Five attributes of a complex system

More on the complexity subject... (thanks to Simon, Ando and Courtois, as cited by Booch). This should really be influencing a lot of social science research as well!!

1. This one's predictable: Frequently, complexity takes on the form of a hierarchy, whereby a complex system is composed of interrelated subsystems that have in turn their own subsystems, and so on, until some lowest level of elementary components is reached.
2. And then it gets interesting: The choice of what components is a system are primitive is relatively arbitrary and is largely upto the discretion of the observer of the system
3. Intracomponent linkages are generally stronger than intercomponent linkages. This separates high frequency dynamics (internal interaction within component) from low frequency dynamics (interaction among components). (In a thought experiment, I tried applying this to people... and it made me grin in recognition!)
4. Hierarchic systems are usually composed of only a few different kinds of subsystems in various combinations and arrangements. (I knew the world had to be simple! Booch as a wonderful term for it - economy of expression!)
5. A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a simple working system. (Anyone tried making long term relationships work without getting a simple working system in place first??)

Complexity

There's something inherently fascinating about Object Oriented thinking. It connects with me a very fundamental level, so I'm just giving it the status of "basic truth" at the moment. See this definition of complexity from Booch's text book on OO Analysis and Design. And tell me one good reason why it shouldn't apply to any complex system.
Replace his "software complex systems" with any other form of complex systems - people, communities, relationships, design, - and see how true it rings:

• Systems are inherently complex - the complexity of the system often exceeds the human intellectual capacity.
• The trick to making complex systems "usable" is to engineer an illusion of simplicity.
• Complex systems usually evolve from stable intermediate forms
• Complex systems can be viewed upon things or processes. there are complelling reasons for us to see the world as a meaningful collection of objects people that collaborate to achieve some higher level behavior

If it's Mani, it's got to be "correct"?!

All this heartache about the movie Guru - and its supposed weaknesses - in story telling, in an appreciation of economics, in whatever else. I've a couple of thoughts on that.

First, I admit I enjoyed the movie - in spite of all the un-ManiRatnamesque "goofs" (such as trying to pass off Karnataka for Gujarat, ditching characters halfway and so on..).

So Mani makes no bones about making a hero of an unabashed money-maker. I was a little surprised at the number of movie reviews that ripped the movie on the count that it had the got the economics wrong, or that it didn't depict "both sides of the reality". One could I guess have that expectation if Mani was making a documentary or a case study documentation. Considering he was making a hindi movie, doesn't a guy have a right to say a story, with whichever aspect of a character he chooses to glamorise? Is it "wrong" to make a one sided movie? It seems to be so, especially if you are Mani Ratnam!

ಹೀಗ್ ಕೂಡ ಒಂದು ದಿನ ಬರತ್ತೆ ಅಂದ್ ಕೊಂಡ್ಇರ್ಲ್ಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಇಷ್ಟು ವರ್ಷ ಕನ್ನಡದ್ ವಾಸ್ನೆ ಕೂಡ ನೋಡ್ದೆ ಇದ್ದ ನಾನು, ಈಗ ಒಂದು ಕನ್ನಡ ಸಿನಿಮಾ ಹಾಡ್ನ ರಿಂಗ್ ಟೋನ್ ಆಗಿ ಇಟ್ಟ್ಕೊಂಡಿದೀನಿ! ಹೋದ ಮೂರ್ ತಿಂಗ್ಳಲ್ಲಿ ಓದಿರೋಷ್ಟು ಕನ್ನಡ, ಕಳೆದ್ ಹತ್ತು ವರ್ಷದಲ್ಲಿ ಓದಿಲ್ಲ. (ಅಷ್ಟು ಹೆಚ್ಚ್ಚೇನಲ್ಲ, but still, relatively!)
ಈಗ ನಾನು ಕನ್ನಡದಲ್ಲಿ ಇಂಗ್ಲಿಷ್ ಅಷ್ಟೆ ಬೇಗ type ಮಾಡ್ಬಲ್ಲೆ. (well, almost! and spelling mistake ಅದೂ, ಇದೂ ಅನ್ನ್ ಬೇಡಿ... ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಮಾಫ್ ಮಾಡಿ, ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ adjust ಮಾಡ್ಕೋಳಿ!)

ಇದು technology ಇಂದ ಭಾಷೆ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಆಸಕ್ತಿ ಬರ್ತಿದಿಯ ಇಲ್ಲಾ ಭಾಷೆ ಮೇಲಿನ interest ಇಂದ technologyನ ಹುಡುಕಿ ತೆಗಿತಾಇದೀನ ಇನ್ನ ಅರ್ಥ ಆಗ್ತಿಲ್ಲ. ಯಾವ್ದಾದ್ರು ಇರ್ಲಿ, ನಾನಂತೂ full enjoy ಮಾಡ್ತಿದೀನಿ!

Every once in a while, I remember this particular piece by Kahlil Gibran.
It isn't just words and poetry... it's the soundest approach I've known to dealing with any relationship. It works. Everytime. With everyone - friends, spouses, lovers, parents, children, siblings...

Let there be spaces in your togetherness,
And let the winds of the heavens dance between you.
Love one another but make not a bond of love:
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.

Fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup.
Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf.
Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,
Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.

Give your hearts, but not into each other's keeping.
For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts.
And stand together, yet not too near together:
For the pillars of the temple stand apart,
And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other's shadow.

Kahlil Gibran

Critical distinction

The university if full of words. Each one stealthily sounding like the other, with fine nuances, with totally different world views behind each of them. My favourite case of messed up usage revolves around that loved and hated C word: Criticism. Is that a neutral word meaning objective evaluation? Or does it mean a whining, mean nitpicking that is bound to make anybody defensive and irritable? I think a distinction is important.

Criticize: To nitpick, find fault, and belittle people, things, ideas, events ...
Effects: It doesn't matter if the observation is technically accurate. It doesnt leave anybody happier or wiser, not even the "criticizer". And you'll often find it articulated in positive language, disguised as sarcastic humor. (You know the sarcastic humor scene - everybody is laughing but nobody is happy)

Critical thinking: To understand, analyze, apply, synthesize and evaluate information, events, processes... and the objective is to understand better or act more wisely. Almost never to put down another or score points.
Effects: Better understanding, people receive observations based on critical thinking very positively (you'll be amazed how positively), action is possible, there is a lightness of spirit...

It amazes me how much criticizing happens, under the guise of critical thinking!! Of course, some people are smart - they can add layer on layer of complexity: When you are smart, you hide the criticism under critical thinking. Which in turn is presented as a very humble, "in my opinion". So much intelligence and so many smiles... barely covering a mass of messy emotions.

Surely, our emotions deserve better acknowledgement than this!!

orkut scrapping మజా మజా అని స్నేహితులన్టుంటె,
అయ్యొపాపమ్ పిచ్చేమో అని అనుకున్నాను...
కాని ఇప్పుడు... hmmmmm

పగలు రాత్రి online ఉండి, web 2.0 చూస్తుంటె,
అయ్యో పాపమ్ మతిపొయిందని అనుకున్నాను...
కాని ఇప్పుడు... hmmmmm

time pass ఏకంగా బ్లాగుల్లన్నే రాసారు
ఈ writers కేమి పనిలేద అని అనుకున్నాను...
కాని ఇప్పుడు... hmmmmm

oh oh oh అరే ఇంతలో ఏమెమో జరిగిందిరో
oh oh oh ఈ ప్రేమలో నే కూడ తడిసానురో!