08/05/2008
World press photo of the year, 2008. American soldier resting at bunker, Korengal Valley, Afghanistan, 16 September. Picture: Tim Hetherington, UK, for Vanity Fair
via www.news.com.au’s gallery of the World Press Photo awards.
Photo posted at 15:16
Ralph Waldo Emerson (via minuswell, who probably likes this for the same reason I do).
Nietzsche tried hard to communicate why systematization of thought was detrimental to philosophical integrity. Look no further than Hegel, whose system is complete enough to swallow the whole universe of inquiry but leaves man shivering and alone, waiting for the Existentialists’ rescue.
Systematization of thought, the imposition of consistency and the extension of ideas to their limits, is an urge we all have; it’s particularly destructive politically, in governmental and private organizations. The application of Marxism to art and music, or the manner in which companies begin to stupidly force the latest business-speak stratagem from their CEO on the most minute details of their operations, exemplify this.
We all like to logically abstract our principles and then instantiate them in the areas of our lives; we seek consistency, formality, codification, standardization, and the smooth, clean system of the purely logical world. We subordinate reality to this vision: everything we see reminds us of our favorite candidate’s ideas, our favorite author’s theses.
The flaw inherent in seeking consistency or systematization is that you place a higher value on those qualities than on the inherent properties of whatever you’re systematizing. If we are trying to construct HR policy that is “fair and just,” but begin to overly standardize its processes and remove autonomy from managers, we have have reduced its fairness and justice in the interest of consistency.
The search for a truly full system in any field or endeavor, one both complete and coherent, was dealt a blow first by Wittgenstein and then by physicists, but it persists. It persists despite the fact that we all know what works: inconsistency, decentralization, flexibility, local implementation of ideas and communities, policies at the individual level, and so on. It’s why we want to work for start-ups and not monoliths.
But still, every damn day in meetings, I hear, “Well, we have to be consistent.” No, we don’t.
(Note: it is important to observe the word “foolish” in the quote; not all consistency is foolish, of course).
(via mills)
What else can be said except: Yes.
Quote posted at 06:49
06/05/2008
Unsurprising quotes #847:
“Hemp advocates foresee a bright future for hemp.”
Gee…you don’t say, huh. I’ve rarely known hemp advocates to be anything but tediously over-optimistic about hemp’s ability to cure all social, environmental, and medical ills and lead us into a shining new future of galactic love, harmony and shared consciousness. It’s a wonder we’re not making eco-space-shuttles out of it right now, if the hemp publicity hyperbole is anything to go by.
Quote taken from the (heavily biased) wikipedia entry for hemp.
Yes, it’s hemp day in my little tumblr circle.
Text posted at 17:09
Dr Dave. Spanish Broom.
Quote posted at 16:52
- Me: If it was so awesome it'd be everywhere, probably with some DuPont trademarked name to make it more palatable to people and so it doesn't need to carry a seven-leafed logo.
- Dr Dave: Yes, I have noticed that we're not all living in hemp cities on the moon yet....
Conversation posted at 16:51
Suddenly it’s cool to take the bus, Business Week
Looks like Business Week did an entire issue on how the price of oil may change and has changed the way we live. Check out the articles on how the price of gas might effect our car culture, and where we live.
The above quote is from an article on the increase use of employer sponsored transit systems with every increase in the cost of gas. For the short time that I dealt with an hour commute each way by car, I always felt completely drained by the time I got home. I quickly decided that the extra cost of rent in the city was well worth my time and sanity, but it’s interesting to see that some businesses went to the trouble of quantifying that happiness.(via theurbanist)
It’s fairly obvious that I’m a car-nerd. I like looking at them, driving them, talking about them, reading about them.
But lets be clear — commuting in a car, especially a single-occupancy car, is just about the worst thing you can do if you have access to any other form of transport.
Quote posted at 15:39
Its Electric / Materialicious
The interesting thing about this is that Volkswagen could never build a soap-box derby-type car like this and make it half as cool. Yet this is a very Volkswagen sort of thing to do. But Volkswagen owns Bentley. Branding works, people.
Of course, it doesn’t hurt that it’s just super-cool, too.
Photo posted at 09:26
05/05/2008
via Axel Ganz (Seawings forum)
Cap’n Tony says: ” I love Savoia-Marchettis. They’re like a Norman Bel Geddes dream come to life.”
Indeed. They even have their own collective noun: a Balbo.
Cool.
Photo posted at 19:40
04/05/2008
Paul Graham
Quote posted at 22:36
03/05/2008
John Gruber on the press’ repeated concept that it’s “only a matter of time” before competitors duplicate the iPhone and its success. (via marco)
Gruber: so cranky; so right.
Quote posted at 21:25
01/05/2008
Call to increase capacity (2)
Sorry dude, my use of the term ‘market demand’ is a bit vague in the original post. I dislike market-demand allocation if it is based merely on what students want to do. But if it is tailored to what the particular industries can support (in terms of jobs/placements for graduates) than I’m ok with that.
My understanding is that is what happens, though it is not as an efficient a process as it could be, at least partially because the process of getting an undergraduate degree is relatively lengthy.
In IT, which was my background, when I did undergrad study, the boom was in full swing. Everyone who graduated after 3 years got a job and those of us who stayed back an extra year for honours walked into jobs too. And then the boom burst. All those kids who were one or two years behind my cohort graduated into a market that didn’t want them. But what could those kids do? They’d already committed to a degree program.
A little bit of bleed is ok, it makes for more motivated graduates, and people can change their minds, but if more places are allocated to degrees because they are popular one ends up with wasteful supply.
I question the need for so many to go to university in the first place. Often the relevant skills could be developed through experience and mentoring, but our society is moving away from fostering that.
That’s a slightly different question, but yes. Paul Graham wrote something about school being a place where society sends those who are currently economically inconvenient. In lots of fields, that’s sort of true. What you learn at university, assuming you learn anything, is how to learn the stuff that you’ll learn when you start your day job.
I guess it comes down to how you wish to look at the role of Universities. I think they over cater, and would like to see a return to shorter duration technical colleges and on the job training. I fear Australia going down a path where you need a Masters to do anything… that’s how it seems to be in America.
The university model in the ‘States is a bit different to here. They seem to do less specific stuff as undergrads which makes “graduate school” necessary. Here we have highly specific undergraduate degrees.
Having said that, I agree that a return to tech colleges and apprenticeships would be worth considering.
Text posted at 16:55
