[HN Gopher] OODA Loop
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OODA Loop
        
       Author : yehudabrick
       Score  : 106 points
       Date   : 2023-02-21 16:28 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
        
       | KineticLensman wrote:
       | The idea of getting inside an enemy's decision loop means that
       | you are iterating OODA faster than they are.
       | 
       | OODA is sometimes paraphrased by cynics as 'Observe, Overreact,
       | Deny, Apologise'.
        
         | samatman wrote:
         | Or by barbarians as "Observe, Orie--" "TIMING!"
        
         | hosh wrote:
         | Iterating OODA faster is not the same as getting inside the
         | adversary's OODA loop. That's a common misconception. It's more
         | that, you are able to drive the adversary's OODA loop so that
         | they start doing things in a way you control. Sometimes that
         | means iterating faster, but if you are not controlling the
         | adversary's OODA loop, you are more likely to be "observe,
         | overreact, deny, apologise", just doing it faster. That's
         | something you should be doing to the adversary, rather than
         | something you yourself should be doing.
         | 
         | For example, a friend told me this story. He doesn't know OODA
         | as a formalism, but he knows human nature and practices martial
         | art. He was at a party and some dude hits on his girlfriend and
         | then challenges him to a first person shooter game. He told me,
         | he doesn't have great reflexes, but he knew how people behave
         | and act, and so he was able to dictate the entire engagement.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related. Others?
       | 
       |  _Colonel John Boyd - briefings and personal papers_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34153730 - Dec 2022 (2
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _John Boyd_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33766979 -
       | Nov 2022 (1 comment)
       | 
       |  _Boyd 's Management Model_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28660415 - Sept 2021 (2
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Boyd 's Law of Iteration (2007)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28218194 - Aug 2021 (1
       | comment)
       | 
       |  _The OODA Loop: How Fighter Pilots Make Fast and Accurate
       | Decisions_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26465766 -
       | March 2021 (93 comments)
       | 
       |  _The OODA Loop and the Half-Beat_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22601681 - March 2020 (31
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Ask HN: How do you apply Boyd 's OODA Loop in your life?_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16447690 - Feb 2018 (10
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _How winners win: John Boyd and the four qualities of victorious
       | organizations_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16179009 -
       | Jan 2018 (1 comment)
       | 
       |  _"Patterns of Conflict" - a techno-industrial "Art of War"
       | (1976) [pdf]_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9063017 -
       | Feb 2015 (4 comments)
       | 
       |  _John Boyd and the four qualities of victorious organizations_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6669129 - Nov 2013 (29
       | comments)
        
       | _glass wrote:
       | This reminds of the concept of D.I.E. that we use in the social
       | sciences, describe, interpret, and evaluate. It is important to
       | separate the stages clearly, because if you interpret while
       | describing, this taints your observations. Evaluate can be seen
       | as a precursor to action, because it is from the implications
       | where science then moves forward.
        
         | hosh wrote:
         | OODA is a lot more than that. Since it is something developed
         | for adversarial interactions, you're also talking about
         | disrupting or overwhelming the adversary's OODA. Or another way
         | is feeding the OODA bad intel (tainting their observations),
         | and then stepping up the tempo so that they are making worse
         | decisions faster. Another is taking advantage of the
         | adversary's "frame" (the orientation) and using that to drive
         | the adversary into diverging from reality. (Sun Tzu talks about
         | direct and indirect actions for that).
         | 
         | There's also a version of OODA where things become intuitive
         | and there are shortcuts within OODA as well.
        
           | _glass wrote:
           | Oh wow, cool. Thanks for the explanation. This is very
           | stimulating as a concept, I will dig deeper then. Actually,
           | this can be quite productive as a research strategy.
        
       | philip1209 wrote:
       | I have fond memories of my Krav Maga instructor casually saying
       | "reset their OODA loop" in place of "punch them in the face"
       | during lessons.
        
         | AstralStorm wrote:
         | Casually a trained badass (or a sufficiently unhinged person)
         | will ignore that punch and proceed to destroy you. So unless
         | you're a super trained boxer and can knock out everyone in one,
         | it's a waste of time.
         | 
         | You lost the element of surprise and tempo. If you want to do
         | some damage, do it, not rely on the opponent obliging or
         | complying.
        
           | RealityVoid wrote:
           | Certainly it's better to punch them than not punch them. Many
           | many times overwhelming violence is sufficient to win a
           | fight. Trained people might not be as phased, true.
        
           | varjag wrote:
           | _Everyone Has a Plan Until They Get Punched in the Mouth_ -
           | Mike Tyson
        
             | lolbert3 wrote:
             | [dead]
        
       | abhiyerra wrote:
       | I found Science, Strategy, and War a great deep dive of the OODA
       | Loop.
       | 
       | https://amzn.to/3IKx77A
        
       | Entwickler wrote:
       | LazerPig gives a pretty good (albeit irreverent) take on John
       | Boyd... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZDfdCj61dY
        
       | barking_biscuit wrote:
       | Every discussion I see of the OODA loop is almost always
       | ridiculously oversimplified to the point of being useless or just
       | plain wrong. I watched a ~2 hour interview on YouTube with a guy
       | who worked alongside Boyd when he was developing the idea, and
       | the way he explained it just clicked and was one of the most
       | beautiful ideas I've seen to date.
       | 
       | You mostly see it depicted as a circle, well forget that as it's
       | completely meaningless in that formulation. Search up the
       | original diagram of it and you see that it's actually a set of
       | loops through which there are some different pathways.
       | 
       | It starts with an observation that comes from the outside world,
       | and proceeds to the orientation phase which is about how you
       | interpret the situation, and from the orientation phase it can go
       | one of three ways. In one path you aren't sure what action you
       | need to take so you form a hypothesis upon which you act, which
       | generates a change in the external world which then becomes a new
       | observation and the cycle starts again. Another path is that of a
       | reflexive or instinctual reaction in which you have no need to
       | form a hypothesis but rather you have a heuristic upon which you
       | act, and so you are able to act quicker, and again your action
       | generates a change in the external world which becomes a new
       | observation and the cycle starts again. The third and most
       | important pathway, and they key idea/realisation, is that new
       | observations can be generated directly from the orientation phase
       | and this can be exploited! Why? It's a positive feedback loop
       | that is devoid of any information from the external world, so the
       | more iterations it goes through before finally breaking out and
       | going through one of the paths that do interact with the external
       | world it will be more and more detached from reality and hence
       | the action will be less effective at moving you towards your
       | goals.
       | 
       | I recall the guy saying that Boyd's key insight was the
       | exploitability of that positive feedback loop that was detached
       | from physical reality and if one can purposely trigger it in
       | their adversary they can make their adversary behave in a way
       | that takes them away from their goals. To me that's such a neat
       | observation.
        
         | rwc wrote:
         | Can you share the YouTube video?
        
           | vault wrote:
           | maybe it's this one:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdK4y6O-llE
        
       | badrabbit wrote:
       | The thing about OODA is, everyone needs to be onboard.
       | 
       | I've had higher upd override my decision and go "nah,we're just
       | gonna act, not gonna let you observe or orient" basically as well
       | as peers thay go around you and take actions that prevent your
       | observe+orient attempts.
       | 
       | It is intuitive to just act.
       | 
       | I work in infosec for context. One of the biggest non-technical
       | issues I have is convincing people to ignore their intuition.
       | Especially technical people who don't do IR. Like maybe you spent
       | 50 years as a ninja coder or netadmin but I am still gonna want
       | the threat actor loose until I have some idea of their intent or
       | scope of compromise unless I have reason to believe they're
       | acting on their objectives.
       | 
       | Actual military brass get this, you need to understand the
       | situation before you can react. That's how ambushes happen or you
       | get flanked.
        
       | redivysoft wrote:
       | "Adapt, react, readapt, act"
        
       | WalterBright wrote:
       | Boyd's biography is a great read:
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Boyd-Fighter-Pilot-Who-Changed/dp/031...
       | 
       | about a very unconventional man.
        
       | rcarr wrote:
       | For me, OODA really clicked when I mapped it to the Weinberg-
       | Satir Interaction Model:
       | 
       | Observe -> Intake
       | 
       | Orient -> Meaning
       | 
       | Decide -> Significance
       | 
       | Act -> Response
       | 
       | Highly recommend checking out the work of Gerald Weinberg and
       | Virginia Satir. HN people will probably appreciate Weinberg more
       | than Satir as Weinberg was a programmer for NASA back in the day
       | so his books are aimed at technical types. People from an arts
       | background will prefer Satir who was one of the all time great
       | counsellors/therapists.
       | 
       | https://stevenmsmith.com/AONW/Satir%20Interaction%20Model.pd...
        
       | dingosity wrote:
       | I fear the Wikipedia article offers only the slightest of
       | overviews of a surprisingly deep subject. Don't get me wrong,
       | it's a great place to start.
       | 
       | But I would suggest also reading the related "Patterns of
       | Conflict" Wikipedia page:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_of_Conflict
       | 
       | Which references this 1986 version of the presentation:
       | https://www.ausairpower.net/JRB/poc.pdf
       | 
       | I met John Boyd at Eglin when I was a kid, and later in the 80s
       | when I was a Marine. Dude was a complete nut. But I mean that as
       | a compliment. Preaching a brand of war-fighting at odds with the
       | dominant narrative, I would not have been surprised to see Apple
       | feature his image in a "think different" commercial.
       | 
       | The Air Force was slow to warm up to Boyd (and the OODA Loop) --
       | but the Marines were ready to hear something new. Here's a page
       | with some decent info, including a link to a short video where
       | John Schmitt, Van Riper and (my old boss) Al Gray discuss the
       | "intellectual renaissance" in how they thought about war-
       | fighting. If you're not a military history nut, the 5 minute
       | video is good to give you an idea for how "novel" ideas permeated
       | the US military in the 70s and 80s. You don't _HAVE_ to be an Air
       | Force pilot or Marine to make use of the intellectual
       | underpinnings of Boyd 's "Patterns of Conflict." But you _MAY_
       | miss out on some critical detail if the only thing you read is
       | about the more-generic, not-specific-to-the-military OODA loop.
       | 
       | Which is to say... even if you're not inclined to study military
       | history or operations, you may get some decent context on the
       | formation of the OODA loop by investigating the environment in
       | which it arose. "Maneuver Warfare" is much more than the OODA
       | loop, but it was definitely influenced by Boyd's E-M Theory,
       | Patterns of Conflict and the OODA loop.
       | 
       | Here... the videos on this page total just over 10 minutes. Worth
       | a watch.                 https://grc-
       | usmcu.libguides.com/pme/qpme/history-of-mcdp-maneuver-
       | warfare/context-background
       | 
       | And... the link to the full video seems to be broken, so here's
       | the direct YouTube link if you're hip:
       | https://youtu.be/RL4__NVYByw
        
       | Kim_Bruning wrote:
       | Compare also PDCA [1] which is used more by civilians.
       | 
       | Every time people rediscover rapid iteration in tight feedback
       | loops, and every time so far it's gotten watered down to nothing
       | again by people who get the rituals, but don't quite grok the
       | underlying concept. [2]
       | 
       | On the other hand, you could do practically any sort of ritual or
       | even just laze around in bed: if you understand the underlying
       | concept, you'll still get decent results. [3]
       | 
       | see also: [4] for a short bit on OODA when actually flying an
       | aircraft.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDCA
       | 
       | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
       | 
       | [3] http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/koans.html See eg. Tom Knight
       | and the Lisp Machine ;-)
       | 
       | [4] https://youtu.be/OCFMX5z-ed4?t=940 (starting 15:40) Art of
       | the kill, Pete "Boomer" Bonanni
        
         | Terretta wrote:
         | PDCA is entirely unrelated to OODA. There are a bunch of
         | graphics that confuse people into thinking they're related, by
         | showing O-O-D-A-> in a circle. That's dead wrong.
         | 
         | OODA is all about feedback mechanisms:
         | 
         | https://co2partners.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ooda.png
         | 
         | So any correspondence is a misunderstanding:
         | 
         | https://static.wixstatic.com/media/f16206_0206cf0c618a47b1ab...
         | 
         | You will _not_ achieve the same results with an iteration.
         | 
         | You will only achieve similar results with "double loop"
         | learning and informed intuition driven actions that skip the
         | "decide" step.
        
       | cjmb wrote:
       | I highly recommend reading Boyd's transcript of a talk he gave in
       | 1989 instead of the wiki on this stuff:
       | https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5497331ae4b0148a6141b...
       | 
       | It will resonate with any builders in the HN audience and give a
       | ton of context behind the thinking here.
       | 
       | > You know, some people like to be regarded as being an analyst.
       | They think that's a term of endearment. I treat it as a personal
       | insult if somebody calls me an analyst. A personal insult. If
       | you've read the last paragraph, I've showed there are two things
       | you have to be able to do: analyze and synthesize. Analysis and
       | synthesis. And if you can do that in many different areas,
       | tactics, strategies, goals, unifying theme, you can run
       | businesses, you can do any goddamn thing you want.
       | 
       | I find his discussion of Clausewitz's "friction" and the idea of
       | speed as always being relative to one's adversary incredibly
       | useful, even for my day to day work in Tech.
        
         | taeric wrote:
         | Would be amazing if that talk is available as a recording
         | somewhere. I was several pages in before I looked at how big
         | the transrcipt is. Will have to come back to it. Huge thanks
         | for posting it!
        
           | hencq wrote:
           | Some Googling led me to this: https://geekboss.com/blog/boyd-
           | patterns-of-conflict It does have 4 youtube videos that seem
           | to be of a presentation he gave, though I don't think it's
           | the same one as the transcript (apologies, I haven't watched
           | them yet, only briefly skipped through them). They are a bit
           | potato quality, but might still be of use.
        
             | taeric wrote:
             | My apologies on having you do the googling for me! Huge
             | thanks!
        
       | notShabu wrote:
       | FYI vgr of Ribbonfarm has a significant body of work expanding on
       | the OODA loop, including a book "Tempo".
       | 
       | https://studio.ribbonfarm.com/p/the-use-and-misuse-of-the-oo...
       | 
       | If I were to summarize it to a 5 year old I'd use the analogy of
       | rhythm games like taiko drum master. Once you make a mistake your
       | timing is thrown completely off and everything going forward is
       | wrong unless you can get your timing back. OODA is way of
       | thinking about things to help you "get into the rhythm" of a
       | situation faster than an opponent.
        
       | NoraCodes wrote:
       | I always find formalized metacognitive tools like this very
       | interesting. Having ingrained "memory items" that can be called
       | on as if they were instinctual requires a huge training
       | investment, and for highly dangerous situations the tradeoff of
       | time spent to value is much clearer than for, say, software
       | engineers. That said, having the _right_ metacognitive tools
       | deeply embedded in one 's thought pattern might still be very
       | valuable for those of us that fly desks rather than jets!
        
         | meltyness wrote:
         | This is not untrue, but a more applicable interpretation of
         | this conceptual framework might go as follows:
         | 
         | In an AAR[0] operators explain risks, causes, and limitations
         | of the system. This provides a formal structured language for
         | describing how, precisely, supporting systems can be improved
         | and how they impact all specific aspects of operator
         | interaction.
         | 
         | Since the operator is viewed simply as a networked control-
         | system in this case, the cognitive path from structure,
         | supporting physical system, and then physical quantities
         | needing improvement is unmistakably clear, as is required in
         | successful planning, acquisitions, operations, and
         | maintenance.[1]
         | 
         | Essentially it makes subjective experience concrete, and is
         | prophylactic against bikeshedding/blame-gaming.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After-action_review
         | 
         | [1] https://youtu.be/ir0FAa8P2MU?t=1340
        
       | getpost wrote:
       | Tangentially, Taleb tweeted a nice quote yesterday, "You don't do
       | well by trying to be right; it is impossible for humans. You do
       | well by figuring out when you're wrong faster than others do."
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1627765781168619520
        
         | john-tells-all wrote:
         | Strongly agree. We need to put out a constant stream of low-
         | quality products, and iterate quickly to achieve our goals.
         | 
         | I used to do the opposite: write high-quality well-tested code,
         | but very often the results weren't useful to the business by
         | the time I was done. It would have been much better to produce
         | a couple "sketches" of the feature first, then the business
         | could kill or refine it as they want. Everyone wins!
         | 
         | (disclaimer: writing a book, featuring feedback loops)
        
           | wruza wrote:
           | Isn't most of our business code just glue, forms and api? I
           | appreciate the quick way, but also believe that our tools at
           | hand have a plenty of room to improve. Sometimes I drop a
           | project because it induces "ah, here we go again" mood. Quick
           | mudballs that could be bricks that could be panels, but
           | there's nowhere to order them. The worst part is when the
           | idea actually works so that mudball becomes your home.
        
           | quickthrower2 wrote:
           | That is quite nuanced. It is good to be clear when you are
           | building a POC or a production ready feature. Often the POC
           | becomes the POS. But https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.p
           | hp/2730:_Code_Lifesp...
        
         | JohnBooty wrote:
         | This is wack advice.
         | 
         | There's value in shipping an MVP (or multiple MVPs) fast, sure.
         | Cull the failures and iterate the successes. Better than trying
         | to achieve perfection with a forever-delayed product that never
         | ships.
         | 
         | But even the sloppiest, most minimal MVP has to get _something_
         | extremely right. You need to solve some problem for the user in
         | ways that others haven 't.
         | 
         | If you don't get things right enough, you've just trashed your
         | entire brand. Game over.
         | 
         | And sometimes, getting things "right" is literally your entire
         | unique selling point. Look at Apple nailing the iPod's features
         | in ways that its predecessors didn't. Look at Tesla nailing
         | their vehicles' features in ways that its predecessors didn't.
         | Etc.
        
         | ouid wrote:
         | It is not impossible for humans to be right. This is an idiotic
         | position.
        
           | angry_octet wrote:
           | Taleb loves an idiotic aphorism.
        
           | getpost wrote:
           | I have no idea what Taleb actually means, but to the extent
           | it isn't dramatic rhetoric, I imagine his claim is based on
           | the idea that humans can never be completely right, due to
           | the limits of our perception and memory. The best we can hope
           | for is to be right enough to survive until the next iteration
           | of our learning process.
        
       | zoenolan wrote:
       | Some previous discussions
       | 
       | The OODA Loop: How Fighter Pilots Make Fast and Accurate
       | Decisions (2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26465766
       | 
       | The OODA Loop and the Half-Beat (2020)
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22601681
       | 
       | Ask HN: How do you apply Boyd's OODA Loop in your life? (2018)
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16447690
        
       | grrdotcloud wrote:
       | I teach the OODA loop in Martial Arts. Watching the pattern
       | develop in my child was fascinating.
       | 
       | First object permanence, then two and three and eventually four
       | dimensional tracking. Throwing is easy. Catching tool effort and
       | developing these skills. I recall him reaching blindly at objects
       | as he could recall their position in space, orient his body, and
       | grab them without looking.
       | 
       | Having him catch Frisbees and racquetballs at 2 years gave me
       | insight into what skill and observational development was
       | required. At some point he was able to transition between
       | projecting the path of a rolling object vs a thrown object.
        
       | user3939382 wrote:
       | I built a startup around 2005 based on a variation of OODA that I
       | independently devised before I learned of it. Unfortunately the
       | critical hardware features I needed weren't caught up yet and it
       | didn't work out, but the competitors to this day still don't have
       | feature parity. Thinking in the framework of feedback loops is
       | super powerful.
        
       | jph wrote:
       | I teach OODA loop ideas to software teams, and have open source
       | notes here: https://github.com/joelparkerhenderson/ooda-loop
        
       | lolbert3 wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-02-21 23:01 UTC)