Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (8014)	8/31/2001 5:02:37 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 74559

Why LLCF may be right on his cup of tea idea of knowledge. As I made my one-day crash course in economics it came back to me an explanation I made 10 years ago when digital systems were replacing analogue transmission systems. The explanation was necessary in a debate about the de-skilling of the microwave engineer -I'm a self taught transmission engineer but it took me like 10 years to get my 'degree'. I explained to the guys that a modulator was designed using ASICs. In each of these ASICs were some 100.000 hours of high level design. As a result a single engineer trying to get the grasp of the whole concept built in Forward Error Correction, all the mathematics behind the algorithms and other techniques, will fail. The engineer would only operate a diagnostic measuring equipment which enabled him to detect faults and replace faulty equipment. The knowledge was embodyed in the blue print. The skills required were minimum and could be grasped by a high school student. I went on comparing with my 15 years of on the job learning to be a specialist in analogue microwave system, when the knowledge/expertise was embodied inside my head When I started thinking about that LLCF's cup of tea came to my mind. Yes! We -AS AN INDIVIDUAL- don't know more than a cup of tea! I realised that on my exploration of the Achilles heel of 3G/UMTS. I'm trying to profit for my concept using the weakness of the concept. Here it goes: 1) The overall concept is heavily loaded with knowledges and expertises and economic facts. Result: Impossible for a single individual to grasp. 2) Concept is not perfect because even though loaded up with a lot of brain working in pool it is impossible to cover all gaps. But the gaps are few and extremely hard to detect. 3) But gaps are weaknesses in the concept. If one can identify the gap/weakness, then with a smaller knowledge is possible to attack the concept. 4) By pinpointing the gap/weakness in the overall concept one can build a business by exploiting this gap/weakness. I wrote this down. Stepped back and gave it a hard look. Yes, I have got it. But then I realised LLCF is right. As individuals what we know doesn't fill a cup of tea. But there is a lesson: In parallel processing -in a pool of brains pushing in a single direction- we could make a significant dent in anything we would care to take on.