Enlightened Conflict

waiting versus the battle (and managing moments)

June 13th, 2013

Soldier: This is the worst part. The calm before the battle.

Fry: And then the battle is not so bad?

Soldier: Oh, right. I forgot about the battle

- from a Futurama episode

So.

I chuckled when I read this.

And I am guilty of saying something similar <the calm before the battle part>.

One of my favorite quotes comes from a midshipman’s diary entry on Collingwood’s flagship before the battle of Trafalgar:

“… we await glory in silence. Oh, let the din of battle begin.”

Waiting can suck.

It can be uncomfortable.

It can be tense.

It can actually drive you a little crazy.

Oh.

Yeah.

Then there is the battle.

Oops.

Talk about being uncomfortable & tense.

I imagine I could suggest something wise here like ‘doing is better than not doing’ or even ‘Life is nothing without action’ … but I will not.

Instead I will say <after sagely pondering this philosophical question>

Parts are parts & pieces are pieces.

Aw.

Let me explain.

Prior to any actual moment … the moment you are within is simply a prelude to what is to come as well as past the actual moment is simply another moment that has arrived in its own time.

Say what?

The worst part is the calm before the battle.

The worst part is the battle itself.

The worst part is the aftermath of the battle.

But.

The best parts are also found within each of those moments.

Each moment is the best of times … and the worst of times.

Well.

At least you can find pieces and parts of both within every moment.

Best or worst?

Glass half full or half empty?

Optimist of pessimist?

Aw. Who cares?

All I can really suggest is that we can see the best and the worst of what lies within each of us in every moment associated with a battle … whether that ‘battle’ be within everyday life or a business situation or an athletic event or even a real battle.

Within those moments we are challenged to be the best we can be.

Our lives are often defined by these moments.

Ok.

Maybe not our lives but certainly our character.

Character as in how we are seen … by others … and most importantly … by the person we see in the mirror.

I imagine my real point here <beyond using a silly but insightful Futurama quote> is that character can be defined in parts & pieces of moments not always by big things <or an entire moment>.

We each have our little demons that cannot wait to diminish our character.

They lurk in the parts & pieces of the moments.

Is it within the waiting?

Is it within the battle?

Is it within how we manage after the battle?

They exist everywhere & nowhere. And in that same everywhere & nowhere our character awaits.

Character manages to deal with the parts & pieces of moments … the moments which contain both the best of times & the worst of time … and … well … all these parts & pieces define our character.

Every moment is a battle in itself. There is always a waiting before as well as the battle itself. They all overlap. We may hate it … but it is simply the worst … and best … and it is Life.

the antichrist bigfoot and global warming

April 18th, 2013

“One in four Americans suspect Barack Obama to be the anti-Christ”. – Public Policy Poll

<note: for the mathematically challenged that equates to 25%>

Well.

There are moments where I not only scratch my head with regard to the present possibilities for the human race … but there are also moments that I encounter full despair about the future of the human race.

25% think the American president is the anti-christ?

Please. Someone tell me this is a joke.

Unfortunately it is not a joke … and it is because of this recent Public Policy Polling survey conducted in America with regard to conspiracy theories that has me very worried about the future.

Because in the here and now? There are a shitload of people who are either unequivocally nuts or absolutely clueless.

Ok.

Maybe not nuts.

But they are … for some reason … deluded into believing some really wacky things.

Like what?

Beyond the 25% who suspect that President Barack Obama might be the antichrist … more than a third believe that global warming is a hoax … and more than 50% suspect that a secretive global elite is trying to set up a New World Order.

Yikes.

Have we become so paranoid?

The survey asked a sample of American voters about a number of conspiracy theories, albeit the phrasing the questions in eye-catching language that will have the country’s educators banging their heads on their desks makes for interesting reading itself, and the results are disturbing.

The study revealed:

- 13% of respondents thought Obama was “the antichrist”, while another 13% were “not sure” – and so were at least appeared to be open to the possibility that he might be.

Thankfully … some 73% of people were able to say outright that they did not think Obama was “the antichrist”.

- 37% of Americans thought that global warming was a hoax, while 12% were not sure and a slim majority – 51% – agreed with the overwhelming majority view of the scientific establishment and thought that it was not.

- The survey also revealed that 28% of people believed in a sinister global New World Order conspiracy, aimed at ruling the whole world through authoritarian government.

Another 25% were “not sure” and only a minority of American voters – 46% – thought such a conspiracy theory was not true.

At least some of the insane theories suggested by the poll were dismissed by large majorities. For example:

- only 7% of Americans in the survey believed the moon landing was faked

- only <a stunningly large amount to me> 14% believed in Bigfoot

- only 4% accepted that “shape-shifting alien reptilian people control our world by taking on human form”

- only 6% believe Osama Bin Laden is still alive

- 21% of voters say a UFO crashed in Roswell, NM in 1947 and the US government covered it up.

- 20% of voters believe there is a link between childhood vaccines and autism <thankfully 51% do not>

- 29% of voters believe aliens exist

- 14% of voters say the CIA was instrumental in creating the crack cocaine epidemic in America’s inner cities in the 1980’s

- 9% of voters think the government adds fluoride to our water supply for sinister reasons (not just dental health)

- 4% of voters say they believe “lizard people” control our societies by gaining political power

- 51% of voters say a larger conspiracy was at work in the JFK assassination, just 25% say Oswald acted alone

- 15% of voters say the government or the media adds mind-controlling technology to TV broadcast signals (the so-called Tinfoil Hat crowd)

- 5% believe exhaust seen in the sky behind airplanes is actually chemicals sprayed by the government for sinister reasons

- 15% of voters think the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry “invent” new diseases to make money

In some good news, Paul McCartney will be relieved that a mere 5% of respondents believed that he died in a car crash in 1966 and was replaced by a double so the Beatles could continue their careers

And thankfully just 11% embraced the concept that the US government knowingly allowed the terror attacks of 9/11 to take place.

Here is the link to the full results: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_ConspiracyTheories_040213.pdf

Ok. I won’t dwell on the real purpose behind the survey <it was carried out in order to explore how voters’ political beliefs impact on their willingness to embrace conspiracy theories> despite the fact it did indeed find that the partisan divide that is blamed for many problems in Washington DC also extends to the world of paranoia, aliens and Big Foot.

I will not dwell on the politics because my real concern has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans but rather the fact such paranoia, fear and irrational thinking is so prevalent among people.

Look.

I have written many times on how difficult it is these days to discern truth from non-truth as well as partial truth.

But at its core … conspiracies have a sense of irrationality.

According to conspiracy monger Alex Jones, “The military-industrial complex killed John F. Kennedy” and “I can prove that there’s a private banking cartel setting up a world government because they admit they are” and “No matter how you look at 9/11 there was no Islamic terrorist connection—the hijackers were clearly U.S. government assets who were set up as patsies like Lee Harvey Oswald.”

This is crazy talk.

But people are listening.

And even more scarily … if they are not fully believing … they are accepting this garbage.

I dug up some research to try and explain what I would consider ‘indications of an ignorant paranoid population.”

University of Kent psychologists Michael J. Wood, Karen M. Douglas and Robbie M. Sutton in a paper entitled “Dead and Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories,” published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science.

The authors begin by defining a conspiracy theory as “a proposed plot by powerful people or organizations working together in secret to accomplish some (usually sinister) goal” that is “notoriously resistant to falsification … with new layers of conspiracy being added to rationalize each new piece of disconfirming evidence.”

Once you believe that “one massive, sinister conspiracy could be successfully executed in near-perfect secrecy, [it] suggests that many such plots are possible.”

With this cabalistic paradigm in place, conspiracies can become “the default explanation for any given event—a unitary, closed-off worldview in which beliefs come together in a mutually supportive network known as a monological belief system.”

This monological belief system explains the significant correlations between different conspiracy theories in the study.

For example, “a belief that a rogue cell of MI6 was responsible for [Princess] Diana’s death was correlated with belief in theories that HIV was created in a laboratory … that the moon landing was a hoax … and that governments are covering up the existence of aliens.”

The effect continues even when the conspiracies contradict one another: the more participants believed that Diana faked her own death … the more they believed that she was murdered.

The authors suggest there is a higher-order process at work that they call global coherence that overrules local contradictions:

“Someone who believes in a significant number of conspiracy theories would naturally begin to see authorities as fundamentally deceptive, and new conspiracy theories would seem more plausible in light of that belief.”

Moreover, “conspiracy advocates’ distrust of official narratives may be so strong that many alternative theories are simultaneously endorsed in spite of any contradictions between them.” Thus, they assert, “the more that participants believe that a person at the center of a death-related conspiracy theory, such as Princess Diana or Osama [bin] Laden, is still alive, the more they also tend to believe that the same person was killed, so long as the alleged manner of death involves deception by officialdom.

Wow.

That is scary.

Alex Jones proclaimed in Conspiracy Rising: “No one is safe, do you understand that? Pure evil is running wild everywhere at the highest levels.”

This is rampant paranoia … at its worst.

Okay.

To me … conspiracies are for the lazy thinkers.

I now that sounds odd because the amount of energy they take to think these things up would make you believe they are hard working thinkers.

But here is the deal with conspiracy thinking.

Conspiracies are all about isolating empty spaces … empty of information … or the gaps as it were … and then accumulating all the empty space and creating a theory <and feasts on empty minds>.

But what is a conspiracy theory in the end?

Just empty space filled with speculation and not facts.

Yes.

Everyone is entitled to challenge conventional wisdom but that doesn’t mean the alternative conspiracy theories are true … they simply represent intriguing possibilities.

And these possibilities only exist because the theories’ “reality” only lives in the empty spaces.

And the biggest empty space seems to be people’s minds.

On his Infowars.com Web site, Jones headlines his page with “Because There Is a War on for Your Mind.”

Well. There is certainly a war on for our minds.

It is called the war between reason and fear & the irrational.

Conspiracy mongering feasts on the second at the expense of the first.

I imagine the lure of conspiracies is twofold:

First it makes the believer special, in their own eyes and the eyes of many. That person knows “the secret” … something no one else knows. It’s a matter of having inside information nobody else has, unless they are wise enough to be in on the scoop.

Second it permits the believer to blame someone else for their lot in life.

The possible third lure is conspiracies can never be proven … nor disproven to a conspirator … therefore they are always right <although they are not proven right>.

It makes my head hurt.

Here is something I read that explained why my head hurts on this topic:

“… remember that the best place for a nefarious conspirator to hide is inside a conspiracy theory which by its nature is infinite in complexity, there is always another layer needed to cover up the inconsistencies.

Conspiracies are non-falsifiable hypothesis. There are the refuge for those without proof.

What we have then is the extremes at both ends, those that believe in nothing but the norm, the mindless sheep awaiting orders. And at the other end those that believe nothing they are told and no longer have a coherent grasp of reality because of their missing pool of shared experiences.”

So.

I blame a lot of things and mostly people themselves <because they are being unerringly paranoid and duped by selective truths and speculative thinking> for this trend but I will point out a major contributor … television. This report summarizes why I wanted to point out TV as a major culprit:

According to “The State of the News Media 2013”, a report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism at the Pew Research Centre, the deteriorating financial state of news organizations has hurt their output.

Americans who think media firms are putting out fewer original, thoughtful stories are probably right. Weather, traffic and sport now account for around 40% of local television newscasts. The average length of a story keeps falling. Only 20% of local TV stories exceed a minute, and half take less than 30 seconds.

On cable-news channels, live reports, which require camera crews and journalists actually to show up somewhere, have fallen by a third in daytime programs in the past five years. Interview segments, which are cheap, have risen.

Americans may also prefer talking heads because they increasingly prefer to hear opinion rather than fact.

This trend is highlighted by the popularity of Fox, a conservative news network, and of MSNBC, its left-leaning counterpart. CNN, which tends to toe the middle line, continues to struggle with its ratings unless there is a big news event.

Pew says the news industry is “undermanned and underprepared to uncover stories, dig deep into emerging ones or to question information put into its hands.”

This dependence on “opinion entertainers” as news is probably the most damaging … and disturbing.

I know lots of people who get 100% of their news from Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh or Jon Stewart. Unfortunately, while smart people, they are entertainers.

Their existence is based on ratings not truth. Opinions drive ratings. Apparently Truth isn’t a big seller these days.

Anyway.

Conspiracies and paranoia and irrational thinking.

Sure.

Be skeptical.

Disbelieve, doubt and look askance.

If you want, look askance twice.

Assume you are being lobbied if not actually lied to if you want.

But in the end make up your own mind using common sense <and try and avoid too many ‘what ifs’ and made up shit>.

And remember a conspiracy theory is just empty space filled with speculation and not facts.

Make sure that description isn’t your mind.

Oh. And make sure you just aren’t paranoid.

Oh. And you may have to recognize that all this poking holes in conventional wisdom and faux science and conspiracy theories will take strength of character, a constant battle for clarity <and common sense> and a boatload of courage to take on people whose only real argument is “so you just don’t get it”.

morons

March 16th, 2013

“All morons hate it when you call them a moron.” - Holden Caulfield <Catcher in the Rye>

Ok.

Morons is a harsh word and a harsh concept …but let’s face it … most of us have experienced that maddening discussion where we explain that seemingly simple concept … or that seemingly simple common sense point of view to someone … and not only can they not grasp it but may actually argue a completely moronic point of view that flies in the face of <1> facts, <2> truth, or maybe even <3> common sense.

In fact … during the discussion we may even try several different approaches to the idea, using every metaphor <or parable or analogy> within reach to throw into the discussion that we think the person should reasonably be capable of following.

In the end … sometimes we succeed … mostly we fail … and always it is painful <to us> and obviously moronic <to us>.

It is here I will bring up the idea of intelligence <despite the fact it may sound odd in a rant on morons>.

First. Just to set the groundwork … most everyday functions of modern life require an IQ of around 90.

Those functions include driving a car, mailing a letter, paying bills and making a bank deposit.

The more specialized the function, the more intricate, the higher the level of intelligence necessary.

Second. I am not using the term ‘moron’ as a classification of any mental deficiency despite the fact that technically ‘moron’ translates to denoting a mild mental deficiency. I am going to suggest being a moron denotes a certain deficiency … but not a mental one.

Therefore <here is where I link intelligence and the topic of morons> we can dispense with the idea that morons are stupid or have a lack of intelligence.

The deficiency within morons, or being moronic, has nothing to do with intelligence <or at least IQ>. Most have IQs at or above 90 <I made that up but I tend to believe it>.

Let me take it one step further. You cannot be a moron unless you actually are intelligent.

Because morons are actually people who have intelligence … but they waste it.

Either by using it <their intelligence> poorly or misusing it or not even using it at all.

Wow.

Bet you didn’t think I was going to head down that path, did ya?

Morons are actually intelligent? Yup. Morons are simply purposefully ignorant … but they are smart.

Uh oh.

That means morons are as intelligent as you and I <okay … maybe at least me … you are probably smarter and this is simply my issue>.

All that said … it suggests that the moronic issue resides elsewhere than intelligence.

Robert Heinlein said that stupidity characteristics <or characteristics of morons> are actually tied to ignorance <so I am going to steal that idea because I agree with Bob>.

He suggests that stupidity cannot be cured using money, remedial education or some governmental edict because inevitably it resides within a different reason … a purposeful or intentional ignorance.

Purposeful. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … This means that morons actually know something to be wrong with themselves <it may be subconscious but they somewhere within they understand> … they are intelligent enough to understand … and, yet, rather than correct themselves and abandon that ‘something’ … they practice intentional ignorance clinging to that ‘thing’ and inevitably insist that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

And this is where morons are dangerous.

Very very dangerous.

“Because, fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding. And soon, your Honor, with banners flying and drums beating, we’ll be marching backward, backward, to those glorious ages of the 16th century, when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind.” – Clarence Darrow <Inherit the wind>

Morons march backwards. Busily marching themselves and trying to herd the rest of us backwards to some glorious age.

It is a Life truth that fanaticism & ignorance is forever busy <and a busybody>.

I fully understand that this fanaticism and ignorance is impossible to extinguish. But that doesn’t mean it should be tolerated. Particularly if it is actually harmful.

Regardless. Tolerance is an acceptance of the morons.

And with this acceptance, albeit grudging acceptance, the morons simply see it as permission to be moronic and they gladly step up <in their forever busy way of theirs> and do harm.

Harm in the form of stopping <or even reversal> of progress … harm in marching us backwards.

Or they teach and promote falsehoods to others <others including children which is disturbing> with the hope that this younger generation will grow up and can possibly march us backwards.

All this translates into a lot of time and effort and energy lost as ignorance and its byproducts step up and suck time & energy from progress.

Ok. A Bruce thought.

I believe we can no longer afford the luxury of moronic ignorance or tolerate the presence of morons. Tolerating them leads to the creation of a sense that this moronic ignorance actually equals some sort of knowledge <which then makes them some sort of “knowledgeable person” and you know where that leads … ‘trouble in River City’ to quote The Music Man>.

“<there is a> … false notion that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ― Isaac Asimov

Morons are wily. They have the notion that their smarts, combined with their purposeful ignorance, is just as good as real unfiltered knowledge.

This is tiring to deal with.

In fact … if you find yourself surrounded by morons, rather than just shake your head, you have to purposefully accept the challenge to deal with their moronic thinking with the knowledge that they actually have the intelligence to be non-moronic <but actually choose to be moronic>. Wow. Just typing that made my head hurt.

It would take a monumental effort to create the unlikely evolutionary change where morons become extinct <that may be an unattainable objective but it is certainly an admirable objective>.

And it will take your best monumental effort to deal with a moron because there are instances where the lines are blurred and where argument and debate and discussion regarding two sides of an issue are actually warranted.

But.

You should seek solace in that there are also issues where right is right … and wrong is wrong … and anyone who argues it looks like the guy who believes Yoda exists somewhere and The Force can be attained with focus & practice.

Oh.

And here is where morons really thrive.

Numbers & science & studies & statistics <oh my>.

Science is smart and science is stupid.

Both are true and there could be studies done to prove it.

One of the smart/stupid things about science is something called the ubiquitous study. They are excellent scientific research formats but while all studies <and most research in general> are interesting … they do not reveal eternal, all-encompassing truths.

They simply provide a glimpse into one small, carefully cordoned off area of interest. Extrapolations from the data are based on statistics and therefore do not necessarily apply to everyone and everything.

I say that because it seems like we find comfort worshiping at the altar of the ‘numbers’.

All of us seem to be considering study results and numbers to be the indisputable truth.

What a fantasy.

But it is often a fantasy land morons live, eat & drink in <and thrive in like a bacteria in a petri dish>>. Numbers are their friends and constant companions.

Morons thrive on the isolated statistic. A random factoid or piece of information that has no context nor admits it has Truth only within a limited set of circumstances. And they win a shitload of debates using this technique. How does all this happen?

Well. It sounds simplistic … but I believe we allow it to happen for a couple of reasons … first is a well intentioned but subverted belief in freedom of speech. Subverted because inevitably it is often simply ‘freedom of opinion’ these days. Secondly … ‘opinion’ forces us all to seek something tangible in which to reach some conclusion … therefore we seek statistics or numbers to identify truth <and isolate something we can all agree on>.

And numbers do not necessarily translate into Truth. Especially isolated non-contextual numbers.

In the end we seem to be damned by a society that has ingrained in us this strange belief that because we encourage freedom of speech and freedom of thought … that all ideas deserve respect and consideration that no one individual <or idea> is “better” or more “worthy” of consideration than any other.

What a bunch of bullhockey.

This has created an environment in which any moronic idea can hover around like an aggravating gnat as legitimate idea.

It is crazy.

A moron is a moron.

A moronic idea is a moronic idea.

It is time that we learned to have the balls <or spine if you are a woman> to call out the morons.

Morons don’t like to be called morons.

Why?

Because they are frickin’ intelligent enough to know better than skate by on shallow feelings and beliefs.

And all the while you must swim in the shallow end of the intellectual debate to debate with them … you must be careful of your own ignorance more than theirs … because purposeful ignorance does have a sneaky way of creeping up on you. What I mean is that it is easier to be a moron than to not be a moron. It takes less work, intellectually and curiosity, to maintain an ignorant point of view than it takes to not only grow personally but to actually help a moron grow <which is a quite taxing job>. Frankly it is just easier to quit debating than to take on a moron. I imagine it becomes a test of character.

Regardless. I imagine in the end that is my point <the test morons give us day in and day out>.

Morons are morons because they are smart enough to engage in purposeful ignorance.

To be ignorant on purpose?

Yikes.

You would have to be a moron.

But. In the end … morons hate to be called morons simply because they are smart enough to know they could do, and be, better. Even morons know somewhere under their purposeful ignorance they should be better than what they are. I imagine the only way to beat morons is to actually get them to face that fact.

Wow. There is a tough job. But. We cannot let the morons win. Purposeful ignorance is a disease. A disease that can affect entire civilizations & cultures. That thought makes it scary to even think about tolerating the moron.

answering the help wanted ads for data decipherer

March 12th, 2013

Help Wanted!- Data, data everywhere—and not enough people to decipher it – WSJ headline 3/11

51% of surveyed IT professionals currently involved in big-data projects cited ‘lack of expertise to connect the dots’ as a reason projects fail in their organization. No other factor was more commonly cited. – infochimps, inc.

Well.

This post is either going to show I am incredibly naïve or incredibly smart or incredibly stupid <and clueless>.

Look.

Everyone in business is drowning in data these days.

But here is a newsflash … we were always drowning in data … albeit different data … but I am willing to bet a shitload of money that anyone with any business experience will agree that we had so much data crossing our desks <in the good ole days> that you could build your own great pyramid of paper if you so desired.

As I scratch my head over the flurry of farcical diatribes around “big data” I can’t help but be reminded of the poem “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”:

“water, water everywhere, nary a drop to drink.”

We might say the same thing about how technology has enhanced the volume of data these days.

The volume of data is almost unfathomably vast.

And because of that we see thousands of articles on how to sift through the data for business advantages.

Well.

This is crazy talk. Mostly because it seems like everyone is mesmerized by the quantity of data available.

Anyone with any business chops will quickly point out that anyone, throughout the history of business, has always had a quantity of data available.

And we almost always had too much quantity <more than they could ever use>.

The access to quantity has never been an issue.

Now.

They will also point out that part of knowing your business shit is setting up efficient/effective data gathering … so you capture the most important <and not invest gobs of energy on stuff you will never use, cannot use, do not really want to use or is just plain useless> data.

Now.

They will also point that data analysis has three components:

- Assessing the data available <with gobs available which gobs are most meaningful>

- Setting up a system to use the useful data <consistently trapping & tracking the useful stuff consistently saves time and effort>

- Analyzing the data <connecting the dots … instead of just showing numbers>

Now.

They will also point out that the third step in the process is often best done by someone who has no clue how the data is gathered … or even needs to know exactly what data was not gathered <although they may at some point suggest gathering something that someone up the ladder had decided was unimportant> … but they know how to connect dots.

Now.

I will now point out we in business have been doing this for years.

Sure. More and different data may be available today but the schematic looks the same.

Business management has always faced an obstacle when it comes to reaping the benefits of big data because they always need someone who can tell them what it all means.

But it seems that because there are so many new ways to gather and track data there is a heightened awareness, and desire, to actually use all this data stuff … with the same good intentions that business had in the past … gain a competitive edge … or at least to keep up with the competition.

Oh.

And here is what any business person with chops will also tell you … relying on data alone isn’t enough. This is a game of both head and gut.

When you rely too heavily on data, you can become too reactive, too myopic in your thinking and miss out on what the numbers can never tell you … the why’s and the what’s and the <inconceivable to number crunchers> impractical inconsistent sometimes illogical human mind & behavior. Data cannot tell you what to do.

<Big> data can lead to small sharp insights and beget great decisions and action.

But.

Here is a business truth <that most executives do not want to hear these days> … data, of any size <double venti, regular venti, grande, etc.> has no value in and of itself.

The true value of data is found in context.

Look.

You absolutely need a team with technical people to gather & mine the data … but they need to be working together with an experienced analytical person who knows how to ‘connect dots.’ This type of person knows how to observe information, interpret information and place it in context with non-number/data stuff and explain it.

And, no, that person may not be a data gwonk.

They are just good at connecting dots.

And they are good at not being blinded by the newest & nearest data point.

“Gut feel is great for everyday problems. But, it often leads us astray when we’re presented with complex streams of information. We can be blinded by the newest and nearest data point and miss the big picture.” – Nate Silver statistician & author

I don’t agree with Nate … well … he did caveat it with “can” and “often” … so maybe I will give him a break.

Gut feel … intuition … ability to “feel” the numbers in context … is essential in order to use the data.

I do believe in what IBM calls “augmenting intuition.” And that means … well … what it says. Augment … ‘in addition to’ … add in as part of your decision criteria.

No amount of numbers <and data of any kind> can eliminate all decision risk. Nor can any amount of numbers <and data of any kind> insure you make the best decision.

Here is my last “Truth” of this post … data & analytics can make you equally smart & stupid.

People make smart decisions using data all the time.

People make stupid decisions using data all the time.

The only thing consistent is people.

And here is where the article kind of truly went a little nutso.

Increasing training & skill set on ‘connecting dots’ <I assume this is “analyzing the data” in academia> to increase the amount of decipherers available to businesses.

This is where it all falls apart for me.

Because doing what they suggest basically means that data drives good decisions. Data all by itself. No intuition … no feel … no gut from experience … that maybe data can make a decision for you … and they are wrong.

I become scared because I almost feel like this is a deeper dive into that business hellhole I call “responsibility free decision making” with the intent to do the “safest behavior to increase return <or increase advantage>”.

This is using data to make all the decisions <and they even use it to hire a person which is also kind of nuts>.

This is dancing on the head of a pin business management.

And it doesn’t teach people how to think.

It doesn’t utilize skills of existing people <who aren’t steeped in ‘Big Data” but are also not intimidated nor blinded by the newest & nearest data point> who are very good at connecting dots.

And, worse, it guarantees a next business generation of “big Data decipherers” … or people who use data decision making skills and have honed no intuition skills at all.

Am I suggesting “gut management” alone? Of course not. I never have. I never will.

In the 80’s we scoured computer printouts with ‘crosstabs’ and supermarket SAMI and Nielsen reports which contained reams of data point we had to make sense of.

In the 2000’s we are scouring computer printouts <assuming you print out> which contain reams of data points we have to make sense of. And you did it then, as it should be done now, as part of a team to insure you didn’t get dazzled by some shiny data point.

This stuff drives me a little nuts because we all think the newest and nearest data point <oops … innovation> means that the world has turned on its head.

It hasn’t.

Some skills are just … well … good business skills. Adaptable to pretty much any new widget or innovation that mankind can create.

I know how to connect dots. I have no clue how to build systems to gather these dots. And you know what? I am not sure I have ever known.

And I am not unique. There are hundreds if not thousands of Me’s out there.

The skill?
Making Big Data nice small simple learnings/conclusions. Ok. Making any data available into nice small simple learnings.

2013. 1913. 1813.

The skill has always been relevant … and thinking that ‘data decipherer’ is some new skill is crazy.

nothing beats flying

February 1st, 2013

“Come to the edge,” he said.

“We are afraid,” they said.

“Come to the edge,” he said.

They came and he pushed.

And they flew.

- Appollainare

Ah.

The edge.

There is a lightning rod word.

Edge is … risky … dangerous … uncertain … for the fearless … <insert your own word here>

Because of all those words … some people fear nearing the edge.

Oh.

Of anything.

They like to remain solidly in the middle. Some call it ‘the safe ground.’ On the other hand … other people don’t consider it safe but rather they simply want to keep their feet on the ground. It is nice and solid. It is a place where even if a stiff wind catches you unaware you do not even come close to teetering near the edge.

Now.

Some people like living near the edge. Of everything.

They dance on the balance beam of life. They are really only safe when not moving and steadying themselves but never stopping any longer than to contemplate the next move on the balance beam … the edge … of life. They find comfort in the instability offered by the edge.

Regardless of how you may feel about the edge … to fly you must not only near the edge … you must step off the edge.

Now.

Some people fear flying.

Some people want to fly.

Ok.

Let me take that last one back. I guess I know that all people want to fly <in some way even if it is just in their dreams or ‘what ifs’>.

It’s just that some people are better than others at getting near the edge.

And an even fewer ‘some people’ are better at actually taking that step over the edge.

Now.

To give people a break … stepping off the edge is a big step.

That big scary step … the one where you not only go to the edge … but you step off.

It is truly one small step for a person and one giant leap for who you will be as a person (sorry Neil … I paraphrased ya …).

Some truths about this whole edge and flying thing.

Truth <part 1>?

Sometimes you do not fly … you fall. And you … well … crash. And it sucks <and hurts really really bad>. Yup. Not everyone flies when they go to the edge and take that step.

That is Life.

Just don’t beat yourself up if you fall instead of flying. The fall hurts enough <I know from experience>. But … just because you crashed that time doesn’t mean you can’t eventually learn to fly.

Which leads me to Truth part 2.

Truth <part 2>?

In order to learn to fly you need to overcome fear.

Let’s face it. That first step with just about everything in life contains, at minimum, a sliver of fear and, at maximum, crushing fear.

That’s not bad … in fact it has a natural characteristic of caution … but fear can also be debilitating.

And fear can also create stagnancy.

And fear can exponentially increase in size if you actually crash.

Truth <part 3>?

Please note that I believe flying, or learning to fly, is not about living Life without regrets. While I am a big ‘no regret’ guy this is not about regrets. Because Life is tricky in that it is rarely a straight line. It zigs & zags and whether you have chosen to stand as far away from an edge as you can in Life or you choose to dangle your mind off the edge … Life will place an edge in front of you whether you chose it or not.

I believe the edge is not about regrets but rather the battle between Fear and Curiosity. Because we have both in all of us. And I suggest this is not about regrets because … well … regrets can reside in both Fear & Curiosity therefore simply a derivative of your choice between Fear & Curiosity.

So. All that said.

Here is what Life forces you to balance out.

The dichotomy.

Fear versus Curiosity.

Curiosity stimulates the energy to move. Curiosity, when outweighing Fear, can not only wrestle Fear out of the way to get you to the edge … but actually get you to step off even if you cannot see a landing place. Curiosity is a pretty powerful energy.

And it is powerful because Curiosity offers a prize <where Fear doesn’t really offer any added value … at best Fear offers ‘maintained value’>.

Knowledge <or ‘what is not known’> … that is the tantalizing prize.

So what do I say?

Keep your eye on the prize.

And step off the edge <or at least an edge … or 2 … in your lifetime>.

You may fly.

You may not <this time>.

Scary?

Sure.

But, let me tell you, once you have done it … nothing beats flying.

where truth resides

November 9th, 2012

“To find the truth you need do no more than examine everything you are absolutely sure would not lead to the truth and need only connect those facts that you are entirely sure had no relation at all. Because this, for better or worse, is exactly where the truth lies – at the intersection of the forgotten and the ignored, in the neighborhood of all we have tried to forget.” – Silette <a fictional detective>

So.

‘… truth resides at the intersection of the forgotten and the ignored.’

What a fabulous thought.

Truth is simple … and complicated. Once discovered it seems so simple you wonder why it didn’t occur to you earlier. And many times we beat ourselves up for not recognizing the truth faster.

Well. We didn’t get there faster because the road we traveled most likely was the tried & true.

The comfortable. The one most traveled.

And truth is most often found on the road that leads to the intersection of forgotten and ignored.

We forget things that make us uncomfortable.

We forget things that don’t seem to make sense.

We forget things that seem unimportant <to us>.

We ignore things that make us uncomfortable.

We ignore things that don’t seem to make sense.

We ignore things that seem unimportant <to us>.

Truth sometimes rises from the seemingly unimportant, from things that don’t make sense and almost always makes us uncomfortable.

Oh.

This fictional character also said … ‘simplicity is the refuge of fools.’

Truth is rarely simple … therefore ‘simple truths’ are the refuge of fools.

More of us should visit the knowledge neighborhood we have tried to forget more often. It isn’t simple … but most of us are not fools. Nor do we seek to live in the refuge of fools.

We seek to be something better.

We seek truth.

And to do so … we should examine everything we are sure would not lead to the truth.

flash and dazzle

October 27th, 2012

“Persistence isn’t very glamorous. If genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration then as a culture we tend to lionize the one percent. We love its flash and dazzle. But great power lies in the other 99 percent.

It’s not that I’m so smart. It’s that I stay with problems longer.” (Einstein)

The perspiration.

The grind.

The fluff.

The flash.

Yes. We often overlook the perspiration aspect but … c’mon … who doesn’t? Who hasn’t? And when haven’t we? We love the fluff <and get bored with folding> and get blinded by the flash <but love the bright lights & colors>.

Perspiration is, in my words, grinding. It is the true grind. Manually taking that ugly stone you dug out of the dirt and manually grinding out the necessary and uncovering the diamond.

No one truly likes to grind <even if we give it some lip service> but the true keepers, the best employees, in any organization are the grinders. The ones who are willing to grind it out … day in and day out.

Now.

Not all ‘grinders’ are equal. Huh? Well. Einstein may have been a grinder but his grinding was all about a vision toward an outcome. He always had the diamond vision.

Yes. He certainly had a genius about him. I would argue his true genius was an ability to grind his way through the components, and the grind of continuous trial & error, and <here is his genius> his ability to filter out the ordinariness of that which he grinded and reconfigured the ordinary <or known> into something extraordinary. A thought. An idea. A new way of viewing that which was.

On the other hand … some grinders are just that … grinders. The ones who put in the perspiration 100% of the time. It is just not in their DNA to have the genius inspiration.

Here is the real point.

It all has value. Therefore they all have value.

And they all <grinders> are organizational ‘keepers’ <because, trust me, the non grinders are wasted slots>.

The true genius perspire.

The non genius perspire.

The lazy are rarely, okay, let’s be honest … the lazy are never genius.

Yup. They may seem like geniuses at some point but they are simply emperors without clothing. They get uncovered with time. Beware the false genius. And be aware of the grinders because just because they don’t have the genius doesn’t make them any less valuable.

Persistence is not glamorous but it is a fact, yes, and an unequivocal truth, that if you stay with a problem longer, grind out it out as it were, you will become smarter.

You will be a better ‘whatever you are’ because in the grind time that you are toiling, and awaiting the genius, you are also studying all aspects, connecting different dots, eliminating different dots, crafting knowledge and developing a deeper understanding.

This may seem silly but it is also true … but because persistence is not glamorous … you may need to often remind yourself that persistence is your constant companion and friend.

Embrace it or you will never even have the chance to become an Einstein.

Despite common myth, or maybe our desire to believe the genius is a born talent and “easy for some’ … or maybe we truly do get blinded by flash & dazzle.

But.

In the end.

There is no short cut to the genius.

Hail to the Grinders of the world.

who gets fired?

September 24th, 2012

…”we helped leave this race a statistical dead heat.”- stated after spending $250 million dollars

The Wall Street Journal outlines that an unprecedented amount of money is being spent in the American election. The total is somewhere near $500 million to date in advertising (here is tracking to date: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/track-presidential-campaign-ads-2012/).

Oh my. Think what that money could be used for … okay … that is a different article.

The spending, and number of ads, has become a little wacky this year because it isn’t just the candidates money nor is the majority of spending being done by the actual candidates <now there are random political ‘super pacs’ … people who say what they want to say and spend what they want to spend>.

Regardless.

Apparently all the spending hasn’t done jackshit to influence voter opinion.

Here is a humdinger of a Republican quote “we believe we have kept a number of races competitive and put important issues on the table.”

That is code for “our money didn’t do jackshit.”

Another quote <republican> …”we helped leave this race a statistical dead heat.” Please note that this was said despite the fact Romney’s poll numbers continue to lag the incumbent.

Wall Street Journal also did a spectacular job highlighting the spectacular ineptness of the advertising in specific areas where republicans overinvested in order to create the desired behavior <vote Republican> and reported spectacular failure to do so <in some of these states/areas Romney’s scores have actually declined>.

So.

Here is my question.

Who is getting fired?

Why do I ask that? Well, let’s try this whole situation out in the business world.

P&G spends over $4billion (in the US I believe). Pepsi spends an estimated $2.1 billion a year on marketing, McDonald’s $1.2 billion, and Coca-Cola is not far behind at $895 million. Let’s get closer to apples to apples comparisons … State Farm spends $860million, Apple around $650million and Volkswagen $730million.

I am either the CMO or the advertising agency standing up at the end of the year giving my report (just to be clear … any sane CMO would be putting their advertising person up at the front of the room to tell this story).

- “Gee. The <plug in any of the billion or million dollar number from above here> kept us competitive. We didn’t gain any sales but, gosh darn it, statistically it was a dead heat! In addition … I would note we were absolutely disappointed with the lack of results in the places where we made investment spending <translation: we overspent and under delivered>.”

Needless to say … I am fired.

Heck.

I would fire me.

Why? Because some smartass <like me> is sitting off to the side saying something like “how the fuck do you spend $250 million dollars and get no return or increase?”

But you don’t even need a smartass like me sitting around in the business world because in the general business world $250 million is a lot of money and people expect to see some <positive> results if you spend that amount.

However, let’s assume that didn’t get me fired.

I actually make it to Q&A. I guarantee you someone <most likely the CFO because that is the person who seems to ask this question the most> will ask “what did we actually do and do we have any thoughts on whether it was the right thing to do?”

Here is where I figure out how to shift from my 110 page powerpoint presentation, where I had manipulated numbers to mask the disappointing results, to video so I can show the television executions. Yup. Of which almost 80% are negative messaging.

Needless to say … I am now fired.

And, once again, I would fire me.

Let me begin here by saying that with this large a budget I could live with running some <maybe 15-20%?> negative ads because they speak directly, and only, to my core audience who wants to think bad things about the other choices. Inevitably the negativity solidifies my base because I am simply saying what they want to hear <even if it may not be completely true>.

All that said … if the majority, the significant majority. Of my messaging is negative … well … ‘Houston, we have a problem.’

In general business negative advertising is specious at best in a short term effort and never an option long term.

In politics negative advertising is (1) unbelievable to the general audience, (2) polarizing in an unhealthy way and (3) well … as the British would say … ‘it’s just not cricket’ … <the equivalent of “not according to Hoyle”> ,in other words, it is diminishing through negativity rather than expanding through positive. Negativity increases your value by diminishing the other (so you could simply become the tallest midget). Negativity has never been an effective communications tactic and it has never been proven to build long term brand value.

I would tell politics the same thing any business industry knows … in a negative war of words no one wins. The entire category loses.

I would stand up in front of any politician right now and unequivocally state that the advertising war currently going on is not only a losing strategy for the candidates but a losing tactic for the country’s psyche.

Regardless, this isn’t a business lesson; this is me wondering who is going to get fired for wasting $500 million dollars.

I find the entire topic if not insane certainly inane.

Well.

The only people who I can envision taking solace in this entire insane topic are the Belarusians.

Huh? Belarus? Yup.

Belarus just had a round of elections in which the opposition candidates were ignored by television and newspapers declined to publish information.

Someone should send the opposition party the Wall Street journal article and suggest they just saved a shitload of money because any advertising they did was not going to make any difference anyway.

coin of your life

August 9th, 2012

“Time is the coin of your life. It is the only coin you have, and only you can determine how it will be spent. Be careful lest you let other people spend it for you.” – Carl Sandburg

In a world where we so often talk about time being money I am surprised we don’t see this quote more often.

Oh.

Sorry.

I know why. Because it suggests you control your time and popular wisdom suggests that our time is out of our hands (and that there is not enough of it).

Carl suggests a different perspective.

Time is currency in your wallet and just like that ten dollar bill you have a choice how and where and when to spend it.

I am sure there has been a book written suggesting this but suffice it to say thinking about time as money in your own wallet that you have to spend (and earn) is actually a useful thought.

It’s bigger than “time management” and closer to “time budgeting.”

Anyway.

A similar thought <which I liked> is time spent is not distance covered. I don’t know who wrote this, or said this, but it seemed appropriate here.

How we use our time is a discussion I am fairly sure we will never tire of.

Well. We may tire of it but we will never stop discussing.

Mostly because we worry whether we are using it wisely, or efficiently or whether we even have any control of our own time at all. In addition many of us assess our time investment by ‘distance covered’ <distance being defined by any variety of something tangible so that we can have some type of ‘measurement>.

Look. I see many <many> people spending the coins of their life … not flippantly for sure … but I question whether they do so wisely. There is more time spent on … well … time … than almost anything else I can think of. People telling you how you should spend your time … on what and how and for what. So many people being told HOW to invest their time.

But it’s your money. Do you really want others spending it?

Sure.

We all have responsibilities but at some point, I admit this may be a selfish perspective, if I only have ten dollars of time I sure as hell do not want to let someone spend all ten dollars for me.

Ok. Whether I really know what I am talking about what I do know for sure is that Carl makes a valid point.

One which I believe is worth thinking about.

songgaar and burungaar

July 31st, 2012

These two words are Tuvan.

songgaar means “go back” or “the future” in the tuvan language.

burungaar means “go forward” or “the past” in the tuvan langaue.

Yes.

I typed that correctly.

Tuvans believe the past is ahead of them while the future lies behind.

The thought? They constantly look to the future but it’s behind them … not yet seen.

To most of us this is confusing. Aw shit. Thinking about the past, present and future is confusing anyway.

We are told to not live in the past. Yet we are also told to learn from the past. We are told to treat the present, each moment, like it is the last. And yet we are told to plan for the future.

We save money for future needs while sacrificing some present needs <or wants>. We look to the past with an eye toward how we could improve ourselves in the future while doing things in the present that will inevitably confuse people around us, most likely have a number of people be hesitant to accept whatever changes we are attempting to sincerely attempt and ultimately make us unhappy, in some form or fashion, with ourselves in the present.

Well.

Now that I have typed that, frankly, I am not sure that we are ever going to be happy attempting to do all that we are supposed to do with regard to the past, present and future.

Heck. I am not sure if I am being selfish focusing on the present, dumb for ignoring the past and irresponsible for not investing energy planning for the future. In addition I fear that while I had a thought in the present by the time I typed it I had stepped into the future and the thought remained in the past.

Ok.

I do not know any Tuvans <the Republic of Tuva is located in southern Siberia on the edge of Mongolia>. So they can probably truly explain the thought. My attempt will be … well … mine.

I like the concept of what they believe.

I imagine, unlike many of us, the future to them doesn’t have all the trappings of ‘better’ and ‘more’ and ‘personal improvement.’ I hesitate to say that their view of life is simpler because it implies we have a more complicated life. And we do not. Nope. We only make it so … by worrying about status and how other people view us and what our title is and what type of car we drive. Oh. And retirement. I imagine they don’t worry about planning for their retirement.

Anyway. Maybe their lives are more focused on the present and doing the best that they can within some frame of time they call “now” <which may not be a speck of time but rather a longer living moment>. It permits them to say that their future needs, yes, needs to contain elements of the past. In addition … by focusing too much on the future they are sliding backwards.

Now. There is a thought, huh? Investing energy, or too much of it, on ‘future thinking’ could possibly be detrimental to moving forward?

Wow. Love it.

Ok.

Here is a thought.

Most of us are smarter than we think. Not maybe in terms of sheer brain power but rather with regard to “making decisions in the present that will benefit us in the future.” We spend so much time planning for the future and assessing decisions yet to be made that all that time <which I would suggest could be called ‘the present’> just slip on by. In general I tend to believe most of us know how to assess ‘now decisions’ and their possible effect on our future. That doesn’t mean we will always make the right decision. In addition some of us may get suckered into making similar wrong decisions more often than others <not having had that statistics class that taught us that each decision is mutually exclusive therefore the odds do not increase in your favor as time goes on>. Time teaches you that <by the way … that is called ‘the past”>.

Well. That was complicated.

So try this.

To move forward you must look to the past.

Simple as that.

No more. No less.

Chew on that thought.

Ok.

About Tuva.

The Republic of Tuva is the former Tannu Tuva, a country in south Siberia first annexed by Russia in 1914 and then absorbed by the former USSR in 1944.

Tuva extends from the coniferous forests of the taiga in the north to the rolling steppe of the south. 82% of the lands of the country is hilly and the rest 18% are covered with savannas. Tuva has a lot of variety within its geography containing grassy meadows, boundless steppe, medicinal springs, beautiful lakes, mountain rivers fed in spring by melting snows, dusty semi-deserts and snowy chains of mountains. Tuva is near the geographic center of Asia and Tuvans are historically nomadic herders, moving their aal—an encampment of yurts—and their sheep and cows and reindeer from pasture to pasture as the seasons progress.

Regardless.

When I saw these two words I wanted to share. Interesting how different cultures view different aspects of the past & future. And maybe we can learn something from their view.