it just know what to do next?
I've always been pretty certain that the brain does in fact know exactly what the right thing to do would be. The reason I believe that is because it shows stress symptoms when it doesn't do it. That was the basic idea behind my "Resistance Principle".
So my question is why does the brain need to construct external systems in order to get it to do what it knows perfectly well it should be doing? Why can't it act as its own Manna?
July 10, 2012 at 10:07 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark - It is an old problem.....I think that the brain does indeed "know" what to do and it is really our "will" that is the problem.....another thinker summed it up well a couple of thousand years ago in Romans 7:15-25. Your systems help us better utilize our will power.
Paul
Paul
July 10, 2012 at 12:12 |
Paul B in Canada
Paul B in Canada
If I want to call my friend, it's easier to look up his number on my phone than type the number from memory.If I design a house, I do better by drawing a diagram. Writing helps us think.
When I try to solve a complex math problem, I find it much easier to do this if I use paper. But it's more than that. I follow systems of logic in addition to heuristics and intuition. Investigation is a multifaceted technique.
When I try to get my life in order, it's the same as solving a math problem with one added layer of difficulty: emotion. I need to balance what needs doing with my varying feelings and abilities. So I need things written, and I want a system to guide my exploration and decision making.
When I try to solve a complex math problem, I find it much easier to do this if I use paper. But it's more than that. I follow systems of logic in addition to heuristics and intuition. Investigation is a multifaceted technique.
When I try to get my life in order, it's the same as solving a math problem with one added layer of difficulty: emotion. I need to balance what needs doing with my varying feelings and abilities. So I need things written, and I want a system to guide my exploration and decision making.
July 10, 2012 at 17:27 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I need a list so I can add whatever I want to it, whenever I think of something, and be confident that I won't forget about it. I need a system to process the list so it doesn't become overwhelming, to ensure that the important and urgent tasks get done, to prevent any backlogs (piles of "stuff") from accumulating, to be able to find relevant materials without too much trouble, and to allow things to resurface at just the right time in the future. My brain is powerful, but I am much better at keeping track of everything if I use it with help from the list and system.
July 10, 2012 at 22:58 |
ubi
ubi
Mark, I would agree with Paul B, in the sense that the brain doesn't do all these things perfectly because it is bent as a result of our fallen nature.
Our passions and habitual inclinations cloud our vision so we cannot see clearly the right and best actions to take, and they also limit our freedom to act even when we do have a clear vision.
Mark, one reason your systems work so well is that you have an understanding of this, and have designed features into your systems to try to neutralize many of these characteristics of our fallen nature. Even better, sometimes your systems harness the power of the natural passions and try to steer them in the right direction. Principles like "little and often", "work on closed lists", "take baby steps", and so many other things that you've built into your systems, all help to engage the mind and get it moving in a desirable direction.
Our passions and habitual inclinations cloud our vision so we cannot see clearly the right and best actions to take, and they also limit our freedom to act even when we do have a clear vision.
Mark, one reason your systems work so well is that you have an understanding of this, and have designed features into your systems to try to neutralize many of these characteristics of our fallen nature. Even better, sometimes your systems harness the power of the natural passions and try to steer them in the right direction. Principles like "little and often", "work on closed lists", "take baby steps", and so many other things that you've built into your systems, all help to engage the mind and get it moving in a desirable direction.
July 12, 2012 at 0:30 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I think one reason our powerful brains need lists and other external devices is that we tend to operate on auto-pilot most of the day. Paying attention takes a lot of mental energy and so it's much easier to zone out on low-attention activities like watch TV, eat corn chips, surf the web, etc.
Looking at the list, making a chain, seeing what stands out, etc are all ways we get our brains out of auto-pilot and back to paying attention and engaging again with what our thinking selves considered important at some point in time.
The whole auto-pilot idea is why habits and rituals can be either powerful or disabling, depending on what it is we ultimately want to accomplish.
So saith I, at any rate!
Looking at the list, making a chain, seeing what stands out, etc are all ways we get our brains out of auto-pilot and back to paying attention and engaging again with what our thinking selves considered important at some point in time.
The whole auto-pilot idea is why habits and rituals can be either powerful or disabling, depending on what it is we ultimately want to accomplish.
So saith I, at any rate!
July 25, 2012 at 20:30 |
Mike Brown
Mike Brown
As humans,
We often tend to ignore our ability to manage things we want to and we need a constant reminder of what to do next. A time management app is not only about creating a task list and following it but it is about giving yourself a constant reminder about what you are supposed to do (in an ideal world) in the given time.
An advanced app something like http://www.commonslot.com/ that not only helps you manage your time but also lets you book an appointment and most importantly give you a note of free time left with you through the day is a better option. It even tells you about events in your neighbourhood that you can attend during your free time.
We often tend to ignore our ability to manage things we want to and we need a constant reminder of what to do next. A time management app is not only about creating a task list and following it but it is about giving yourself a constant reminder about what you are supposed to do (in an ideal world) in the given time.
An advanced app something like http://www.commonslot.com/ that not only helps you manage your time but also lets you book an appointment and most importantly give you a note of free time left with you through the day is a better option. It even tells you about events in your neighbourhood that you can attend during your free time.
May 2, 2016 at 13:30 |
Jyoti Agarwal
Jyoti Agarwal
http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
Whether you say yes or no, the implications are deep and interesting.
If yes, then where is the value of creativity, inspiration, response to the needs of the moment, to the unanticipated?
If no, then what exactly DO we want a task management system to do?