rc3.org

Strong opinions, weakly held

Author: Rafe (page 45 of 989)

Mike Daisey on Steve Jobs

I encourage you to read Mike Daisey’s New York Times op-ed eulogizing Steve Jobs. It is both tough and fair.

For what it’s worth, I think that Apple’s move toward a closed model of computing, which I have discussed before is justifiable as a technical choice. Is it what I would prefer? No. But it provides customers with both benefits and costs, and each of us can choose whether we think the tradeoffs are worth it.

The more damning indictment is that Steve Jobs failed to lead Apple to a more humane and fair labor arrangement when it comes to manufacturing its devices. I’ve written about that before as well. Apple generates huge amounts of cash — if they wanted to move all of their manufacturing to Long Island over the course of a decade, they could. Sure, it wouldn’t be easy, but it would be truly world changing. At a time when other technology companies are importing sweatshop conditions to America, it really would be a way to Think Different.

The death of Steve Jobs is, of course, sad, and is also notable. He is arguably the greatest businessman of his generation. If we’re going to dwell on it, it should be to reflect on which aspects of his legacy we should emulate and which we should discard.

We need to be less stingy with praise and acknowledgement

Since Steve Jobs passed away, I’ve read a great many things about him that really struck me, but I haven’t written anything about it. I’ve been an appreciator of Apple products for over 20 years, and have been a user of them for at least 30. I admired his drive, genius, and passion greatly. But that’s not what I want to talk about. Instead, I want to talk about the need to let other people know that you appreciate their work. I was sort of inspired by this, but I was more inspired by a talk I heard this week.

The talk, presented by Donnie Berkholz, is called Assholes are killing your project. In it, he explains the corrosive effect that negative people have on a volunteer project. It doesn’t matter how productive they are individually, the toll they take on the volunteer community outweighs whatever good work they do on their own. In the talk, he mentions that research shows that on average five good interactions are required to make up for every bad interaction, so it’s very important to get rid of the assholes. What I also take away from that, though, is that we all need to take more responsibility for making up the gap with good interactions.

I will be the first to admit that while I am pretty good about thanking people who do things I appreciate, I’m not so great at handing out praise. I think that’s mostly projection — I’m not the best at receiving praise. But what I’m realizing is that being generous with sincere and meaningful praise is essential. A decision to be more forthcoming with praise puts the giver in a state of mind to be more observant of good things, which has to be good psychologically, and of course receiving praise offsets the negative reinforcement we’re bombarded with on a daily basis.

So, how do we become more liberal with praise? The mechanisms of social software make it easier than ever. You can Favorite things on Twitter and on Flickr. There are Facebook Like buttons and Google +1 buttons everywhere. And of course, you can leave positive feedback in comments or just send someone an email telling them that you appreciate their work. For more on that, I’d recommend Anil Dash’s post All in Favor. In the real world giving people a nice comment is easy enough if you try.

Praise and acknowledgement are not limited commodities. Everyone benefits if we are more generous with them.

Selected links

Nick Bilton explains the ways in which Facebook is easier on new users than Twitter.

Yelp is shifting business from chain restaurants to independent establishments.

How to get a decent meal at a bad restaurant.

Node.js is a cancer. Or it isn’t. On a general note, I am not a fan of polemics like the one at the former link.

Alabama’s draconian new anti-immigrant law goes into effect.

I have to admit that I have very little empathy for CEOs with a persecution complex.

Managing the complexity of your software development process

GitHub has one of the most interesting approaches to product development and software development of anyone in the industry. Zach Holman posted an overview of their process and talked about how they have maintained it as the team has grown. Toward the end, he writes:

This stuff doesn’t come easily, but it unfortunately leaves easily. Figuring out ways to streamline, to improve your process, to grow your company as you grow your employees is a constant struggle. It’s something that should be continually re-evaluated.

Just as it’s a lot easier to add features to software than it is to remove them, so too is it a lot easier to make software development processes more complex than it is to simplify them.

More on the victimization of the rich

Yesterday, I linked to a Malcolm Gladwell piece that included the following sentences:

The rich have gone from being grateful for what they have to pushing for everything they can get. They have mastered the arts of whining and predation, without regard to logic or shame.

It put me on the lookout for other examples of rich people whining about being victimized, and reminded me immediately of this week’s Economist cover story — provocatively titled “Hunting the rich.” Here’s how it starts:

THE horns have sounded and the hounds are baying. Across the developed world the hunt for more taxes from the wealthy is on.

Economist hunting the rich

This is important because the basic demographic to which The Economist appeals is rich people. (Before you argue with me, purchase a dead trees issue and check out the ads.) Clearly this is a message that they are confident will resonate. Fortunately, being The Economist, they are willing to engage with actual facts:

First, the West’s deficits should not be closed by spending cuts alone. Public spending should certainly take the brunt: there is plenty of scope to slim inefficient Leviathan, and studies of past deficit-cutting programmes suggest they work best when cuts predominate. Britain’s four-to-one ratio is about right. But, as that ratio implies, experience also argues that higher taxes should be part of the mix. In America the tax take is historically low after years of rate reductions. There, and elsewhere, tax rises need to bear some of the burden.

Second, there is a political argument for raising this new revenue from the rich. Spending cuts fall disproportionately on the less well-off; and, even before the crunch, median incomes were stagnating. Meanwhile, globalisation has been rewarding winners ever more generously. Voters’ support for ongoing austerity depends on a disproportionate share of any new revenue coming from the wealthy.

This is basically the argument I see most progressives make regarding taxes. Tax revenue has been going down for years and the gap between rich and poor has been increasing for years. Clearly US economic policy has disproportionately benefitted rich people the most, and they can best afford the tax increase. The article then goes on to endorse an Obama-like tax plan. Hunting the rich, indeed.

The wealth gap and the NBA lockout

Malcolm Gladwell on the wealth gap:

It is worth noting, though, that in the social and political commentary of the 1950s and 1960s there is scant evidence of wealthy people complaining about their situation. They paid their taxes and went about their business. Perhaps they saw the logic of the government’s policy: There was a huge debt from World War II to be paid off, and interstates, public universities, and other public infrastructure projects to be built for the children of the baby boom. Or perhaps they were simply bashful. Wealth, after all, is as often the gift of good fortune as it is of design. For whatever reason, the wealthy of that era could have pushed for a world that more closely conformed to their self-interest and they chose not to. Today the wealthy have no such qualms. We have moved from a country of relative economic equality to a place where the gap between rich and poor is exceeded by only Singapore and Hong Kong. The rich have gone from being grateful for what they have to pushing for everything they can get. They have mastered the arts of whining and predation, without regard to logic or shame.

From a piece that defies summarization on how a real estate developer purchased the New Jersey Nets NBA team as part of a plan to acquire and develop a coveted piece of prime real estate in Brooklyn. I strongly encourage you to read the whole thing.

Selected links

Just a few random items I found interesting over the past few days:

People are being killed in Mexico for tweeting about the activities of drug gangs.

Enabling yourself to post links from the Wall Street Journal to your Facebook page involves giving them a lot of privileges.

Here’s a great list of do’s and don’ts for New York.

New York Times columnist Joe Nocera warns about the unfortunate likely outcomes of the Solyndra scandal.

Netflix founder and former employee Marc Randolph explains why Netflix chose to split up the company.

In the New Yorker, Atul Gawande writes about the value and history of coaching. I think that the ability to provide coaching is one of the biggest strengths anyone can bring to a leadership role in software development.

Why software patents won’t be voided anytime soon

Tom Insam on why calls to invalidate software patents will continue to go unheeded:

So, with lots of handwaving, we can argue that this petition is asking the US government to unilaterally destroy $100bn worth of corporate-held property.

It’s always politically difficult to take valuable things from people who have the means to defend their right to keep them.

Managing my mistrust of Facebook

Like a lot of people, I don’t trust Facebook. A lot of people deal with that by deleting their Facebook accounts, but I don’t want to do that. A lot of friends and family members post their photos to Facebook, so I need an account if I want to see them. It’s also the main way to keep in touch with certain people. That’s Facebook’s hook for the skeptical — they know you like other Facebook users more than you hate Facebook itself.

I have never liked it when you go to a page that’s not a Facebook page and it shows your picture and which friends have liked that page already. That provides no value to me as an end user, but it certainly provides value to Facebook. They track your activity using those buttons whether you click on them or not.

This weekend I learned that when you log out of Facebook, you don’t actually log out of Facebook. They still track wherever you go on the Web. That, for me, was the final straw. I logged out of Facebook and deleted all of my Facebook cookies manually.

From now on, when I want to visit Facebook, I’ll be using the private browser setting in whatever browser I’m using. For Google Chrome, that’s Incognito mode. For Firefox, you use Private Browsing. Safari supports Private Browsing as well. It seems like putting Facebook in jail is the only way to keep it from tracking you everywhere you go on the Web, so that’s what I’m going to do.

Update: Facebook has addressed the logout issue. You can decide whether it has been fixed to your satisfaction.

Where does blogging stop and republishing start?

Blogging is mostly about pointing to interesting stuff and, for some people, commenting on it. Whether you’re paid to blog or not, one of the real ethical conundrums involves walking the line between quoting or summarizing enough of the work you’re commenting on to interest your readers and providing so much detail that there’s no reason to visit the original piece.

For sites like Business Insider and the Huffington Post, that’s no dilemma at all. Their business models are based on essentially republishing other people’s work, as explained by Ryan McCarthy on Felix Salmon’s blog. I found that post through Marco Arment’s first-hand account of having his work reliably published on Business Insider’s site as though he is one of their authors. It’s also worth checking out Business Insider’s response to Marco, in which they argue that Instapaper and Tumblr are essentially in the same business as they are.

Ideally search engines would return links to original material ahead of aggregated material but that strikes me as a really tough problem to solve. Until that happens, aggregating other people’s writing is going to be profitable. And as long as it’s profitable, publishers are going to keep doing it.

Older posts Newer posts

© 2024 rc3.org

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑