Although, this could just more a case of me being of the wrong generation. I’m more comfortable with reading online than a lot of people in my age group, but that’s probably not saying much. Still, I’d like to argue that this is really just a case where design matters. The design of the paper version of Wired is just better. That’s my angle and I’m sticking with it…

In any case, one way or another you should read the cover story from the April issue about fixing the electric grid. It’s pretty US-centric, and if you’ve been following the smart grid discussion at all there won’t be much new there. But if you’re new to the topic, it’s a nice outline of some of the issues that most of the developed countries are now facing with their systems of electrical supply.

The whole story is fascinating from a network/systems perspective. At the country level, the electric grids are essentially self-organising networks. And the current sorry state of most of them is a pretty good demonstration that emergent self-organisation isn’t unequivocally good. Really, it’s just a process – and consequently neutral. I suspect that fixing the electric grid is really a wicked problem, as are most of the ones that are worth tackling these days. It also shows that when you’re innovating, it isn’t enough to come up with a good idea. In order for your idea to spread, you have to break connections within the current economic network. The electric grid is highly interconnected with the rest of the economy, and part of the problem in trying to fix it is that doing so requires the breaking of quite a few connections. That is in large part why innovation is also usually destructive – something it pays to bear in mind.