I don't think so. That would be too much like listening to your ex-wife's husband talk about renovating your house when you know he had to lie to get the job and your house.
No. It's my baby girl's eleventh birtday today. We'll celebrate that and watch "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" on DVD. It's the same theme as the de factotem's speech but the CGI is waaaaaay better.
As he does every year, my son tossed her out the door into the yard this morning. The good news: she didn't see her shadow on the way back in to kick his head around the living room as she does every year. The difference: her feet are much bigger this year. So, winter will be shorter. He will be too.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Just Say No To Desktops
The ultimate act of government control in this century will be to outlaw the personal computer. I can think of some more technically efficient approaches (outlaw compilers and scripting editors), but they are more complicated. No, the 'take no prisoners' simple approach is to outlaw the personal computer. What is left is the thin system, of course, that enables delivery of services and content, but absolutely removes the ability to build anything useful locally and without oversight.
Why do this Draconian thing?
Simple. Anything profitable and digital quickly gets burgled and its creator gets buggered in today's "I want it, I want it now, and I want it for free" entitled generation, and computer geeks young and old, smart and not so smart have stepped up to the challenge around the world. The virus writers are simply immature show offs or curmudgeon terrorists compared to the devils of the freeware open source open content generations. These burglars are the real pros who have dedicated their skills to relieving the rich and powerful of their means of holding onto wealth and power: distribution.
From Napster to BitTorrent to MythTV, the systems to liberate content from the shackles of the pay-to-play and monthly cable bills grow in strength and intensity and no one seems to be able to stop them.
I have. Outlaw the personal computer. That will put it on a par with Schedule A drugs. We all know how successful that war has been.
Just Say No to Personal Computing.
:-)
Why do this Draconian thing?
Simple. Anything profitable and digital quickly gets burgled and its creator gets buggered in today's "I want it, I want it now, and I want it for free" entitled generation, and computer geeks young and old, smart and not so smart have stepped up to the challenge around the world. The virus writers are simply immature show offs or curmudgeon terrorists compared to the devils of the freeware open source open content generations. These burglars are the real pros who have dedicated their skills to relieving the rich and powerful of their means of holding onto wealth and power: distribution.
From Napster to BitTorrent to MythTV, the systems to liberate content from the shackles of the pay-to-play and monthly cable bills grow in strength and intensity and no one seems to be able to stop them.
I have. Outlaw the personal computer. That will put it on a par with Schedule A drugs. We all know how successful that war has been.
Just Say No to Personal Computing.
:-)
Monday, January 31, 2005
Farhenheit 911
Last weekend, the wife rented Farhenheit 911, Michael Moore's documentary of the involvement of the Bush family with the Saudi royal family and the effects of the entanglement on American foreign relations. He goes on to document the war in Iraq in the beginning and the web of half-truths and deceit surrounding that. She rented it because my soon to be sixteen year old son is very interested in this, and as an American kid approaching draft age, that's a healthy interest.
He made the astute comment that this was a one-sided presentation. True, I said, but if even a fourth of it is true, it is scary nonetheless.
Post-election, most have settled down into the typical American cynicism about our government's actions, and given yesterday's Iraqi-election-under-the-umbrella, one can begin to forget that this is a country that did nothing to justify being invaded by a foreign army. Iraq is now as Secretary Powell said, something we broke so we own the problem. I don't see a quick exit strategy and my judgement is that before this is over, there will be theocratic rule in Iraq, or we will be occupying that country for the next two decades.
What is bothering me is the blase attitude toward this the hard right is creating in America. Fear is still squelching any honest appraisal of the decisions of the neocons driven by their brownshirt standins, the Christian Coalition of the Willing to Be Fooled. With initiatives to force school systems to teach the barely masked religious dreck "intelligent design" in American science classes, a full press on getting rid of abortion rights, and resolute refusal to look at the growing surveillance systems as anything more than a necessary surrender of personal liberties, these take-no-prisoners forces of darkness are fast putting out the light of freedom and democratic thought just as their leader stands at his bully pulpit proclaiming the right and necessity of the Americans to do anything to anyone anywhere anytime to advance American interests.
The exception to this media blitz designed to keep us frightened and quiescent is black radio. If you listen to the black college stations, among the cool grooves you will hear commentary from black leaders and they are vocal about their opposition to these policies. When you count the numbers of poor white and black soldiers and look at the numbers of affluent Americans who are notable by their absence in the US military forces at this time, you understand their opposition. The price for opposition is the administration has sent the IRS attack dogs to get rid of the NAACP's non-profit tax status. That ought to make them heel, yeah? Not bloody likely.
This is VietNam again; a war fought by the poorest of the American economic classes. The difference is that during VietNam, the American middle class and upper class kids in college took to the streets to oppose the war. Talking to some over the weekend, they have that same dumb attitude that Britney Spears expressed so glowingly in Moore's film. It scares the hell out of me. Unfortunately, the war will have to take out more of their classmates, they will have to go to more funerals, and then maybe they will get it. The kids of the rich in America don't fight this kind of war, but here in the American South, their classmates do. Willingly. For now. Some returning from duty are coming back with changed attitudes about that decision. Now they know.
The world is still watching and America is becoming ever more isolated. The world hoped the American electorate would do the right thing in the last election and when they failed to do that, their admiration and affection for the American people diminished. Perhaps a few more of us should rent Michael Moore's film and watch it, if not for the first time, then with a few of those who stand on the sidelines. I'm not sure if it does more than make us mad, but at least we don't sleep as soundly, and frankly, we shouldn't. Bad things are happening, and even if Moore is one sided, everything I read and hear and see says he isn't completely wrong.
Those of you who think Bush will be a lame duck, think again. He has the lack of will of the American public in his back pocket, and supreme command of the American military in his front. He has both houses of Congress. In two years, you get a chance to change that. You might want to.
He made the astute comment that this was a one-sided presentation. True, I said, but if even a fourth of it is true, it is scary nonetheless.
Post-election, most have settled down into the typical American cynicism about our government's actions, and given yesterday's Iraqi-election-under-the-umbrella, one can begin to forget that this is a country that did nothing to justify being invaded by a foreign army. Iraq is now as Secretary Powell said, something we broke so we own the problem. I don't see a quick exit strategy and my judgement is that before this is over, there will be theocratic rule in Iraq, or we will be occupying that country for the next two decades.
What is bothering me is the blase attitude toward this the hard right is creating in America. Fear is still squelching any honest appraisal of the decisions of the neocons driven by their brownshirt standins, the Christian Coalition of the Willing to Be Fooled. With initiatives to force school systems to teach the barely masked religious dreck "intelligent design" in American science classes, a full press on getting rid of abortion rights, and resolute refusal to look at the growing surveillance systems as anything more than a necessary surrender of personal liberties, these take-no-prisoners forces of darkness are fast putting out the light of freedom and democratic thought just as their leader stands at his bully pulpit proclaiming the right and necessity of the Americans to do anything to anyone anywhere anytime to advance American interests.
The exception to this media blitz designed to keep us frightened and quiescent is black radio. If you listen to the black college stations, among the cool grooves you will hear commentary from black leaders and they are vocal about their opposition to these policies. When you count the numbers of poor white and black soldiers and look at the numbers of affluent Americans who are notable by their absence in the US military forces at this time, you understand their opposition. The price for opposition is the administration has sent the IRS attack dogs to get rid of the NAACP's non-profit tax status. That ought to make them heel, yeah? Not bloody likely.
This is VietNam again; a war fought by the poorest of the American economic classes. The difference is that during VietNam, the American middle class and upper class kids in college took to the streets to oppose the war. Talking to some over the weekend, they have that same dumb attitude that Britney Spears expressed so glowingly in Moore's film. It scares the hell out of me. Unfortunately, the war will have to take out more of their classmates, they will have to go to more funerals, and then maybe they will get it. The kids of the rich in America don't fight this kind of war, but here in the American South, their classmates do. Willingly. For now. Some returning from duty are coming back with changed attitudes about that decision. Now they know.
The world is still watching and America is becoming ever more isolated. The world hoped the American electorate would do the right thing in the last election and when they failed to do that, their admiration and affection for the American people diminished. Perhaps a few more of us should rent Michael Moore's film and watch it, if not for the first time, then with a few of those who stand on the sidelines. I'm not sure if it does more than make us mad, but at least we don't sleep as soundly, and frankly, we shouldn't. Bad things are happening, and even if Moore is one sided, everything I read and hear and see says he isn't completely wrong.
Those of you who think Bush will be a lame duck, think again. He has the lack of will of the American public in his back pocket, and supreme command of the American military in his front. He has both houses of Congress. In two years, you get a chance to change that. You might want to.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Marketing X3D: The Basics
1. What situations will X3D make the better solution? In what way? What needs are met? Listening is everything. Timing is everything else. Location is opportunity.
2. What will the customer or user lose if they don't use X3D? Risk aversion is more powerful than opportunity.
3. When is X3D the classier approach and worth a little more money? Prestige is not cheap. When is X3D the cheaper approach and worth a little more time? Repetition is expensive.
4. X3D is boring as a technology. Interactive solutions are exciting as an experience.
5. A world with the customer's image in it is prettier than a picture of you.
6. The larger the number, the more the risk. Think small. Scale large.
7. In a world of ends, value is not had by creating a completely new world but by adding one that cooperates. In X3D, at the endpoint is a new world.
8. Creating a new service is better than competing with an existing service.
9. If you can do something but your competitor can do more, you will lose. If you can do more but your competitor is already doing something better, you will lose. If you can do something better and do more of it, you will win.
10. It isn't enough to be different, but it helps.
11. Know precisely what you want to do.
Practice doing that.
Do that every day in front of those who want that.
12. Location. Practice. Persistence.
2. What will the customer or user lose if they don't use X3D? Risk aversion is more powerful than opportunity.
3. When is X3D the classier approach and worth a little more money? Prestige is not cheap. When is X3D the cheaper approach and worth a little more time? Repetition is expensive.
4. X3D is boring as a technology. Interactive solutions are exciting as an experience.
5. A world with the customer's image in it is prettier than a picture of you.
6. The larger the number, the more the risk. Think small. Scale large.
7. In a world of ends, value is not had by creating a completely new world but by adding one that cooperates. In X3D, at the endpoint is a new world.
8. Creating a new service is better than competing with an existing service.
9. If you can do something but your competitor can do more, you will lose. If you can do more but your competitor is already doing something better, you will lose. If you can do something better and do more of it, you will win.
10. It isn't enough to be different, but it helps.
11. Know precisely what you want to do.
Practice doing that.
Do that every day in front of those who want that.
12. Location. Practice. Persistence.
The Beginner's Mind
In the philosophy of Zen (chan), there is the concept of beginner's mind.
Essentially, the mind of the master and the mind of the beginner have the same form and this is revealed in their works. The beginner will create a simple work because they don't know enough to attempt a complex work, and the master will create simple works because they know enough to do that. The differences will be subtle, stylistic, but immediately apprehended by even a casual viewer. In the work of the beginner, one may only see simplicity but may also see the genius of the universe that comes serendipitously to the beginner's mind when it is sensitive and in motion. In the work of the master, one will see both simplicity and the genius of the universe that comes continuously because the master's mind is empty and still, therefore, ready.
I see this in XML design. The schemas of beginners are simple and contain just those elements and attributes needed to do a small task. The schemas of masters are simple and contain just those elements and attributes needed to do a small task in the context of a larger task. The schemas of the journeymen are often very large, use as many of the features of the schema language as they can manage, and attempt to capture all of the tasks in a single grand unified design.
Some think such are the product of committees and blame the size of the committee or the process, but committee work is really the work of one or two individuals who collect and attempt to synthesize all of the requirements while maintaining consensus. They create risk averse schemas because they think that the safe bet is the right bet when in truth, loss is part of the art.
"What to leave in, what to leave out" - Bob Seger
The work also reflects the lifecycle of the committee or working group that may have completed its initial task and now is attempting to gather up other tasks in an act of self-perpetuation. Such works are never completed because the work reflects the desire to remain affiliated so they never have the properties of beginner's mind or mastery. They just fatten and rot. If one compared this to theatre, they are soap operas, a never ending story instead of sit-coms, episodic with recurring characters.
Unfortunately for the current period of XML design and fielding, and more unfortunately, procurement, we see mostly the works of journeymen and committees. It is notable that few have the patience, will, resources, or opportunity to do enough of these to master the art of simple effective design, and those that do are often led away from these design jobs to management and other tasks that provide more means but fewer challenges to the skill that they labored so hard to master.
Intuition is not trustworthy. Technique is not trustworthy. Practice is trustworthy. Sit before the Buddha every day if you wish to learn the artless art.
Essentially, the mind of the master and the mind of the beginner have the same form and this is revealed in their works. The beginner will create a simple work because they don't know enough to attempt a complex work, and the master will create simple works because they know enough to do that. The differences will be subtle, stylistic, but immediately apprehended by even a casual viewer. In the work of the beginner, one may only see simplicity but may also see the genius of the universe that comes serendipitously to the beginner's mind when it is sensitive and in motion. In the work of the master, one will see both simplicity and the genius of the universe that comes continuously because the master's mind is empty and still, therefore, ready.
I see this in XML design. The schemas of beginners are simple and contain just those elements and attributes needed to do a small task. The schemas of masters are simple and contain just those elements and attributes needed to do a small task in the context of a larger task. The schemas of the journeymen are often very large, use as many of the features of the schema language as they can manage, and attempt to capture all of the tasks in a single grand unified design.
Some think such are the product of committees and blame the size of the committee or the process, but committee work is really the work of one or two individuals who collect and attempt to synthesize all of the requirements while maintaining consensus. They create risk averse schemas because they think that the safe bet is the right bet when in truth, loss is part of the art.
"What to leave in, what to leave out" - Bob Seger
The work also reflects the lifecycle of the committee or working group that may have completed its initial task and now is attempting to gather up other tasks in an act of self-perpetuation. Such works are never completed because the work reflects the desire to remain affiliated so they never have the properties of beginner's mind or mastery. They just fatten and rot. If one compared this to theatre, they are soap operas, a never ending story instead of sit-coms, episodic with recurring characters.
Unfortunately for the current period of XML design and fielding, and more unfortunately, procurement, we see mostly the works of journeymen and committees. It is notable that few have the patience, will, resources, or opportunity to do enough of these to master the art of simple effective design, and those that do are often led away from these design jobs to management and other tasks that provide more means but fewer challenges to the skill that they labored so hard to master.
Intuition is not trustworthy. Technique is not trustworthy. Practice is trustworthy. Sit before the Buddha every day if you wish to learn the artless art.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
The Blue Flame
There are moments of creativity that are spontaneous and Heisenbergian. If you try to make them happen, they don't. If you try to observe them too hard, they dissolve. If you try to repeat them, you can't. They are the true moment of jhana, the blue diamond of the net of Indra, or simply, the blue flame. We live for these moments because they form the clearest memories in which emotion and motion blend into perfect expression of desire, longing, and completion.
I was sitting outside the rehearsal for the musical last Sunday night in the entrance way for the city hall where rehearsals are being held. Two rooms away, forty or so teen agers and pre-pubescents were learning the complex choreography for their scenes in the Emerald City. I took my nylon string Godin, a very serviceable work axe, to practice classical pieces and noodle improvised sections because the entrance area is a sixty foot tall enclosure with a deep echo clear as the glass windows that make up the walls. This room produces a beautiful sound with nylon strings. I was improvising an arrangement for "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" because, given the show, this tune is stuck in my head like a 2x4 wooden beam stuffed through a tree by a tornado.
One of the principals in the show is an opera diva who for this show plays the part of Auntie Em. The community chorus is loaded with singing talent and as the Wizard/Professor in the show, neither she nor I sing in it. As I sat there noodling, she came out to leave for the night, then stopped for a moment and began to sing the song that in the show is sung by our 15 year old ingenue.
For just a few moments, in the late night dark, in the cold entrance way, we had a perfect moment of collaboration. There was no planning, no words of direction or even suggestion, just a pure blue flame that only comes from the lack of direction, the absence of will. It comes of a shared desire for emotional expression. It was beautiful, clear, pure, clean, so satisfying and unrepeatable.
To be in the flame, for the perfect moment, that is why we trained, why we kept our gifts alive even past the peak of our ambitions in the world. To feel the flame, that is enough. It is the perfect expression, and when the last note dies in the echo, we breathe that note, release it, and are complete.
I was sitting outside the rehearsal for the musical last Sunday night in the entrance way for the city hall where rehearsals are being held. Two rooms away, forty or so teen agers and pre-pubescents were learning the complex choreography for their scenes in the Emerald City. I took my nylon string Godin, a very serviceable work axe, to practice classical pieces and noodle improvised sections because the entrance area is a sixty foot tall enclosure with a deep echo clear as the glass windows that make up the walls. This room produces a beautiful sound with nylon strings. I was improvising an arrangement for "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" because, given the show, this tune is stuck in my head like a 2x4 wooden beam stuffed through a tree by a tornado.
One of the principals in the show is an opera diva who for this show plays the part of Auntie Em. The community chorus is loaded with singing talent and as the Wizard/Professor in the show, neither she nor I sing in it. As I sat there noodling, she came out to leave for the night, then stopped for a moment and began to sing the song that in the show is sung by our 15 year old ingenue.
For just a few moments, in the late night dark, in the cold entrance way, we had a perfect moment of collaboration. There was no planning, no words of direction or even suggestion, just a pure blue flame that only comes from the lack of direction, the absence of will. It comes of a shared desire for emotional expression. It was beautiful, clear, pure, clean, so satisfying and unrepeatable.
To be in the flame, for the perfect moment, that is why we trained, why we kept our gifts alive even past the peak of our ambitions in the world. To feel the flame, that is enough. It is the perfect expression, and when the last note dies in the echo, we breathe that note, release it, and are complete.
Acronymphobia
I was reading an interview with John Carmack yesterday. It seems the DoomMaster has decided to spend his game millions playing a real life and death game: he wanted to compete for the Ansari X-Prize. Of course, Burt Rutan has that now. Some games require significant practice and despite Carmack's prodigious self-learning capability, aeronautics is more than knowing how to build a Newtonian propulsion system. Rocket science is something rocket scientists do best.
The interesting comment he made was that he was reading mostly papers written in the Fifties and Sixties because he disliked the acronym-filled papers written from the 1970s forward. As someone who worked for NASA in the early eighties as a technical writer for the Marshall Space Flight Center where Saturn V and Shuttle engine development was done and later for DoD contractors, I commiserate with Carmack. Acronyms become the magic spell words of technological social networks. Having mastery of the latest acronyms is the precise equivalent of the now short phrases and acronyms of chat, instant messaging, and yes, the gaming community. They determine who is in, who is out, who is hot and who is not.
In other words, they not only determine what you know, they are used to rank membership in the social network of a technology, and of course, Carmack resents that. It is as if he is being denied access to the cheat codes in a game and as a result, he will lose consistently to better connected players. In a technology such as manned space flight, when that happens, your avatar gets removed permanently usually in a big noisy fireball a few feet above the ground.
One should know when one isn't ranked to play certain games and when the network is telling one not to play. Acronymphobia is nature's way of telling you that you may not be up to a game.
"On finding the sign, apply your mind. Thus you will not sleep."
The interesting comment he made was that he was reading mostly papers written in the Fifties and Sixties because he disliked the acronym-filled papers written from the 1970s forward. As someone who worked for NASA in the early eighties as a technical writer for the Marshall Space Flight Center where Saturn V and Shuttle engine development was done and later for DoD contractors, I commiserate with Carmack. Acronyms become the magic spell words of technological social networks. Having mastery of the latest acronyms is the precise equivalent of the now short phrases and acronyms of chat, instant messaging, and yes, the gaming community. They determine who is in, who is out, who is hot and who is not.
In other words, they not only determine what you know, they are used to rank membership in the social network of a technology, and of course, Carmack resents that. It is as if he is being denied access to the cheat codes in a game and as a result, he will lose consistently to better connected players. In a technology such as manned space flight, when that happens, your avatar gets removed permanently usually in a big noisy fireball a few feet above the ground.
One should know when one isn't ranked to play certain games and when the network is telling one not to play. Acronymphobia is nature's way of telling you that you may not be up to a game.
"On finding the sign, apply your mind. Thus you will not sleep."
Friday, January 21, 2005
The Second Term
Tim Bray makes marvelous observations about the inauguration. Some replies from the voice of the resistance in the heart of the Red States:
The Americans tolerate the war and the criticism of the war because they don't want to lose it. Fear of losing is the heart of their viewpoint. They lost in VietNam. Regardless of what else happens, they don't want to lose again.
President Bush is becoming irrelevant. He is now in the second day of his last term and counting. Largely, I think most of us are ignoring him.
The bad thing will be if his lust for misadventure continues. If for example, Seymour Hersch is right and he and his have some design on Iran, he may have a much tougher time getting that past the Congress, and remember, we now know how to impeach a President without too much fanfare. Would the Republican majority allow that? They would if they thought it was going to cost them personally.
We aren't lusting for war down here. We don't like this war in Iraq, we know we were lied to, and we are looking for an exit strategy. The challenge in the Middle East will be to discover a means to keep its culture of monarchic and theocratic rule and still feed its people or its people will feed on it, because this is a world of growing interdependencies, particularly, economically.
Where were the jihadhists when Saddam was torturing his people? In their mosques. Where are they now? In their mosques. Bush can't change that. Time to deal.
We aren't lusting for war down here. We don't like this war in Iraq, we know we were lied to, and we are looking for an exit strategy. The challenge in the Middle East will be to discover a means to keep its culture of monarchic and theocratic rule and still feed its people or its people will feed on it, because this is a world of growing interdependencies, particularly, economically.
Where were the jihadhists when Saddam was torturing his people? In their mosques. Where are they now? In their mosques. Bush can't change that. Time to deal.
Fish Herding: Open Source Management
In a predator/prey ecology, the open source community are much like fish. Their schooling behavior is observable and appropriate. They use simple rules for collision avoidance and nutrient seeking, and they collect closely and densely to fend off predators. Over time, schooling prey tend to develop their lateral sensors exclusively because the behavior of managing position in a loosely coupled herd dominates their sensory evolution. The fact of genotypic crossover within the herd and a slow rate of mutation mean the herd phenotype converges quickly.
So, as in boids of a feather, they flock and mate together. Because they are not isolated, they are increasingly homogenized. The effect of propinquity is to increase homophily. The rules for significaion and legitimization stabilize the relationships reflexively. They are well-protected and well-schooled.
But the shape of the school in motion is shaped by the distance to and types of predators. The predators are solitary and diverse. Being large means they consume less and digest slowly. The 3/4 power law effect of their metabolic rate and the need for speed when culling individuals away from the herds drives their sensory systems toward forward looking stereo sensors. Their hearing is not as good because ears are used to control lateral motion and as a non-schooling network, lateral motion is deemphasized.
Schools do not need leaders. Predator families do but predators do not school and emphasize an almost darwinian evolution based on a fitness function. They adapt quickly. Schooling systems do not need a fitness function; they use the simple rules and shared goals of consumption to effect direction. Their phenotypic change is very slow and their size can increase in an almost unlimited dimension.
Neither form wins. The predators cull individuals away from the herd and consume them. The schools maintain formation and mate frequently so they always have a reasonable replacement rate as long as they remember where to find food and don't overfeed. Overfeeding slows their motion and because they are schooling, they slow the herd which leads to a rise in the rate of predation. A school that grows too small or fails to maintain close distance is ripe for rapid predation. A predator that exhausts a small school on which it depends for vital nutrition may starve or be forced into a rapid adaptation mode which reduces its size over generations as the metabolic rates rise to compensate for the loss. Catastropic loss may cause a predator type to disappear, but the relief effect on the prey school is short as this is an opportunity for a different predator.
Predators learn to herd prey. Smart predators don't overfeed. If the open source community is to be a source of innovation, special care for culling and feeding must be taken by their predators. Of course, a prey society can evolve into a predatory society, but the need for balance remains the same. They will only be changing roles in the ecology of the games, not the rules.
This is what Lawrence Lessig doesn't get.
So, as in boids of a feather, they flock and mate together. Because they are not isolated, they are increasingly homogenized. The effect of propinquity is to increase homophily. The rules for significaion and legitimization stabilize the relationships reflexively. They are well-protected and well-schooled.
But the shape of the school in motion is shaped by the distance to and types of predators. The predators are solitary and diverse. Being large means they consume less and digest slowly. The 3/4 power law effect of their metabolic rate and the need for speed when culling individuals away from the herds drives their sensory systems toward forward looking stereo sensors. Their hearing is not as good because ears are used to control lateral motion and as a non-schooling network, lateral motion is deemphasized.
Schools do not need leaders. Predator families do but predators do not school and emphasize an almost darwinian evolution based on a fitness function. They adapt quickly. Schooling systems do not need a fitness function; they use the simple rules and shared goals of consumption to effect direction. Their phenotypic change is very slow and their size can increase in an almost unlimited dimension.
Neither form wins. The predators cull individuals away from the herd and consume them. The schools maintain formation and mate frequently so they always have a reasonable replacement rate as long as they remember where to find food and don't overfeed. Overfeeding slows their motion and because they are schooling, they slow the herd which leads to a rise in the rate of predation. A school that grows too small or fails to maintain close distance is ripe for rapid predation. A predator that exhausts a small school on which it depends for vital nutrition may starve or be forced into a rapid adaptation mode which reduces its size over generations as the metabolic rates rise to compensate for the loss. Catastropic loss may cause a predator type to disappear, but the relief effect on the prey school is short as this is an opportunity for a different predator.
Predators learn to herd prey. Smart predators don't overfeed. If the open source community is to be a source of innovation, special care for culling and feeding must be taken by their predators. Of course, a prey society can evolve into a predatory society, but the need for balance remains the same. They will only be changing roles in the ecology of the games, not the rules.
This is what Lawrence Lessig doesn't get.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Social Networks and The Innovation Challenge
In researching network theories as applied to organizations, discourse, games, and identity, I've been pondering the power of the social network to dominate the other networks and asking myself, is this most effective way to run a company? It seems that the current position of the company in the cycles of event types determines the network that should be chosen for the most effective communications media. A company that is seeking stability relies on the social network. Why? Research indicates that the social network favors the oldest relationships as these have longer lifecycles and have settled into stable orbits. Social networks do provide a fast and efficient under the table messaging medium.
What about a company that has evolved in a sub-optimum mode for innovation and now needs to make rapid changes to kick start innovation efforts?
The social networks are deadly to this goal. The tendancy of the members to preserve status quo ostracizes any source of new ideas that threaten the social oligarchy unless that source reinforces the positions of the oligarchs.
Social networks are necessary and where one doesn't exist, human resources and management will create one. However, without the challenge of learning and adopting technologies appropriate to the environment BEFORE it emerges, these networks only preserve power and often at the expense of adaptation and flexible response. Smart executives know that if the social network is the only effective means of communication, the company is dead and just doesn't know it.
Schadenfreude as a concept has become a cliche, but it is the one really effective means to eliminate innovation. Humiliation drives out thought just as its close cousin, fear, kills it. White pigging is alive and well in the social networks of the companies dominated by the formerly successful innovators who cannot accept that just as pop artist must, they have to know when to get off the stage and let a fresh act take it. Even when we have fans, we may not be doing our business much good to keep on giving them the old hits.
What about a company that has evolved in a sub-optimum mode for innovation and now needs to make rapid changes to kick start innovation efforts?
The social networks are deadly to this goal. The tendancy of the members to preserve status quo ostracizes any source of new ideas that threaten the social oligarchy unless that source reinforces the positions of the oligarchs.
Social networks are necessary and where one doesn't exist, human resources and management will create one. However, without the challenge of learning and adopting technologies appropriate to the environment BEFORE it emerges, these networks only preserve power and often at the expense of adaptation and flexible response. Smart executives know that if the social network is the only effective means of communication, the company is dead and just doesn't know it.
Schadenfreude as a concept has become a cliche, but it is the one really effective means to eliminate innovation. Humiliation drives out thought just as its close cousin, fear, kills it. White pigging is alive and well in the social networks of the companies dominated by the formerly successful innovators who cannot accept that just as pop artist must, they have to know when to get off the stage and let a fresh act take it. Even when we have fans, we may not be doing our business much good to keep on giving them the old hits.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Doing Business With The Swarm
While it is certainly true the old networks tend toward dead speech patterns, and that swarm behavior typifies the open network model of communications and transactions, have you ever actually tried to buy honey from the swarm?
You can't. You have to follow them back to the hive, smoke 'em out, and steal it.
The superior bee keeper does not negotiate with the bees; he harvests their production and sells it. As much as one resists the deadening of language and behavior based on businessSpeak, it is useful to know when to use a protocol and when to dump it just as a jazz musician knows when to comp, when to improvise and when to play the head note for note. Emergence is not chaos: it is order modulating out of chaos and back to the edge for more honey.
The competitors believe business is a chess game and they have to beat the other players. The innovators believe business is a means to get the bees to dance together, so they cooperate with them. Command and control is replaced by converse and learn. "Readiness is all."
You can't. You have to follow them back to the hive, smoke 'em out, and steal it.
The superior bee keeper does not negotiate with the bees; he harvests their production and sells it. As much as one resists the deadening of language and behavior based on businessSpeak, it is useful to know when to use a protocol and when to dump it just as a jazz musician knows when to comp, when to improvise and when to play the head note for note. Emergence is not chaos: it is order modulating out of chaos and back to the edge for more honey.
The competitors believe business is a chess game and they have to beat the other players. The innovators believe business is a means to get the bees to dance together, so they cooperate with them. Command and control is replaced by converse and learn. "Readiness is all."
Drinking From The Well of Our Incompetence
There was a discussion in my cube yesterday with an engineer that I thought interesting in the context of attempts to get better growth and performance from our company. The position of the engineer was lack of communication between development and management is a problem for many companies, but this is really the fault of management because they cannot understand engineering. If the manager takes the time to explain his or her techniques, tools and terminology, a programmer with their assumed mathematical skills will likely understand what the manager knows, but the reverse cannot be assumed. Programming is innately complex and mysterious and no matter how long and how well the programmer explains their techniques, tool, and terminology, the manager will never catch on. For this reason, the arguer went on, development decisions and design decisions must be left strictly to the engineering staff. Interference by product planners, line managers, upper management, and for God's sake, anyone from the sales staff is just interference and time wasted plus exposure to risk that the product will not perform.
Do you believe this?
My position is this: programming is not that complex although some applications are. Any discipline practiced widely enough suffers from from terminology legacy, that is, the language used is likely a polyglot with layers of overlapping terms accrued from many years of practice and reinvention. That which is assumed to be science by some is just common practice. Further, any terms acquired in a discussion or description that are not applied with some regularity become meatware clutter, that is, they can be pronounced but applying them well without experience is dubious. It becomes a case of "A little learning is a dangerous thing. Drink deep or taste not of the Pierian spring" as Willy the Shake wrote.
Truthfully, of those of you who sling code for a living, how many of you know how discounted cash flow (DCF) and earnings-based valuations work and can be reconciled? Do you know what the key performance variables are for forecasts (sales growth, profit margins, working capital turnover and long-term asset turnover) as well as financial leverage and cost of capital? Do you know how to get those values (from whom, who is credible, how do you vette the data, etc.)?
You might be able to write the code to calculate the values, but I suspect that given some reasonable practice, so can your manager. I also suspect your manager has a better grasp of when to use that software and when to trust their gut. All the counter examples exist on the other side of the knowledge chasm, of course, but I think the point is made.
Too often, we don't trust each other and that is really why so many of our businesses fail or have mediocre growth. We do have to trust each other to do their job. Otherwise, we are drinking from the well of our incompetence.
Do you believe this?
My position is this: programming is not that complex although some applications are. Any discipline practiced widely enough suffers from from terminology legacy, that is, the language used is likely a polyglot with layers of overlapping terms accrued from many years of practice and reinvention. That which is assumed to be science by some is just common practice. Further, any terms acquired in a discussion or description that are not applied with some regularity become meatware clutter, that is, they can be pronounced but applying them well without experience is dubious. It becomes a case of "A little learning is a dangerous thing. Drink deep or taste not of the Pierian spring" as Willy the Shake wrote.
Truthfully, of those of you who sling code for a living, how many of you know how discounted cash flow (DCF) and earnings-based valuations work and can be reconciled? Do you know what the key performance variables are for forecasts (sales growth, profit margins, working capital turnover and long-term asset turnover) as well as financial leverage and cost of capital? Do you know how to get those values (from whom, who is credible, how do you vette the data, etc.)?
You might be able to write the code to calculate the values, but I suspect that given some reasonable practice, so can your manager. I also suspect your manager has a better grasp of when to use that software and when to trust their gut. All the counter examples exist on the other side of the knowledge chasm, of course, but I think the point is made.
Too often, we don't trust each other and that is really why so many of our businesses fail or have mediocre growth. We do have to trust each other to do their job. Otherwise, we are drinking from the well of our incompetence.
Monday, January 10, 2005
Will Work For Food
Having just read some blogs extolling the need for free music for podcasting, I feel the "Will Work for Food" blues coming on. The web equivalent of food is fan mail coming in our email boxes. MP3.Com promised us incremental payments if the downloads of our songs rose above a certain rate within a certain time. None of it materialized except for those sharp enough to game the system, and that made it exactly the same deal we got from the major labels if we were sharp enough to get a deal.
On the web, musicians are required to acknowledge that the reward for spending years to learn, the money to get the gear, the thousands of hours of experimentation and revision, and the time away from good things like sex and beer is a bit of fan mail and some snarky ignorant kids sending critiques. Money? No one pays for anything do they?
No, if you really want the money, you have to do what your favorite girls who hang out late night at IHOP do after their gigs: no free samples, no free services, cash or an approved credit card, and "give them what they want" ethics; that is, if you were starving as a street musician playing your original songs, you'll probably starve as a podcaster for the same reasons. At the end of the day, popular tastes are the ultimate example of emergent effects and unless you've mastered the art of the network effect, you are just one more isolated node in a sea of digital clutter.
Hookers and professional musicians know they have one thing in common with the Real Estate witches:
Location. Location. Location.
Unless you are on a street known for the kind of service you are selling, your customers won't be there and you won't be shreddin' the 'natch. If you want to sell your music, find an ipodcaster who needs what the RIAA (Real International Access to Action) pimps won't give them: music tailored to the location. Work out a one time charge or services in kind, then move on.
"Connectivity: the relation of an agent to its neighbors, it can be sparsely connected (only affected by a few neighbors), fully connected (interfacing with every other agent in the system), or some intermediate arrangement. This parameter critically affects the dynamics of the system."
So, pick a place that has lots of traffic looking for the kind of thing you have to offer, but specifically, of the kind you can make. No Bach at the BoogiePalace.
Amazon.com has a new deal for independent labels and others with the ability to make an mp3: a free downloads section. Read the contract. It is about what MP3.COM offered but it doesn't pretend you will make money and you do give them a lot of rights to use your music to make money. It is 'exposure', same as that street corner. Heck, at least they could provide you the equivalent of an 'open axe case' into which people can toss spare change while paying for something else in a neighboring site. Perhaps that is what these sites really need. When someone pays for a book or a used Masserati, they round up their purchase price and name a starving artist to send the spare change to, who of course, must be on the Amazon.com site to be eligible.
At least that's something. Keep in mind: music is not software. Free software gets reused a lot. Free music gets one or two listenings then becomes bit bucket filler. Today I get free email from betwitched.net. At least on that corner of the street, they do appreciate the effort it took to record the song and give it away.
At Amazon.com, I'll be 'exposed'. Brrrr.
On the web, musicians are required to acknowledge that the reward for spending years to learn, the money to get the gear, the thousands of hours of experimentation and revision, and the time away from good things like sex and beer is a bit of fan mail and some snarky ignorant kids sending critiques. Money? No one pays for anything do they?
No, if you really want the money, you have to do what your favorite girls who hang out late night at IHOP do after their gigs: no free samples, no free services, cash or an approved credit card, and "give them what they want" ethics; that is, if you were starving as a street musician playing your original songs, you'll probably starve as a podcaster for the same reasons. At the end of the day, popular tastes are the ultimate example of emergent effects and unless you've mastered the art of the network effect, you are just one more isolated node in a sea of digital clutter.
Hookers and professional musicians know they have one thing in common with the Real Estate witches:
Location. Location. Location.
Unless you are on a street known for the kind of service you are selling, your customers won't be there and you won't be shreddin' the 'natch. If you want to sell your music, find an ipodcaster who needs what the RIAA (Real International Access to Action) pimps won't give them: music tailored to the location. Work out a one time charge or services in kind, then move on.
"Connectivity: the relation of an agent to its neighbors, it can be sparsely connected (only affected by a few neighbors), fully connected (interfacing with every other agent in the system), or some intermediate arrangement. This parameter critically affects the dynamics of the system."
So, pick a place that has lots of traffic looking for the kind of thing you have to offer, but specifically, of the kind you can make. No Bach at the BoogiePalace.
Amazon.com has a new deal for independent labels and others with the ability to make an mp3: a free downloads section. Read the contract. It is about what MP3.COM offered but it doesn't pretend you will make money and you do give them a lot of rights to use your music to make money. It is 'exposure', same as that street corner. Heck, at least they could provide you the equivalent of an 'open axe case' into which people can toss spare change while paying for something else in a neighboring site. Perhaps that is what these sites really need. When someone pays for a book or a used Masserati, they round up their purchase price and name a starving artist to send the spare change to, who of course, must be on the Amazon.com site to be eligible.
At least that's something. Keep in mind: music is not software. Free software gets reused a lot. Free music gets one or two listenings then becomes bit bucket filler. Today I get free email from betwitched.net. At least on that corner of the street, they do appreciate the effort it took to record the song and give it away.
At Amazon.com, I'll be 'exposed'. Brrrr.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Tootsie Fruitsie
My good friend Dave Blalock, had me over last night for a birthday fete. He put on a copy of The Marx Brothers "A Day At The Races" and went to the scene entitled "Tootsie Fruitsie". He then asked me to identify which company's business model it exemplified.
I highly recommend the exercise.
After that, we watched a 1966 Avengers episode in which Diana Rigg as Mrs. Peel dances a middle Eastern dance dressed in less than... less. There is a lot to be said for DVDs, slo-mo, and freeze frame.
I highly recommend the exercise.
I highly recommend the exercise.
After that, we watched a 1966 Avengers episode in which Diana Rigg as Mrs. Peel dances a middle Eastern dance dressed in less than... less. There is a lot to be said for DVDs, slo-mo, and freeze frame.
I highly recommend the exercise.
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Would You Like to Upsize Your Order?
Because proposal work is tedious and maddening, and sometimes maddening and tedious, one must have some fun. This week I reviewed a Request For Proposal for a database system that requires 'predictive intelligence'. Two items stood out in the spreadsheet:
28) iii
32) viii
That's the whole statement for those two requirements. Now it is the job of the analsyt to interpret vague requirements and that is what I did.
28) iii
"Vendor interprets this in accordance with the Third Eye requirement and bids four weeks to develop this as an XML interface. The customer agency is required to select and provide a Third Eye system to the contractor for the purpose of developing and testing this interface. Vendor shall provide an XML Schema for the EspXML language."
32) viii
"Vendor interprets this as the Instant Answer requirement. Vendor bids third party Eight Ball Magic Answer product from Whammo. Customer will receive Train The Trainer courses for this product. The bid is item cost current on delivery ($9.99 at Wal-Mart) plus a 30% markup. Training costs are for one week at $5995."
Somedays, this business is fun.
28) iii
32) viii
That's the whole statement for those two requirements. Now it is the job of the analsyt to interpret vague requirements and that is what I did.
28) iii
"Vendor interprets this in accordance with the Third Eye requirement and bids four weeks to develop this as an XML interface. The customer agency is required to select and provide a Third Eye system to the contractor for the purpose of developing and testing this interface. Vendor shall provide an XML Schema for the EspXML language."
32) viii
"Vendor interprets this as the Instant Answer requirement. Vendor bids third party Eight Ball Magic Answer product from Whammo. Customer will receive Train The Trainer courses for this product. The bid is item cost current on delivery ($9.99 at Wal-Mart) plus a 30% markup. Training costs are for one week at $5995."
Somedays, this business is fun.
Monday, November 29, 2004
Innovation and Ideas: Understand the Difference To Pick The Means
Reading Tim Bray's blog on corporate blogging and outward and inward facing blogging, it occurs to me that when espousing the idea of open vs closed blogging, one should look at or reference the concepts of clusters and long distance inputs. See these articles on six degrees of invention and on innovation diffusion.
This resonates with the concepts of Information Ecosystems. To the point:
1. Ideas and innovations are not the same thing. Ideas can be blogged, shared on maillists or even in more controlled tech, forumed. Innovations are diffused through customer adoption, that means, real running code/product. If one wants to diffuse an innovation a wiki or even a UDDI registry are the means. The means are determined by appetite for messiness and risk/reward tolerance. Messy systems diffuse more ideas at a higher rate. More orderly systems diffuse innovations more predictably. Again, skating at the edge of chaos..
2. Clusters tend to retard ideas but diffuse innovation. Big changes tend to come from long distance relationships where distance can be conceptual or spatial. Clustered relationships can have very long lifecycles. Look at the Markup Tribe, as Tim named them. Innovation is inherently collaborative and so is leadership. To the point of Tim's blog, closed blogging systems don't take advantage of long distance relationships. They tend to reinforce the local clusters. "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." ;-)
3. Mid career employees are rising in value, not diminishing. Just as one acquires a company to acquire a market (not just the IP or technology), one hires an employee for their cluster membership (analogous to the old, hired them for their rolodex idea and why your resume includes your organizational memberships. It should also include your Google rating and Google count for contributions to mail lists, wikis and open source projects).
4. Companies are no longer a means to capture and hold ideas but a means to diffuse innovations through customer relationships. Customers can also be a long distance source of ideas (usually are in any RFP-driven business).
5. Ideas can't be patented. Innovations can. Note that Sony recently announced that they have patented 'emergent semantics' which is an idea that has been discussed for years here and elsewhere. The idea that semantics emerge bottom-up as systems negotiate to do tasks is venerable. I don't know what is innovative about the Sony patents, but like a lot of software patents, they may not pass the obviousness test.
This comes down to the appetite for ideas and the risk management for innovation. One can separate and manage these in theory, but in the real ecosystem, when the good ideas stop coming, the clusters lose their vitality and the innovation stops. Coming from a company that formerly had the mantra, "Shut up and go back to work!" now attempting to innovate by committee, it will be an interesting test of the learning curve of this company to see how long it takes them to find out that forums are ok for innovation, but for ideas, outward facing blogging is better.
This resonates with the concepts of Information Ecosystems. To the point:
1. Ideas and innovations are not the same thing. Ideas can be blogged, shared on maillists or even in more controlled tech, forumed. Innovations are diffused through customer adoption, that means, real running code/product. If one wants to diffuse an innovation a wiki or even a UDDI registry are the means. The means are determined by appetite for messiness and risk/reward tolerance. Messy systems diffuse more ideas at a higher rate. More orderly systems diffuse innovations more predictably. Again, skating at the edge of chaos..
2. Clusters tend to retard ideas but diffuse innovation. Big changes tend to come from long distance relationships where distance can be conceptual or spatial. Clustered relationships can have very long lifecycles. Look at the Markup Tribe, as Tim named them. Innovation is inherently collaborative and so is leadership. To the point of Tim's blog, closed blogging systems don't take advantage of long distance relationships. They tend to reinforce the local clusters. "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." ;-)
3. Mid career employees are rising in value, not diminishing. Just as one acquires a company to acquire a market (not just the IP or technology), one hires an employee for their cluster membership (analogous to the old, hired them for their rolodex idea and why your resume includes your organizational memberships. It should also include your Google rating and Google count for contributions to mail lists, wikis and open source projects).
4. Companies are no longer a means to capture and hold ideas but a means to diffuse innovations through customer relationships. Customers can also be a long distance source of ideas (usually are in any RFP-driven business).
5. Ideas can't be patented. Innovations can. Note that Sony recently announced that they have patented 'emergent semantics' which is an idea that has been discussed for years here and elsewhere. The idea that semantics emerge bottom-up as systems negotiate to do tasks is venerable. I don't know what is innovative about the Sony patents, but like a lot of software patents, they may not pass the obviousness test.
This comes down to the appetite for ideas and the risk management for innovation. One can separate and manage these in theory, but in the real ecosystem, when the good ideas stop coming, the clusters lose their vitality and the innovation stops. Coming from a company that formerly had the mantra, "Shut up and go back to work!" now attempting to innovate by committee, it will be an interesting test of the learning curve of this company to see how long it takes them to find out that forums are ok for innovation, but for ideas, outward facing blogging is better.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
XML 2004: The People Who Changed The World
Someone asked on XML-Dev why the average age at the XML 2004 Conference is older than the usual at such events.
Because we aren't afraid to bully our managers? ;-)
Possibly because as one person noted, XML is thought to be only a syntax, therefore, what can an XML conference be about? Smart players in the business know that a lot of contacts are made, hallway business is conducted, and one can survey how well some application languages are doing or aren't. It's recon work. But this isn't the reason to send the younger players.
Send them to meet the people who changed the world.
The people at this conference are true innovators and leaders. To be accepted among such people is an incomparable honor. They have a global view and a global agenda. They don't see the borders; they see the connections. In a business where most are competitors, they are collaborators. In a world where most are feeding themselves, they are feeding each other. In a market where most simply accept what the dominant vendors sell them, these people roll their own and then show everyone else how to do that too.
Some bits are intuition. I was fortunate to be seated at a table next to Norm Walsh and Paul Cotton as they did some TAG work over breakfast. The respect these two have for each other is right up front. It showed in their work and their conversation. Believe it or not, that single serendipitous encounter gave me the confidence to say, yeah, we can let go of SGML and push XML to the top of the stack. Markup is just stuff; people of high quality make all the difference, particularly when they show such respect and take genuine pleasure in each other's company. Keep in mind, these guys work for competing companies. It can be fun, it can be respectful, and it can still be competitive.
I sat with Henry Thompson and talked futures. The man has an enormous grasp of arts, science, history and philosophy. I was pretty awed and he was very patient.
Ed Dumbill is solid class. It is so easy to be distainful, and it's a lot of work to pay attention. Edd is an asset to O'Reilly in ways they may or may not know. The diplomat.
Simon St Laurent will always be a credit to whatever he works on. A good egg. Funny too and unafraid. Fearlessness is a rare thing.
Eve Maler: Wow.
Tim Bray and Lauren Wood: the King and Queen. I am deeply in their debt. They lead with smarts and heart and genuine ethics.
Michael Sperberg-McQueen: a bear of a man. A deeply joyful guy who stays on the right side of the argument.
Jelks Cabaniss: Friendly, caring, loves life.
Michael Kay: I didn't get nearly enough time to talk to him and I regret that. There isn't one of us who works with XML that doesn't owe Michael for the care and detail in his books and his help on XML-Dev.
Priscilla Walmsley: calm rivers run deep. Smart. At ease.
Michael Rys: patient with lesser mortals. I'm glad he and Soumitra Sengupta are on the other end of the chain that feeds me technology. They treat their competitor with the utmost respect and humor.
Dan Connoly: a lover of good musical gear. This is something we have in common. Serious dude. Detailed and attentive. His name is in the highest ranks and the earliest for the WWW. He is one of the very few who can truly be said to have made the WWW a reality.
Mike Champion: tough minded and amiable. Results matter to Mike.
Mitch Amiano: sincere and a listener.
Jon Bosak: A taciturn way, he called the XML party to order; then he started his *serious* work. Jon quietly and resolutely pulls the levers and things happen. As Bray said, "Don't bet against this guy."
Pamela Gennusa: the first SGMLer I met. She impressed me then with her command of the technical, the political and the practical knowledge of markup. Still the classiest woman in the business.
Ken Holman: The teacher. He brought for my first visit to Canada, and made me realize what wonderful neighbors we have to the north. Genuine and a family man.
Betty Harvey: She can toss a balloon javelin twice as far as the best man in the crowd. Strong and smiling, she lead the charge in the Beltway to get the web accepted as a standard platform.
Bob Glushko: full of restless energy, he made a business of XML and is still protecting the openness of markup by defending the IP from the bad guys. Don't get in this guy's way.
Matt Fuchs: He sees through the mysteries straight to the application. He is imaginative, down to earth, and very very insightful. His success has no effect on his personality. I think whoever his friends in high school were still are, and anyone he has met since.
Some play duets:
Debbie LePeyre and Tommi Usdin: The divas of the markup community. Not just technical but also spiritual and kind. Probably two of the best people one could have as bosses.
Steve Newcomb and Michele Biezunski: warriors from the old school. We've served together and it was all good. When I'm with them, I'm the student again.
Paul Prescod: a committed man. Cool under pressure and funny. Priceless.
Then there are the technical aha moments. It was worth the price of admission to watch Steve Pepper build the Topic Map example with the Ontopia Omnigator. After years of reading or hearing about topic maps, to watch someone sit there and confidently model one from the requirements of an attendee in real time, I understood it better than all of the previous experiences combined.
Then there was John Cowan's presentation of RelaxNG. It was the clearest exposition of the advantages of it I've been exposed to. John is incredibly intelligent and one heckuva good friend when needed.
There were many more but these are good examples.
One cannot help but be impressed by the XML community. Some people do business. Others have subtle understanding. The leaders of XML can do magic.
And that is what the younger crowd needs to see: leadership by example. It is waaay too easy on the web to become bloodless or crusty. If there is to be a better world, the kids have to see how the one they have is being made better by the people who know how. Employers do themselves a big favor exposing their younger employees to the best in the business. Let them meet the real heros, the people who changed the world.
Innovation is inherently a collaborative art. So is leadership.
Because we aren't afraid to bully our managers? ;-)
Possibly because as one person noted, XML is thought to be only a syntax, therefore, what can an XML conference be about? Smart players in the business know that a lot of contacts are made, hallway business is conducted, and one can survey how well some application languages are doing or aren't. It's recon work. But this isn't the reason to send the younger players.
Send them to meet the people who changed the world.
The people at this conference are true innovators and leaders. To be accepted among such people is an incomparable honor. They have a global view and a global agenda. They don't see the borders; they see the connections. In a business where most are competitors, they are collaborators. In a world where most are feeding themselves, they are feeding each other. In a market where most simply accept what the dominant vendors sell them, these people roll their own and then show everyone else how to do that too.
Some bits are intuition. I was fortunate to be seated at a table next to Norm Walsh and Paul Cotton as they did some TAG work over breakfast. The respect these two have for each other is right up front. It showed in their work and their conversation. Believe it or not, that single serendipitous encounter gave me the confidence to say, yeah, we can let go of SGML and push XML to the top of the stack. Markup is just stuff; people of high quality make all the difference, particularly when they show such respect and take genuine pleasure in each other's company. Keep in mind, these guys work for competing companies. It can be fun, it can be respectful, and it can still be competitive.
I sat with Henry Thompson and talked futures. The man has an enormous grasp of arts, science, history and philosophy. I was pretty awed and he was very patient.
Ed Dumbill is solid class. It is so easy to be distainful, and it's a lot of work to pay attention. Edd is an asset to O'Reilly in ways they may or may not know. The diplomat.
Simon St Laurent will always be a credit to whatever he works on. A good egg. Funny too and unafraid. Fearlessness is a rare thing.
Eve Maler: Wow.
Tim Bray and Lauren Wood: the King and Queen. I am deeply in their debt. They lead with smarts and heart and genuine ethics.
Michael Sperberg-McQueen: a bear of a man. A deeply joyful guy who stays on the right side of the argument.
Jelks Cabaniss: Friendly, caring, loves life.
Michael Kay: I didn't get nearly enough time to talk to him and I regret that. There isn't one of us who works with XML that doesn't owe Michael for the care and detail in his books and his help on XML-Dev.
Priscilla Walmsley: calm rivers run deep. Smart. At ease.
Michael Rys: patient with lesser mortals. I'm glad he and Soumitra Sengupta are on the other end of the chain that feeds me technology. They treat their competitor with the utmost respect and humor.
Dan Connoly: a lover of good musical gear. This is something we have in common. Serious dude. Detailed and attentive. His name is in the highest ranks and the earliest for the WWW. He is one of the very few who can truly be said to have made the WWW a reality.
Mike Champion: tough minded and amiable. Results matter to Mike.
Mitch Amiano: sincere and a listener.
Jon Bosak: A taciturn way, he called the XML party to order; then he started his *serious* work. Jon quietly and resolutely pulls the levers and things happen. As Bray said, "Don't bet against this guy."
Pamela Gennusa: the first SGMLer I met. She impressed me then with her command of the technical, the political and the practical knowledge of markup. Still the classiest woman in the business.
Ken Holman: The teacher. He brought for my first visit to Canada, and made me realize what wonderful neighbors we have to the north. Genuine and a family man.
Betty Harvey: She can toss a balloon javelin twice as far as the best man in the crowd. Strong and smiling, she lead the charge in the Beltway to get the web accepted as a standard platform.
Bob Glushko: full of restless energy, he made a business of XML and is still protecting the openness of markup by defending the IP from the bad guys. Don't get in this guy's way.
Matt Fuchs: He sees through the mysteries straight to the application. He is imaginative, down to earth, and very very insightful. His success has no effect on his personality. I think whoever his friends in high school were still are, and anyone he has met since.
Some play duets:
Debbie LePeyre and Tommi Usdin: The divas of the markup community. Not just technical but also spiritual and kind. Probably two of the best people one could have as bosses.
Steve Newcomb and Michele Biezunski: warriors from the old school. We've served together and it was all good. When I'm with them, I'm the student again.
Paul Prescod: a committed man. Cool under pressure and funny. Priceless.
Then there are the technical aha moments. It was worth the price of admission to watch Steve Pepper build the Topic Map example with the Ontopia Omnigator. After years of reading or hearing about topic maps, to watch someone sit there and confidently model one from the requirements of an attendee in real time, I understood it better than all of the previous experiences combined.
Then there was John Cowan's presentation of RelaxNG. It was the clearest exposition of the advantages of it I've been exposed to. John is incredibly intelligent and one heckuva good friend when needed.
There were many more but these are good examples.
One cannot help but be impressed by the XML community. Some people do business. Others have subtle understanding. The leaders of XML can do magic.
And that is what the younger crowd needs to see: leadership by example. It is waaay too easy on the web to become bloodless or crusty. If there is to be a better world, the kids have to see how the one they have is being made better by the people who know how. Employers do themselves a big favor exposing their younger employees to the best in the business. Let them meet the real heros, the people who changed the world.
Innovation is inherently a collaborative art. So is leadership.
Friday, November 12, 2004
The Code of Joy
I received a mail from someone who found my song "Sam (for Liz)" at the bewitched.net site. That song, given away to the web, gets me the most consistently positive response of any work I've done. I attribute that to the incredible love people have for Elizabeth Montgomery and the character of Samantha, but also the deep need people have to believe in the power of good, the strength of courage in the face of darkness, and the resolute faith that darkness will always be defeated by the light. Yet the strength, courage and faith come from the struggle of the individual. In this struggle, one can give in to fear and abandon the struggle to make a more positive world for self and other, or one can learn to recognize and amplify joy in the myriad forms people find it.
Much is being made about the codewords used to sell the agenda of the far right. Much is made about the issues of morality. Would anyone dispute that joy is a shared codeword for anyone who struggles? The best way to go forward is not to contribute to the despair or the anger, but to discover the code for joy. This is what we should be about practicing in our lives and the lives of those we share with. Letters like the one I quote below is how I know that in that one piece of work, I discovered a means to share joy and that this work resonates in the hearts of some whose needs for joy and determination to share their joyful gifts are so great, it is a thirst for life itself. When I offer up songs or poems on the web, I do wonder if it is the right thing to do. It is. Regardless of the topic, if the code is the code of joy, it always is.
With a little pride, but mostly the humbling feeling that some works are made of the power of the universe to seek the highest achievement of humans, joy, I share the following. Thanks Kris. You pulled me back from a dark chasm today. That is how joy works when it is shared.
"Hi,
I just heard your recording of your song "Sam". Thank you. I had tears in my eyes as I listened to it, and I am a 44 year old man. You have written a gentle love song with yearning. The music will stay in my mind as I hum/whistle it tomorrow. The words are so,...special, they say what I feel. For that too, I thank you. You are gifted in many areas, I do pray that your talent may be more widely recognised, as you well deserve it. Do you have any C.D.'s available?
As a child I grew up watching Bewitched when it first came out; I even remember when it was in black and white. Thursdays were my favorite day of all because that was the night Bewitched was on T.V. . No matter what was going on in my life, Bewitched could make it better. You see, Bewitched was also about being different and trying to fit in. Well, we moved a lot as I was growing up, plus I was a bit smarter than many other children my age and a bit of a loner. Later I finally accepted and came out as being gay, so being different and trying to fit in really hit home with me. In addition, my whole life I have always been very psychic, which I was afraid to share with others, as well as a few other "abilities" as well. Your song came at a perfect time for me, and an important time in my life as well.You see, at this point in my life I am being pushed forward in my psychic work to be doing very serious work as my abilities have been recognised, an! d because of my high level of abilities many people are urgeing me to go professional. I have been very hesitant in moveing forward with this, as it is "different" and others do not understand. Hearing your song "Sam" tonight has resolved my hesitation. From it, I now feel the strenghth to move forward with my abilities no matter how different. Sam would have done so. Your song meant a great deal to me tonight, and I wanted to write and let you know why your song was so important to me, and to thank you.
Kris Tondee"
Much is being made about the codewords used to sell the agenda of the far right. Much is made about the issues of morality. Would anyone dispute that joy is a shared codeword for anyone who struggles? The best way to go forward is not to contribute to the despair or the anger, but to discover the code for joy. This is what we should be about practicing in our lives and the lives of those we share with. Letters like the one I quote below is how I know that in that one piece of work, I discovered a means to share joy and that this work resonates in the hearts of some whose needs for joy and determination to share their joyful gifts are so great, it is a thirst for life itself. When I offer up songs or poems on the web, I do wonder if it is the right thing to do. It is. Regardless of the topic, if the code is the code of joy, it always is.
With a little pride, but mostly the humbling feeling that some works are made of the power of the universe to seek the highest achievement of humans, joy, I share the following. Thanks Kris. You pulled me back from a dark chasm today. That is how joy works when it is shared.
"Hi,
I just heard your recording of your song "Sam". Thank you. I had tears in my eyes as I listened to it, and I am a 44 year old man. You have written a gentle love song with yearning. The music will stay in my mind as I hum/whistle it tomorrow. The words are so,...special, they say what I feel. For that too, I thank you. You are gifted in many areas, I do pray that your talent may be more widely recognised, as you well deserve it. Do you have any C.D.'s available?
As a child I grew up watching Bewitched when it first came out; I even remember when it was in black and white. Thursdays were my favorite day of all because that was the night Bewitched was on T.V. . No matter what was going on in my life, Bewitched could make it better. You see, Bewitched was also about being different and trying to fit in. Well, we moved a lot as I was growing up, plus I was a bit smarter than many other children my age and a bit of a loner. Later I finally accepted and came out as being gay, so being different and trying to fit in really hit home with me. In addition, my whole life I have always been very psychic, which I was afraid to share with others, as well as a few other "abilities" as well. Your song came at a perfect time for me, and an important time in my life as well.You see, at this point in my life I am being pushed forward in my psychic work to be doing very serious work as my abilities have been recognised, an! d because of my high level of abilities many people are urgeing me to go professional. I have been very hesitant in moveing forward with this, as it is "different" and others do not understand. Hearing your song "Sam" tonight has resolved my hesitation. From it, I now feel the strenghth to move forward with my abilities no matter how different. Sam would have done so. Your song meant a great deal to me tonight, and I wanted to write and let you know why your song was so important to me, and to thank you.
Kris Tondee"
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Thank you, John Kerry
Thank you, John Kerry. Thank you for serving, thank you for leading, thank you for keeping alive the dream of the ultimate goodness of the American way. Of those duties that a leader may obligate to, the first duty of the American leader is to keep this dream alive. As this dream is passed on, it has always grown more powerful in its inspiration to make the real world more like that dream, a dream of justice for all, liberty denied none, and the rights of the common man honored as highly as the rights of the extraordinary.
That you did not win does not mean you are not the better leader, a strong and wise man, and that somehow this makes those who voted for you less satisfied and pleased to have done so. You make me remember that when the time came to tell this country that it had made a mistake, you saved the lives of men and women like myself, then draft age and unwilling to become conscientious objectors. We the very young who watched our older brothers and sisters go, and for those of us blessed by God to see them come home, there is the knowledge that the stories you told to Congress were truth. We knew the war had become something unwinnable because no matter how many battles we won, no matter how many Vietnamese and Americans died, there is no way to deny a country to the people who live in it without genocide. By understanding that the deepest oath of the officer is to protect the lives and liberty of the American people, you showed the true measure of the best of the American people, and the American soldier.
Understanding that you have obligations to your wife and family, to your friends, and to yourself, I nonetheless ask that you not do as other defeated Presidential candidates have done and step away from the platform. There are few times such as this when Americans so desperately need the leadership that only the very best of us can provide, and you are such an American. I and I think many others will be proud to work with you and with your wife to continue to keep the American dream alive. For this is the great treasure that we must pass to our children and this is the awesome promise we must keep to those who passed it to us.
Thank you, John Kerry. It is good to know you.
That you did not win does not mean you are not the better leader, a strong and wise man, and that somehow this makes those who voted for you less satisfied and pleased to have done so. You make me remember that when the time came to tell this country that it had made a mistake, you saved the lives of men and women like myself, then draft age and unwilling to become conscientious objectors. We the very young who watched our older brothers and sisters go, and for those of us blessed by God to see them come home, there is the knowledge that the stories you told to Congress were truth. We knew the war had become something unwinnable because no matter how many battles we won, no matter how many Vietnamese and Americans died, there is no way to deny a country to the people who live in it without genocide. By understanding that the deepest oath of the officer is to protect the lives and liberty of the American people, you showed the true measure of the best of the American people, and the American soldier.
Understanding that you have obligations to your wife and family, to your friends, and to yourself, I nonetheless ask that you not do as other defeated Presidential candidates have done and step away from the platform. There are few times such as this when Americans so desperately need the leadership that only the very best of us can provide, and you are such an American. I and I think many others will be proud to work with you and with your wife to continue to keep the American dream alive. For this is the great treasure that we must pass to our children and this is the awesome promise we must keep to those who passed it to us.
Thank you, John Kerry. It is good to know you.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
The Wizard of Oz
The key to the character of the Wizard is that he is a humbug in a world where all other creatures have their unique magic. A carnival veteran, he must organize his world using his talents of illusion and character to survive. The Wizard is the Professor, the Doorman, The Cabby and The Guard. To protect his illusion, he must adapt his character so that all approaches to the truth about him can be foreseen and directed. His magical skills are his illusions and his acting. Skilled in timing, pattern and the technical arts, he is able to portray convincingly, the Great and Powerful Oz.
Yet the face of the Professor when at last found out is the face of a man worn with the worries of his promises to fulfill dreams when all of his illusions only served to open the paths of those whom the Guard favored to enter his presence.Oz is mighty. The professor is careworn. The Guard is sympathetic. The Cabby is carefree. The Doorman is bothered.
Not a man of great personal courage, he was nonetheless a man of great wit and penetrating insight. The quests he sent his visitors on redressed the evils of great magic used to enslave the playful productive citizens of Oz. Though the Witches were all powerful, they had no power over each other. This kept the light and dark powers of Oz in balance. Yet balance is not peace. The evil witches were free to enslave, and the good witches could only rule justly in their own realms. Changing the balance of power between the Good Witches of the North and South, the East and West, by that part of himself that was great and good, by example that was one part fraud, and one part believer in his own tales, this good man brought peace to the land of Oz, such were the tales of Oz.
Yet the face of the Professor when at last found out is the face of a man worn with the worries of his promises to fulfill dreams when all of his illusions only served to open the paths of those whom the Guard favored to enter his presence.Oz is mighty. The professor is careworn. The Guard is sympathetic. The Cabby is carefree. The Doorman is bothered.
Not a man of great personal courage, he was nonetheless a man of great wit and penetrating insight. The quests he sent his visitors on redressed the evils of great magic used to enslave the playful productive citizens of Oz. Though the Witches were all powerful, they had no power over each other. This kept the light and dark powers of Oz in balance. Yet balance is not peace. The evil witches were free to enslave, and the good witches could only rule justly in their own realms. Changing the balance of power between the Good Witches of the North and South, the East and West, by that part of himself that was great and good, by example that was one part fraud, and one part believer in his own tales, this good man brought peace to the land of Oz, such were the tales of Oz.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)