Link: The Smart, the Stupid, and the Catastrophically Scary

“Part of me likes being a programmer—because we’re the last job. I can see a future—if we don’t manage to blow ourselves up first—in the robot paradise where people are either robot engineers or programmers, or I guess do marketing. Or maybe bake pies, or smell things? Those are essentially the hardest things for a computer to do. But computers do everything else.” Original source: The Smart, the Stupid, and the Catastrophically Scary

Link: The Smart, the Stupid, and the Catastrophically Scary

“Part of me likes being a programmer—because we’re the last job. I can see a future—if we don’t manage to blow ourselves up first—in the robot paradise where people are either robot engineers or programmers, or I guess do marketing. Or maybe bake pies, or smell things? Those are essentially the hardest things for a computer to do. But computers do everything else.” Original source: The Smart, the Stupid, and the Catastrophically Scary

Link: The Smart, the Stupid, and the Catastrophically Scary

“Part of me likes being a programmer—because we’re the last job. I can see a future—if we don’t manage to blow ourselves up first—in the robot paradise where people are either robot engineers or programmers, or I guess do marketing. Or maybe bake pies, or smell things? Those are essentially the hardest things for a computer to do. But computers do everything else.” Original source: The Smart, the Stupid, and the Catastrophically Scary

Link: What Your Innovation Process Should Look Like

“Once a list of innovation ideas has been refined by curation, it needs to be prioritized. One of the quickest ways to sort innovation ideas is to use the McKinsey Three Horizons Model. Horizon 1 ideas provide continuous innovation to a company’s existing business model and core capabilities. Horizon 2 ideas extend a company’s existing business model and core capabilities to new customers, markets or targets. Horizon 3 is the creation of new capabilities to take advantage of or respond to disruptive opportunities or disruption.

Link: What Your Innovation Process Should Look Like

“Once a list of innovation ideas has been refined by curation, it needs to be prioritized. One of the quickest ways to sort innovation ideas is to use the McKinsey Three Horizons Model. Horizon 1 ideas provide continuous innovation to a company’s existing business model and core capabilities. Horizon 2 ideas extend a company’s existing business model and core capabilities to new customers, markets or targets. Horizon 3 is the creation of new capabilities to take advantage of or respond to disruptive opportunities or disruption.

Link: What Your Innovation Process Should Look Like

“Once a list of innovation ideas has been refined by curation, it needs to be prioritized. One of the quickest ways to sort innovation ideas is to use the McKinsey Three Horizons Model. Horizon 1 ideas provide continuous innovation to a company’s existing business model and core capabilities. Horizon 2 ideas extend a company’s existing business model and core capabilities to new customers, markets or targets. Horizon 3 is the creation of new capabilities to take advantage of or respond to disruptive opportunities or disruption.

Link: Toxic Technology: the growing legacy threat

“The UK Government Digital Service recently wrote about how they understand legacy and suggested a number of factors that contribute to technology being considered legacy: being poorly supported, hard to update, poorly documented, non-compliant or inefficient. The range of breadth of these negative characteristics runs counter to an often passive view of legacy: stable historic technology that is intended to be replaced. Organisations should begin to think of this technology as toxic: actively harmful to the health of the organisation.

Link: Toxic Technology: the growing legacy threat

“The UK Government Digital Service recently wrote about how they understand legacy and suggested a number of factors that contribute to technology being considered legacy: being poorly supported, hard to update, poorly documented, non-compliant or inefficient. The range of breadth of these negative characteristics runs counter to an often passive view of legacy: stable historic technology that is intended to be replaced. Organisations should begin to think of this technology as toxic: actively harmful to the health of the organisation.

Link: Toxic Technology: the growing legacy threat

“The UK Government Digital Service recently wrote about how they understand legacy and suggested a number of factors that contribute to technology being considered legacy: being poorly supported, hard to update, poorly documented, non-compliant or inefficient. The range of breadth of these negative characteristics runs counter to an often passive view of legacy: stable historic technology that is intended to be replaced. Organisations should begin to think of this technology as toxic: actively harmful to the health of the organisation.

Link: Toxic Technology: the growing legacy threat

“The UK Government Digital Service recently wrote about how they understand legacy and suggested a number of factors that contribute to technology being considered legacy: being poorly supported, hard to update, poorly documented, non-compliant or inefficient. The range of breadth of these negative characteristics runs counter to an often passive view of legacy: stable historic technology that is intended to be replaced. Organisations should begin to think of this technology as toxic: actively harmful to the health of the organisation.