The Future of Innovation

Despite what many believe, a new iPhone released every year is not true innovation. True innovation (also called disruptive innovation) changes the way society behaves and functions, shattering the status quo. It reduces our strain on resources and creates enormous value. When was the last time you witnessed a true innovation? Or have we mostly been witnessing clones and iterations upon iterations?

People have been dreaming about flying cars for the past century, yet we still use the combustion engine developed over a hundred years ago. Why have the dreams and hopes born out of science fiction not materialized? Our planet is in desperate need of life-changing innovation to solve our greatest challenges such as war, famine, and overpopulation.

What does the reasearch tell us?

It has been found that the rate of new U.S. patents registered annually has been steadily decreasing, backing an argument that a peak has already been reached and innovation is slowing. Furthermore, research has shown that the time required to make new scientific discoveries is growing, along with the size of the collaborating team. We continue to need more time and more people to innovate effectively. Further research has also demonstrated that this is the case despite increased public and private economic investment.

Source: Bloom et al. (2019).

Moore’s Law

Moore’s Law states that the number of transistors on a computer chip doubles every 2 years. Phrased differently, the growth of microprocessors can be described as exponential. If we relate this law to innovation, it seems that the team and time required for innovations may also have to increase exponentially. If this is true, we will soon reach a resource limit that prevents us from developing any further ground-breaking innovations. All the low-hanging innovation fruit may have already been plucked and we are awaiting an inevitable halt in progress.

However, this scenario is only possible due to the limitations of human intellect. Artificial Intelligence (AI), which is the intelligence demonstrated by machines and computers, may provide a solution. AI is already present in our everyday lives in the form of Google searches, plane auto-pilots, and email management. In recent years, AI built by IBM and/or Google has successfully beaten world champion Chess, Go and StarCraft II players, demonstrating that humans can be outsmarted by computers provided that the AI has been created for that task. Of course, there is still a significant way to go before there could be an AI with proficiency in multiple tasks and the capability to make breakthrough innovations.

Taking this into consideration, a paradox appears. How can humans with limited intelligence and resources build an AI with unlimited intelligence and resources?

The Technological Singularity

This is answered by something hypothesized for some time, called the technological singularity. The singularity is a hypothetical point in time at which technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable changes to human civilization. The catalyst to this change would be the creation of an AI that is capable of making upgrades and improvements to its own systems. Once this occurs, there will be a snowball effect or a runaway reaction resulting in an Omni intelligent being. This new God AI would be able to solve all our innovation needs and any other problems… if this God AI doesn’t decide to annihilate humanity first.

This superintelligence could just as easily usher in a new dystopia as it could a utopia. Many global technology leaders have issued warnings about the dangers of AI if its development goes unchecked. We just don’t know how humans will be perceived and how it’s final equation will determine our fate. Just as science fiction paints a picture of what the future could be with flying cars as an example, we should not forget the darker realms of science fiction where villainous entities such as Skynet from the Terminator series reside.

The Future

Alas, it seems in my opinion that we will soon reach a fork in the road determining the destiny of mankind. The right road leads to a stagnation of innovation, where our planet will meet its inevitable doom thanks to our own hands… but at least we’ll get a new iPhone every year! The left road leads us to gamble with AI to solve our innovation needs, however, the outcome could be the same as the right road or it could deliver us into a new golden age instead.

What are your thoughts on the challenges of true innovation and how we could overcome them? Is AI our savior or our destroyer?

Randomness and its place in Gaming

Randomness (also called RNG – Random Number Generator) is a technique often seen today in gaming and entertainment services. Randomness eliminates patterns and principles of organization, introducing unpredictability. It relinquishes all control from the individual and leaves all prospects to chance. Strategy and planning are completely thrown out the window in most cases. Randomness elements seem to be present in a wide variety of games and services, often going unnoticed by most users.

Why do some people not notice Randomness and the Random Number Generator

Most people cannot differentiate randomness from predetermined patterns and sequences. A study published in 1985, identified that 62% of the sample group misinterpreted random sequences as something other. Furthermore, a paper from 2013 explains that this is because randomness is inherently ambiguous and the human mind strives to make sense of it, attributing systemic causes to outcomes. Some people may find the chase for a particular random outcome exciting i.e. gambling and others are not even aware that randomness is a factor.

Reward and Effort

Imagine a class of students where you have a wide range of academic results from each student, most likely following the normal distribution. These students are expecting, and rightfully so, that their grades or outcomes, will be proportional to their effort (consisting of time and resources) – high effort and high reward. However, their professor informs them that this semester, everyone will be receiving random grades. The amusing thing is everyone with low effort expecting low grades would celebrate this announcement whereas students on the opposite end of the spectrum would be absolutely livid. We cannot accept randomness when it is not proportional to outcomes or does not meet our expectations.

Students celebrating success not earned due to the random number generator

This is because randomness should only help decide the outcome when the individual’s effort is low. The national lottery is a good example of where randomness is used correctly. The cost of a lottery ticket is quite low, hence low effort on the part of the individual is also low.

Randomness done right

When it comes to game design, the stark differences between the board game, snakes and ladders, and chess highlight the correct uses of randomness in game design very clearly. Snakes and ladders is a game of absolute chance, where every move and turn is only decided by the roll of the dice. Chess, however, every move is under control by the player. This is why there are grandmaster chess players and not grandmaster snakes and ladders die rollers.

Modern comparisons of the Random Number Generator in gaming

However, this does not mean that serious competitive environments can only exist where randomness does not feature and that a game featuring heavy randomness features cannot be successful. Two very popular strategic collectible card games, Hearthstone and Magic the Gathering demonstrate this quite well.

Hearthstone is a digital-only card game started in 2014 based on fictional content from the WarCraft games. Being only digital, random elements are easily implemented in Hearthstone’s code. The randomness in this game has not been positively received by all players, where randomness can cause large swings in game outcomes. Furthermore, many professional players exploit randomness mechanics to win high-level tournaments. Hopeless situations are often turned around by sheer luck. Despite these problems, the game enjoys a massive global following due to its casual appeal, easy to understand mechanics, and its digital platform.

In contrast, Magic The Gathering (MTG), often considered the first collectible trading card game, began in 1993 as a physical version but has slowly appeared digitally over the past few years. It contains extensively fewer randomness mechanics although not completely free of them. The randomness elements that do exist still frustrate players, but most of it can be circumvented using good deck design and game knowledge. Many consider MTG to be more competitive and serious than Hearthstone, however, Hearthstone has a significant market share in comparison, also available on more platforms including mobile devices. MTG utilizes many complicated game mechanics, creating a hurdle for new players, and the game content is designed to appeal to an older audience. Furthermore, the increased randomness in Hearthstone allows the game to appeal to newer audiences where a stroke of luck may allow them to win matches against more seasoned opponents.

Loot Boxes

Again, this randomness and Random Number Generator results in frustration for competitive players who have put in considerable effort but results in elation for new or casual players who have put in very little effort. A similar randomness element pertaining to gaming exists in the form of “loot boxes”. Loot boxes are consumable virtual items that can be redeemed to receive a randomized selection of further virtual items, which may be purely cosmetic or provide advantages to players who purchase them.

Due to the random nature of these items and the fact that they are often purchased directly or indirectly using fiat currency, they have come under great scrutiny across the world and have been classified as gambling in some cases and deemed illegal. Loot boxes use a similar approach to lottery tickets, but in contrast, loot boxes can cost more than lottery tickets with rewards dismal in comparison. Another case of effort not proportional to the outcome.

Loot boxes using the random number generator
An example of Loot Boxes in a game


Using randomness and the Random Number Generator to determine reward outcomes is an easy methodology for developers to apply. No tedious balancing is required nor extra work to design the processes. In some cases, using randomness to generate outcomes may be the correct choice. But in other cases unfortunately a very poor design decision and quite frankly, lazy. Where I believe this is true is when the designers have not taken into account the individual’s effort and equated it with the outcome.

I’m afraid that the gaming and entertainment industries continue to use randomness in their products, to attract new players, providing challenges (however frustrating) to experienced players based on the role of the dice and simply because randomness is easy to implement. In particular, players in competitive settings who have put in considerable effort in the form of time and resources (assuming this correlates with player skill), should not have their chances of victory stolen by randomness mechanics.

Furthermore, rewards such as loot boxes should also not employ randomness, especially if the rewards impact the gameplay and the likelihood of success. Until the industry realizes that rewards should be proportional to the effort from the players, we will continue to be frustrated with the way randomness is implemented.

What are your thoughts on the implementation of randomness in the gaming and entertainment industries? What solutions or steps could be taken to allow more positive experiences for all players?

Inherent Laziness – Why are we Lazy?

A characteristic that I believe all human beings have in common is our potential to be lazy and procrastinate. Even actions or behaviors we know will be extremely beneficial or necessary for success we end up neglecting. We seem to have inherent laziness.

Keen-eyed readers will note that I stated “potential”. This is because we know for a fact that there are members of society that deviate from this observation. These are typically people that excel and are renowned in their respective industries or groups. We often question very naively, “What is their secret?”, with a shameful hope of an answer that aligns with our desire for minimum effort or easy implementation.  However, the answer is basically always the same – hard work and sheer discipline. The potential to be lazy and procrastinate is present but these individuals overcome it.

With 99% of the population suffering from this inherent laziness, it should be quite observable in everyday life. Two observable laziness truths I’d like to discuss are Parkinson’s Law and the Pareto Principle.

Parkinson’s Law and Inherent Laziness

Have you ever sat in a three-hour examination writing an essay, and perhaps despite the simplicity, you had to use the entire three hours to complete it? Or maybe you only had a few short tasks to complete at work for the day, but you only completed them just before the end of your shift/workday? If you answered yes to any of these, you may have experienced something called Parkinson’s Law. Essentially, Parkinson’s Law occurs when “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” If something must be done in a year, it’ll be done in a year. If something must be done next week, it’ll be done next week. If something must be done tomorrow, it’ll be done tomorrow.

Parkinson's Law Chart of Effort vs. Time impact on inherent laziness
Parkinson’s law displayed as Effort vs. Time (credit to

The foundation of Parkinson’s Law is the timeframe. Human beings tend to complete tasks when due, so rather later than sooner. This is literally the definition of procrastination. I believe that procrastination prevents us from becoming the best version of ourselves simply because we fail to set personal goals with definitive deadlines.

The Pareto Principle and Inherenet Laziness

The Pareto Principle (also known as the 80:20 Principle) states that roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. There are plenty of examples in the world such as:

  • 20% of criminals commit 80% of crimes
  • 20% of drivers cause 80% of all traffic accidents
  • 80% of pollution originates from 20% of all factories

The list only goes on. Another interesting example relating to teams and groups of people is that 20% of the team is responsible for 80% of the work. I’ve seen this numerous times in academics and business involving teamwork. If this is a natural phenomenon in society, is there a bias for individuals to lean into either the 20% or 80% group?

Demonstration of 80-20 principle impact on inherent laziness
The Pareto Principle (credit to

If so, one could argue that there is a tendency for individuals to succumb to group laziness. Based on the above, generally, 80% of a group will slack on execution because they know or assume the other 20% will rise to the occasion. If this is true, we make a conscious decision about which group we fall into. Even worse, if you fail to hold yourself accountable for this decision, the majority of the group is displaying the same behavior as you, creating a difficult situation for the minority carrying the majority of the load.

What do you think?

Do you agree with these conclusions or have any examples to share? Besides our failure to create strict timelines for our personal goals and tendency towards group laziness, what other phenomena do you think impacts our inability to reach our full potential? Do we have inherent laziness or is there something we can do about it?

Rebuilding Society – Realising Your Potential

An ominous storm stirs over in the distance. Before you and the crew have time to change course, the ship sails directly into the epicenter of the cataclysm. Your vessel is destroyed, along with your equipment and reserves. Fortunately, all lives were saved as everyone is washed ashore to a nearby island. Even better, as almost fashioned up by some bored deity, this island has an abundance of natural resources for the survivors to utilize during their stay. Everyone assumes a rescue in due time, but what if it never comes? Do we need to begin rebuilding society?

A shipwreck making it necessary to begin rebuilding society

The Way Forward

A mutual decision is made by the group that a new society should be forged, with every individual contributing their skills and talents to building this. Help is not coming and the group is completely isolated from the rest of the world. A crucial but unnerving question takes hold of your mind… how will I contribute? More importantly, how will I aid to ensure we can achieve an equal quality of life as we had back home.

Everyday blessings we took for granted such as electricity, running water, medicine, etc. will have to be created from scratch. As we only have the clothes on our backs we have technically been thrown back to the stone age. With not even the simplest tools available, hopefully, there is someone with fundamental skills such as mining and smelting. Will I be an innovator in the new world or do I rely on someone else to place the first building blocks of the invention before I can begin playing my role? Will I provide value during this developmental period or will I become a burden?

Cavemen starting fire, rebuilding society

Discovering Your Value in the Rebuilding of Society

While not a serious issue someone should base their worth on, I believe this topic is a fun thought experiment. I thought about this on and off for some time – I’m not an engineer, how could I possibly help rebuild society after an apocalyptic event? Will I be a woodcutter or berry picker to earn my keep? I currently work in sales, which is in no way useful in this situation. Blogging won’t help either!

Then I thought beyond my job and focussed more on my skillset.

Then it hit me…

I have a degree in biology. My post-graduate studies involved antibiotics. My knowledge is sufficient enough that I can find, isolate, and administer antibiotics to the survivors in times of need. I also know enough about human physiology and biochemistry to provide general medical assistance. Further to that, I worked at a beer brewery for several years. I could easily brew beer like the ancient Egyptians did thousands of years ago. I can contribute to the rebuilding of society.

Beer brewing like the Ancient Egyptians contributes to the rebuilding of society

What About You?

How would you contribute to building an early society provided that the society in question was large and abundant, easily accessible natural resources were available?