Also, there's more ambiguity. Is person X recently the bosses friend or just an overconfident ass pushign their idea. Is person Y still in the bosses good graces.
If only there was some way to give people little rankings of the boss's affection, that could be seen by all and were announced company-wide, so people knew where other people stood.
. I say "belief system" not to be insulting but to point out that such statements are often phrased, as here, to have no exceptions, there's no "usually" qualifiers anywhere.
Because they're implicitly there. When I say that response is indicative of someone who puts forth the least effort of running down a mental checklist of "disagreement points" to dismiss a point, I'm unlikely to say "in the majority of cases". Because there are exceptions.
And your post is one of those exceptions. I agree that there are ways of making a decision not subject to a single dictator's whims. I would say that consensus systems are often subject to the biggest ass's whims, and therefore are worse than other voting systems. The major issue I have with your point is that deciding is hard. It takes a lot of time and thought. Asking numerous people to do that imposes higher costs. Even more given that politicing, communication and voting costs. So you'll have to explain the benefits of organic leaders whose opinions everyone else copies and simply an appointed leader whose opinion is the decision.
My takeaway was that a fad idea was introduced with no thought to cost or consequences. The fad idea was simply about forcing everyone to use the same entrance. But I remember it as applying to the whole holacracy concept.
I know, RTFA is anathema, but there is a real (and stupid) answer for that:
One thing Zapponians now have to do is their own research about salaries, to find out the market rate for jobs at other companies that correspond to their roles. In a normal corporation, such things are taken care of by the human resources department. Not at Zappos, not anymore. Instead, if Murch wants a raise, she has to do all the research into what she's worth, create a badge, come up with qualifications for receiving the badge, and then design the actual look of the badge. Then it all has to be approved by the People Pool & Comp circle. And who happens to be the lead link of that circle? "Now, instead of trying to convince your boss that you deserve more money," said Murch, incredulously, "you have to convince Tony Hsieh [Zappo`s CEO]."
TFA is a description of what a holacracy is, and how it should work. And the people quitting when the experiment was announced. Not a detailed report of the theory in practice.
And while TFA glows about it, the reports I've read about the Zappos experiment [citations not committed to memory] indicate that after a year, it was hard to get issues like "getting from the office to the parking structure at night is physically dangerous because of changes since the holacracy took over" solved.
t "I had to make sure it works right" first. While I have no memories of that time, there is zero chance this was given to me by some "conditioning" by "society" or even my parents,
Unadulterated bullshit. You were mimicking mechanics. It's not a bad thing, and it show curiosity, yada yada. But you didn't spontaneously decide that the underside of a car is the part that needs checking, as opposed to the coin box.
people do not come into this world... already complex people with mostly formed personalities.
Halt the nature vs. nurture debate. We have an answer! Look, I doubt you understand how environment impacted your life. Which is fine. But that's crazy. If you are as old as your id implies, you've noticed your personality change over time in response to your environment.
many people.. have personalities weak enough to be formed to a degree.
Yes, advertising is a hundreds of billions/trillions of dollar a year industry because some people are weak. Not because all people use pretty flawed heuristics to a greater or lesser extend.
What we have achieved as society is that people that fall a bit besides the norm have a good chance to get to do what they want and are good at anyways.
Well, social mobility in America is lower than in Europe or in past-America. So, no, we haven't and are going the wrong way.
Coercing/tricking/convincing more girls to go into coding seems to run counter to that freedom and hence would not be a good thing to do.
Coercing/tricking I'll give you, because duh.. But convincing, not so much. Convincing people to do things for their benefit is a good thing, especially children. See also, school, eat your vegetables, and like a billion other things.
On the one hand, it's pretty bad to manipulate people. On the other hand, someone is going to, if not people I agree with.
And if the choice is making people happier because they drink brand X and wear brand Y, or making people happier because they are productive programmers, I'd much rather the later.
You weren't born like that. You were socialized from a very young age by the same father who (a) took the time to learn all those things himself and (b) took the time to pass on that love and that knowledge to you.
That's a good thing. There are just other people who could have developed that love if they were encouraged. And there are girls out there who were told that coding is boys job that need to hear that's not the case.
I'm not saying everyone needs to code. I'm saying that people should get encouraged to give it a real try.
Where did I say women are uniquely weak? I think advertising is a hundreds of billions a dollar industry because their preferences can be manipulated subtly and expertly. Just like all other human beings.
Strange way to jump. On the Internet, people only know your gender if you tell them. Saying that gender, just like real name or real location is irrelevant seems like a fine solution. And society can push for that.
Obviously, all women that want to be coders...have a more than good shot at becoming coders. That is what matters.... "getting more women into coding" sound like trying to trick or coerce people into doing things they do not want
You make it sound like people's preferences are fully formed when they emerge from the womb. They aren't. Society, and subgroups within, try to mold preferences for all kinds of reasons..
I felt fine about those Colbert and the Daily Show with Jon Stewart (holding out judgment on Noah) Because those shows were funny already. The Big Bang Theory is not.
It's like the pretty much the difference between splitting a bottle of wine with your partner to celebrate closing a giant deal, and splitting a bottle of whiskey because you lost one.
No, they feel having successfully conflated git (the software) and their service in the minds of investors/the public/a helluva-a-lot of developers is worth 2 billion.
You know, all that value Linus left on the table for the good of mankind.
Yeah, I know that. Reading the documentation of the idea and creating a codec is fine. Reading the code and creating new code could, if the code is similar enough, be copyright infringement.
Same deal with javascript being able to open the App Store. WHY??
Well, I have an app in both the app store and the play store. So, when i talk about it, I use a URL that checks which os is hitting it, and redirects to the appropriate store. Great for tweeting, cards (next to the QR codes for each store), etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, there's more ambiguity. Is person X recently the bosses friend or just an overconfident ass pushign their idea. Is person Y still in the bosses good graces.
If only there was some way to give people little rankings of the boss's affection, that could be seen by all and were announced company-wide, so people knew where other people stood.
Because they're implicitly there. When I say that response is indicative of someone who puts forth the least effort of running down a mental checklist of "disagreement points" to dismiss a point, I'm unlikely to say "in the majority of cases". Because there are exceptions.
And your post is one of those exceptions. I agree that there are ways of making a decision not subject to a single dictator's whims. I would say that consensus systems are often subject to the biggest ass's whims, and therefore are worse than other voting systems. The major issue I have with your point is that deciding is hard. It takes a lot of time and thought. Asking numerous people to do that imposes higher costs. Even more given that politicing, communication and voting costs. So you'll have to explain the benefits of organic leaders whose opinions everyone else copies and simply an appointed leader whose opinion is the decision.
Ah yes, that is the article I was thinking about.
My takeaway was that a fad idea was introduced with no thought to cost or consequences. The fad idea was simply about forcing everyone to use the same entrance. But I remember it as applying to the whole holacracy concept.
I know, RTFA is anathema, but there is a real (and stupid) answer for that:
TFA is a description of what a holacracy is, and how it should work. And the people quitting when the experiment was announced. Not a detailed report of the theory in practice.
And while TFA glows about it, the reports I've read about the Zappos experiment [citations not committed to memory] indicate that after a year, it was hard to get issues like "getting from the office to the parking structure at night is physically dangerous because of changes since the holacracy took over" solved.
Unadulterated bullshit. You were mimicking mechanics. It's not a bad thing, and it show curiosity, yada yada. But you didn't spontaneously decide that the underside of a car is the part that needs checking, as opposed to the coin box.
Halt the nature vs. nurture debate. We have an answer! Look, I doubt you understand how environment impacted your life. Which is fine. But that's crazy. If you are as old as your id implies, you've noticed your personality change over time in response to your environment.
Yes, advertising is a hundreds of billions/trillions of dollar a year industry because some people are weak. Not because all people use pretty flawed heuristics to a greater or lesser extend.
Well, social mobility in America is lower than in Europe or in past-America. So, no, we haven't and are going the wrong way.
Coercing/tricking I'll give you, because duh.. But convincing, not so much. Convincing people to do things for their benefit is a good thing, especially children. See also, school, eat your vegetables, and like a billion other things.
I'm honestly quite conflicted about it.
On the one hand, it's pretty bad to manipulate people. On the other hand, someone is going to, if not people I agree with.
And if the choice is making people happier because they drink brand X and wear brand Y, or making people happier because they are productive programmers, I'd much rather the later.
You weren't born like that. You were socialized from a very young age by the same father who (a) took the time to learn all those things himself and (b) took the time to pass on that love and that knowledge to you.
That's a good thing. There are just other people who could have developed that love if they were encouraged. And there are girls out there who were told that coding is boys job that need to hear that's not the case.
I'm not saying everyone needs to code. I'm saying that people should get encouraged to give it a real try.
Where did I say women are uniquely weak? I think advertising is a hundreds of billions a dollar industry because their preferences can be manipulated subtly and expertly. Just like all other human beings.
Strange way to jump. On the Internet, people only know your gender if you tell them. Saying that gender, just like real name or real location is irrelevant seems like a fine solution. And society can push for that.
You make it sound like people's preferences are fully formed when they emerge from the womb. They aren't. Society, and subgroups within, try to mold preferences for all kinds of reasons..
Why does every show think that it needs to "evolve" to be about romantic relationships?
I felt fine about those Colbert and the Daily Show with Jon Stewart (holding out judgment on Noah) Because those shows were funny already. The Big Bang Theory is not.
It's like the pretty much the difference between splitting a bottle of wine with your partner to celebrate closing a giant deal, and splitting a bottle of whiskey because you lost one.
But what if I put my buddy in charge of FEMA. He's really good at looking at pretty horses, and organizing events where people do the same.
No, they feel having successfully conflated git (the software) and their service in the minds of investors/the public/a helluva-a-lot of developers is worth 2 billion.
You know, all that value Linus left on the table for the good of mankind.
Yeah, I know that. Reading the documentation of the idea and creating a codec is fine. Reading the code and creating new code could, if the code is similar enough, be copyright infringement.
Well, copyright law.
Revoking zero a day, it would only tzake about 20 years for them to haave no more IP.
And you only have to revoke ones they sue with for the rest ot be invalid.
But also, I thought Intellectual Ventures had inventors that developed physical products.
Oh, I remember a little while ago they were pretty annoying. They fixed it a few years ago. If you haven't looked at it in a long time.
Of course, with NoScript, ad blockers, etc. I never know what the web looks like to other people.
Yeah. Last month they unrolled a huge amount of content.
The NYT is paywalled, after a certain number of free articles a month. Which I consider pretty fair.
I'm not 100% sure why you blocked them. You oppose ad blocking, but also paywalls?
I went to a professor once, and my teammate got half the grade I did.
Why not? Who gives a shit if your GPA is 4.0?
Well, I have an app in both the app store and the play store. So, when i talk about it, I use a URL that checks which os is hitting it, and redirects to the appropriate store. Great for tweeting, cards (next to the QR codes for each store), etc.
Well, that's the problem right there. Don't participate in the system and then bitch.
You could do the project and not turn it in in those situations. Cause fuck those guys.