How can technology make the trade-offs we face less severe?

The title of this article is a question which I pose because of its importance. I also have it in my profile description at the top. It is an important driving question for engineers or technologists to ask. What is more fundamentally important is that everyone thinking about the problems we face should realize that none of the solutions come Scott-free or unattached to other consequences... there are always trade-offs.

I find that this concept that trade-offs are inescapable is missed by many. I've argued with others over the benefits of wind turbines even if they are nearby to the person's property. Sometimes the individual finds them an unpleasant sight (an opinion I am baffled by), so they reject the idea. However, they fail to realize that by choosing to reject a few wind turbines on the horizon they have inadvertently chosen a coal plant down the road instead... Because I am certain they will not choose to live without their electronics.

As is said in economics: there is no such thing as a free lunch (TINSTAFL). We must begin every design problem with the notion of trade-offs in the back of our minds. When we think we have a probable solution, one must ask: what are the opportunity costs? ... that is: how would this solution constrain our options if we implement it? Of course this question of trade-offs is useful as an idea filter of sorts. A quick mental check to make sure ideas you have pass muster.

Let me explain how I use this concept in decision making by recounting an interesting lecture. There is a TED lecture video where Barry Schwartz talks about the paradox of choice. His thesis is basically that choice is a good thing that people want and benefit from, but too much choice hinders decision making and is ultimately a bad thing by leading to poor or irrational decisions or paralyzing your ability to decide. Schwartz mentions that there is some optimal number of options to have, the question is: how many is that? Although Schwartz offers an answer, it is somewhat of an open question in no small part because it varies case by case. But the lesson is for every decision we face, we should approach it first by asking what are the extraneous choices. Extraneous choices generally are the options that, upon quantitative scrutiny, are not competitive on any direct metrics, not competitive on the majority of direct metrics or have an unacceptable opportunity cost. Then we are left with only the choices that are true trade offs. Here we are faced with options which have rival benefits and comparable opportunity costs.

From here it takes some cost-benefit analysis. One must also begin to look at indirect consequences of the decision or "cascading effects," so to speak,  to being to differentiate the choices. At this point, rather than committing to one choice or the other as is, one might ask is there an extant technological option that, if implemented somehow in the decision, can sway the choice/cost/benefits/trade-off in one direction to make the decision an easier calculation? If there isn't an extant technology for this, is there feasible or conceivable technology to do so?... Then the question is what will it take to mobilize that technological option?

Incidentally, I find that some of the RPG (role playing game) style games I enjoyed playing as a child uniquely prepared my mind for handling these kind of mental checks and trade-off comparisons. RPG's are all about constructing a character with favorable traits and equipment. So these games constantly presented me with choices to calculate: "Should I choose a long range archer or a durable warrior? Should I use the sword with +10 to all attributes or the spear with +40 strength and decent reach?" Hmmmm.... aren't these just mini cost-benefit analysis problems?

I believe so, and they make for good practice. Eventually we will have to bring this mental process to bear on trade-offs with much more at stake. It helps to have a general process to guide one through the decision making steps... and it helps to have some practice, too.