Pondering M&M's

I was poking around the 'Net and found several lesson plans posted by teachers/professors for other teachers/professors. And a bunch of them involved using M&Ms as a way to demonstrate/illustrate the concepts being taught. I read a couple of these and actually learned a couple of things. One article in particular got me thinking about something I am observing here at work. The article was on demonstrating the radioactive decay of an isotope. And I am wondering if this is somehow related to the two colors (either red or green) in Holiday M&M's in the following observations...

1) the ratio of red to green as they are pored out of the bag - there seem to be more green
OR
2) the ratio of red to green as they appear to be consumed - people appear to prefer green

Yes, these are deep thoughts indeed.

With regard to the ratio out of the bag there are a few possibilities that come to mind. First is the conspiracy theory; where some bean counter (or m&m counter) figured out that red food dye is more expensive (0r some other reason red cost more) and to save money made less red M&Ms. I like this solution better than they common ploy food manufactures use - where they keep the packaging the same size, put less in it, put some adverb on the packing to make you believe it's a better value and change you the same (or more)!

The second possibility that occurred to me is what if (as my observations above show) people just like green M&M's better so they make more of them. Is it as simple that red M&M's just like black licorice jelly beans - they have their fans - but they are a minority. My mind starts wondering on prejudices and stereotypes from here; I think I will say more on this later...

A third possibility is the chaos/random theory - that my measly sample of 5lbs of M&M's just not large enough to draw any conclusions. This is just not as much fun as some of the other reasons.

Every hear the one about why there are so many socks out there without a mate; it's because socks are actually the larvae form of coat hangers. Which is why you always have so many of those. Could something like that be true for M&M's that the all the red one's have "hatched" and become green ones. I guess the opposite could also be true depending upon the larvae time length.

Lastly, could this all be related to the fact that some time ago there was a red M&M scare back in the 1970's; where (if my recollection is correct) they were pulled from circulation. So now they are back. But have people really forgotten? So are people consciously or subconsciously avoiding the red ones and the manufacturer knows it - so they make fewer of them?

Hmm. Just needed to share some of the scary thoughts that roll around in my mind. I think this is one of those times when sometimes words don't mean anything.

Happy New Year!!

Is Yukon Cornelius an Architect?

This blog entry has sat as an idea with no text for over a year now. The reason why? I have no idea what an Architect does; I thought I did, but it’s like grabbing a handful of smoke. Reach, grab, and peek inside … nothing – just like Yukon Cornelius. I have considered myself some sort of an architect (maybe not in title but in the role of) for a long time now.

Since I consider myself an Architect; I want to find ways to make myself a better one. What better way than to read and talk to others about their ideas. So I took to reading a bunch of books and articles on this topic. And while they all make pretty good sense; it’s always sense in the pristine context of a book. It’s easy to define something outside the context things like culture, bureaucracy and politics. Sort of like writing code in PowerPoint; code always compiles/works in PowerPoint. When I talk to people they always seem to define what an Architect does as it pertains to themselves or their organization. Turns out organizations are as varied as the description I am working towards.

My current working description for an Architect is; someone that has enough experience to look at a complex problem and see abstractions. Then uses those abstractions to get something done. Note the lack of detail in what is enough experience and the something is. How much is enough? Far be it for me to put down a number. And depending upon the something I may put some other qualifier in front of the work architect; such as “enterprise” or “solutions”. But how many qualifiers do I have to come up with? What if I downsize my something to a piece of code? Since much of coding is about finding abstractions; does that make it an architectural exercise? Nope that’s design. Reach, grab, peek …

So have found the need for an additional definition that is used to help the first. An Architect is someone that gets stuff done at multiple levels in the organization; which means doing some sort of planning (budget, project, envisioning, etc) one minute, setting up a standard for building wizzy widgets the next and finishing off the day with a little code. This definition helps to differentiate pure coding and design from the larger activity of architecture. Architects are expected to some level of design and coding (again meant in a very broad way to include activities like scripting or installing) but they are often meant to do in a way that is not exclusively coding or design. Reach, grab, peek … Better, but notice how long this entry is getting. This is taking way to long!

When talking to people who have no idea what working in the computer field is like; I use an even simpler version of the second definition. I shorten it to be – “I am a guy who gets stuff done” (sometimes substituting another four letter “s” word for stuff). Hey if you can’t easily describe what you do to a total stranger in an elevator ride then you either need to rethink what you are doing or abstract it down to something easier for them to understand. Unfortunately, this abstraction is so abstract that it encompasses everything.

And nothing. Reach, grab, peek …

Guess I need to rethink my career and start staying at Holiday Inn Express to become proficient at something else.