http://www.jayhanson.us/page89.htm
I have roughly conjectured on this at times. I find it all too feasible. As the individual who linked to the above page noted in their comment, “The world is full. Further economic growth is neither possible nor desirable. “
As I returned from taking out my trash this evening and looked upon some of my possessions, it struck me in an unusual way that a “me” 50 years into the future might look upon those same and similar structures in reflection rather than anticipation. It was difficult to comprehend. Is it just me, or does everyone do this?
As a whole you’re really becoming a giant frustration. Your secure transfer protocols still aren’t VRF aware (client applications – i.e., scp) after how many years and incantations of IOS. The sole benefit I get from maintaining SmartNet contracts on equipment (software updates… TAC would be a joke, but it’s not funny) is becoming pointless, as the updates are just as broken as the software the boxes shipped with, they’ve just shuffled the bugs to new locations in the code. You finally get a system to the point where it’s just about stable, and you end-of-life it. Your supply chain is among the worst I’ve ever seen, to put it nicely. And with the last couple of generations of ISR’s, I’ve even had some doubts about the quality of the hardware. I’ve dealt with a few really sharp individuals in your organization over the years, and I hate to take anything away from them, but this slide on the whole makes me wonder if it’s just rime to find something… anything… else.
I was watching an episode of Super Readers on PBS Kids with my daughters this morning, and they based the story upon a derivative of the story of The Emperor’s New Clothes, simplified a bit so as to perhaps be more easily followed by younger minds and focusing less on the social aspects of not wanting to be singled out by the flock as less competent (and thus going along with ridiculous suggestions so as to “appear intelligent”). The simplification of the story was OK, but it did make me think about the impact of the first time we hear a story, song, etc, and our very common acceptance of that as “right”, and versions we hear later as being “wrong”. I think the adaptation angle of that is OK, and it’s a good mental exercise.
What really got me thinking, though, was the aspect of puppetmastery exercised by a lower level advisory body (in this case, the tailor) to the decisionmaker. I never really caught it in the original story, nor even thought about its being there. But it was somehow exacerbated in this version, such that the tailor seemed to hold the emperor in contempt and believed his importance to be higher than that of the emperor. While that happens in everyday life (look at what some of the advisory councils and cabinet members have been able to push our presidents and congresspersons to do), I hadn’t directly thought before about the subtle or subliminal impact some of these observed relationships – even in entertainment as simple cartoons – can have on kids; I was focused more on the “higher level” message of the programming (in the case of this particular episode, the message was clearly stated as “speak up” – let people know your thoughts and feelings). My real problem in this particular episode was the subjugation of the emperor, and the assimilation into “flock thought”, especially of someone who should be a thought leader and decisionmaker, and thus putting this in the realm of being even more acceptable and appropriate for John Q. Public.
I’ll admit our kids watch some cartoons, and in a perfect world they would watch less and we’d have greater real interaction with community, family, and friends, rendering cartoons and shows to a merely “entertainment” scenario. I will also acknowledge that there is a decent amount of educational value in many of the shows. I know it’s overthinking a simple cartoon, and I suspect I’m reading a lot of what I see as societal problems into my interpretation. I do think there is too little thought put into the decisions we’re making and the direction we’re heading, and it disturbs me and leads me to overanalyze cartoons.
“Time is what we want most, but what we use worst.”
–William Penn
A fitting and appropriate quote for the day, as I am attempting to do some time tracking to see just where my time is going. It will be interesting to see if I can stay sufficiently engaged in any one area for long enough periods to get anything meaningful from it.
While it would seem a poor day for typing (my grammar, spelling, and punctuation is atrocious this evening), it’s a fantastic day for thoughts. I watched the girls today while my wife was working in Omaha, and it was probably our best day together since it was just myself and my eldest. We actually had fun!
I thought about location and movement of people as I watched my wife’s return home based on a client application on her Android phone, and I think the most apt name for the current 20-30 somethings is the “Location Generation”. Between Google’s Latitude and 4square and the like, everyone knows where everyone else is at. If you think nobody knows where you are and you have any online social presence whatsoever (or even have friends who do), you’re lying to yourself.
Had a few great sociopolitical short discussions with people, and had the opportunity to become of people who I share context with. Aspiring presidential candidates who have near-literal references to my own ideals, and people with similar thoughts who challenge me. Old friends who influenced my development. Expanding my horizons on ventures in which I am currently involved (though probably not of great consequence to anyone but myself). I do appreciate social networking as a whole, and I think Google+ has some really great things to offer.
Lots of great social, political, and family things. Plus, it’s my anniversary! What amazing changes in two years, and even more in three. No more “io sol uno”; I am truly blessed. Tomorrow comes sooner than my preference would dictate, as always. I had best find my way to a brief rest and rejuvenation. Farewell for now, Internets.
Of course one can’t speak for all things desired by all shareholders in most cases, as that is generally a very large and often diverse group. It’s a little like describing “what women want” – you can’t speak for all of them, and you’re pretty much guaranteed to offend at least some of them. I have a problem, though, with shareholders always driving corporations to increase profits. Yes, this is the goal of an investment, but at some point (for most products) your market will become saturated. You can realize continued sales through attrition or product upgrades and improvements, but are not often likely to see the rapid expansion and growth experienced early in the lifecycle. It would seem to me that, to provide the best product and experience, and to maintain both the brand and a (hopefully loyal) customer base, the organization would at this point focus on optimization, cost reduction, increased efficiency, and improvement, as well as possibly alternative use cases for the product. However, it seems instead that the shareholder pushes for diversification in the product line – pushing the business to grow by expanding to areas and products with which it does not have an intimate, innate familiarity. To be fair, I can appreciate some of their reasoning for this; one need look no further than the disease resistance and outbreak survival mechanisms in genetics to see that diversity has a tendency to promote longevity. This brings to mind an interesting point in its own right – it’s perhaps not so much “survival of the fittest” in genetics, but rather a convergence towards entropy.
All this said, I can’t completely refute the idea that “if you’re not growing, you’re dying” which also seems to be a popular and accurate mantra in business. I only wish I could put a business in a controlled bottle with no inflation and see if it still held.
You are currently browsing the archives for the Musings category.
