From: bill.sloman@ieee.org   
      
   On 4/12/2025 2:48 am, john larkin wrote:   
   > On Mon, 1 Dec 2025 11:25:49 -0800, Joerg    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 12/1/25 10:56 AM, john larkin wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 05:07:57 +1100, Bill Sloman    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> [...]   
   >>   
   >>>> Brainstorming is much less ambitious - it's just a mechanism for getting   
   >>>> people to think of less obvious potential solutions to the problem that   
   >>>> needs to be solved. There's a well known problem in multi-parameter   
   >>>> curve fitting where the search algorithm latches onto a local minimum in   
   >>>> the search space, and you can need to get the search process to check   
   >>>> out a bunch of more or less arbitrary points to get a feel for how deep   
   >>>> the minima may get.   
   >>>   
   >>> Even one brain has a lot parallel processing capability. The advantage   
   >>> of brainstorming is that it randomizes searches to break out of   
   >>> conventional wisdom, namely local minima. That's why an intern can   
   >>> inspire a genius.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Or an external consultant. EMC issue, lots of head scratching. Only   
   >> happened every few seconds for whatever reason. Thinking, gazing out the   
   >> window. "What's that thing up there on top of the hill that glistens in   
   >> the suns every few seconds?" ... "That? Nothing, it's just a military   
   >> radar. Oh, OH DANG!" ... closed the metal blinds, no more EMI, opened   
   >> the blinds, EMI was back.   
   >>   
   >>> What's fun is to brainstorm a project that's well along, and maybe   
   >>> reboot the design. Sunk cost thinking is the enemy there.   
   >>   
   >> Or "We've always done it that way so what's wrong with it now?" thinking.   
   >   
   > Or worse, "we've already wasted $200K on a stupid idea, so we don't   
   > want a better, cheaper design now."   
      
   Nobody wastes $200k on a stupid idea, but once you have spent $200k   
   working out that a tolerably sensible idea wasn't actually good enough,   
   the enthusiasm for doing something different isn't great.   
      
   There's also the case where over-enthusiastic management can mess up the   
   development of a perfectly sensible idea, by cutting corners in the   
   development of more complicated electronics than the management is used   
   to dealing with. The Cambridge Instruments multisampling electron beam   
   tester eventually worked, but the development took a year or so longer   
   than it should done because its first project manager didn't see the   
   point of design reviews and skipped them as a waste of time. Finding and   
   fixing a bug in a schematic is lot faster and cheaper than finding it in   
   an assembled board.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Bill Sloman, Sydney   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)