Please join me at my new blog.
(Why give any more to Google - home of "Do(n't) be evil".)
A "Function over FORM" production.
Please join me at my new blog.
(Why give any more to Google - home of "Do(n't) be evil".)
And extraverts have constructed things, so that they pocket most of the money.
(A bit more specific than simply extraverts; click through for the details.)
What to do?
just consumed, as most of us are, by… gestures vaguely at everything…
I've been spending a bit more time on twitter (much useful and actionable info - from certain specific sources who've demonstrated usefulness)
and on facebook (trying like hell to counter the tide of disinformation - and utter BS - there)
I Write Like by Mémoires, Mac journal software. Analyze your writing!
I pasted some code in.
Yep, WS was a geek, too. :)
(Via a DF tweet: Greenpeace and Apple, Sitting in a Tree.)
You may recall that Greenpeace has been all over Apple for awhile now. Regardless whether you liked the Greenpeace words/tactics, they at least recognize that Apple has become much more "green".
Aside: In Greenpeace's current analysis of consumer electronics (Which companies really sell greener electronics), Apple leads in every category. Interestingly, Apple is also the only company that has a product in every category.
In any event, Apple does seem to be a company that listens, and is inclined to "do the right thing" - at least some of the time.
This is where we get into "enlightened self-interest" territory: Clearly (in addition to the direct reductions to pollutants) it's in Apple's interest as a for-profit corporation, to be seen as "green", especially as "green" becomes a bigger and bigger buzzword.
Now, allow me an extrapolation into politics:
Let's be clear: What's being called "bipartisanship" now, makes as much sense as a scientist accepting a debate with a creationist - at *best* it's a waste of time.
Though it can be more insidious; an attempt to mire, delay, drag down, suck the energy out of... - just look at our so-called "debate" about healthcare. There certainly are critical things to debate, though the vast amount of energy spent is not debate at all, but a naked attempt to maintain the status quo - of healthcare's overriding goal being, not healthcare, but profit.
So, what to do?
Here's what not to do: What the Bush (II) administration did; bulldoze anyone who wasn't 100% signed on to your version of the truth. They certainly got things done - in the same way Mussolini made the trains run on time.
So what's the "happy medium"?
Certainly everyone should have a chance to be heard - for a time. And after that time, it's necessary to take stock and move to the next phase - actually getting something done.
There's nothing impolite or non-inclusinve about this - we have limited time in the same way we have limited money.
This is what governing is: Actually getting something done.
and yes, something that *seems* completely reasonable (necessary even!) can in fact be detrimental to someone else.
bonus blast-from-the-past link: Caring For Your Introvert (Jonathan Rauch, The Atlantic).