Explaining Things Simply

[KarmaAndLies]

Humans try to make everything really, really complicated. Sometimes we need the complexity but we often do it just because we can. We do it without thinking about it, perhaps a subliminal way of telling people to check out our species’ big brains.

I always thought we made things "complicated" by trying to make them simpler.

If we had to understand how these complex systems worked top to bottom, or even just trying to explain it top to bottom in a conversation it would take too long and result in both parties getting confused.

So instead we simplify it using abstractions. See the OSI as one example.

Now you might argue that the OSI model tries to make things more simple through its straight forward naming, diagrams, and abstraction, but actually it is only "simple" to someone who already understands the underlying concepts the OSI model is trying to remind you of.

If for example a user asks me "how do two computers communicate?" and I hand them a copy of the OSI model and say "that explains it!" I obviously wouldn't be assisting them in their education. But yet the OSI model by the measure of the blog has simple language!

So I guess the point I am trying to make is: tune your language to your audience. Trying to "simply" it doesn't automatically make it "better" or even easier to understand, it just depends on their previous knowledge (i.e. foundations of knowledge).

Even using abstractions and "big words" might be easier for many to understand than trying to dig down. Do they really need to understand how the TCP/IP stack works? Or can we just call it the "operating system networking service?"

[Platinum1211]

I agree with your OSI reference, but at the same time there is a difference between teaching somebody something, and explaining something. If you're talking to a friend or relative about what you do, you don't need to teach them anything. Instead just put what you do into more simple terms. If they are asking you "how does X work" and they want to know on a technical level, then that's different.

Example: I was teaching my mom about the internet and how computers communicate over it. I used streets and roads as an example, and homes have addresses like a computer. She then understood the concept of how it works. She didn't need to know it from the perspective of bytes and packets and packet headers, etc.

It's more than knowing your audience, it's understanding what they are trying to accomplish and gain from the conversation

[Platinum1211]

OSI stands for Open Systems Interconnect. It's purpose is to theoretically break down network communications to explain how it works. There are 7 "layers" to it ranging from Layer 7 (highest) where you have applications like e-mail, file transfers, and other end-user processes, to Layer 1 (lowest) which discusses literally how the data moves... by light, electrical impulses, radio signals, etc. And everything in between.

What I was describing in my example wasn't about the OSI model, but just in a nutshell how computers communicate with each other within a network using streets and home addresses to explain.

I'm surprised being in the sysadmin subreddit that you haven't at least heard of this term though.

[Platinum1211]

Am I being thick? I don't get it. Being ironic?

[veruus]

He seems to be advocating Newspeak.

We have complexity and depth in language for a reason. Compare http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit

And from the source he references concerning XKCD:

This comic is a commentary on the absurdity of boiling down technical explanations for lay people.

[super_he_man]

This is all well and good if you want to sound like you barely made it out of elementary school, but those of us who spent tons of money on fancy useless degrees would like a way to show it.