Information Risk Management – Page 59 – Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord

3+ bodies found in business

… just about everywhere. Of course I refer to the n-body problem set with n > 3 as here.
Because it is so dismally known, and applied. Most starkly (#loveofwords) in ‘business’ ‘strategy’, where the lack of wisdom is clearly demonstrated in the lack of inclusion of all (sic) potential (sic; including chance function estimations) competitors’ moves. Name any market where the latter s doesn’t apply, and report it to (anti-?)cartel authorities.

I.e., the Problem applied to strategy means: Strategising is futile, all your course belong to us. On a side note:

[Alignment; Vienna]

Critical management, not governance

Ah, there’s another authoritative source with a description how leadership and (‘actual’) management should be.
I.e., not the robotic, stupid (when one would be offended, consider this a. reflecting your own insecurity out of gut feeling that it describes you, b. intended, c. still being the most lapidary labelling) totalitarian-bureaucratic ‘governance’ type of ‘control’ (quod non, and this) but actual effective, results-achieving teaming. Like what firms originally were invented for.

OK, just resting my case again. Plus:
DSCN7735
[Some parading, but in operation, stealthy over pomp; Baltimore]

Summarily: yolosec

Yes that’s the summary title at once describing the sum total result of all your humongous efforts to ‘secure’ … whatever scope, in infosecland. HT to @thegrugq
To which we may add the find of yeauleau for francophones. Of course.

That’s it for today. With:

[Fashionable Without A Cause, too; (i.e.) Milan. Look to the left (shop) and shiver…]

Swa(r)m(i’)s anyone ..?

OK. That title needs some explanation. This is that.

First, a pic to display the right mood:

[Office; Y2K fieldwork at Martinique]

Yesterday [at time of scheduling ;-] it struck me that some years ago already – time flies like an arrow (eight interpretations) OR when you’re not working (traditional interpretation) – there was this fad in organisationland called ‘swarms’ in which agile (sigh…) little bands of independent professionals would come together all bringing their individual expertise and competences (as swami’s) to do a certain project job, then disband to go off to other ventures in yet other swarms. As transparent pools of in-group trusted achievers that would need less coordination than Big Corp in-house controlled project teams, and would leave the independents truly independent even from one another. Yet needing the trust among themselves.

But as swarms go, the hype’let soon disappeared it seems. So I checked with Trends™ – and found something interesting:

Off search term ‘swarm -bird -bee -starcraft -alien -heart -“the swarm” -locust -particle’ yes even the movie needed to be excluded to let it make some sense.

Where you see … there might not have been a hype’let in the first place. And/or it was buried amidst negativity over the New Economy (© The Year 2001) in the Financial Downturn.

Anyway; which part of the jobless growth isn’t jobless but rather perm-contractless ..? Only if we net out the work contracted to independents (individual / swarm / inc.), would we know how much actual productivity/growth is jobless indeed.

Or you would have pointers to definitive data on the latter already ..?

Musk / Vicarious / ASI

Haven’t heard in a while of anything fruitful coming forward from Elon Musk’s investments in Vicarious despite his concerns. (Now that DeepMind has gone over to the Dark Side.)

Reasons ..? Double secrets?
I’d just like to know.

For the weekend:
DSCN8447
[Algorithmic justice prevails ..? Amsterdam]

Machines Won 200 Years Ago

As a simple repost / link:

Steve Wozniak: Machines Won 200 Years Ago.

Which should not surprise anyone or you tuned out, (un)consciously, some time ago already. But hey; party time:

[Stationary at Utrecht. Can awaken.]

Simple link: BYOD is the New Wi-Fi

Very true. Though we may even say: BYOD was the new WiFi, as BYOD is so 2013 … but let’s await the resurrection of WiFi when IoT-in-the-shape-of-ubiquitous-computing takes off…
BYOD is the New Wi-Fi – Infosecurity Magazine.

Will amount to not much

… Was the typical reaction that long (!) time ago when this aired. Which was, statistically, correct I guess. When betting on binary outcomes ( [Huge | Nothing] ) with so skewed a distribution [Intermission: What would the moment-generating function be ..? Could point at some underlying success formula!] of probabilities, the Will Amount To Nothing opinion is quite valid.
But then, when weighing in the possible pay-offs (per distribution, too ..?), the picture is somewhat less clear. But still heavy on the Dismiss side, right ..?

Safe bet:

[May still loose out after tech moved on; Sevilla]

Too Big (to … whatever)

As predicted, ERP has dropped from view in the world of business and/or tech.
Because reasons. Many of which have to do with the bigness of it all; one would really need to have a business so big to be able to capture all advantages of ‘seamless’ integration of systems into one, and not or, have to transform it so completely as to better have built the new one all from scratch (or schlepping in all the parts of the old, into the new mold). Which sort-of defeats the purpose. Completely.

Hence, the demise of ERP (as predicted here) has taken its final form. For now; we expect shrinkage of attention and market share to continue.

This, triggered by yet another laggard attempt i.e., by some government, to implement SAP througout at some Department but failed. Typical cost (overrun): €196M zooming out to €900M which only suffices to salvage some parts that work. Typically, because Reality didn’t seem to want to fit into the ideal mold set out but just went its own way, the way which it was on from before the start. Not even wrecking the project on purpose, just going along and not even noticing the project’s required changes as daily business had better things to do. As it was called: Where (the failure of) makeability [translations manufacturability and engineerability have also been seen in the wild] met reality.

So, no need to resort to Project Governance mumbo-jumbo. Just too big is reality, and:

[Huh? Well, it’s Cyprus Meridien but why ..?]

‘sup, competitor ..?

Oh yes, of course. One couldn’t leave Docker to capture all the market as one understands the power of (being a) monopoly, right ..?
Was the first that crossed my mind when reading this here piece on D’s competitor Rocket. Still backing D, the Big G will now play them against each other ..?

Anyway:

[Wouldn’t life without competition be like this, always ..? Resson, FR]