This is gold. An interesting and unconventional perspective on the common tropes and processes that occupy management science and drive tech. strategy at corporations. The misconception about planning ahead is in line with Talebs notion of becoming anti-fragile rather than becoming robust, ie getting stronger with change (change not being directly predictable).
“Within a big pharma we’re giving a twelve hour review process in which if no one objects, you’re authorized to do it…” sounds a lot like Command by Negation which is something the Navy has been doing for multiple decades. It goes hand-in-hand with the Marines preferred Mission Command.
“The unknown unknowable after covid with retrospective coherence you said we should have known…” except that we did know we should have known beforehand as Bush jr created an infectious disease element within the national security council which Obama enhanced though Bolton under Trump eliminated while they canceled and closed US funded and staffed Corona virus research within China in the summer of 2019. Look too to fiction with End of October and World War Z. We knew and we should have been better set. In terms of our retrospective coherence, look at Michael Lewis’ The Premonition as it showed Reagan destroying the efficacy of the CDC while it highlighted several knowing the FDA and CDC were incompetent to task meaning we knew, only that those seeing lacked power. In The Premonition, look at the Fort Dix situation in which they took aggressive action to be ahead just in case - they made the correct call but got blamed for it. Look also at how Obama got lucky regarding Mexican Swine Flu. And consider now post Covid how little we’re doing regarding Avian Flu despite recent “lessons.” These really aren’t unknown unknowables. Instead they’re a lack of capacity to imagine the worst. Climate change falls in this bin too. We know yet we dither.
“Unknown knowns, the things known within the organization but not to the decision maker…” perhaps a better fit to explain Covid even if the decision maker was willfully ignorant. Same for climate.
@@ashbirk4681 I think he correctly has animosity with psychology but then this gets applied too broadly such that he can’t accept Tversky, Klein, Kahneman. Similarly, he busts on Boyd saying “we’ve moved beyond Boyd.” He is also an apologist for Taylor because Drucker busted on him for having once properly understood the dehumanizing nature of Taylor. But Cynefin, Sense-Making, Estuaries are all good things which should not be cast off because of this angst with Kahneman. Seems he has warmed to Dekker, which is good too.
@gitbutlerapp, great talk! I can’t help but wonder why our source control systems limit themselves to just storing text? Our editors have embraced tree-sitter to represent the code in a more structured way. What possibilities are opened up if a vcs embraced something like tree-sitter too?
(Napomena, nemam trotinet, prevozim se automobilom). Ako poredimo elektricni trotinet/bicikl i automobil. Trotinet/Bicikl mora da pomeri 120kg, automobil 1200kg. Jasno je sta trosi vise energije. Tako da, i ako trotinet nije zelen, daleko je cistiji od automobila
