Where good ideas come from | Steven Johnson

Translator: Reelika Saar Reviewer: Piret Hion

Fifty-two minutes ago, I took this picture about 10 blocks from here.

Vaid mõned minutid tagasi tegin ma selle pildi

siit umbes 10 kvartali kaugusel.

This is the Grand Café here in Oxford.

See on Grand Cafe siin Oxfordis.

I took this picture

Ma tegin selle pildi, sest tuleb välja, et see on

because this turns out to be the first coffeehouse to open in England,

esimene kohvik, mis Inglismaal

avati, aastal 1650.

in 1650.

That's its great claim to fame.

Kuulsusrikas kohvik!

And I wanted to show it to you,

Ma tahtsin teile seda näidata

not because I want to give you the Starbucks tour

mitte selleks, et teha teile mingi Starbucks-ringkäik

of historic England --

ajaloolisest Inglismaast,

(Laughter)

vaid sellepärast,

but rather because the English coffeehouse was crucial

et kohvik oli Inglismaal ülioluline

to the development and spread of one of the great intellectual flowerings

selleks, et areneks ja leviks

üks viimase 500 aasta suurimaid intellektuaalseid õitsenguid -

of the last 500 years,

valgustusajastu.

what we now call the Enlightenment.

And the coffeehouse played such a big role in the birth of the Enlightenment

Kohvik mängis nii suurt rolli

valgustuse tekkimises

in part because of what people were drinking there.

osaliselt selle pärast, mida inimesed seal jõid.

Enne seda, kui kohvi ja tee

Because, before the spread of coffee and tea through British culture,

Briti kultuuris kodunesid,

what people drank -- both elite and mass folks drank --

oli põhiliseks joogiks - nii eliidil kui ka tavainimestel -

day in and day out, from dawn until dusk,

päevast päeva, koidust ehani -

was alcohol.

alkohol.

Alcohol was the daytime beverage of choice.

Terve päev otsa oli joogiks alkohol.

You would drink a little beer with breakfast

Hommikusöögi juurde väike õlu ja lõunasöögiks vein,

and have a little wine at lunch,

a little gin, particularly around 1650,

natuke džinni - eriti 1650. aasta paiku -

and top it off with a little beer and wine at the end of the day.

ja päeva lõpetuseks jälle natuke õlut ja veini.

See oli tervislik valik,

That was the healthy choice, because the water wasn't safe to drink.

sest vesi ei kõlvanud juua.

And so, effectively, until the rise of the coffeehouse,

Seega, kuni kohvikute populaarsuse tõusuni

you had an entire population that was effectively drunk all day.

oli kogu rahvas praktiliselt

terve päev purjus.

(Laughter)

And you can imagine what that would be like in your own life --

Te ju kujutate oma elu ette, mismoodi see oleks -

ma tean, mõnede puhul teist on see tõsi ka -

and I know this is true of some of you -- if you were drinking all day --

kui te jooksite päev läbi

(Laughter)

and then you switched from a depressant to a stimulant in your life.

ja siis vahetaksite rahusti oma elus erguti vastu,

teil tekiksid küll paremad ideed.

You would have better ideas.

You would be sharper and more alert.

Oleksite teravama taibuga ja erksamad.

So it's not an accident that a great flowering of innovation happened

Niisiis pole see juhus, et suur innovatsiooni õitseng juhtus just siis,

kui Inglismaa tee ja kohvi poole pöördus.

as England switched to tea and coffee.

But the other thing that makes the coffeehouse important

Teine põhjus, miks kohvik osutus nii tähtsaks,

is the architecture of the space.

oli selle ruumiline ülesehitus.

It was a space where people would get together,

See oli koht, kus võisid kokku saada erineva

from different backgrounds, different fields of expertise,

taustaga inimesed erinevatelt

tegevusaladelt ja omi mõtteid jagada.

and share.

It was a space, as Matt Ridley talked about, where ideas could have sex.

See oli koht, kus - nagu Matt Ridley rääkis - ideed võisid seksida.

See oli teatud mõttes nende abieluvoodi.

This was their conjugal bed, in a sense; ideas would get together there.

Ideed said seal kokku.

And an astonishing number of innovations from this period

Hämmastavalt suur arv innovatsioone sellest ajajärgust

have a coffeehouse somewhere in their story.

ongi miskitpidi mõne kohvikuga seotud.

Ma olen viimase viie aasta jooksul veetnud palju aega

I've been spending a lot of time thinking about coffeehouses

for the last five years

kohvikute üle mõteldes,

because I've been kind of on this quest

sest ma olen olnud otsingul,

leidmas vastust küsimusele,

to investigate this question of where good ideas come from.

kust tulevad head ideed.

What are the environments that lead to unusual levels of innovation,

Mis on need keskkonnad,

mis viivad erakordse innovatsioonitasemeni,

erakordse loovuseni?

unusual levels of creativity?

What's the kind of environmental -- what is the space of creativity?

Milline on see keskkonna...

milline on see loovuse ruum?

And what I've done is,

Selle käigus olen ma

I've looked at both environments like the coffeehouse,

uurinud selliseid keskkondi nagu kohvikud,

olen vaadanud meediakeskkondi nagu seda on Internet,

I've looked at media environments like the World Wide Web,

mis on olnud erakordselt innovaatilised.

that have been extraordinarily innovative;

Olen vaadanud esimeste linnade ajalugu ning

I've gone back to the history of the first cities;

läinud isegi bioloogilistesse keskkondadesse

I've even gone to biological environments, like coral reefs and rain forests,

nagu korallrahud ja vihmametsad,

milles on tavatult kõrge bioloogilise innovatsiooni tase,

that involve unusual levels of biological innovation.

And what I've been looking for is shared patterns,

otsides ühiseid mustreid,

signature behavior that shows up again and again

iseloomulikke käitumismalle, mida võib

ikka ja jälle kõigis neis keskkondades näha.

in all of these environments.

Are there recurring patterns that we can learn from,

Kas on korduvaid mustreid, millest võime õppida,

that we can take and apply to our own lives

mida saame kuidagi rakendada omaenda eludes,

or our own organizations or our own environments

oma organisatsioonides

või keskkonnas, et muuta neid loomingulisemaks ja uuenduslikemaks?

to make them more creative and innovative?

Ma arvan, et olen mõned leidnud.

And I think I've found a few.

But what you have to do to make sense of this

Kuid sellest aru saamiseks ja tõepoolest

and to really understand these principles is,

nende põhimõtete mõistmiseks

you have to do away with

tuleb unustada

the way in which our conventional metaphors and language steers us

suur osa sellest, mil viisil meie harjumuspärased metafoorid ja keel

juhivad meid teatud

towards certain concepts of idea creation.

arusaamadeni ideede loomisest.

We have this very rich vocabulary to describe moments of inspiration.

Meil on väga rikkalik sõnavara

inspiratsioonihetkede kirjeldamiseks.

Meil on sisekaemuse välgatused,

We have the "flash" of insight,

the "stroke" of insight,

äkiline äratundmine,

we have "epiphanies,"

ilmutused ja "heureka!"-hetked

we have eureka moments,

we have the "light bulb" moments, right?

ning ideesähvatused, eks ole?

All of these concepts, as rhetorically florid as they are,

Kõik need arusaamad,

retooriliselt ilustatud nagu nad on,

share this basic assumption,

põhinevad lihtsal oletusel,

which is that an idea is a single thing.

et idee on selline eraldiseisev asi,

It's something that happens often in a wonderful, illuminating moment.

miski, mis tihti juhtub ühel

imelisel valgustaval hetkel.

But, in fact, what I would argue and what you really need to begin with

Kuid ma väidaksin hoopis - sellest peaks tegelikult alustama -

et idee kui selline

is this idea that an idea is a network on the most elemental level.

on lihtne võrgustik.

I mean, this is what is happening inside your brain.

Tähendab, see on see, mis juhtub teie ajus.

An idea -- a new idea -- is a new network of neurons

Idee - uus idee - on uus võrgustik närvirakkudest,

firing in sync with each other inside your brain.

mis saadavad ajus välja impulsse üksteisega sünkroonis.

It's a new configuration that has never formed before.

See on uus konfiguratsioon, mida enne pole tekkinud.

And the question is: How do you get your brain into environments

Küsimus: kuidas saada oma aju sellisesse keskkonda,

where these new networks are going to be more likely to form?

kus need uued võrgustikud on tõenäolisemad tekkima?

And it turns out that, in fact, the network patterns of the outside world

Tuleb välja, et tegelikult on välise maailma võrgustike mustrid

sarnased paljudele inimese aju

mimic a lot of the network patterns of the internal world of a human brain.

sisemaailma võrgustike mustritele.

So the metaphor I'd like to use,

Nii võin ma hea metafoori

võtta

I can take from a story of a great idea that's quite recent --

ühe suure idee loost, mis on päris värske -

a lot more recent than the 1650s.

palju hilisem kui 1650-ndad.

A wonderful guy named Timothy Prestero

Üks vaimustav mees, Timothy Prestero,

has an organization called Design That Matters.

kellel on organisatsioon nimega Design that Matters.

They decided to tackle this really pressing problem

Nad otsustasid käsile võtta pakilise ülesande,

of the terrible problems we have with infant mortality rates

rasked probleemid seoses imikusuremuskordajaga

in the developing world.

arengumaades.

One of the things that's very frustrating about this

Üks väga masendav tõsiasi selle juures on teadmine,

is that we know by getting modern neonatal incubators into any context,

et vastsündinute inkubaatorite olemasolu

ükskõik kus,

if we can keep premature babies warm, basically -- it's very simple --

enneaegsete imikute soojas hoidmiseks - see on ju väga lihtne -

we can halve infant mortality rates in those environments.

vähendab imikute suremust poole võrra.

So the technology is there.

See tehnoloogia on olemas.

These are standard in all the industrialized worlds.

Need on tavavarustus kõigis arenenud tööstusriikides.

The problem is, if you buy a $40,000 incubator,

Probleem tekib siis, kui osta 40 000-dollariline aparaat

and you send it off to a midsized village in Africa,

ja saata see teele

keskmise suurusega Aafrika külla,

it will work great for a year or two years,

töötab see seal hästi aasta või paar,

and then something will go wrong and it will break,

kuid siis läheb see läheb rikki,

and it will remain broken forever,

ja jääbki igaveseks katkiseks,

because you don't have a whole system of spare parts,

sest puudub varuosade süsteem

and you don't have the on-the-ground expertise

ja koha peal pole ühtki kompetentset inimest

to fix this $40,000 piece of equipment.

selle kalli seadme parandamiseks.

So you end up having this problem where you spend all this money

Nii meil ongi lõpuks probleem, et kulutame küll palju raha

nende riikide nüüdisaegse tehnikaga varustamiseks,

getting aid and all these advanced electronics to these countries,

kuid lõpuks muutub see kasutuks.

and it ends up being useless.

Niisiis otsustasid Prestero ja tema meeskond

So what Prestero and his team decided to do

ringi vaadata ja uurida: milliseid ressursse leidub külluses

was to look around and see: What are the abundant resources

nendes arengumaades?

in these developing world contexts?

And what they noticed was,

Nad märkasid, et neil pole just palju videosalvesteid

they don't have a lot of DVRs, they don't have a lot of microwaves,

ega kuigi palju mikrolaineahjusid,

but they seem to do a pretty good job of keeping their cars on the road.

aga autode töökorras hoidmisega saavad nad hästi hakkama.

There's a Toyota 4Runner on the street in all these places.

Toyota 4Runner on

kõigis neis paigus tänavatel.

They seem to have the expertise to keep cars working.

Näib, et nad oskavad hästi autosid käigus hoida.

So they started to think,

Nii tulid nad ideele:

"Could we build a neonatal incubator

"Kas me saaksime teha inkubaatori,

that's built entirely out of automobile parts?"

mis koosneks täielikult autoosadest?"

And this is what they came up with.

Tulemuseks oli see riistapuu siin.

It's called the NeoNurture device.

Seadme nimi on NeoNurture.

From the outside, it looks like a normal little thing

Väljastpoolt paistab see nagu üks tavaline asi,

you'd find in a modern Western hospital.

mida võib näha moodsas lääne haiglas.

Sees on aga autoosad.

In the inside, it's all car parts.

It's got a fan, it's got headlights for warmth,

Sel on ventilaator, esituled soojuse jaoks

ja autouste alarm häire jaoks.

it's got door chimes for alarm,

it runs off a car battery.

See töötab autoaku pealt.

And so all you need is the spare parts from your Toyota

Nii et vaja on ainult oma Toyota varuosasid,

oskust esituld parandada

and the ability to fix a headlight,

ja seda saabki remontida.

and you can repair this thing.

Now that's a great idea,

See on muidugi hiilgav idee, aga tegelikult

but I'd like to say that, in fact,

this is a great metaphor for the way ideas happen.

on see väga hea metafoor ka selle jaoks, kuidas ideed tekivad.

We like to think our breakthrough ideas, you know,

Meile meeldib mõelda, et meie läbimurde-ideed

on nagu see hirmkallis, uhiuus inkubaator,

are like that $40,000, brand-new incubator,

tehnoloogia viimane sõna,

state-of-the-art technology.

But more often than not, they're cobbled together

aga tihtilugu on uued ideed kokku klopsitud hoopis

from whatever parts that happen to be around nearby.

igasugu osadest, mis juhtuvad käepärast olema.

Me võtame ideid teistelt -

We take ideas from other people,

nendelt, kellelt õpime; nendelt, kellega juhuslikult kohvikus kokku saame -

people we've learned from, people we run into in the coffee shop,

ja seome need kokku uuteks vormideks, luues midagi täiesti uut.

and we stitch them together into new forms and we create something new.

Nii toimuvad tegelikult uuendused.

That's really where innovation happens.

And that means we have to change some of our models

See tähendab, et peame muutma mõningaid oma arusaamu

of what innovation and deep thinking really looks like, right?

sellest, kuidas uuendus ja ideede areng toimuvad.

I mean, this is one vision of it.

See on üks nägemus sellest.

Another is Newton and the apple, when Newton was at Cambridge.

Teine on Newton ja õun ajast, mil Newton Cambridge'is oli.

This is a statue from Oxford.

See on kuju Oxfordis.

You know, you're sitting there, thinking a deep thought,

Teate küll, puu all istumise ja sügavalt mõtlemise ajal

kukub puu otsast õun ja äkki ongi olemas gravitatsiooniteooria.

the apple falls from the tree, and you have the theory of gravity.

Tegelikult näevad kohad, mis läbi ajaloo uuendusteni

In fact, the spaces that have historically led to innovation tend to look like this.

on viinud, pigem sellised välja.

This is Hogarth's famous painting of a kind of political dinner at a tavern,

See on Hogarthi kuulus maal poliitilisest õhtusöögist kõrtsis,

aga just sellised olid ka kohvikud tol ajal.

but this is what the coffee shops looked like back then.

This is the kind of chaotic environment where ideas were likely to come together,

See on selline kaootiline keskkond,

kuhu ideed tõenäoliselt kokku tulid,

where people were likely to have new, interesting, unpredictable collisions,

kus tõenäoliselt põrkasid kokku

uus, huvitav ja ettearvamatu erinevate taustadega inimeste näol.

people from different backgrounds.

So if we're trying to build organizations that are more innovative,

Seega, kui me tahame uuendusaltimaid organisatsioone,

peame looma kohti, mis oleksid sarnased sellele siin.

we have to build spaces that, strangely enough, look a bit more like this.

Sellised peaksid olema teie kontorid.

This is what your office should look like, it's part of my message here.

See on osa minu sõnumist.

Üks probleem selle juures on see,

And one of the problems with this is that, when you research this field,

kui asja uurida, on inimesed tegelikult

people are notoriously unreliable

paganama ebausaldusväärsed,

when they actually self-report on where they have their own good ideas,

kui nad kirjeldavad,

kus neil head ideed tekivad,

or their history of their best ideas.

või kuidas parimad ideed kujunevad.

And a few years ago, a wonderful researcher named Kevin Dunbar

Mõned aastad tagasi otsustas suurepärane teadur Kevin Dunbar

ringi käia ja sisuliselt

decided to go around and basically do the Big Brother approach

rakendada tõsielusaate lähenemist,

to figuring out where good ideas come from.

et teada saada, kust tulevad head ideed.

He went to a bunch of science labs around the world

Ta käis mitmetes teaduslaborites üle maailma,

and videotaped everyone as they were doing every little bit of their job:

filmides seal kõiki

sellel ajal, kui nad oma igapäevatööd tegid.

when they were sitting in front of the microscope,

Nii seda, kui nad istusid mikroskoobi taga

when they were talking to colleagues at the watercooler ...

kui ka seda, kui nad vestlesid kolleegiga kohvinurgas - kõike sellist.

Ta filmis kõiki neid vestlusi

And he recorded all these conversations

ja üritas välja nuputada, kus sünnivad

and tried to figure out where the most important ideas happened.

kõige tähtsamad ideed.

And when we think about the classic image of the scientist in the lab,

Tüüpiliselt, kui mõtleme teadlastest laborites, on meil

we have this image -- you know, they're poring over the microscope,

kujutluspilt sellest, teate küll, kuidas nad mikroskoobi all uurides

and they see something in the tissue sample,

näevad midagi koeproovis.

and -- "Eureka!" -- they've got the idea.

Ja "Oi, heureka!" ongi neil idee käes.

What happened, actually, when Dunbar looked at the tape,

Kui Dunbar filmitu läbi vaatas, nägi ta, et tegelikult

is that, in fact, almost all of the important breakthrough ideas

tekkisid peaaegu kõik tähtsad läbimurde-ideed

did not happen alone in the lab, in front of the microscope.

kusagil mujal, mitte üksinda laboris mikroskoobi taga.

They happened at the conference table at the weekly lab meeting,

Nad tekkisid nõupidamistelaua taga

iganädalastel koosolekutel,

when everybody got together and shared their latest data and findings,

kui kõik said kokku ja jagasid omavahel uusimaid andmeid ja leide;

oftentimes when people shared the mistakes they were having,

tihtipeale siis, kui inimesed rääkisid tehtud vigadest,

eksimustest ja kõigest, mis takistas läbimurret.

the error, the noise in the signal they were discovering.

Midagi selle keskkonna juures -

And something about that environment --

and I've started calling it the "liquid network,"

mina nimetan seda "vedelikvõrgustikuks" -

where you have lots of different ideas that are together,

kus on koos palju erinevaid ideid,

different backgrounds, different interests,

erinevaid taustu ja huvisid, mis

jostling with each other, bouncing off each other --

tõuklevad üksteisega, põrkuvad omavahel -

midagi selles keskkonnas

that environment is, in fact, the environment that leads to innovation.

on see, mis viib innovatsioonini.

The other problem that people have is,

Inimeste teine probleem

they like to condense their stories of innovation

on nende soov suruda oma innovatsioonilood kokku

down to shorter time frames.

lühemale ajaskaalale.

So they want to tell the story of the eureka moment.

Nad tahavad rääkida loo just oma "heureka!" hetkest.

They want to say, "There I was, I was standing there,

Nad tahavad öelda: "Seal ma siis seisin

and I had it all, suddenly, clear in my head."

ja korraga oligi kõik mu peas selge."

But, in fact, if you go back and look at the historical record,

Aga tegelikult, kui nad vaatavad ajas tagasi,

it turns out that a lot of important ideas have very long incubation periods.

tuleb välja, et paljudel tähtsatel ideedel

on väga pikk inkubatsiooniaeg.

I call this the "slow hunch."

Ma panin sellele nimeks "aeglane eelaimus".

We've heard a lot recently about hunch and instinct

Hiljuti on olnud palju kuulda

aimustest ja instinktist

and blink-like sudden moments of clarity,

ja hetkega saabuvast selgusest,

kuid tegelikult jäävad paljud suured ideed

but, in fact, a lot of great ideas linger on, sometimes for decades,

mõnikord aastakümneteks

kellegi pähe toppama.

in the back of people's minds.

They have a feeling that there's an interesting problem,

Neil on tunne, et on üks huvitav probleem,

aga neil pole veel päris õigeid tööriistu selle avastamiseks.

but they don't quite have the tools yet to discover them.

Nad töötavad kogu aeg mingite probleemide kallal,

They spend all this time working on certain problems,

but there's another thing lingering there that they're interested in,

aga üks idee ootab ikka oma aega -

huvitav on see küll, aga lahendust nad ei leia.

but can't quite solve.

Darwin on selle kohta hea näide.

Darwin is a great example of this.

Darwin himself, in his autobiography,

Darwin ise räägib oma autobiograafias

tells the story of coming up with the idea for natural selection

loo sellest, et idee looduslikust valikust

tekkis tal

as a classic eureka moment.

klassikalise "heureka!" hetkena.

He's in his study, it's October of 1838,

Oma kabinetis,

1838. aasta oktoobris

and he's reading Malthus, actually, on population.

luges ta üldse Malthust rahvastiku kohta.

And all of a sudden,

Ja ühtäkki

the basic algorithm of natural selection kind of pops into his head,

turgatab talle pähe loodusliku valiku põhialgoritm ja ta lausub:

and he says, "Ah, at last, I had a theory with which to work."

"Lõpuks ometi oli mul teooria, millega edasi töötada."

That's in his autobiography.

See on ta autobiograafias.

About a decade or two ago,

Kümmekond aastat tagasi

a wonderful scholar named Howard Gruber

võttis õpetlane nimega Howard Gruber ette

went back and looked at Darwin's notebooks from this period.

ja vaatas läbi Darwini märkmikke sellest perioodist.

Darwin kept these copious notebooks,

Darwin pidas mahukaid märkmikke,

where he wrote down every little idea he had, every little hunch.

kuhu ta kirjutas üles iga väikseimagi idee ja õrna aimuse.

And what Gruber found was that Darwin had the full theory of natural selection

Gruber leidis, et

Darwinil oli terve loodusliku valiku teooria olemas

for months and months and months

juba mitmeid kuid enne

before he had his alleged epiphany reading Malthus in October of 1838.

oma väidetavat ilmutushetke

1838.a. oktoobris Malthust lugedes.

There are passages where you can read it,

On olemas lõigud, mida lugedes tekib

and you think you're reading from a Darwin textbook,

tunne, nagu oleksid need mõnest Darwini õpikust

from the period before he has his epiphany.

tema avastusele eelnevast ajast.

And so what you realize is that Darwin, in a sense,

Nii saamegi aru, et teatud mõttes oli Darwinil

had the idea, he had the concept,

juba see käsitlus olemas,

but was unable to fully think it yet.

aga veel mõtlemises "kinni".

And that is, actually, how great ideas often happen --

Tihtipeale head ideed just nii tekivadki:

they fade into view over long periods of time.

nad tõusevad pinnale pika aja jooksul.

Now the challenge for all of us is:

Meie kõigi ees seisab väljakutse:

How do you create environments

kuidas luua selliseid keskkondi,

that allow these ideas to have this long half-life?

mis võimaldavad ideedele pikka küpsemisperioodi?

It's hard to go to your boss and say,

Raske on minna ja öelda oma ülemusele:

"I have an excellent idea for our organization.

"Mul on suurepärane idee meie ettevõtte jaoks.

It will be useful in 2020."

See muutub kasulikuks 2020. aastal.

(Laughter)

"Could you just give me some time to do that?"

Kas annate mulle sellega tegelemiseks aega?"

Mõned ettevõtted, nagu näiteks Google,

Now a couple of companies like Google have innovation time off, 20 percent time.

annavad 20% tööajast vabaks uuenduste jaoks,

In a sense, those are hunch-cultivating mechanisms in an organization.

mis tegelikult ongi ettevõttesisene aimuste küpsemise tööriist.

See ongi edu võti.

But that's a key thing.

And the other thing is to allow those hunches

Teine asi on lasta neil aimustel

to connect with other people's hunches;

luua ühendus teiste inimeste ideedega - mis ka tihtipeale juhtub.

that's what often happens.

You have half of an idea, somebody else has the other half,

Sul on üks pool ideest, kellelgi on selle idee teine pool

ja õiges keskkonnas olles

and if you're in the right environment,

muutuvad need millekski suuremaks kui 1+1.

they turn into something larger than the sum of their parts.

Ühest küljest

So in a sense,

räägime me tihti, kui tähtis on

we often talk about the value of protecting intellectual property --

intellektuaalse omandi kaitse,

you know, building barricades,

teate küll, tõkete ehitamine,

having secretive R and D labs, patenting everything that we have

arenduslaborites salatsemine, kõige olemasoleva patenteerimine,

so that those ideas will remain valuable,

et ideed säilitaksid oma väärtuse

and people will be incentivized to come up with more ideas,

ja inimesed oleksid motiveeritud uusi ideid välja käima

ning kultuur muutuks uuendusaltimaks.

and the culture will be more innovative.

But I think there's a case to be made

Teisest küljest aga on vajalik

that we should spend at least as much time, if not more,

kulutada sama palju aega, kui mitte rohkem,

valuing the premise of connecting ideas

ideede eos ühendamise väärtustamisele,

and not just protecting them.

mitte ainult nende kaitsmisele.

And I'll leave you with this story,

Lõpetuseks räägin ma teile ühe loo,

which I think captures a lot of these values.

mis minu arvates näitab neid väärtusi

It's just a wonderful tale of innovation, and how it happens in unlikely ways.

ja on väga hea lugu

ettearvamatust innovatsioonist.

It's October of 1957,

On 1957.a oktoober,

and Sputnik has just launched.

Sputnik on hiljuti startinud.

And we're in Laurel, Maryland,

Me oleme Laurelis, Marylandis,

at the Applied Physics Lab associated with Johns Hopkins University.

rakendusfüüsika laboris,

mis on osa Johns Hopkinsi Ülikoolist.

On esmaspäeva hommik

It's Monday morning,

and the news has just broken about this satellite

ja uudised Maa ümber tiirlevast satelliidist

on just teatavaks saanud.

that's now orbiting the planet.

And, of course, this is nerd heaven, right?

Mõistagi oleme me nohikute paradiisis.

There are all these physics geeks who are there,

Kõik need füüsikatarkurid mõtlevad:

thinking, "Oh my gosh! This is incredible. I can't believe this has happened."

"Jessas! See on vapustav. Ma ei suuda uskuda, et see juhtus."

Kaks neist,

And two of them, two twentysomething researchers at the APL,

füüsikalabori teadurid vanuses 20 ja natuke peale,

are there at the cafeteria table,

istuvad kohvikulaua taga

having an informal conversation with a bunch of their colleagues.

ja ajavad töökaaslastega niisama juttu.

And these two guys are named Guier and Weiffenbach.

Nende meeste nimed on Guier ja Weiffenbach.

They start talking, and one of them says,

Nad ajavad juttu ja üks neist ütleb:

"Hey, has anybody tried to listen for this thing?

"Hei, kas keegi on proovinud seda värki kuulata?

There's this, you know, man-made satellite up there in outer space

Seal üleval kosmoses on ju inimkäte loodud satelliit,

kindlasti saadab see välja mingisugust signaali.

that's obviously broadcasting some kind of signal.

Seda saaks ilmselt kuulda, kui õigesti häälestada."

We could probably hear it, if we tune in."

So they ask around to a couple of their colleagues,

Nad uurivad mõne kolleegi käest

ja need vastavad: "Ei, ma pole selle peale mõelnud.

and everybody's like, "No, I hadn't thought of doing that.

See on huvitav idee."

That's an interesting idea."

Tuleb välja, et Weiffenbach on tegelikult ekspert

And it turns out Weiffenbach is kind of an expert in microwave reception,

mikrolainete vastuvõtmise alal

and he's got a little antenna set up with an amplifier in his office.

ja tal on tööruumis olemas

väiksed antennid koos võimendiga.

So Guier and Weiffenbach go back to Weiffenbach's office,

Guier ja Weiffenbach lähevad tagasi viimase ruumi

and they start noodling around -- "hacking," as we might call it now.

ja hakkavad proovima - või häkkima, nagu praegusel ajal öeldakse.

Juba paari tunni pärast püüavad nad signaali kinni,

And after a couple of hours, they start picking up the signal,

sest Nõukogude Liit tegi Sputniku

because the Soviets made Sputnik very easy to track;

väga lihtsalt jälgitavaks.

it was right at 20 MHz, so you could pick it up really easily,

Sagedus oli täpselt 20 MHz ja signaali oli kerge kinni püüda,

because they were afraid people would think it was a hoax, basically,

sest nad kartsid, et seda peetakse pettuseks.

Nii nad muutsidki selle kergesti leitavaks.

so they made it really easy to find.

Need kaks meest istuvad siis seal ja kuulavad seda signaali.

So these guys are sitting there, listening to this signal,

ja inimesed tulevad ruumist läbi ja ütlevad:

and people start coming into the office and saying,

"Vau, see on päris lahe. Las ma kuulan ka. Vinge!"

"That's pretty cool. Can I hear?"

And before long, they think, "Jeez, this is kind of historic.

Varsti tuleb neil uus mõte: "Aga see on ju midagi ajaloolist.

We may be the first people in the United States listening to this.

Võib-olla oleme me esimesed Ameerika Ühendriikides, kes seda kuulevad.

Salvestame seda."

We should record it."

So they bring in this big, clunky analog tape recorder

Nad toovad kohale suure, kohmaka magnetofoni

ja hakkavad neid väikeseid piikse lindistama.

and start recording these little bleep, bleeps.

And they start writing down the date stamp, time stamps

Nad kirjutavad üles ka kuupäeva ja ajamärgised

for each little bleep that they record.

iga väikese lindistatud piiksu kohta.

And then they start thinking,

Nad hakkavad mõtlema: "Aga, vaadake, me märkame siin

"Well, gosh, we're noticing small little frequency variations here.

väikeseid muutusi sageduses.

We could probably calculate the speed that the satellite is traveling

Me saame ilmselt arvutada kiiruse,

millega satelliit liigub,

if we do a little basic math here using the Doppler effect."

kui teeme mõned arvutused

Doppleri efekti kasutades."

And they played around with it a little bit more

Siis nad mängisid sellega veel natuke ja

rääkisid paari kolleegiga

and talked to a couple of their colleagues who had other specialties.

teistelt erialadelt.

Siis nad arvasid: "Teate, aga

And they said, "You know,

we could actually look at the slope of the Doppler effect

me usume, et saame Doppleri efekti kallet vaadates

to figure out the points at which the satellite is closest to our antenna

määrata ära need punktid,

kus satelliit on antennidele kõige lähemal

and the points at which it's furthest away.

ja kus ta on nendest kõige kaugemal.

That's pretty cool."

See on päris lahe."

Eventually, they get permission -- this is all a little side project

Lõpuks nad saavadki loa -

see kõik oli väike kõrvalprojekt, mis ei olnud ametlikult nende tööülesanne.

that hadn't been officially part of their job description --

they get permission to use the new UNIVAC computer

Nad saavad loa kasutada uut UNIVAC arvutit,

that takes up an entire room that they'd just gotten at the APL.

mis võtab enda alla terve toa ja mille labor oli just saanud.

And they run some more of the numbers,

Nad teevad veel mõned arvutused ja umbes kolme-nelja nädala pärast

and at the end of about three or four weeks,

on nad kaardistanud satelliidi täpse trajektoori

turns out they have mapped the exact trajectory

of this satellite around the Earth,

ümber Maa - ning seda kõike

just from listening to this one little signal,

lihtsalt üht väikest signaali kuulates,

going off on this little side hunch that they'd been inspired to do

üht kõrvalist aimust järgides, millele nad said innustust

over lunch one morning.

söögilauavestluse ajal.

A couple weeks later, their boss, Frank McClure,

Paar nädalat hiljem kutsub nende ülemus Frank McClure

pulls them into the room and says,

nad oma kabinetti ja ütleb:

"Hey, you guys, I have to ask you something

"Kuulge, ma pean teilt midagi küsima

about that project you were working on.

projekti kohta, mille kallal te töötasite.

You've figured out an unknown location

Te määrasite kindlaks ümber Maa tiirleva

satelliidi asukoha

of a satellite orbiting the planet from a known location on the ground.

ühest kindlast asukohast maa peal.

Kas teistpidi ka saab?

Could you go the other way?

Could you figure out an unknown location on the ground

Kas te saate kindlaks määrata teadmata asukoha Maal,

kui teate satelliidi asukohta?"

if you knew the location of the satellite?"

And they thought about it and they said,

Nad mõtlesid ja ütlesid:

"Well, I guess maybe you could. Let's run the numbers here."

"Arvatavasti saab. Peame mõned arvutused tegema."

So they went back and thought about it

Nad läksid tagasi ja mõtlesid sellest.

and came back and said, "Actually, it'll be easier."

Tagasi tulles ütlesid nad: "See on tegelikult lihtsamgi."

McClure vastas: "Väga hea.

And he said, "Oh, that's great,

because, see, I have these new nuclear submarines"

Vaadake, mul on uued tuumaallveelaevad,

(Laughter)

neid parasjagu ehitatakse.

"that I'm building.

And it's really hard to figure out how to get your missile

Väga raske on kindlaks määrata raketi teekonda,

so that it will land right on top of Moscow

et see täpselt Moskvat tabaks,

if you don't know where the submarine is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

kui pole teada, kus allveelaev Vaikses ookeanis täpselt asub.

Me mõtlesime, et võiks üles saata hulga satelliite ja

So we're thinking we could throw up a bunch of satellites

and use it to track our submarines

jälgida nendega meie allveelaevu,

and figure out their location in the middle of the ocean.

määrates kindlaks nende asukoha keset ookeani.

Kas te saate sellega tegeleda?"

Could you work on that problem?"

And that's how GPS was born.

Nii sündiski GPS.

30 aastat hiljem

Thirty years later,

Ronald Reagan, actually, opened it up and made it an open platform

avas Ronald Reagan selle tsiviilkasutuseks ja muutis avatud platvormiks,

that anybody could build upon,

kuhu igaüks võib peale ehitada

and anybody could come along and build new technology

ja juurde arendada uut tehnoloogiat, mis

that would create and innovate on top of this open platform,

oleks loov ja innovaatiline.

Sellele avatud platvormile

left it open for anyone to do pretty much anything they wanted with it.

võis igaüks rajada

praktiliselt kõike, mida ta teha tahtis.

And now, I guarantee you, certainly half of this room, if not more,

Ja nüüd ma garanteerin,

et vähemalt pooltel siinolijaist

on praegu taskus mõni seade,

has a device sitting in their pocket right now

mis räägib ühega neist satelliitidest avakosmoses.

that is talking to one of these satellites in outer space.

Ja ma vean kihla, et vähemalt üks teist

And I bet you one of you, if not more,

has used said device and said satellite system

on kasutanud seda seadet ja satelliite

to locate a nearby coffeehouse somewhere in the last --

mõne lähedal asuva kohviku leidmiseks viimase ...

(Naer)

(Laughter)

in the last day or last week, right?

päeva või nädala jooksul, õigus?

(Applause)

(Aplaus)

Ja see, ma usun,

And that, I think,

is a great case study, a great lesson

on väga hea näide ja õppetund

in the power -- the marvelous, unplanned, emergent, unpredictable power --

sellest imelisest, planeerimata, arenevast,

ettearvamatust jõust, mis on

of open innovative systems.

avatud innovaatilistel süsteemidel.

When you build them right,

Kui need õigesti ehitada, antakse neile hoopis teistsugune suund,

they will be led to completely new directions

kui nende loojad eales ette oskavad kujutada.

the creators never even dreamed of.

Needsamad kaks meest

I mean, here you have these guys

who basically thought they were just following this hunch,

mõtlesid, et nad järgisid lihtsalt üht ideekest,

seda väikest tekkinud kirge;

this little passion that had developed,

pärastpoole nad arvasid, et peavad külma sõda,

then they thought they were fighting the Cold War,

ja nüüd tuleb välja, et nad aitavad kellelgi lihtsalt

and then, it turns out, they're just helping somebody find a soy latte.

tassi kohvi leida.

(Naer)

(Laughter)

That is how innovation happens.

Nii toimubki innovatsioon.

Chance favors the connected mind.

Juhus soosib seoseid loovat mõistust.

Thank you very much.

Suur tänu!

(Applause)

(Aplaus)