All posts by Peter Mangiafico

Can the Internet change your brain?

I recently finished reading the new book by Nicholas Carr called “The Shallows“. The premise of the book is that technology used to carry information has important implications for how our brains evolve over time.  Watching television news coverage utilizes different parts of our brain than reading a newspaper, and although the information may be similar, the way it is absorbed and processed is different.

The Internet is profoundly different from virtually every other previous technology for a couple reasons:

  • it has hyperlinked text, making it easy to move from one area to another
  • it has a vast, almost unlimited, amount of information available on demand via powerful search engines like Google

When you also add in the ability for two-way communication, blurring the lines between producers and consumers, you have a profoundly new broadcast mechanism.  There is of course not profound and there is of course much to celebrate in these technologies.  The ability to quickly locate virtually any piece of information instantly has made research easier and faster.  The ability to communicate with anyone in the world brings families and friends closer together.

But each of these technologies has downsides, and Mr Carr explores them in depth and discusses how their use, or more precisely, their overuse, can lead to changes in the physiology of our brains.

His main point is that the vast quantity of information, parceled over web pages, and read quickly and primarily on computer screens, leads to a shift in learning patterns.  We move from reading longer passages in a linear fashion over to searching, and then quickly scanning web pages. Mr Carr provides evidence that this activity causes the parts of our brain responsible for filtering and scanning to be strengthened, while the parts of our brain responsible for deep reading and comprehension are weakened.

Short term memory can hold only a handful of items at any one time.  In order to transfer that knowledge into long term memory, the human brain needs some time to process it, place it into a larger framework of relevance, and then process it.  Mr Carr argues that searching and scanning, the predominant form of reading while web browsing, is not conducive to the transfer of knowledge into long term storage, nor of its true comprehension.  In this model, we simply search for information when we need it, and trust that when we need it again, Google will be there for us.  We quickly scan it, decide which pieces are important to us at the moment and use them.   If we find a link that seems interesting, we follow it, sending us down another pathway, causing the place we just were to slide out of our short term view.  Essentially, we use the Internet as a form of massive, virtual short term memory, like a little window cut into a piece of paper and being run over the pool of knowledge.  At any one time, we see only the pieces of information behind that little window, but not how they might fit together into a larger cohesive framework of knowledge.  For this we need the long term memory and deep thinking, and these are what become weak when we don’t give our brains an opportunity to absorb information at a more relaxed pace.

So does the Internet make us dumb?  I don’t think so, but it does change our behaviors.  I can certainly attest to finding it harder to focus, especially when I am in front of a computer.  There is something about a book that invites you in, asks you to close the door and allows you to forget about the rest of the world.  There is something entirely the opposite about an open web browser – it beckons you to go far and wide on a virtual safari.  Each is a very different type of activity, and there is value in both.  I sensed this before and knew something was going amiss, but reading this book has made me put down the computer and read more books, and it’s hard to argue with that.

Next time I’ll talk about some software I’ve found to help improve the web browsing experience when you actually want to slow your brain down for a bit and allow some of that information to be converted into actual knowledge.

Scientific Literacy and Why It Is Critical

Bertrand Russel, British philosopher, once said “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”  This quote neatly summarizes a cognitive bias known as the “Dunning-Kruger effect“.  The effect, as described by Justin Kruger and David Dunning in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in 1999, is one in which “people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it”.  In other words, they are too dumb to realize they are dumb.  Fortunately, there is a way out of the worst results of this effect, and it involves promoting scientific literacy in schools and in the media.

I am currently working on education and outreach efforts for the NASA Astrobiology Institute.  In these efforts, we seek to better inform the public as to how their tax dollars invested in NASA are used.  Not only do we need to train future scientists and engineers for NASA, we also need to train the public to understand, appreciate and fund their work.  We also need to produce members of society for whom scientific literacy and methodology is the expected norm.  We need to remove the oft-perceived barrier between scientists and the public, and produce better results in large public policy debates.

These policy debates, such as health care reform, financial regulation, and climate change policy, are often dominated by emotion, opinion, and biased lobbying by groups with short-term economic issues in mind.  Facts, however, do not have political agendas.  There is only set of facts, and those are backed by evidence and devoid of emotion.  The scientific process of discovery is based on finding and refining these facts, even when they contradict our own beliefs, preconceptions, or previous scientific findings.

If our goals include the long term custody of the world, then we need to move public discussions towards evidence-based fact as much as possible.  We need the public to understand, appreciate, and demand that policy decisions in diverse areas like health delivery, energy production, and more be made on the basis of evidence.  Science literacy and reducing the gap between scientists and the public is one mechanism for achieving this goal.

As an example of preconceptions, the unusually heavy snowstorms in the eastern US this past winter demonstrated the lack of understanding of basic scientific principles within the general media, a significant fraction of the general public, as well as many elected officials.  There were numerous discussion of how the snowfall was evidence that “global warming” was not occurring.  Similarly, heat waves in the summer sometimes produce the opposite reactions from the media, overshadowing more compelling evidence for climate change. This creates a confusing message that undermines confidence in carefully researched insights.  Absent from many of these discussions is the fact that local events (either in time or geography) are highly variable.  Our understanding must see these short term events in the context of the general trends as it is the study of the long term trends that increase knowledge of the system. While the eastern US was receiving cold weather in January and February, a simple calculation shows that it represents about 0.1% of the surface of the Earth and is not a representative indicator of the Earth’s climate.  Such care is rarely evident in the popular media, and this indicates the severity of the problem of scientific illiteracy.

Another common misconception is that when a previously publicized scientific result is updated, changed or overturned, this indicates scientists have been wrong before, and therefore shouldn’t be trusted at all.  What this view fails to appreciate is one of the cornerstones of scientific advancement – every result is subject to change based on new evidence, new understanding, and new experimental results.  What the public sees as a case of scientists being wrong or changing their minds is often normal advancement in a profession which is highly critical of itself and subjects any claims to scrutiny.  If only politicians would subject themselves to the same self-critical reviews as scientists, the world might be a much better place.

There will certainly be debates and issues for which emotion, faith and other inherently unquantifiable areas are important.  But for most policy issues and most professions, fact, evidence, and logic are a much more productive way to solve problems.  Now we need to take message to our schools and to the media so that we get better results from the next generation of leaders than we are getting from the current generation.


Baked motherboard to go

I’ve got a Toshiba Tecra M4 Tablet PC.  Actually, I’ve got two of them.  And neither of them have worked for about five months now.

I started with one, about two and half years ago.  It was my primary PC for a year and a half, and I used it to develop software first in Microsoft ASP and VB.Net and later in Ruby onRails.  It’s a great computer, with a 1400×1050 high-res 14″ screen that can rotate into tablet mode and be drawn on, a fairly quick processor, not too heavy, and generally just a nice computer.

I used it to start coding on the EOL.org website. I used it to take notes in tablet mode.  I used to build a messaging/networking system that I sold to a meeting registration company. I used it to train in Flight Simulator while I got my pilot’s license.  I even installed Ubuntu on a separate partition and used it to code in Rails.  Its a great Linux laptop.

Then one day I booted it up and the video display went crazy, almost like the matrix.  I rebooted – no dice.  External monitor didn’t work either, and not even the BIOS screen came up correctly – which is really bad news, since this means it’s likely not the OS or the video driver. Yuck.

It was out of warranty, so I did some Google searching and found many others with the same problem.  The problem was a cooked video card, which is discrete but is soldered on the motherboard.  It seems to happen a lot with the Tecra M4, since the fan on the video card doesn’t come on enough and lets the card get very very hot.  The solution was a complete motherboard replacement, to the tune of $550-$600.

I still needed a computer to work on the EOL.org website and although I was still contracting with them, I was preparing to start working full-time as a regular employee, so they bought me a new computer.  I went to a Mac, and got a nice shiny white Macbook.  This was a truly great computer: lighter, faster, and OS X was much better for developing in Rails.

But I wasn’t quite ready to give up on the tablet.  So I looked on eBay and found a used Tecra M4 for $500.  I figured I would buy it, swap the hard drive out and it would be my computer again.  I would then have two batteries, two power bricks, and a machine I could canablize for parts.   So I ordered it, and a week later was back in action with the tablet. I even installed Vista and it worked great.  The handwriting recognition in tablet mode was spookily good.

About seven months later, I had the same problem with the video.  The matrix was back – no BIOS, no external monitor, nothing.  Another fried video card.  I still had my Macbook of course, so I resigned myself to forgetting about the tablet, cursing Toshiba’s engineers, and set both Tecra M4s on my bookshelf, next to my vintage 1999 Palm Pilot, and cell phones of bygone eras.  It was a totem pole of retired hardware.

Until yesterday.  Something struck me – I had an urge to get the tablet back in action.  So I did some more Google searching, and found some people suggesting the video card could be resurrected with — heat.  A similar issue with XBox 360s was discussed and people had pictures of XBox motherboards in their ovens, next to pancakes on their griddle, and so on.  Yes, blasting it with exactly the same thing that killed it was supposed to bring it back to life.  Heat gun, oven, hair dryer, whatever you had.

The theory is that the overheating of the video card due to a poorly designed fan and heatsink causes it to become separately slightly from the motherboard.  The heat gun causes it to sink back in and become resoldered.  Sounds like a load of crap, but like the other folks talking about it in the forums, I went through the “what the hell?  its busted anyway!” thought process.

So last night I took one of the Tecra’s apart, covered the rest of the motherboard with aluminum foil for shielding, uncovered the video card, and did some computer baking with a heat gun.  You know, the tool you use to strip wallpaper.  I pointed it at my computer (see the photos below).

The motherboard
The motherboard
Cooking time
Cooking time

After cooking the video card for a bit and feeling the warm glow coming from the motherboard, I shut it off.  I knew it was time when Karen said “it smells like something is melting!”.   I watched a couple innings of the Phillies-Yankees game while I waited for it to cool.

I popped in the hard drive, flipped it over, turned it back on, and voila – the tablet is back in action!

Its alive
It's alive

Unbelievable.  The Internet has told me something useful.  And now I can browse said Internet on my resurrected tablet PC.  Not sure how long it will last…but it’s better than a dead tablet.  Next project: connect the power cord for the fan on the video card to the USB power, so it runs continuously (like it should).  Or maybe just get one of those laptop cooling pads.

PS. I did the same thing on the ‘backup’ tablet PC that I got off eBay, and it also worked, although there are still some odd colors when Windows come up.  But at least it boots and is not totally dead.  Maybe it just needs some more quality time “under the gun”.

PPS. I still like the Mac better.