Comments: "Censorware Chronicles" advice - recapping recent censorware news

Perhaps the oscillation between totalitarianism and libertarianism is inevitable?

Why add your tuppence to the pendulum when it'll swing both ways whatever you do?

Perhaps that ebb and flow is not worth your time?

Is there some other contribution you could make to human progress rather than the displacement activity of getting involved in the ephemera of political correctness and thought crime?

Posted by Crosbie Fitch at November 29, 2006 03:41 PM

Well, so far I haven't found anything that fits all of:

1) Makes a difference
2) Makes a living
3) Makes sense in my life

Two out of three isn't enough.

Posted by Seth Finkelstein at November 29, 2006 04:11 PM

I think any combination of achieving two out of those three would be pretty good...

Posted by Bob Turner at November 29, 2006 11:58 PM

Nope. "Makes a living" is a necessity for sustainability, since I'm not a dot-com millionaire. "Makes sense in my life" also can't be omitted, since there are some things which are just beyond my ability (e.g. delicate diplomacy among power-holders). Maybe "Makes a difference" is overrated :-(.

Posted by Seth Finkelstein at November 30, 2006 12:53 AM

a. Making a living is quantifiable...

b. Making sense in your life can be self validated or not.

c. Making a difference runs 2 major risks

1. hubris
2. offering yourself as a sacrificial lamb to society...

the yardstick of "making a difference" is abstract and invites vulnerability which can adversly effect a and b...

hence 2 out of 3 isn't fact perhaps a and b is all one can reasonably expect....
it is history that determines c ...what made a might have the desire to "make a difference" but that desire in no way equates to "making a difference". If it was that easy
we would all be doing it.

Posted by Bob Turner at November 30, 2006 05:11 PM

"Makes sense" isn't a self-validated aspect, it's sort of the flip side of "Makes a living" - basically, is it a match for my talents? I'm extremely skilled at e.g. spending several hours tracing down obscure problems in computer programs. I'm completely unsuited to e.g. spending several hours giving a sales pitch to very rich idiots.

Of course it isn't easy. But that doesn't make it failing at it much more palatable.

Posted by Seth Finkelstein at November 30, 2006 05:31 PM

Pitching to idiots...that is a totally different job need to fail at that.

It sounds like you need a partner or agent who is good at successfully communicating to others who possess fiscal strength and the capability to understand the value of the proposition that you want to put on the table.

This is a standard division of labor for a tech enterprise. Seldom does any one possess both those capabilities. Almost every meeting (on line or in real time)I've been involved with reduces to four people. Two on each side wearing those two hats...sales and tech. That is who is on the conference call. I think it is safe to say never or almost never is it sucessfull to have the "deal side" made with the tech guy(s) or the tech guy does the deal side.

Two totally different job discriptions.

That just seems to be how it works.


Posted by Bob Turner at November 30, 2006 09:54 PM