While watching a video on system semiconductors on YouTube, I came across a striking passage and want to copy it down.
It's not as if Korea's film industry produced bad films just because the budget was small or because something else was lacking, is it? From our current perspective, we are creating a new organization, gathering well our strengths and our new influences, and redesigning this with that.
It is not done with one or two ideas; it's a process in which hundreds and thousands of ideas come together with their own balance, even with a kind of beauty, and are fused in a way appropriate to the purpose, and through that process the product comes out.
In the end, that process itself is what matters. This process is really important, and innovation in this process — innovation in the perspective with which we look at this work — is, I believe, the core of a startup. In a way, organizations far more powerful than those of the past are being born.
It's not that a small team flashes with a few ideas and just runs with them; rather than that, it's a process where, compared to looking at our existing semiconductor chips of the past, we build a much more powerful foundation and process and scale up with that. YouTube interview with the CEO of FuriosaAI
And I dug a bit more into the keyword "processor" that the FuriosaAI CEO mentioned. Then, while browsing the internet, I happened upon the following text.
A processor, on the hardware side, is "a hardware unit within a computer that executes a program." This refers to the Central Processing Unit (CPU); if it is built according to the von Neumann architecture, it must contain at least one ALU (Arithmetic Logic Unit) and processing registers.
On the software side, a processor refers to a data processing system that performs the role of converting data formats, and word processors that produce printable outputs, compilers, assemblers, and the like are also called processors.
A process (program) is, literally, a "procedure (process)." Therefore, by itself, it cannot process anything. A process should be thought of as a list of tasks arranged to perform a specific purpose. That is, a program. In a computer, a program is merely a process of performing tasks written in a programming language. The source code written by the programmer and the binary file translated into machine language by compiling that source code are also just files in which the work process is recorded.
When the work process is stored as a file, we call it a "program," and when it is loaded into memory and is being executed or waiting to be executed, we can distinguish it by calling it a "process." That is, a process can be most accurately defined as "a program loaded into memory and being executed by a processor."
The process by which a computer executes a program
1. The user runs a program from a shortcut icon or the command line.
2. The program, which had been stored as a file, is loaded into memory (RAM) by the loader, and the address in memory of the first machine code to be executed is stored in the CPU's instruction pointer (IP) register.
3. The processor (CPU) fetches the instruction (the first one) to be executed from the memory address pointed to by the IP register (bringing it from memory into the CPU) and stores it in the instruction register (IR).
4. The instruction stored in the IR is executed, and the IP is updated to store the address of the next instruction to be executed.
5. Steps 3–4 are repeated until the end of the program.
Source: https://blogger.pe.kr/422
As the FuriosaAI CEO said, feeling once again the importance of foundation and process, suddenly it occurred to me that the work between people and people in everyday life might be no different — so I jotted down some of the things I had looked into.
These days Jira and Confluence are all the rage. They are tools for Agile. But Jira, Confluence, and even the work methodologies of Waterfall and Agile are, in the end, programs (processes). The processors are people and people. And they move by their own will.
Waterfall is a program optimized for responsibility and expertise; Agile is delegation built on voluntary motivation and trust.
Waterfall is for the forest, Agile for the trees; Waterfall for insight, Agile for feedback; Waterfall for consistency, Agile for flexibility — these are programs for those purposes. It is not a question of good vs. bad, nor of choosing one or the other.
Just as the same program yields different results depending on who uses it, it depends on how you use it. If you need both, you can use both; if you don't need them, you can simply not use them. Tools are for people's convenience. Programs are like that. Could there be greater irony than being chained to a program, having one's creativity diminished, betraying or becoming dependent on trust between people?
It is not Agile that is important; whether one is a manager or an expert, what matters is not acting unilaterally and gathering and reflecting users' opinions and experiences unit by unit. Waterfall is not stuffy; what matters is being able to distinguish uniformity from consistency.
Just as being young does not automatically grant antibodies against being a stickler, there seem to be many cases where being Agile does not automatically make everything proactive and flexible. Frames are convenient, that is true, but in the hope that we are not trapped within frames, I leave a few words to myself this time.
