In my experience, the "Mangement Methodology Obession" began in the 80's and unfortunately stayed with us to this day.
The basic idea of looking for ways to improve results, measure results, make rational changes, and plan ahead is great. I'm all for it. I'm one of those people that, in general, feels people do not think or plan far enough ahead.
The problem is everyone began looking for a magical solution. This methodology doesn't work? Try this one! Everyone was looking for the Magical Productivity Bullet of Total Quality, to the point where they didn't even give the methods they were trying a chance to work.
There are good ideas out there - but they're being used as crutches, quick fixes, and outright scams. There are plenty of lousy fad ideas out there as well, and thanks to all the obscufation, it's hard to tell them apart.
I distrust any new "method" unless people can show it's worked and worked elsewhere and explain WHY it worked. Usually good solid planning, review, and testing will do the job just fine.
The internet is a complicated communications matrix. To compare it to gambling, drug addiction, etc. is to compare apples and oranges.
I use the internet 3-8 hours a day at home and work. Why? Because it works. I suppose I'm a hopeless addict of making social connections, research, and doing my job.
Last night, my friends and I held a wake for MST3K, then signed on-line to mourn in bits and bytes. It was sad, but a ten year run is a damn good run for any show.
We take comfort in the fact that it isn't dead, however. There are websites that have text 'MiSTings' such as (Website #9 and SVAM, and there are rabid MST3K fans everywhere. Some of us circulate amateur MiSTings on video or audio tape as well.
Dead? Hardly. As long as there's drivel, ranting, and shallow pop culture, we'll be there with quips.
Though I understand the writer's concerns and situation, we the technicians and programmers are in demand. We do have the skills and economic clout to decide our fate - but we're not used to it individually or (importantly) as a community. I think we're used to being the nerds, the techheads, etc. and sometimes we just take it and live with it. We don't have to.
To put it simply we're needed and you can't just replace us. The Information Economy is run and maintained by us. We have the clout, but don't often realize it - and when we do we're damn powerful. We are not just necessary, we are indespensible.
I work about 40-45 hours a week as a programmer/analyst, and overtime when needed (sometime pre-emptively). I know my sanity is more important than money, and that if my manager doesn't understand, there is other work out there. Too many of my fellow computer professionals have lost their sanity, and I put my foot down early that I wouldn't be one of them.
I don't think this is quite as bad as you do, but I do find it stupid and disgusting. I don't think there's a conspiracy to make us all stupid and enslaved - but the mentality that mandates these filters can grow into something more deadly.
The pardox of censorship and similar behavior is this: someone says they know how to run my life better than I do, yet if I am so beneath them, how do I *know* they are so qualified? Unless someone proves they can really benefit me and others (like an experienced doctor, etc.) I have no reason to trust them.
And I see no benefit in this censorship. Better to face unpleasant knowledge then cope with ignorance.
Flawed filtering software and know-nothing politicians looking towards the next election aren't going to stop violence. It's another publicity stunt, an unconstitutional one at that (if the government is the protector of our freedoms, what does this say?).
The communists are gone. Gay people are being accepted. I guess the net and its users are the last thing politicians have to blame. Hopefuly the supreme court, which keeps surprising me, will strike this measure down and strike a blow for sanity.
Remember who worked on this people, remember it next election.
At work, I access slashdot a few times a day to keep up with Geek News. I've explained a few times that slashdot has nothing to do with "Slash" erotic fiction.
I think however the way it was handled pretty much ignored his victims. It really did feel like everything was erased by one act, and I find that disappointing.
I wonder how different it would be if the writingwas handled by someone with a sense of arc and continuity, like JMS from Babylon 5. I suspect it would be much better. As I've noted, Lucas seems to have assembled a pile of archetypes without a great deal of depth. Now going back and writing a prequel and ret-conning exacerbates the limits. The Tradgety of Darth Vader - that would be an interesting take. If only at the end of Jedi we could see him not just save his son, but show some remorse for the billions upon billions whose slaughter he helped engineer.
Regarding the classic elements of Star Wars, the problem I have is more with TPM than anything else, but I do feel what the Star Wars series did is basically create a pile of archetypes and tie them together without a great deal of depth.
This I believe flaws the storyline. Brin's article does bring up things that would have helped improve the story and make the archetypes more three-dimensional. Treating archetypes just as archetypes doesn't give you a lot of depth, and makes the meaning shallow.
Personally, I think this is being taken so seriously by people on both sides of the argument because Star Wars really is its own culture and is part of the USAs (and to an extent the worlds) collective culture. Thus I feel opening it to critique is important.
Me, I'll still take the Federation, where I'm not waiting for some bacteria-infected supermen to save the day. I'm not a big fan of Star Trek, but at least its a world where I'm less likely to be cannon fodder for the demigods.
I disagree on some of Brin's analysis, but I do think he has several points: 1) There are some serious logic/plot holes in the story. 2) Some of these are due to an elitist/uberman viewpoint in the story. 3) There are distinct differences between the first three films and TPM. 4) I don't care if Darth Vader saved his son, I'd still hang him high if he got to trial for war crimes. Redemption is nice, but there are some people you don't take chances with.
It seems Star Wars has degenerated (or always had traits of) a power trip story. Brin's question, which universe would I live in is simple - the Federation. There I'm not an extra.
1) A network paid a lot of money to make a show they didn't air for a questionable reason. 2) The fans got annoyed. 3) The fans exchanged copies/transcripts of the show. 4) A lot of this was done on or with the assistance of the internet.
Lesson - all other things aside, your show runs on your fans, don't annoy them, they've got the technology to support each other and don't have any qualms about using it.
First of all these articles are blatantly manipulative FUD. "Oh pity us stuff is cheap" and "you'll STARVE because of these 'other people'" seem to be the major themes. Yes, now lowered consumer prices are bad and open source is the ENEMY of all of us programmers. It's hard to imagine anyone falling for this garbage.
What was truly pathetic is the lack of knowledge about Open Source shown by the articles, especially the FLUX one. Open Source would mean more opporutnites for programmers - they'd have code to improve (and create better products), quicker bug fixes, the ability to make their own bug fixes on the job, and more customer trust. Open Source to me means more competition, not less. Most importantly, the articles miss that Open Source can make money in SUPPORT, in helping the often-forgotten customer.
I'm a programmer/analyst consultant. Open Source to me means more work not less - because I'll be able to better adapt and serve those who need me. It means I can tweak products and compare code, and ultimately be a better (and thus better paid) consultant.
After reading the article, all I could wonder is if these guys actually studied the situation before putting their spin on it. OSS and FSF is not some Naderian conspiracy, which seems to be what they think.
My take on this is that OSS and FSF and their like threaten their idea of how things work. Apparently having open exchange of ideas is somehow the antitheses of capitalism (funny, I thought open markets were capitalistic). If they want serious competeition, let's see companies compete to release the best products instead of relying on closed source and copyright law to protect them. Let's see REAL competition.
My guess is that Microsoft is looking at a port. Office is a serious cash cow for them, and ignorning Linux would be far stupider than anything they've done recently.
Besides, if they say they aren't doing something, they probably are.
I have to agree - sure, Linux is stable. I'm a recent convert, and I'm impressed what one installation of S.u.S.E. 5.3 could teach me. But I don't think Linux is EASIER yet than Windows 95/98. However, I expect that the attention of "The Suits" is only going to stimulate the development of more usability.
It's open source - it can evolve quickly. my bet is that the attention of the Suits is going to mean some massive and fast leaps in usability and idiot-proofing very quickly. That, for Linux, I feel is very good.
An acquantence of mine told me that, in business, boil things down to money to make a point.
Linux does make good financial sense on many (but not all) levels. Would I reccomend placing a secretary on Linux? No. But if my company is going to set up a web server, I can grab a copy of Linux and an old unused system and have it up cheap. Are we going to need something highly customized - Open Source makes it easier ahd cheaper.
The secret of Linux some of the Suits haven't gotten is this - in the right situation it saves time and money and gives more back than many other products.
I admit, I'm going to miss the show. It was funny and in some cases brilliantly subversive. Was it a "geek" show as some suggest? I think only in the way that it was a lot more savvy and intelligent than 99% of the television dreck out there. It made us laugh about media and culture, but it also made us think.
I don't expect MST3K to die away - it's an idea as well as a show - the idea of making humorous but insightful commentary on various forms of media. The idea is there, and exists and will survive in on-line form at:
Slashdot Mirror
In my experience, the "Mangement Methodology Obession" began in the 80's and unfortunately stayed with us to this day.
The basic idea of looking for ways to improve results, measure results, make rational changes, and plan ahead is great. I'm all for it. I'm one of those people that, in general, feels people do not think or plan far enough ahead.
The problem is everyone began looking for a magical solution. This methodology doesn't work? Try this one! Everyone was looking for the Magical Productivity Bullet of Total Quality, to the point where they didn't even give the methods they were trying a chance to work.
There are good ideas out there - but they're being used as crutches, quick fixes, and outright scams. There are plenty of lousy fad ideas out there as well, and thanks to all the obscufation, it's hard to tell them apart.
I distrust any new "method" unless people can show it's worked and worked elsewhere and explain WHY it worked. Usually good solid planning, review, and testing will do the job just fine.
The internet is a complicated communications matrix. To compare it to gambling, drug addiction, etc. is to compare apples and oranges.
I use the internet 3-8 hours a day at home and work. Why? Because it works. I suppose I'm a hopeless addict of making social connections, research, and doing my job.
Poor me.
Last night, my friends and I held a wake for MST3K, then signed on-line to mourn in bits and bytes. It was sad, but a ten year run is a damn good run for any show.
We take comfort in the fact that it isn't dead, however. There are websites that have text 'MiSTings' such as (Website #9 and SVAM, and there are rabid MST3K fans everywhere. Some of us circulate amateur MiSTings on video or audio tape as well.
Dead? Hardly. As long as there's drivel, ranting, and shallow pop culture, we'll be there with quips.
Whenever Cyberpunk is invoked, it always seems folks forget KW Jeters earlier novel "Dr. Adder," which contained all the classic cyberpunk elements.
Though I understand the writer's concerns and situation, we the technicians and programmers are in demand. We do have the skills and economic clout to decide our fate - but we're not used to it individually or (importantly) as a community. I think we're used to being the nerds, the techheads, etc. and sometimes we just take it and live with it. We don't have to.
To put it simply we're needed and you can't just replace us. The Information Economy is run and maintained by us. We have the clout, but don't often realize it - and when we do we're damn powerful. We are not just necessary, we are indespensible.
I work about 40-45 hours a week as a programmer/analyst, and overtime when needed (sometime pre-emptively). I know my sanity is more important than money, and that if my manager doesn't understand, there is other work out there. Too many of my fellow computer professionals have lost their sanity, and I put my foot down early that I wouldn't be one of them.
I don't think this is quite as bad as you do, but I do find it stupid and disgusting. I don't think there's a conspiracy to make us all stupid and enslaved - but the mentality that mandates these filters can grow into something more deadly.
The pardox of censorship and similar behavior is this: someone says they know how to run my life better than I do, yet if I am so beneath them, how do I *know* they are so qualified? Unless someone proves they can really benefit me and others (like an experienced doctor, etc.) I have no reason to trust them.
And I see no benefit in this censorship. Better to face unpleasant knowledge then cope with ignorance.
Flawed filtering software and know-nothing politicians looking towards the next election aren't going to stop violence. It's another publicity stunt, an unconstitutional one at that (if the government is the protector of our freedoms, what does this say?).
The communists are gone. Gay people are being accepted. I guess the net and its users are the last thing politicians have to blame. Hopefuly the supreme court, which keeps surprising me, will strike this measure down and strike a blow for sanity.
Remember who worked on this people, remember it next election.
At work, I access slashdot a few times a day to keep up with Geek News. I've explained a few times that slashdot has nothing to do with "Slash" erotic fiction.
This probably won't help . . .
I think however the way it was handled pretty much ignored his victims. It really did feel like everything was erased by one act, and I find that disappointing.
I wonder how different it would be if the writingwas handled by someone with a sense of arc and continuity, like JMS from Babylon 5. I suspect it would be much better. As I've noted, Lucas seems to have assembled a pile of archetypes without a great deal of depth. Now going back and writing a prequel and ret-conning exacerbates the limits. The Tradgety of Darth Vader - that would be an interesting take. If only at the end of Jedi we could see him not just save his son, but show some remorse for the billions upon billions whose slaughter he helped engineer.
Regarding the classic elements of Star Wars, the problem I have is more with TPM than anything else, but I do feel what the Star Wars series did is basically create a pile of archetypes and tie them together without a great deal of depth.
This I believe flaws the storyline. Brin's article does bring up things that would have helped improve the story and make the archetypes more three-dimensional. Treating archetypes just as archetypes doesn't give you a lot of depth, and makes the meaning shallow.
Personally, I think this is being taken so seriously by people on both sides of the argument because Star Wars really is its own culture and is part of the USAs (and to an extent the worlds) collective culture. Thus I feel opening it to critique is important.
Me, I'll still take the Federation, where I'm not waiting for some bacteria-infected supermen to save the day. I'm not a big fan of Star Trek, but at least its a world where I'm less likely to be cannon fodder for the demigods.
I disagree on some of Brin's analysis, but I do think he has several points:
1) There are some serious logic/plot holes in the story.
2) Some of these are due to an elitist/uberman viewpoint in the story.
3) There are distinct differences between the first three films and TPM.
4) I don't care if Darth Vader saved his son, I'd still hang him high if he got to trial for war crimes. Redemption is nice, but there are some people you don't take chances with.
It seems Star Wars has degenerated (or always had traits of) a power trip story. Brin's question, which universe would I live in is simple - the Federation. There I'm not an extra.
1) A network paid a lot of money to make a show they didn't air for a questionable reason.
2) The fans got annoyed.
3) The fans exchanged copies/transcripts of the show.
4) A lot of this was done on or with the assistance of the internet.
Lesson - all other things aside, your show runs on your fans, don't annoy them, they've got the technology to support each other and don't have any qualms about using it.
Where to start . . .
First of all these articles are blatantly manipulative FUD. "Oh pity us stuff is cheap" and "you'll STARVE because of these 'other people'" seem to be the major themes. Yes, now lowered consumer prices are bad and open source is the ENEMY of all of us programmers. It's hard to imagine anyone falling for this garbage.
What was truly pathetic is the lack of knowledge about Open Source shown by the articles, especially the FLUX one. Open Source would mean more opporutnites for programmers - they'd have code to improve (and create better products), quicker bug fixes, the ability to make their own bug fixes on the job, and more customer trust. Open Source to me means more competition, not less. Most importantly, the articles miss that Open Source can make money in SUPPORT, in helping the often-forgotten customer.
I'm a programmer/analyst consultant. Open Source to me means more work not less - because I'll be able to better adapt and serve those who need me. It means I can tweak products and compare code, and ultimately be a better (and thus better paid) consultant.
After reading the article, all I could wonder is if these guys actually studied the situation before putting their spin on it. OSS and FSF is not some Naderian conspiracy, which seems to be what they think.
My take on this is that OSS and FSF and their like threaten their idea of how things work. Apparently having open exchange of ideas is somehow the antitheses of capitalism (funny, I thought open markets were capitalistic). If they want serious competeition, let's see companies compete to release the best products instead of relying on closed source and copyright law to protect them. Let's see REAL competition.
My guess is that Microsoft is looking at a port. Office is a serious cash cow for them, and ignorning Linux would be far stupider than anything they've done recently.
Besides, if they say they aren't doing something, they probably are.
I have to agree - sure, Linux is stable. I'm a recent convert, and I'm impressed what one installation of S.u.S.E. 5.3 could teach me. But I don't think Linux is EASIER yet than Windows 95/98. However, I expect that the attention of "The Suits" is only going to stimulate the development of more usability.
It's open source - it can evolve quickly. my bet is that the attention of the Suits is going to mean some massive and fast leaps in usability and idiot-proofing very quickly. That, for Linux, I feel is very good.
An acquantence of mine told me that, in business, boil things down to money to make a point.
Linux does make good financial sense on many (but not all) levels. Would I reccomend placing a secretary on Linux? No. But if my company is going to set up a web server, I can grab a copy of Linux and an old unused system and have it up cheap. Are we going to need something highly customized - Open Source makes it easier ahd cheaper.
The secret of Linux some of the Suits haven't gotten is this - in the right situation it saves time and money and gives more back than many other products.
I don't expect MST3K to die away - it's an idea as well as a show - the idea of making humorous but insightful commentary on various forms of media. The idea is there, and exists and will survive in on-line form at:
Web Site #9
SVAM
MSTie Web Ring
And a ton of other sites.