A Lesson from Wall Street

by Luke 5. August 2010 10:37

I recently had the chance to spend some time talking with the founder of a startup in the financial industry. He was looking for better ways to express the decisions he wanted to automate for a hedge fund management tool. And it struck me that the finance folks must know something that the engineers haven't caught on to yet.

Look at the Rules Fest speaker lineup and see all the finance folks. What do they know the we engineers don't? The cynic might say that they know the rules to skimming profit off a transaction. That seems to be the general feeling about high-frequency trading algorithms these days. But from my experience it's more than high-frequency trading - it's about automating all the little decisions.

The simple fact is that there is money to be made and in the financial industry it's easy to keep score. But when you look deeper, it's clear that beyond simple opportunism, the financial industry has learned how to automate the simple tasks. A large trade could be made any number of different ways. But rather than have people explore the myriad of options, computers do the heavy lifting. Doing it that way makes them more money. It's that simple.

That's a lesson we engineers need to absorb. The simple fact is that we need to get more efficient and we need to keep score if we're going to stay competitive. We've gotten good as a profession at using computers to automate calculations, and the next logical step is to use them to automate the simple decisions. That will make you a more efficient engineer, and efficiency is a great way to get more business.

Nobody Gets Paid to do Addition

by Luke 3. June 2010 03:02

There was a time when "computers" meant a small army of secretaries doing tedious math problems in the service of war or business. Today, nobody gets paid to do addition. Or multiplication. We have machines to do that.

For that matter, we don't use lookup tables for trigonometry or logarithm calculations. Machines do those, too. We don't manually calculate the standard deviation for a data set. We click a button in a spreadsheet to do that. We don't even have to type in the data since most of the time a machine collected it. The machine calculates integrals. It solves partial differential equations numerically. For almost any type of math an engineer could want to do, we're running out of problems that a computer can't solve.

Simple problem solving is the latest class of work to be automated. My GPS can route me around traffic jams. Netflix and Amazon can suggest movies and books you might like. Google made a fortune deciding what adds to show with your search. All of that problem solving was more than number crunching.

Today we use computers to manage supply chains, balance stock portfolios, and decrypt terrorist communications. We are so far beyond automating simple addition that it is amazing no one seems amazed. And this is a trend that is still accelerating. Be ready because the engineers that can harness the power of decisions in software will be the only ones able to manage and build on the complexity that's growing around us.

SpaceUp - Motivations

by Luke 1. March 2010 09:32

I've spent the past several months here on the Mindviews Labs blog, at conferences, and other places talking with people about automating engineering and how important I think it is. But I have to admit, as much as I enjoy working on this major project and solving the interesting problems that come up, this work really isn't my end goal.

I'm a huge space nerd. I think sending people and robots into space to explore and live is about the most exciting, fascinating, and interesting work in the world today. I got to spend a couple of days this past weekend at SpaceUp with a bunch of other people who are as taken with going to space as I am. If you're curious, you can see some of the Ignite talks that took place on Saturday evening at www.spacevidcast.com/spaceup/.

I think the only way living and working in space is ever going to be viable is if we can make it cheap, easy, and safe to design and build the rockets, satellites, space hotels, and mining stations we would be using. Right now the engineering is just too expensive.

The point is that the work going on here at Mindviews Labs is about making it easier - or maybe even making it possible - to do something that's important to you. We're building a powerful new tool. The same tool that can engineer my dream could also engineer yours. What would you build if you didn't have to worry about how much it would cost to design? Check in with us because your dream might be closer than you think.

Think Beyond the Calculator

by Luke 24. November 2009 08:56

Part of my job is to help create great software. That's probably not a surprise to you. The other part of my job might be, though. That job is to help change our perspective (as engineers) on what software can do. The simple fact is that we've been using computers in our work almost exclusively as glorified calculators.

Excel? Calculator. Matlab? Fancy calculator. Super-computer time? Big parallel calculator. Code you wrote? Also probably a calculator. CAD/CAM software? Ah, now we're getting somewhere...

CAD/CAM software has offloaded the process of turning a part blueprint into a manufactured component from the machinist, who would interpret the drawing and devise a series of machining tasks, to the computer, which today can go from a CAD drawing to CNC instructions to finished part with little to no human intervention. But what about all the work that leads up to the CAD drawing?

We already have software that can make decisions about how to turn a design into a manufactured part. What are all of the decisions that need to be made to go from concept to that design? That's where we are focused. The future of engineering is creating tools that make decisions to help us, not simply building more powerful calculators.

Why Can We Automate Boring Engineering?

by Luke 17. November 2009 10:26

So why do we think we can automate boring engineering when we haven't seen anything like this before?

We have two - make that three - reasons for the claim. First, "boring" is a key part of why we can make progress. Creative tasks are usually engaging to people and keep them interested. It is the boring parts that are tedious and un-challenging. In short, boring work doesn't require a lot of creativity. And problems that don't need creativity are usually not as hard to solve with computers.

The second reason is social. Our challenges aren't just technical. Rather, we are working to see our tools used in engineering shops everywhere. Boring tasks are a bad way to introduce junior engineers to the work environment. Today's junior engineers are often skilled at computer programming and can make short work of the tasks that used to keep such team members busy until they had a chance for promotion. Instead, we can provide an opportunity for inexperienced engineers to learn from experience faster than they could have before. By automating the tedious work, young engineers can see more alternatives and more quickly understand the trade-offs that need to be made for a design to reach production. Our tools can change the way engineers learn on the job - instead of spending time crunching numbers and observing the work of others, they can spend that time exploring designs and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of them.

And the third reason that I almost forgot to mention was that we've already been able to use this approach in our case studies. For more information, contact us for one of our whitepapers that describes real-world scenarios where we've been able to use our tools. We think you'll be impressed by what we've been able to do.

ORF Coming Up

by Luke 23. October 2009 09:39

October Rules Fest 2009 is rapidly approaching and I'm putting the final touches on the papers and slides for my two talks. I will be giving presentations on "Graph Based Knowledge Bases and Rules" and "Designing a System of Rule Based Agents".

These papers cover some of our secret sauce that I mentioned in the last post. These technical innovations in rule-engine design/use have been key to our automation systems. These tools have given us the performance and scalability improvements we needed to make our software for automating boring engineering viable.

I believe many young technology companies are too secretive about their competitive advantage. Unless you've signed an NDA, the most you'll learn about their process or technology is that "the magic happens" and then you get the result. The software equivalent is "security through obscurity" which any security expert will tell you is little better than no security at all - in fact it often provides the illusion of security thus leading to overconfidence. So why is the analogy important?

We think hiding our secret sauce would work against us. We are working on hard problems with real technological innovations. The sharing of ideas and feedback will make our work better and help us build the tools we need to automate engineering. Our competitive advantage isn't in our secrets, it's in our execution. We're doing something hard. We're doing it well. And we challenge anyone to do it better.


by Luke 12. October 2009 06:29

An "Aha!" moment is simply the last in a long series of steps that prepare you for when inspiration strikes. I want to share my "Aha!" moment with you - the one that led me down the automating engineering path that we're on today. Here is the spark:

Make software that performs work.

I was doing some research on expert systems and listening to a talk given by Larry Smith, an Economics Professor at the University of Waterloo, when I heard that message. To paraphrase his take on software opportunities, "We don't need more software to let us talk to each other. Make software that performs work." And I was struck by how true, yet unappreciated, that sentiment is.

The story of the internet billionaire warped the expectations of software developers everywhere. Google, Facebook, and now Twitter are all about communication and those are the imagination-grabbing examples that ambitious developers want to emulate. The job market for a software developer looks like a choice between the "glamorous" examples above and all of the "boring" line-of-business work going on within companies all over the world.

I agree that we have more than enough people working on communication tools. We've also spent the last two decades on the "boring" work of automating business processes (e.g., order processing, payroll, inventory management). But the third choice, the often overlooked choice, is to automate any of the other work that people do.

We can do amazing things by making computers perform engineering work. That was the realization I had when that final message clicked into place. That was my "Aha!" moment.

Automating Boring Engineering

by Luke 8. October 2009 11:35

While the long-term goal is to automate engineering more generally, we need a starting point for our work. Having looked at many different paths to that goal, the one that is most promising is the one that gives us something to work with today. The start to that path focuses on automating boring engineering.

What do I mean by boring engineering? Usually that means some task than an experienced engineer would find tedious. Maybe it's finding and plugging numbers into a well-known equation. Maybe it's repeating the same task over and over until the answer is reached. In short, any task that is much more tedious than creative is a candidate. That's what "boring" means in our work. And that's the place we're starting at.

This is the type of work you might normally assign to someone right out of college. Junior engineers often get tasks that are time consuming (but necessary) and can be easily verified by an experienced engineer - usually with just a few sanity checks. It's usually work that needs to be done but that isn't an efficient use of a high-paid engineer's time. In fact, it's often not even worth a junior engineer's time, but that's who the job has always fallen on because there is no one else to do the work. We are changing that.

We want engineers at all levels to be able to do better work by focusing on the important tasks - not the ones that are just a step above rote memorization.

What is Automated Engineering?

by Luke 5. October 2009 09:28

It is amazing how often science fiction inspires real life. In a way, science fiction is science's imagination - dreaming up possibilities for scientists and engineers to explore.

I never read the Iron Man comic books, but I did love the first movie. I remember the scenes where Tony Stark was working in his home lab/fab designing, building, and testing the components of what would become his Iron Man suit and thinking to myself, "Gee, I would kill for his home computer!" His fictional robotic suit of armor has to easily be as complicated as an airplane and here we've got one guy in his (admittedly high-tech) garage designing the whole system. There's no way one person would be able to do all of the analysis by hand and keep everything organized, so you have to imagine that almost all of that is being handled in software.

No one on Star Trek writes device drivers. When Scotty reroutes system controls, you don't see him sitting down to rewrite the hardware drivers. When Geordi needs to launch a custom-built probe to examine an unknown alien device, he doesn't have to worry about making sure all the components work together. His computer handles all of those little details.

And that's our inspiration. For any of those details that the computer can take care of, it should be the one doing the work. The important insight is that in order to automate engineering, our software cannot focus on just the data.

Engineering expertise is about turning data into information and then being able to make judgments and decisions. It's one thing to have software that can determine if a component will break under a 400g impact. It's quite a more useful thing to have the software determine if the component can survive a fall from a table. Software that does the first can only answer one question about data. Software that does that latter answers the real question. More importantly, systems that answer the "smarter" questions can be joined together to provide much more complex judgments and can ultimately be used to suggest possible designs based on those conclusions.

Raw data is not much use unless you have context. We're giving computers the context so they can make smarter choices and help you do real work by producing not only data, but real engineering design options as well.

Mindviews Labs Blog

Sharing about the future of automated engineering.