Emanuel's Blog

There seems to be a growing opinion that university is a waste, some even claiming that it might be the next bubble to burst. While any institution should be critisized, the arguments against higher education seem to have missed what it’s all about. The university is and should only be a forum and a filter.

University is not hard, not unless you study something you don’t like. The only people I have met that fail subjects do so because they don’t spend the time required. Anyone, and I mean anyone, can obtain a diploma if they want to. And that’s exactly what I mean by filter – university filters out the ones that have some ambition and some will to put in some effort.

The one thing that no other medium can offer, but a university can – and should – is a forum. While I could self-teach me an equivalent amount of knowledge to my education through Wikipedia, the Internet could never offer me the chance to meet like-minded and ambitious students and competent professors. It’s the whole networking-thing that I love the most. It’s invaluable, and utterly difficult to achieve in any other way.

Some of the upcoming rockstar industrialists go to the same school as me. Period.

But a good forum is very difficult to achieve. It’s probably more of a utopia than a present fact. The main reason, I believe, is professors that are damn good at their subject but lack anything that can be related to pedagogy. Also Chalmers’ (incredibly stupid) policy of hiring professors with an impressive academic curriculum shuts out the people with extensive industry experience, with real, tangible and valuable knowledge. I believe that more of the industry perspective would add much quality and balance to education. Bottom line is, let passionate people in and blackboard-staring researchers out. Engage in debates and discussion rather than PowerPoint slides, and a fantastic forum will occur.

If there’s a bubble to burst, it better create action against the confined, nose-in-the-book culture in favour of a forum for people who by any means possible want to push development forward. Academics were born to serve the industry, and it should remain there.

Discuss (1) · Tweet

As an engineer-in-progress it’s easy to observe some new technology and think “wow, this has great potential!”. The technological factors are overwhelming, so much that all other factors for success are disregarded as “details” to be solved along the way. Especially economic ones.

My favourite example is the moon. Certainly we could build a habitable station on the moon. If we can, and the technology is pioneering and awesome – then certainly we should! Right?

Enter the killjoys. The ones asking “and then what?”, “with what money?” and “why?”. I believe, to be successful as an engineer and entrepreneur I have to accept them as relevant. I must even be able to give answers – good and convincing answers. In other words, I must endulge myself in the languages of economics and marketing. Technology is not only about technology. Maybe even the least.

Examples are the thousands of shiny new webapps, services and communities sprouting the web. I dare say most of them are build before a functioning business model is figured out. “Users = money” has been proven not applicable, mainly due to the lack of money within advertising. Facebook, Twitter and many other services simply are not profitable. Why invest and build something, if not for profit?

Perhaps the starch truth is that for the vast majority the web can merely function as a complement – an accelerator – for the company’s core business. Just as The New York Times is now implementing paid online news, most of the other free services will have to actually start …selling something. Crazy I know – selling something to be profitable?!

But as a tech enthusiast, I sincerely hope that functional business models will emerge so that all those webapps remain free. Technology on its own is pretty awesome.

Discuss (4) · Tweet

This spring I enjoyed taking the best course yet at Chalmers — Mathematical Modelling. Hands down to Dag Wedelin for keeping a high pace with excellent tutoring and lectures.

The course was composed by supervised weekly modules, each dealing with different “kinds” of problem solving. The last one, however, was of a more open-ended nature allowing for a personal structure in the report. I’m quite proud of my result since I managed to squeeze in a few interesting arguments that I have been pondering for a long time:

”

Personally, I understand concepts better when presented with their opposites, or merely an alternative. Hence, “mathematics as a tool” is for me much more understandable when it can be argued that – for example – constructional calculation could be substituted with intuitive guesses, experienced estimates, or architectural drawings. When building a small cottage, calculating the strength of a stone wall is superfluous, and the measuring of a roof beam unnecessary. The conclusion of this argument is that while real world activities have been getting more and more complex (for example building a bridge), a need for a new “tool” must have emerged. I believe that this tool is mathematics. Just as a hammer is a tool for a blacksmith’s sword, mathematics is a tool for engineers to dress and decorate the world.

The report in it’s glorious 11 pages of LaTeX beauty is available here.

Discuss (1) · Tweet

Running is the only form of physical activity I do, and has been for the last few years. The short reason is that it’s cheap and effective, while the long reason is a bit more …extensive.

For me, running is a metaphor of much of what I believe in life. It has the greatest simplicity of any form of exercise, and I’m not dependent on anyone else but myself to reach the goal. The road takes me through people, nature and urban environments. There are steep hills to climb rewarded by downhills. And long stretches where the goal just seems to approach infinity, yet I always reach it.

Also, I enjoy the sound of movement — constantly going forward. I never listen to music while running, and I never measure the time.

All I need are my shoes.

Discuss (1) · Tweet

Among the few places in the world I have visited, there are two that stand out. I frequently think of them and I constantly try to plan trips there. They are Rome and Bangkok. I love them for completely different reasons.

I probably love Bangkok for much the same reasons as Fredrik loves Tokyo. It’s huge, there’s always something to do, people are nice and numerous, food is great, clubs are awesome, shopping is massive and it’s far away. I spent a month there, and I was never bored. Living in a huge city is a special feeling, that I think can only be understood when experienced. If I was there I could go to the cinema now, do some shopping if I wanted, or just go out to some amazing restaurant. Here? It’s dead.

Rome on the other hand, appeals to my “finer” senses. Art, culture, food and history is what I love the most, but it’s not the whole picture. Again, I believe it has to be experienced, because the atmosphere in the small streets, the piazzas, the historic locations and art galleries is something unique. It’s simply beautiful. I wish these photos could give a more fair picture. There’s something special with a city that puts flowers at Ceasar’s statue to commemorate his day of death. Or where remains of ancient colons serve as flower pot stands. Or where you can reach out and touch some of the greatest pieces of art ever made.

The title? Ingmar Bergman’s “Smultronstället” is called “Wild Strawberries” in English!

Discuss · Tweet

I think this has to be my fifth blog. Hopefully it will be the last in a long chain of unsuccessful attempts to fit in the “blogosphere”. Because yes, dear future employer, I know you want me to have blog.

Discuss (1) · Tweet