Jinn of Quality and Risk

Couching knowledge sharing in terms of altruism, as some people do, is mistaken. The essential meaning of the term "altruism" is to give up one's interest for the sake of others, i.e. to sacrifice oneself (see August Comte, who coined the word for that concept in the 19th century; what he meant was not simple benevolence or charity, but rather a moral obligation of the individual to sacrifice his own interests for the sake of somebody else's). Advocating altruism in the context of knowledge sharing ignores and contradicts its very value, which is that knowledge is understanding built on experience, and that sharing it empowers groups of people to work towards common goals — there is no sacrifice there. What is needed is a positive outlook, the desire to learn and teach, and long-term thinking. Positive people are excited about new knowledge and enjoy listening to or telling stories. Learning and teaching implies respect for knowledge and fellow human beings, and the awareness of one's own, constantly changing limits of knowledge. Finally, long-term thinking correlates with a focus on creating value, hence on seeking mutual profit.

Brent Ashley and Seblogging recommend enthusiasm, altruism, [and] optimism to support a culture of knowledge sharing but altruism is emphatically not what we need. Enthusiasm and optimism are correlated, but insufficient. We need people who see that it is in their own rational self-interest to work with others, because they value thinking and new ideas, as well as the power of shared knowledge and goals. It should be a deeply rooted and non-altruistic behaviour, even in a large, multinational company. I submit 3M as an inspiring, successful example. To recap: sacrifice is at the root of altruism, while self-interested value-creation is at the root of knowledge. 

A Medieval Warm Period existed throughout vast areas of Asia during the 9th through 14th centuries. ...much of Asia was considerably warmer during the Medieval Warm Period than it was during any decade of the last hundred years. ... If it can be shown that global temperatures were warmer than they are presently at a time when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were much lower than they are presently, then it is clear that something other than the historical rise in the air's CO2 content could be responsible for the global warming of the 20th century. 

Six months ago my employment at Sapient ended due to a euphemistic third round of "redundancies" (as a matter of fact, the company was, and still is, losing tons of money each quarter). As is maybe usual, they required me to sign an agreement that neither would ever say bad things about the other party (it's more complex than that, but let's skip the legalese). For instance, I believe they could not criticize me for exploiting cheap labour in third-world countries, even if it were true, which it isn't. Anyway, I've met a few wonderful people at Sapient, and I don't regret at all being called "redundant." 

Jacob Sullum (Reason): Subsidies, quotas, and tariffs steal from the poor and give to the rich. ... Anyone who considers the ways in which the rich and powerful use government to get what they want will understand that fighting for the poor and downtrodden requires defending the free market. Consider the subsidies and trade barriers that benefit affluent Americans and Europeans at the expense of producers in developing countries who are struggling to eke out a living. Advocates of free markets in the Western world must promote freedom for everyone; anything less, such as the EU's scandalous agricultural policy, is a protectionist recipe for injustice and pauperization. 

The New Yorker's Cover Gallery: Christmas has always been a boon for The New Yorker's cover artists. The regimented cheer and the age-old symbols of the season make an excellent setting for illuminating the urbanite's soul. 

Nicole Auger: The project plan is clear and the specifications are detailed. So why is the final product so different from what you expected? ... perspective on how features get changed or added during the development process [and] tips on how to get what you ordered, instead of a substitute.

In a nutshell, the essential causes of failed IT projects are 1) not solving the customer's most important problems and 2) not dealing with evolving requirements. The main solutions to the first problem are a) to explicitly identify and rank business drivers and b) to understand and design the user experience. How one deals with changing requirements depends, for the most part, on personality (dogmatic, or pragmatic), description (detailed specifications, or tabulated priority, complexity, and effort), and focus (enforcing a schedule, or solving problems). In other words, the belief/mantra that the project plan is clear and the specifications are detailed is a reliable indicator of the potential for failure. 

Context plays an important role in the success of tips and hints -- they are right there when the user needs them. As a counter-example, consider the "Tip of the Day" screens that come up initially in applications such as Microsoft Word 6.0. These tips don't work nearly as well because they are presented out of context, before the user has started working. When tips are presented out of context, the user has to identify the context where it could be needed and remember the information when the situation arises. As a result, users don't find such tips very helpful, though they can sometimes be entertaining... [via cognitiveArchitects News] 

Eyewitness acount of the invasion of England: During the early morning of the next day, October 14, Harold's army watched as a long column of Norman warriors marched to the base of the hill and formed a battle line. Separated by a few hundred yards, the lines of the two armies traded taunts and insults. ... On Christmas day 1066, William was crowned King of England in Westminster Abbey. Rye is a very nice medieval village near Hastings. Worth a visit. 

One of my favourite love poems, and one I like to cite when called to speak at a wedding, is the Song of Songs (aka Song of Solomon). The entire Song of Songs is a hapax legomenon of its own. It is unique in both the Old and New Testaments because it leaves out God entirely. It never mentions Israel as a people or a nation. It is free of any talk of sin. And it is the only surviving example of secular love poetry from ancient Israel. Why such a romantic poem found its way into the biblical canon is something of a mystery. A cosmic mistake.