When you need a book to explain, or enthrall, some unexpected readers into believing Hygge were something exceptional — the Dutch have had Gezelligheid already for ages, without considering it something so special that it would need any investigation; just smile as tourists discover it to their surprise. Certainly not treat it as if it were something that defines the national mood…
No, the English Wikipedia page is wrong on this. The Dutch one is correct period
Tag: education
A parachute to your Dutch granny budget
If you have no clue about the title, read on.
It’s about a Dutch ‘granny bike’. And about your bosses’ golden parachutes. And how to get budget for the playthings bare minimum tools you require.
First off: the biker part. Note that this has unsurpassably been written up here. On how crappy banger bikes, are locked with supremo but ridiculously expensive gear and how this out-of-all-proportion control-cost still makes sense. Reading is believing.
Second: These days, FUD is Real; à la the “Either you’ve been hacked or will be, soon” line and including the ever bigger transparency in the press. With a warning of impeding disaster for all your remotely involved (even if by negligence — wait did I write ‘if’ ..?) bosses and their tenure, as these days, too, a great many including CEOs get fired / are forced to quit / commit seppuko almost, when <youknowwhat> hits the fan and always runs downstream, hence getting a lot of you superiors their golden parachute. Their mileage may vary, but the threat finally (…!) is a believable one. Either they believe (wrongly) to be able to escape the gauntlet anyway but should then, officially, care about the parachutes’ cost to the company and take that as a clue about the (tenfold++) reputational damage to the company, or … they aim to take the money and run and go on disastering elsewhere, leaving said reputational damage and parachute costs to the laggerds left behind — you inform the odd superior here and there that their colleagues/peers are about to pull their leg and leave the sweeping up of the damage to the stayers.
Summing up to: At the cost side, the rationale is such that the ceiling of any of your proposals takes off to, at last, suitable levels. At the benefits side (cost-avoidance), suddenly the decision makers’ personal interest is there.
Combined, this should as written suffice to finally get sufficient budget for the playthings bare minimum tools you require. Or what.
I tell you what: The above even now may still not make sense to the … [expletive censored] bosses above you. Plus:
[Harmless sea beggars on the Dutch coast; Bloemendaal]
Cozy versus Anti-cozy
Once more reaching back to last Wednesday’s post: Opposing sides may have to recognise the very existence of the other one.
When anti-bureaucracy force battle the eternal struggle against complacency et al., they better take into account that 60% of people (any mass), is of Type B, and hence will diligently work 9-to-5 and not complain too much. And, by their majority and no moral objection to hence realised mob rule, will (try to) encapsulate the Other 40% Type A’s. Whereas if all the Type A’s were contra their nature to band together in some loose-form cooperation, this could very easily deteriorate into B big time.
And, in a world that’s overly complex, even when subsets of the complexity may be institutionalised, B may be the only feasible organisational form — IF one’d want to organise it all. Which one would, if out of fear typical of the 60% …
So we’ll sine-weave from side to side, and:
[The displaced after Romans’ Franks primordial fear of disappearance leading to ultra-centralism as core quality of the (leading socio-cultural-economic elites of) the nation, sometimes leads to something pleasing the eye; e.g., La Défense Paris]
Did / Did Not (Know Who Did)
Anyone still have an overview of where we (?) stand qua attribution of “cyber” attacks [ #ditchcyber, of course ] ..?? Apart from this…
There’s so much development in attribution with or without proof, e.g., about hacking elections in some outer corner of the world’s population; was it truly hacks, was it some nation state, was it some scapegoat hackster, was it all a set-up, where are Wikileaks, Anonymous, [fill in your favourite Four Horsemen party and colour the pictures] … the possibilities are endless.
But there are indeed flashes like this and this, which spark some controversy whilst blurring the overall picture. And we’d want unblurred pics of hotel room showers oh wait not I.
And what with all the tools out there (remember, the FBI’s stash stolen and now on fire sale for 99% off the previous list price, right?), planting others’ fingerprints and DNA, so to speak (no, literally ..!), and have pictures and videos even that are near-indistinguishable from proof; what evidence if any is still admissible in courts? None …!? So, what attribution …!?
When others talk about “controlling the cyber battlefield” (no, not the FBI but the extraterritorial agency), isn’t there a protracted “cyber” [ #ditchcyber ] world war under way already ..? Just not as hot as the previous one, more like the Cold one, schlepping on ..?
Just accept all Peace For Our Time‘s … and:
[The SocMed approach: Look! Moose babies!]
Ad Lib / Logic
About some ‘logic’ in an @bookingcom ad.
Where this, commonly well-regarded, travel site sent some spam: “Umbrella in hand, J, it’s raining deals!”
Which may or may not be true, but
- If it’s deals that it’s raining, I wouldn’t necessarily want to shrug them off with an umbrella
- If it’s deals, why associate them with bad weather which I may want to escape, through the deals
- Can’t the deals be collected on some company web site or so; why should it rain into my Inbox?
So, methinks the ad is a wide-net phishing run. Right ..?
Oh, and:
[Old analog pic; now there‘s deal weather …! Martinique — once was business travel location 😉 ]
Walking away from your desk
This, re yesterday’s post that was in some vincinity (though with quite some distance to spare…) of ranting about bureaucratic stupidity being a pleonasm.
By means of a pic, with:
- A Bureacrat certainly designed this. The ejection seat would to a bureaucrat mean the danger of you escaping from the post you were supposed to hold no matter what — since in the bureacratic only thinkable scenario, nothing would ever happen or you’re unfortunate collateral loss but hey, the System continues to perform.
- For all others (the handful, the few good men), the ejection seat is apparently surrounded by just that danger, and to be used to escape from from that immediate and urgent, life-threatening danger of death by utter boredom, by sitting still. Noting that the rig that the sign is on, invariably is one made for dangerous action, not for danger evasion… Ships are safe in harbour but that’s not what ships are for; kites [your check] so much, much less so!
Which side are you on; the sit-stillers’ or the Action Men’s ..?
Two's a Charming Bureaucratic Voilence
First, two (yes) quotes:
To put it crudely: it is not so much that bureaucratic procedures are inherently stupid, or even that they tend to produce behaviour that they themselves define as stupid — though they do do that — but rather, that they are invariably ways of managing social situations that are already stupid because they are founded on structural voilence. (p.57) [ Where structural voilence is … look it up in your sociology study’s notes. Implicit or even explicit threats with disciplinary boards (however pastiche) and ostracism certainly gives you the right idea; ed. ]
At the same time, if one accepts Jean Piaget’s famous definition of mature intelligence as the ability to coordinate between multiple perspectives (or possible perspectives) one can see, here, precisely how bureaucratic power, at the moment it turns to violence, becomes literally a form of infantile stupidity. (pp. 80-81) [ Emphasis mine; ed. ]
This being from Graeber’s Utopia of Rules of course.
Now, apply this to the obviously receptive [what is the opposite side from ‘applicable’?] situation at some petty association that aggrandised itself and use the introduction of ‘quality control’ — not over itself but over parts of its member base — in a criminal way [since the legal and (self- and external) regulatory arguments were and are simply invalid, and procedures at points illegal outright] to force them into obedience to Kafkaesk procedures that wouldn’t and still don’t apply to those in power at the association. Gollum “the ring is mine!”.
My point being the conclusion of infantile stupidity. Charming for its tragicomedy. A disaster at many fronts for those affected by it…
Super Mario gives wrong impression of plumber's degree
On our first day of class, we had to pull three students from the sewer pipe
January 16, 2017 by Harry Withstander
At the start of every school season, Duke University welcomes hundreds of enthousiastic, motivated students, but after only a semester more than half of them will have dropped out, disillusioned and disaffected. “Young hopefuls arrive with the idea they too can be Super Mario”, Vice President Renzo DiLuigi says.
Almost immediately after the release of the very first Super Mario game in 1985, the Master of Plumbing program saw skyrocketing enrollment numbers. “That’s also where trouble starts”, explains DeLuigi. “On our first day of class, we had to pull three students from the sewer pipe. Party’s very much over for us, then. We learn people how to unclog a toilet, not how to save a princess.”
Jack Fore has been a teacher of Siphon Trap Technology with the Plumbling program. He has seen things develop before his eyes: “First day of the semester, they all come rushing into the car park in their carts, banana in hand. This makes clear to me: They’ll never be an A-grade plumber. If you want to fight with monkeys, why not do Biology, but don’t come wrecking the school building.”
Still, for DiLuigi the profession of plumber still is the best the world has to offer. “In the end, the true plumbers come to the fore. Every year, they generate so much energy on campus. As I use to say: Let’s-a go!”
[Original, in Dutch, on the Speld; translated with permission]
Two AI tipping point(er)s
You may have misread that title.
It’s about tips, being pointers, two to papers that give such a nice overview of the year ahead in AI-and-ethics (mostly) research. Like, this and this. With, of course, subsequent linkage to many other useful stuff that you’d almost miss even if you’d pay attention.
Be ware of quite a number of follow-up posts, that will delve into all sorts of issue listed in the papers, and will quiz or puzzle you depending on wether you did pay attention or not. OK, you’ll be puzzled, right?
And:
[Self-learned AI question could be: “Why?” but to be honest and demonstrating some issues, that’s completely besides the point; Toronto]
Electing Coke
Haven’t seen too many comparisons between Coke’s notorious botched A/B testing New Coke on the one hand, and the oh so similar (are they) recent US elections on the other.
If any of you would have a pointer to such an analysis, I’d be glad to hear.
That’s all. And:
[Which side you’d choose ..? Who cares about you / your choice ..? Zuid-As Amsterdam]