Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Are there ways to increase the rate at which humans can output information?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 14 posts

Are there ways to increase the rate at which humans can output information?

#1

Post by faizanbhat »

In his Recode interview, Elon Musk postulates that humans suffer from a fundamental input/output limitation that (supposedly) places an upper bound on our cognitive capabilities. He uses the example of a human typing on an an iPhone to illustrate how our max rate of information output is very low. He then explains how our rate of information input is much higher, mainly because we have a high-bandwidth visual interface.

Are there ways to increase the max rate at which humans can output information, with or without the use of currently available science and technology?

Very interested in hearing your thoughts.

Re: Are there ways to increase the rate at which humans can output information?

#4

Post by faizanbhat »

atmosx wrote: post #3

To me the rate of info one generates in any metric doesn't count. The only thing that matters is the quality one is able to generate.

I see your point, and I would argue that both the rate of output and quality of output matter. You're right that one doesn't necessarily count without the other. A human could produce hundreds of gigabytes of pseudo-random numbers with a single key press, but that output could hardly be classified as 'information'. To classify any data as information, it has to represent some meaning that can be discerned by a receiver with at least some degree of fidelity. Humans do appear to be limited in our ability to produce information at high rates.

Re: Are there ways to increase the rate at which humans can output information?

#9

Post by faizanbhat »

davnn wrote: post #7

The fastest way to output information in the future could be to directly output information by thinking and being connected to some interface that can read your thoughts. Are thoughts the upper bound, however?

In this case, thoughts do seem to be the upper bound. If we are talking about linear streams of vocalised thought, then I suspect we might not get much further from where we are. I, for one, find it harder to stream thoughts faster than I can talk.

But consider any highly complex communication task. For instance, say you have to explain how recursion works. You have to go through abstract thinking, analogising, structuring, word selection, and delivery. It's hard work, and unless your execution is spot on, vital information maybe lost in transmission. Importantly, your thoughts here may not be a linear vocalised stream, and the process may not take very long.

It seems that tasks like these would benefit from some form of information exchange mechanism that doesn't rely on information being encoded in present day language. It would be most efficient to somehow "compress" your thought process around recursion as you're thinking about it, and then have the receiver unzip it on reception.

Post reply on HN