Information Architecture - Information Priority

[grwim]

Suggest the way to structure the order of information priority... at least 1-3 if not 1-5

[grwim]

Information Priority - ACRO [For ACRO itself, not just the Gap graph - the Gap graph should better represent these points anyway] (Roughly written - focus is on content over style here) {Avoided reference to 'policy'}

1. A world filled with robots is just around the corner
2. But they are going to be different than we thought - connected to large ‘brains’ in the cloud, instead of having their own
3. These ‘super’ brains will control millions, eventually billions of robots - some of which will live in our own homes
4. Structures are not in place to ensure that we can trust these super brains and safely live amongst the robots they control
5. To address this gap we need new approaches (ACRO)

@thedavidprice

[thedavidprice]

This is a great start. And maybe, running with "1" above, it's not that it's going to be different but that it's going to require cloud connectivity + processing --> there's no other way forward in the near-term.

Running with this, can we expand on "structures in place"... What's missing and what's at stake? Trust, safety... potential, etc. are at stake (and what else?). What's missing, including but also beyond policy: infrastructure, collaboration, standardization, certification, guidelines, ethical guidelines, risk mitigation, consumer transparency mechanisms, public awareness, public policy and law, etc. See this project and page for how they're addressing consumer technology and addiction --> http://humanetech.com/problem/

Gap Diagram

How I'd structure the priority of ideas to visuall communicate:

1. Gap
2. AI + Robotics Tech
3. "Policy" (or structure, foundation, etc.)

Current communication issue with the graph is that Gap is not the predominant visual -- making it a different color area or something like that might help.

An overall challenge with using a graph like this is that people are trained to see an arrow "up and to the right" as a good thing --> it's a commonly used visual metaphor/symbol that indicates progress. I don't yet know how, but it would be better to somehow show that AI+Robotics+Tech are constrained/limited/etc by lack of structure.

[grwim]

Information Priority - v2 Note: Great input! The human tech site is a great example of communicating a problem effectively. Note1: Avoided mentioning policy directly as it is not only banal, but such language can also be threatening to stakeholders (i.e. potential ACRO members). Note2: (RE there's no other way forward in the near-term) Although hardware may get small enough in the future - such that we don’t need cloud-run robots - the advantages of a cloud-based approach (e.g. all robots get to learn from the mistake of a single robot) will probably result in most robots 'sharing' a ‘brain’ in the cloud for quite some time.

1. A world filled with robots is just around the corner 2. But they are going to require cloud-based intelligence if they are to possess human-like capabilities

• The energy consumption and size of hardware necessitates this for the foreseeable future
• The advantages of a cloud-based approach (e.g. all robots get to learn from the mistake of a single robot) also contribute the the certainty of this development 3. These ‘super brains’ will control millions, eventually billions of robots - some of which will live in our own homes 4. Structures are not in place to ensure that we can trust these brains and safely live amongst the robots they control
• Without standards and corresponding certifications, we won’t be able to discern which robots we should trust - or asses how we can trust them.
• Missing collaboration to develop infrastructure today - to ensure robots we can trust tomorrow - makes robots that compromise our safety and privacy more likely.
• A lack of accountability and consumer transparency mechanisms will result in greater exploitation of humans via robots.
• For the full potential of cloud robotics to be realized, such gaps need to be addressed before - not after - they result in tragic events that establish persistent distrust of robots. 5. To address these concerns, we need new approaches (ACRO)

RE Gap Diagram Agreed on your ordering of information priority for this diagram.

RE making GAP predominant visual: Agreed - using an approach like this (different color area) would help: https://mk0blogacton3ngqa7ix.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Gap-Analysis-clr_illstrtn.png

RE up-and-to-right arrow indicates progress issue: Good point on "up and to the right" being casually perceived as a good thing. Some pushback on 'AI+Robotics+Tech are constrained/limited/etc by lack of structure.': AI+Robotics+Tech aren't constrained by the gap, per se - they are currently progressing at an increasingly increasing rate - structure or not. The issue is more where AI+Robotics+Tech will end up in terms of how AI+Robotics+Tech will be supervised, designed, and used, which is where the present lack of structure comes in, no? Yes - if where AI+Robotics+Tech endsup results in tragic events, there may be less resources spent on progressing the domain (but maybe not). But I think the key point is that where AI+Robotics+Tech ends up ('Where X ends up' is a concept that highly-expressible in a diagram...) is determined by the structure we develop and establish today. So instead of 'AI+Robotics+Tech are constrained/limited/etc by lack of structure' maybe it would be 'Whether the the best manifestation of AI+Robotics+Tech will be realized will be determined by the structure we establish now.' Thoughts?

I sketched out a rough diagram that incorporates such an approach:

I'm not suggesting that all of the components detailed should be included in our final Gap diagram - many aspects of this sketch merely served to help clarify my thinking.

Aspects of note: (1) I think it may be helpful to have two temporal points of significance: 'NOW' and 'Attainment of scalable, cloud robotics w/ human capabilities' - this helps underscore the importance of acting now, rather than later, even though 'cloud robotics with human-like capabilities' can seem outlandish, abstract, and distant. (2) Represent the range of outcomes we could end up with and how the actions we take today determine our trajectory, and thus where we'll end up - same reasons as (1) (3) Redefine the Y axis as 'development of structure to ensure safe, trustworthy cloud robotics' - this way both X and Y axis represent progress, and this progress can be correctly parsed as being progress in a positive direction (so long as enough progress in Y, as progress along X). (4) Not sure how we should define 'Gap' - accumulated Gap to date + Gap to address going forward, or just Gap to address going forward - The first approach would be more visually compelling, but the second is most relevant.

Look forward to hearing you thoughts!

[thedavidprice]

Created a Google Doc with the outline of numbers 1-5. Great start for copy on the home page: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IRpHOqBOfTPPbMUjD0d57awH1_KX3XffycUm15_KMQI/edit?usp=sharing

[thedavidprice]

@grwim This line of thinking is much more convincing. Specifically communicating 1) the potential, great outcome VS 2) the less desirable, inevitable outcome. Feels like the right kind of use for "up and to the right."

You're headed in a good direction with the graph sketch. I suggest you take another stab at iteration:

• don't be afraid of information density. But in that case just make sure we have a well-structured visual IA and all included info is meaningful to our hypothesis.
• the concept of showing two potential future outcomes is strong. Expand on the list of "great outcomes"
• note: the two lines of "approach" direction are visually redundant to the "best case" and "worst case" line. try to combine the two visual symbols in ways that are complementary but not redundant.
• agreed about your reference visual -- showing gap as a colored area is more prominent
• maybe "gap" = "missed opportunity"?

Keep at it. This is good momentum and directional thinking.

[grwim]

Latest stab at Gap diagram

Definitely room for improvement, but wanted to open up for discussion

@thedavidprice @alo9507

[thedavidprice]

@grwim I’m liking this. A lot. Great information density. Colors are working and communicate information well.

Some minor suggestions:

• [x] Lables + Definition: could use typography heirarchy to visiually highlight Lable over definition. E.g. for Ideal, Current, and Imperative —> keep as bold but potentially increase font size a touch. And for definition could unbold or maybe leave as is if changes to Label are sufficient. (Make sure everything is still readable.)
• [x] X, Y Labels: could do a similar thing here with typography to visually highlight Label and make definition/description lower priority. Might apply this to “Time” and “Mass Deployment…” by using a slightly lighter tone of black (not much but just enough to be noticeable)
• [x] I’d use “Mass Deployment” and either remove “of Humanoids” or use “of robotics”
• [x] Can you find a way to make "[3] Imperative” line and lable more distinct/prominent in the visual IA? It can work as is, but it’s a little lost in the other dotted lines. Could be a very subtle tweak needed to just make it ‘pop’ more. Could boost the text lable prominence as well.

Definitely show this to Karl sooner than later.

Given timing, you could ship this as-is for tomorrow and come back to tweaks. It’s a huge improvement over current. Your call based on availability.

[grwim]

Great feedback! Thanks David.

Yup! I've shared with Karl at a couple points over this process.

Suggestions incorporated:

@alo9507 - I have an SVG version for you

[thedavidprice]

close via #20