Tag: #technology

Exploring Innovation & Inventing With Falk Wolsky

On Episode 109 of The Edge of Innovation, we’re talking with Chief Innovation Officer Falk Wolsky, about innovation and inventing!

Sections

Introduction
What is Innovation?
Innovation in the World of Technology
The Magic of IT
One of Falk’s Inventions: The SmartPen
Why Falk Invented The Smart Pen
How The Smart Pen Works
Curiosity: Motivating Inventors
Knowing Where to Start When Making an Idea Reality
Closing
More Episodes
Show Notes

Exploring Innovation & Inventing With Falk Wolsky

Introduction

Paul: Hi, how are you?

Falk: Ah, I’m good. How are you?

Paul: Very good. So, where are you tonight?

Falk: I am actually in a small village in Saxony. This village is called Schöneck and it’s the headquarter of our company. This is already story enough.

Paul: Wow.

Falk: It’s amazing. It’s very, very small village. I might say, 10% of the population is employees of this company.

Paul: Oh really? Wow. That’s cool.

Falk: Yes. No, it, it looks like. I believe it’s not that much, but somehow, sometimes you get this impression because I work most likely in the capitals, in many different countries, and let’s say this is not a capital. It’s where fox and rabbits say goodnight to each other. We have a fairytale about this.

Paul: Cool. Very cool. Well, we’re talking with Falk Wolsky. Is that how we say your name?

Falk: That is absolutely right.

Paul: Alright. So, what is your role at Innogate Tech?

Falk: At Innogate Tech, I’m a chief innovation officer, and at GK Software, I’m the head of innovation. Both means actually the same. I look a little bit into the future and define strategies and detail products and so on.

What is Innovation?

Paul: Alright. So let’s, for our, for our listeners, you know, we’re the Edge of Innovation, but how do you define innovation and what is it? When you go to work, when you wake up… It’s a good time of year. We’re recording this in early January. And what have you sort of said, okay, I’ve got to innovate this year. What does that look like to you?

Falk: Already many questions in one. I might say, I saw a wonderful chart from Andy Brukov. He’s very famous in AI, and he showed a chart, a pie diagram. 90% was blue. And this is people who use stuff. Let’s say 9% was yellow. This is people who adopt stuff and increase or enrich stuff. And 1% of people actually create stuff. That was very interesting.

And if you ask what is innovation, it’s most likely about the thing to create. I’m very lucky I’m in IT. So actually, I can, as I’m also developer, by myself, can create things out of nothing. So, I just go my laptop and I start to code. So actually I’m a source from the brain directly to a product. It was very interesting.

So, I might say the creation of things, the real creation — not only the combination or the adoption — this is the innovation point. When things come together and you have a spark of idea and say, “Ah, cool. This is something new. This is interesting. This is useful.”

Innovation in the World of Technology

Paul: Interesting. Okay. So, do you think your innovation… How would you characterize it? Do you think it’s mostly in the technology world?

Falk: I might say yes. I cannot not say… I’m not a technologist, so I’m, I’m a really pure guy in my brain, in what I like and what I follow. I’m not good in chemistry, for example. I will never make any big innovation in chemistry.

What I do have, I have multiple disciplines. I’m looking for energy. So, I was in Africa and looking to innovate there how people can get solar energy because the current approach doesn’t fit for the people itself. I’m here with IT in retail, for example. With Innogate, we are in IT for energy provider, one of the largest energy providers in Ukraine, actually.

So, this is completely mixed and I’m reading about everything. What is creeping around this technology, not only IT. And some of the time, it’s a combination of this. So, I have not a limited field but chemistry, mathematics — this is not for me. I will not innovate there.

The Magic of IT

Paul: But now here, the, when you say IT to a person in the United States, they think about the people who keep the networks running. And I think you’re talking about IT as really the application of information technology to solve a problem. Is that fair?

Falk: Yes, that is absolutely true. I can say by a combination of technology, IT, programming, marketing, and business model, I make digital products. That’s absolutely right. It’s not a simple app. Some of these products are more complex because you have something in the database, something in the middleware, some service flying around, some cloud stuff to unite all this, make it synchronized, make it swing in harmony and build a product that actually people can use in the front and simple, as an app or website. That is the magic.

Paul: Right, right. So, do you have an example that you can share with us — not something that’s confidential, obviously — of where you have sort of gotten things to work together that wouldn’t have been obvious otherwise?

One of Falk’s Inventions: The SmartPen

Falk: There was a very prominent example. It’s already in the past. I was inventor of the first pen that vibrates when you make a mistake. It was so famous that you even had [inaudible] talking about it. It was very funny. And this was in the 1915 it seems to me, 1914, something like this. And there was multiple things coming together from the physical product, hardware, the design of a pen, where inside fits a computer, where on this computer fits enough software that the pen by itself, without any help, can detect what you write and then vibrate when you do mistakes.

So, this was already complex. I had twenty people, very multi-disciplinary because you have a lot of machine learning. You have hardware designs, sensors. You have [inaudible] catalogs. You have user interfaces. Everything. Right? This is when it all comes together in a very small product. For the user it was simple. Battery in, switching it on, and it was working. That’s all.

Paul: Hmm. Interesting. What did you learn through the lifecycle of the evolution of that product that you didn’t anticipate?

Falk: I must say I anticipated almost everything.

Paul: Really? Okay, so there wasn’t any surprise? Like, did it do as well as you thought it would do?

Falk: Actually yes. Yes.

Paul: Okay.

Falk: I was in the moment… It was very funny story. I was sitting at home and my big son actually make homework. Right? And he makes so many mistakes, and he knows how to do it. He just was not focused. My wife said, “Oh, now he could need a pen with electrical shock.” Right?

I said, “Come on. That’s just one failure.” But actually, vibrating would be cool. But in that moment, let’s say in twenty minutes – It was 2012 October – I had the full idea of how it will work. And that’s innovation.

Paul: Interesting, yeah.

Falk: It will be by motion sensors. It will be this, this, this. I can construct. Okay, you have a lot of research later on. I cannot say I was understand which library, language, I will already use. This comes later. This was already clear. Form factor was clear. Possibility was not clear.

So, the amazing fact is when you have then the prototype first. It would actually do what you told it will do. And even if people say it’s not possible because this motion sensors was used on the scale of an airplane. Now we packed them into a pen, and everybody say impossible. But it was possible. But I believed in this pretty much from the beginning, I might say.

Why Falk Invented The Smart Pen

Paul: Interesting. So, was this to help people to learn to write better?

Falk: Yes. There was multiple interesting things. The first is for children. When they come in the school and the teacher gives them back the homework after some days with the red marks, what they all did wrong, this is a very bad trigger to learn things. But the pen immediately makes you aware, look twice, and you look twice, and you say, “Ah, yeah. True. I made mistake here, that…” This is so-called positive learning. People will learn, children will learn much faster and with much more fun to write.

And when pen can understand your handwriting in the moment you do it, we have also example excellent with Word, then you, in real time, see, when you write something on a paper, it appears in Word. Then you have multiple scenarios from hospitals, doctors, production plans, everywhere where it’s still handwriting needed and by regulatory, even by law, expected. Signature. To understand is this your signature or not? Very interesting.

So, there’s a lot of cases, of what you can do with it, and not only for children.

How The Smart Pen Works

Paul: Wow. That’s cool. So how did you do it? Did you use vector analysis? Did you use scanners? Or how did you actually detect it?

Falk: Ah, it was exactly the story from this moment when I talked about it. The first from decide of a product, it was clear. Battery in, switch on. It must work. That means a lot of things you cannot do, because if you need something else, it would not fit to the product. Most of the older people in the market, when they order products, they rely on some additional. Sometimes a small box you have to climb with the paper. I don’t want. Sometimes in surface where only you can write on this. I don’t want it. Sometimes a special paper with a camera. I don’t want it. I say it must work. Battery in, switch on, go.

The only way to do was to use motion sensors, very fine-graded motion sensors. Now it gets complex. If you only have assimilation and rotation, you’re blind. You have no idea where you are. You only know I move. And then you are start very complex with mathematical calculations. You collect information, and you calculate how much I moved, how much to accelerate, how much I turn, and then you step by step calculate out of it what actually the tip of the pen does.

The tip on the pen on the paper, if you have this, what it does, this motion, then you can give this information to a handwriting recognition engine because it already lives by two-dimensional data. But the magic is out of blindness, only by rotation and assimilation to understand what the pen does. This was the magic. This was the thing that nobody before had gone through.

And there was all six people working only on that to understand. With every case, and we had brilliant people, they worked almost a year to achieve. And we achieved it. It was working. No matter where. You can write upside down, on the paper, on the table, whatever. It was no matter. Right? It was very interesting. We even had small video writing the air because it’s also motion. You have big letters, but in general, it’s the same.

Curiosity: Motivating Inventors

Paul: So you had this. You’re sitting at a home, and your wife is saying, you know, “Can’t we make an electroshock pen?” And you have an epiphany. What made you think that you could do this? What, leading up to that point said, “I have the nerve to be able to say ‘This, this is real. This is something I can try”?

Falk: I would say similar on Innogate or in the position that I do now for GK, it’s very similar. I have, first, long time history when I was developing a lot of stuff by myself, hands on. I know database. I know about development. I know a little bit of Java development. Any kind. I did a lot career. So, you have already gut feeling, a rough-gut feeling.

The second is I’m, by nature, unbelievable curious for everything. I’m following quite clear what is the development in the machine learning. I’m following what is the development in the flying taxi. I am following what is the development in solar panels collecting sun and producing water. It’s endless. This curiosity leads you to swallowing the information, what is existing. Some of the time an innovation appears also by combining things clever and saying, “Ah, if I took this and this and merge it, then it’s actually possible.”

And, I did before, a project about IoT. Actually, I was inventing another thing, but it’s more to smile. It was the first coffee machine that could send tweets. And it could also receive tweets. So, you can control your coffee machine via Twitter. And it sounds a little bit to smile, but actually for brand and for food service, it’s a pretty cool thing.

And from that time, I had already a good experience in IoT and small computers and how to program it and what is the problem or not. What is possible or not? So, this large curiosity for almost everything what is tech, that helps a lot.

Knowing Where to Start When Making an Idea Reality

Paul: Yes, absolutely. I’m asking, would you agree that most people who would approach that problem of saying, I want a pen that when somebody makes a mistake, notifies them of that? They wouldn’t know where to start, let alone to think it was possible.

Falk: I would agree on, some people, they believe it’s not possible. We have people surrounding us. They have maybe not a clue. They don’t know IoT stuff. They don’t know to program. They will say — I don’t know.

Most people though start somewhere into combining things. And there is a second component in innovation. Only combining what is there not always leads you to something. Most of the competitors actually start by camera because it’s existing already. It proves it’s possible, and then you will start constructing your product around these. But I go from the different perspective. I said, “What is the optimal product? And how can I reach it?”

So, I challenge the current state and change it and say, “No, I need a different way.” This is exactly what I do now. I have a huge software project, and I said to everybody, “Guys, we don’t work like everybody work, because if you do it, we actually spent the last part of the line like everybody do.” And also develop ten years. This time we don’t have. We need to be somehow different. I challenge the state also. Not reinventing everything. But I ask twice, “Is this what is existing the right way? Or there is maybe shortcuts? Or something be revolutionized here.”

And this was in the pen exactly the same. I said, “We will do it with motion tracking. If there’s motion sensors.” Everybody was saying, “No way. Not possible.” I said, “No, I have a feeling. I have a gut feeling it will work.” I was just researching a little bit about the resolution that these sensors already have. Is this fine enough or not? And roughly I could guess. I said, “I must be possible. It will be fine.”

So, but this was part of it. And most people, also by my experience, they will say, “Yes, it’s for sure possible,” and then they start to construct a product around the technology they have. This is maybe a small thing. What is the real innovation is not to do this. You just say, “Okay, what do we have? Let’s build something.”

Conclusion

Paul: Well excellent. We’ve been talking with Falk Wolsky. He’s the chief innovation officer with Innogate Tech. And we’ve had a great talk about innovation and there’ll be a lot of links in the shownotes to both his company and some of the things we talked about.

Well, thank you very much.

Falk: Thank you very much too. It was a pleasure to talk to you.

Paul: It was a pleasure to talk to you too.

More Episodes:

This is Part 1 of 3 of our conversation with Falk Wolsky! Stay tuned for Part 2, coming soon!

Show Notes:

Advice For Someone Starting a Business or Non-Profit

On Episode 106 of The Edge of Innovation, Jacob Young is sharing some advice for someone starting a business or nonprofit organization.

Sections

Maintaining Healthy Rhythms
AI Technology & Mimicking A Person’s Voice
Should We Trust What We Consume or What We See Now?
Is Authentication in Information a Major Issue?
Is Foregoing the Digital World Even An Option?
Will Machines & AI Take Over For The Minds & Hearts of Entrepreneurs?
The Playing Field Is Even For Everyone To Be Able To Innovate
Innovation Is Still A Human Process
Closing
More Episodes
Show Notes

Advice For Someone Starting a Business or Non-Profit

Paul: So, one final question. What would be the one piece of advice that you would give to somebody starting something? I know what you’re doing isn’t a business, but I’m sure there’s a lot of angst that you’ve had, a lot of joy you’ve had, a lot of good, a lot of bad, a lot of hard, a lot of easy. And what would be that one piece of advice that you would give out to somebody?

Jacob: For beginning something new, either an entrepreneur?

Paul: Yeah.

Maintaining Healthy Rhythms

Jacob: Interesting. A friend of mine here in the city is – he’s about my age. Maybe a little bit younger than me. He’s an entrepreneur, and he’s not a Christian. We’re very good friends, and he has started up two restaurants here in Manchester. And I think the similarity for what our experiences is, is that if you are starting something new, you are dreaming something into existence, and that’s a very scary dynamic, and it can be a very all-consuming dynamic. Whether it’s a church, or a restaurant, or a tech enterprise, a software, an app – whatever it is – you’re dreaming something into existence, and you’re banking your livelihood on that happening. And so, it can be very all-consuming.

And what my friend and I are regularly kind of checking in on each other with is, do you have healthy rhythms so that you are a whole human being regardless of what happens with whatever you’re starting up?

Paul: Your enterprise.

Jacob: Yeah, whatever your enterprise is. A church, an app, whatever. I think that tends to be where I would aim at for, men and women, young men and women, whoever, who are starting up something new is, not only do you have the ability…

Are you honest with assessing what do healthy rhythms look like for me, and human health look like for me? Do you have people around you – whether it’s a spouse, or close friends, or family – that are able to hold you through that?

Because I think we all have, like, “Oh, I’m fine. You know, I can work eighty hours a week.” Well, you’re going to do eighty hours a week for forty weeks straight, and you’re going to be checked into a psych ward. It’s not a matter of if. It’s a matter of when. And having people who can legitimately say to you, “Hey, you need to re-evaluate,” or, “Let’s re-evaluate your healthy rhythms so that you’re whole.” And some of that includes talking to people who had no relationship to what you’re doing. I have no idea what it’s like to start a restaurant, but I really enjoy hanging out with my friend, and he helps me keep my head above water. Just like it’s good to talk to somebody that has no relationship to the church.

But, a part of maintaining healthy rhythms is maintaining healthy rhythms with people who are just not doing the same thing that you’re doing. You know, and the reason that’s important is because, if you’re actually killing it doing whatever your enterprise is, you’re going to networking out your eyeballs with people that are in the same, or close to the same, sphere of life that you’re trying to build within. Right? I mean, if you’re trying to do an app, you’re trying to get investors who invest in the tech world, so you’re still talking to the same people that are within your sphere. You need to get out and go to a cooking class and learn how to make some killer baked salmon or whatever it is you’re going to make.

It’s a part of being a whole person, and everything about your life is not going to be consumed by what you’re trying to build. So that’s, kind of, where I would go with if you’re trying to start something, a church or not, that’s where my mind goes.

Paul: Ah, I think wise advice.

Jacob: Yeah.

AI Technology & Mimicking A Person’s Voice

Jacob: Can I ask you a question?

Paul: Of course.

Jacob: In the tech world, in The Edge of Innovation, I am increasingly concerned about AI technology as it relates to mimicking and emulating other people, to put it in a broad way. So, I would be curious what your advice is. So, this last week, you have this whole deepfake that’s been on the Internet for a few years now, and now this is being used in very inventive ways.

And so, I’m not sure if you’re familiar with who Jordan Peterson is, but he writes this article this last week saying somebody had made a website using his voice, and you could type in whatever you wanted, and it would emulate his voice from recordings. It used machine learning and AI technology to take his voice and then say whatever you’re typing. So you can type in Mein Kampf, and he’s going to recite it with his voice. And so now it becomes a question of, “Did Jordan Peterson actually say that or not?”

And the concerning thing that was in that article, regardless of the person involved, was that technology is now… basically, they only need about six hours of audio recording to be able to produce that type of technology for anybody.

Paul: Right.

Jacob: That hit my radar immediately, because I’m like, “As a pastor, I put out forty minutes or whatever of audio recording on the Internet every week.” And, as a podcaster, you do similarly.

Paul: Right.

Jacob: And it’s just — It’s deeply concerning as to, “Okay, how do I understand that? But then, what are the ramifications and anticipations and liabilities I need to be aware of moving forward?” Does that question, or does that dynamic make sense at all?

Paul: Absolutely. I mean, you, you mentioned two different things. You know, you were worried about AI and its applications, and then you went into a very specific example of a technology, mechanism, or methodology to do something. They’re very different questions. The whole concept of AI, or artificial intelligence — There’s a point at which something becomes intelligent or not intelligent, and I don’t think we’re really anywhere near that. We have really expert systems that can infer things from larger sets of data than we can. We infer things. You know, somebody’s, is rude to you. You can infer they have a bad day or whatever that is, or we can infer enormous amounts of information with the tone of voice, body language, all that kind of stuff.

And so, systems — computer systems — will be able to be taught, in some ways, to do some of that, but it’s not true artificial intelligence and machine learning. I mean, it is, but it’s not necessarily what science fiction talks about as AI.

Should We Trust What We Consume or What We See Now?

Now, having said that, your concern is not unfounded. It’s not fake. It’s true. I mean, the fact of the matter is, is that I can emulate a voice, or I can send an email that looks like it came from you, or I can do all these different things. So, the bottom line is, I think, that we are in a situation where you won’t be able to trust what you consume or see. That’s the only thing we can do. It’s that, how do you know?

I have a friend who has a Wikipedia page that is quite controversial, but he has a high-resolution scan of his signature there. And it’s like, “Why would you put your signature up there?” I think he even has his Social Security number on there. And it’s a very interesting question. So, now, the point becomes that if you see something with his signature on it, did he sign it, or did somebody put it there from using his high-res sample? And you can’t necessarily know that. So then, it becomes, “Oh, I attest to that, indeed did sign it.”

“Is that your signature?”

“Yes, it is.”

“Is that your Signature?”

“Well, I believe it is.”

They are very different answers.

Jacob: Yeah.

Paul: It will be the fact that I could very easily post something with anybody’s name that I want to. I mean, well — You know, just yesterday one of the senators had a fake — or an alias Twitter account that was actually him, and then, it’s like, “Well, why would you do that?” I mean, regardless of what your political persuasion is, well, what was your point in doing that? And you look at the story that the person has been trying to tell over that. So, it’s very interesting. We have to reconsider the way we validate the sources of information we have.

Is Authentication in Information a Major Issue?

Jacob: Yeah. That’s what I was thinking. Like, it seems like authentication is a major issue at that point.

Paul: It is, but I don’t believe there will be a technical solution to it. It’s extremely difficult. In the world that we’ve created, there are just too many cracks in the foundation. And I’m very frustrated with the Equifax breach, and what has happened to that company is virtually nothing. I mean, even if they get a quarter or a half-a-billion-dollar fine, it’s not a big deal, you know. Nobody goes without pay, and they make that money back in a couple of years, and everything’s fine. But yet, now, my personal information is out and available for other people, and so, what did you expect, I guess.

The bottom line is that with the genies out of the bottle, there’s nothing we can do to put that information back in the bottle, and our systems are built in such a way that they’re built by humans, and there’s a lot of mistakes that humans make, and most of the issues that we see with technology are because humans made a mistake. So, I look forward to finding out what I’m going to say in the future.

But, it’ll be a lot about relationships and saying, “No, that doesn’t sound like Paul. That doesn’t sound like Jacob. That doesn’t sound like Bob. That doesn’t sound like Julie, you know.”

And we’re going to have to get to it and it’s going to be interesting. I mean, there’s been a lot of science fiction written about things like that. Photoshop was the first thing. It’s fairly easy now to Photoshop something and make a person that wasn’t there, there.

Jacob: Yeah.

Paul: And this is just the next level. It was difficult at one time to put somebody into a photo. Now, it’s virtually trivial.

The same thing will happen with our voices. The same thing will happen with our presence, our GPS locations, and all that kind of stuff. It’s an interesting, interesting new world.

Is Foregoing the Digital World Even An Option?

Jacob: Do you feel like that would be an argument, then, for foregoing the digital world?

Paul: I don’t think it’s an option. I mean, you’ll have your outliers of people who say, “Oh, I forego that,” but your sheer absence will almost point to where you are and who you are. I don’t believe there is a digital world. It’s just the world. I’m not negative or positive about it. It’s just the way it is. You lived on a street when you grew up, and you had neighbors, and that was the fact. It was that fact. And they had right assumptions about your family and wrong ones and whatever. They heard snippets of conversations, and they formed opinions, and they heard complete conversations and formed different opinions. It’s all the same thing, except there is a great ability to mess with people now.

Jacob: Yeah.

Paul: So how was that?

Will Machines & AI Take Over For The Minds & Hearts of Entrepreneurs?

Jacob: Well, I’m curious – Again, maybe this is a silly question. I wonder, you were saying with the AI and is working with a larger data set in terms of machine learning, or kind of, that realm of things, do you foresee that the future of — even talking about the nature of your podcast of innovation — that the innovations and entrepreneurial work that comes out in the future, could that basically be pumped out from a machine rather than from the minds and hearts of entrepreneurs? That is, if the nature of entrepreneurial is engaging with problems and finding a solution, are computers the front edge of determining what those problems are and finding solutions rather than humans? Does that make sense?

Paul: Yeah, it does. I don’t know that. It’s interesting. In teaching innovation, you’re teaching people to think differently, and in developing AI or machine learning, we’re trying to teach a computer to think — or to emulate thinking by sheer volume of processing power. And it’s usually the subtleties that make an innovation innovative. There is an “aha” moment that’s like, “Oh, that’s what it was.”

I was just rewatching the introduction of the iPhone, and as Steve was dancing about with the thing, we’re talking about an iPod, an Internet device, a phone. Are you getting it? An iPod, an Internet, and a phone. An iPod, an int— You know, so it’s just one device.

And very, very interesting, in reading and watching some of the videos about the gestation period of the iPhone and what happened during that time, and how some of it was innovative. One of the most innovative things was the ability for when you scrolled with your finger, that it had a rubber band effect at the bottom.

Jacob: Yeah.

Paul: That made the human interface better. Now, could a machine figure that out? I guess I’d like to think that someday it could, but before that was… I mean, when I say it now, it’s an obvious thing, that you can sympathize with and say, “Oh yeah, I see that.” You can’t necessarily remember how bad other devices that didn’t have that rubber banding effect were to use. I do, because I’m a nerd techie, and I remember that kind of stuff, and I saw phones and devices that didn’t have that rubber banding effect.

So, there’s this thing, in data science, called fuzzy, fuzz… Well, it’s fuzzy math or fuzzy data, and the thing is that where you take the data you have, and you make it a little bit more, and a little bit less, and you change different parameters of it to see what happens, and it has to do with chaos and things like that. And so, as, as we start to apply those things to data sets, I think they’ll be tremendously beneficial to help us realize things that we wouldn’t have realized otherwise.

Now, having said that, I don’t know that we’re — You know, the synthesis of something — That rubber banding effect is a human realization that we needed to have a way to experience something in a different way. if you were to go to a native on an island, and say, “Here’s two phones,” and they’ve never seen a phone before. “Do you like the one with the rubber banding effect or the one with out?” I don’t know that they’d have a context to make a decision. So that’s difficult, I think, for machines to do that without a lot more data about that.

Now, I think you could probably build an expert system or an AI that worked on just interface things, and then, as the people started to feed into it different options, it could probably meld those together into the better option that we couldn’t do.

The Playing Field Is Even For Everyone To Be Able To Innovate

Jacob: Yeah. But, then, it seems like the controlling factor in terms of what qualifies as innovation is the human factor, not merely the parts and pieces that actually end up being put together.

Paul: Right. Well, that’s true. Yeah. I have a good friend that says – he was giving a lecture in Washington, D.C. just a few blocks from the Library of Congress – and it’s all the answers are there. And now, all the answers are in your pocket. You just need to know what question to ask.

Jacob: Yeah.

Paul: And so, none of us are uneven. The field is completely even for us to be able to innovate. It’s really a thought process. There’s nothing I intrinsically have that’s better than you or than the person across the street. We are all able to innovate similarly. Now, we might have differences in the way we can execute that innovation, but a lot of that comes with persistence.

Innovation Is Still A Human Process

Jacob: Yeah. So that’s the interesting. That’s a helpful dynamic. It’s that, at the end of the day, the innovation is still a human process. It’s not merely a — Maybe that was where my question was wrong-footed. It’s merely a problem–solution process. It’s a human process, at the end of the day.

Paul: I think so. I think so. But I do think machines can assist on that. They could probably predict better than a human could what you might like to have for dinner if you gave them the information. You know, “I had a hard day. I had this, this, and this,” and, “Okay, well, then. If it’s going to be comfort food, okay, let’s make pasta.” You know, so, however you’re wired, or if you have celiac disease, they’re not going to suggest that. So, it’s all data, and it’s an optimized fit.

Humans, we process enormous amounts of data, and don’t underestimate the amount of data that we process. We also filter out good and bad data, and machines don’t have necessarily that ability to weigh what’s important and what’s not important yet. So, I don’t know.

Jacob: Actually, well, that’s helpful, yeah.

Paul: I don’t know if that’s, you know —

Jacob: No, I appreciate you letting me get into the interviewer chair and ask you a few questions on that.

Paul: Oh, absolutely.

Closing

Paul: All right, well, we’ve been talking with Jacob Young. Do you have an official title?

Jacob: I’m the Great and Mighty Jacob Young.

Paul: No, no. Wasn’t it — What were we saying? It was just yesterday that we were talking about — Oh, Mister Awesome, that’s right.

Jacob: Yes, yeah.

Paul: Is that on your business card?

Jacob: That is, yeah.

Paul: All right. Well, we’ve been talking with Jacob Young, a church-planting pastor in Manchester, New Hampshire, and we’ll have links to his website and some of his blogs.

I think it’d be good for people who are listening who might be interested to follow him and see what he has to say, as he’s sort of on one of the cutting edge of our society right now. New England is really in a post-church time, and you’ve chosen to go and really plant a church, start a church in a hard area.

Jacob: Yeah. Exciting times, and I’m enjoying it. It’s a fun time, you know.

Paul: Cool. Thank you, sir.

Jacob: Yeah, Paul, thanks for your time.

More Episodes:

This is Part 3 of 3 of our conversation with Jacob Young!
If you missed Part 1, you can listen to it here!
If you missed Part 2, you can listen to it here!

Show Notes:

© 2025 Paul Parisi

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑