Instructions Look Easier Than The Actual Experience

I have been watching a lot of cowboy movies and reading a lot of stories about the Wild West. Yesterday I got the idea that it might be fun to get a lever-action rifle to hang on the wall. We constantly hear how easy it is to purchase guns in the United States and so I thought it would be an easy process. It turns out that purchasing a rifle is a lot more complex than I thought. It leads me to believe that people pushing for stricter gun laws have no idea how tough the process actually is. Yes, there are shortcuts, the most glaring one being purchasing one from a private seller.

I am a huge fan of the Second Amendment here in the United States but have never owned a gun. I have often joked about how easy it is to get one in Utah and that we sell them in convenient stores here. That can't be farther from the truth. I read through the process and quickly wondered why people are pushing for more and more gun control. This reminded me of what happened the first I tried a few machine learning experiments.

When I first started playing with machine learning I thought it would be as simple as finding the right algorithm, putting in some training data, and then pulling out some magnificent results. Then I tried my first exercise and realized that the bulk of the work turned out to be massaging the training data into the right format. Then I cycled through a number of different algorithms to figure out which one provided the closest results only to discover that some don't produce consistent values. Finally I had to figure out how to take a trained model and turn it into a production system.

Ultimately I have found that it is not enough to read about doing something, especially technical tasks. In order to truly understand the task at hand, you have to run through the process. It is not enough to read the instructions, you have to pull out your tools and run through the steps yourself.

Thinking About a Masters

I am one of the few people in the Research and Development Department without an advanced degree. I don't really mind as continuing in school has not really appealed to me until the past few weeks. My current degree is in Electrical and Computer Engineering. While in school I had the option of focusing on analog or digital. Naturally I chose the digital option as I really wanted to do stuff with computers and not radios. Now that I have an interest in ham radio, I see the benefits of the analog option but am glad that I chose the digital route.

A natural extension for me would be to go back to school and get a Masters in Computer Science or further my Electrical Engineering degree. I could also try for a Masters of Business Administration (MBA). Unfortunately that sounds really boring. When I got my university diploma it never listed anything other than I have a Bachelor of Science degree. I felt cheated. I could have the same piece of paper even if I spent my time playing in college and got a much simpler degree. So now I am thinking about focusing on Outdoor Leadership or Recreational Management.

Follow my logic. My experience vastly outweighs any accolades I would receive from continuing with a technical degree. At this point in my career, a Masters is merely a checklist item on someone's list. Why not focus on fun? I am already spending a lot of time doing things like SCUBA diving, backcountry skiing, and mountain climbing. Should I want to retire from video games or the tech industry, I could switch careers and become a backpacking or heli-skiing guide.

For those of you looking to do the opposite or to go from a non-technical degree and trying to get a Masters in Computer Science, I don't recommend it. There are some fundamental Math and Physics that you will have to review or learn. I would hate to have to go back and learn to do integration by parts, which is something I did frequently in my electronic circuits classes.

Now if I can only convince my company that an advanced degree in Outdoor Leadership is worth our tuition reimbursement program. I doubt it but it is worth a shot.

Continuing Education and Bad Math

This last Saturday my wife and I attended the 12th Annual Utah Snow and Avalanche Workshop put on by the Utah Avalanche Center. It is the first time I have ever attended and felt it worth my time. It is always good to be reminded of the dangers of winter travel in the backcountry. The moment you become too complacent is when it becomes dangerous.

The first speaker hailed from the National Weather Service and he talked about climate change and what it will do to our winters. For those of us that like to ski, he gave a very depressing talk in that he made the statement that in the next 50 years or so, winter in Utah will cease to exist. Now anyone that knows about long-range forecasts knows that they are always wrong and so it surprised me that there was such a dire prediction stated almost as fact. Anyone that knows anything about weather and statistics knows that you can't apply linear equations to non-linear problems. The long-range weather forecast came from linear regression but we all know that weather forecasting is a non-linear problem. The best you can do is predict weather for the next 7 to 10 days. While I don't dispute that our winters have changed over the past several years, I don't think that we can predict what will happen with the weather in the next 50 years. So in other words, I give the first speaker a failing grade for his math skills.

The next talk extolled the benefits of avalanche safety training but then told everyone in the audience that they are not using that training effectively. He then backed it up with statistics. This time, proper statistics. Interestingly I had to agree with him as did a few of the next speakers.

We next heard about the 4 fatal avalanches we had in Utah last year. We learned things like cause and warning signs to help us avoid similar problems. Then they brought up a panel of backcountry skiers that had been caught in avalanches on the same weekend last year but did not die. That took a lot of courage to go up in front of a bunch of people and talk about mistakes you made. One of the first speakers was the avalanche forecaster who provided an all-is-safe prediction. He felt bad and quite a few people had a false sense of security as we all now know. Then the skiers mentioned a number of red flags that should have had them turning around and not venturing out that day. The biggest was when a lone skier passed a group heading up. The lone skier had been swept downhill 1000 feet in an avalanche and had lost one of his poles. Before Saturday I might have continued up as well. After hearing what happened, I will definitely turn around should something similar happen to me in the future.

My wife and I attended the Workshop to improve our backcountry skills and we both found it to be well worth our time. The workshop cost only $45 and included lunch so we found it to be a good value as well. Furthermore I am an avid user of the Utah Avalanche Center's daily forecast during ski season and felt this helped pay them back for a free service they provide. I'll be back again next year.