<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Monkeying Around - Latest Comments</title><link>http://brianblaker.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://brianblaker.disqus.com/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 11:57:35 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Human/Computer Mind Meld</title><link>http://www.brianblaker.com/humancomputer-mind-meld#comment-47872356</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Very interesting.  I think you would really enjoy reading "Blink".  I haven't picked up the book since September, but the chapter I randomly decided to read today before coming across your post was eerily related.  Basically, the book analyzes these so called "snap judgments" we make.  In the intro, it explains the 3 purposes of the book: to show that snap decisions can be just as good (if not better) than deliberate decisions, how to learn when and when not to trust our instincts, and thirdly, that these decisions can be educated &amp;amp; controlled.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Basically, the part I just read discussed a war game (the Millenium Challenge) put on by JFCOM....the Blue team represented the US...with tons of new technology to analyze every facet of the war.  Red team was the enemy, which lacked all these new technologies.  Long story short...before the Blue team could analyze all its possible moves...the Red team sunk all their ships &amp;amp; assassinated all their dudes.  The people "playing" this game were all very experienced military personnel...the Red team leader just happened to think very differently.  He spent the time leading up to the "war" analyzing everything he could...teaching his men how to act in the heat of the moment, especially since he knew he could only have very limited communication with them due to the Blue team's technology.  The whole point is that these "snap" decisions are actually based on extensive knowledge that one holds - it is just a matter of using this knowledge correctly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The next example is actually in an ER &amp;amp; doctors having to decide who is actually having an MI or not...they compared the doctor's ability to collect all the information themselves &amp;amp; make the decision based on that vs an algorithm developed by Goldman for chest pain (is this still used today? I have no clue...hopefully you know what I'm referring to, haha).  And shocker, the algorithm blew away the doctor's ability to make the decision.  The doctors' downfall was that they were collecting way too much information which was actually clouding their ability to make an accurate snap decision (which is obviously necessary in an ER).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Anyways, hopefully that wasn't too confusing, it is a really interesting book.  I haven't really gotten to the point where it tells you how to train yourself to make good snap decisions, but I'll let ya know how that part is.  I could see if being very beneficial to any doctor, since as we all know, time is a luxury the medical field just does not have.  It is a pretty easy read too, since it is written for the general public.  It should be really interesting to see the results from what the Pentagon is doing though.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dreeza</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 11:57:35 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>