Metapeople – I’ve never Metaone I didn’t like

March 31, 2008 under tongueincheek

If you go to dictionary.com or some other fancy site, they’re liable to tell you that meta comes from Greek and means ‘beside’, or something like that.

If you surf the web you’ll generally gather the impression that attaching meta to a word applies that word to itself: metadata refers to data about data, metadiscussion refers to discussing discussion, metadesign means designing your design process, metaprogramming refers not to programming a computer, but programming a program.

 These are all sneaky weasel definitions which obscure the true meaning of the word.  The true meaning of the prefix “meta” is “not the real work”.

That this is the true definition of the word is pretty obvious – just think about the kind of people who care about “meta” issues (aka. metapeople, or “not real people who do real work”). They’re obviously not real people – for example the greatest example of a metaprogrammer ( not a real programmer) is a Lisp programmer, aka… not a real programmmer.

The hallmark of a ‘meta’ person is that all they do is sit around dwelling on how great ‘meta’ is (meta-tate, or meta-meta-tate, when they reflect on their own lives). If you’ve ever encountered a metaperson, chances are they spent all of the encounter trying to get you to abandon your current, productive task and to adopt a ‘meta’ approach. (Note that changing your habits so they approach a ‘meta’ approach is to metaapproach)

Metapeople will fanatically deny that they are unproductive. They will say that metaapproaching means that the real work will do itself with just a single push of a button, once you’re done. Metapeople even *appear* productive, but this is only because they’ve trapped themselves in a recursive cycle of metaapproaching. They are busy – busying themselves. They’re metabusying – or you could say that they’re busy metabusying, or metametabusying. Need I go further?

Take code generation, for example. Let’s say you’re trying to write a “Hello World” program in bash. You have just finished typing ‘echo’ and are about to enter in “Hello World” when a metaperson accosts you and says that your solution to the problem is far too specific and can’t be used to solve similar problems such as “Hi World” or “Hello Wurld”.

They suggest you write a program which generates programs which are similar to “Hello World”. No sooner do you sit down to hack some code when they reflect that the generator that you have in mind is really quite specific for a code generator, and that maybe you’d be better suited with a generator that could generate *more* kinds of programs than just “Hello World” variants.

So you start to bolt some features on to your generator, and they begin to complain that your spaghetti code is giving them migranes, and that you might as well just write a flexible generator to generate various kinds of generators. After all, you can’t put a price on elegance.

Eventually you’ll hit the natural limit of your hard drive. The first 125GB will be meta^99code, and the second 125GB will be the XML configuration files for the first 125GB.

You won’t have room for the string “Hello World”

comments: 0 » tags: ,

California Crazy

March 27, 2008 under Uncategorized

I lifted this link from the freakonomics blog

A court ruled that California parents will require government certification in order to homeschool – stating that they don’t have a constitutional right to homeschool their children.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120614130694756089.html

 Teaching your own children? Shocking!

comments: 0 » tags: ,

Repentance

March 27, 2008 under theology

Repentance is interesting to me because it’s so hard. Easy things generally aren’t interesting because there’s very little to learn from them. The benefits and consequences of an easy action are usually well known and well understood – people just try it and see what happens.

Bear in mind that I’m talking about *ease*. It’s important to distinguish between ease and simplicity. Many simple things (like asking forgiveness) can be very difficult. It’s also important to distinguish between ease and the size of an activity’s  common denominator – there are many difficult activities which anyone can perform, yet which are difficult nonetheless. Finally, ease shouldn’t be confused with triviality or unimportance. Many easy tasks are crucial.

At the most fundamental level, Christianity rests upon the understanding that we need God. The basis of our need for God and the basis for our having a relationship with him underlies everything else.

This is an understanding which is not entirely rational. It does not contradict reason, but there is more too it than simply an intellectual grasp of the idea. It’s a spiritual insight which has to be received, understood and felt. This understanding precedes everything else in the Christian life, and the right response to it is repentance.

The right response to it is repentance because the understanding *is* that we need to repent. To say that “We need God” is to say that “We need to repent”. Our need for God is the need to be lifted from the state where we stand, unrepentant, as his enemies.

How do you measure a need? Generally you measure a need by the severity of the consequences if it is unmet. If you don’t have clothing you will be cold and ashamed. If you don’t have food you will starve. If you don’t have shelter you will perish from the elements. If you don’t have repentance… ?

We experience and know God’s love through his grace and through his forgiveness.  (“But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” Rom 5:8 NIV)

Since it’s this very same love which we are commanded to extend to our neighbors, we’re placed in a very frustrating place if we are unfamiliar with it - if we don’t have any of it to share.

The logic is simple – if we don’t understand our need for it, we can never ask for it. If we never ask for it, we will never receive it. If we never receive it, we will never have it. If we never have it, we can never share it.

The consequence of an unmet need for repentance is the restriction of our ability to experience God’s love. It is the restriction of our ability to share God’s love with others. When we try to be ‘good’ Christians or ‘good’ people without any repentance, we’re bound to be frustrated in our endeavours, because we’re not actually being good.

At the same time, it’s extremely difficult to do. It’s very simple. Anyone can do it. But it’s very difficult, because it means that we have to put our own definitions of what good and true are, and pick up the ones that God uses.

comments: 0 » tags:

Metrics

March 24, 2008 under Uncategorized

Mangers and business people have an intense fascination with measuring things. This often is accompanied by a terrible fear of things that cannot be measured. The thinking goes that if you cannot measure something, then you can’t manage it; you can’t control it.

More importantly, if you can’t measure something, you can’t prove to your boss that you’re aligning tactical and strategical objectives; you’re unable to demonstrate that you’re enabling best practices and adding value to the company going forward.

I may mock the language, but there’s nothing wrong with the idea that something which is immeasurable bears with it a certain degree of risk. There’s always the chance that things are going pear-shaped and no one will be able to tell before it is too late. Where this becomes a fallacy is when people, afraid that something is going unmeasured and that they are flying blind, force poor metrics on to something.

Metrics reflect your understanding of an activity or thing. If you understand it well, you’ll also understand which status indicators are reliable (or unreliable). If you have an incomplete or flawed understanding, your indicators may be no better than random.

Poor metrics are far worse than no metrics. The reason for this is that people always optimize towards the metrics they have. This a natural thing, not necessarily a bad thing… but it becomes a bad thing if the metrics in place are bad. Putting bad metrics in place takes people’s better judgment away from them. Imagine that you assign a task to someone, and they ask, “How do I know if I’m doing it right?” Think about two different responses:

“I’m not sure – figure it out as you go.”

and

“If you have a high critical performance index, you can’t be far wrong”

In the first case, they have a chance of leaning on experience and the feedback they get while doing the task. If they’ve done similar tasks, they may be able to approach the problem carefully and thoughtfully and arrive at some sort of reasonable metric.

If you slap a bad metric in place, they’ll just follow it. They may not even question it. Slapping a bad metric on something essentially broadcasts the message, “I understand this problem – doing X means you’re solving it well”. It discourages critical thinking around the problem. Well intentioned people always want to do the best job possible – so you can bet that they’ll sink significant amounts of time and effort into getting their numbers up. People always optimize their behavior according to the metrics they are given – it’s how we all do things.

How is masking a dangerous hole in your knowledge better than flagging it as an unknown?

I’d prefer a little honest ignorance rather than false understanding. If you don’t know, say so.

comments: 0 » tags: ,

Easter Sunday

March 23, 2008 under theology

Christ is risen!

comments: 0 »

Good Friday

March 21, 2008 under theology

God loves you.

Peace be with you.

comments: 0 » tags: ,

The Mainstream Adopter’s Curse

March 20, 2008 under tongueincheek

I stay behind the times on everything. It works for me; I like it. This extends beyond avoiding early adoption – it extends to avoiding *mainstream* adoption.

The Happy Moron is a prime example. 2008 is a late year to start blogging. I could have been swaying people’s opinions for the past five years or more!!

But I must say that its *nice* to start blogging in 2008. The software takes just a few clicks to install. It’s free, feature rich and mature. There are many well established and successful blogs that I can study, and there’s a reasonable level of in-depth analysis about blogging which helps me learn from the mistakes of others.

When I buy a computer game, I make sure that it’s several years out of date. Old games run on old hardware. They run on an on-board graphics card. They don’t chew up my hard-disk space. They’re a tenth of the price.

My music collection? It probably doesn’t include much that is dated post 2000. The library carries such great material as “Jukebox hits of 1957″ and “Billboard hits of 1976″. Notice that the passage of time has served as a wonderful and natural filter, since no one ever keeps track of all the bad or mediocre music from 1957. I know who’s good from these periods, because their names are the only ones which stick around. Good times!

I don’t miss out on any experiences; I just delay them a bit. Actually,  my average experience tends to be better than that of a mainstream adopter. In a few years, for example, I will be buying second hand dvds at outrageously low prices: dvds dumped by mainstream adopters who are moving to the next great hi-def media format.

It’s the good life, I tell you.

P.S. Oh, and thanks for beta testing for me ;-)

Don’t become accidentally famous

March 19, 2008 under curios, technical

Because if you do, it’s going to hurt a lot more than it used to. Kristen may have made some poor choices, but she never intended for her life story to be paraded before the nation.

Saying, “My information is safe because no one cares about little old me” really isn’t a very good privacy policy. One effect of making sensitive information available is that people become interested in you who wouldn’t otherwise have been.

Don’t tempt the unscrupulous.

comments: 0 » tags: ,

The Annual Playoff Run

March 18, 2008 under tongueincheek

So, once again the Edmonton Oilers are putting together their annual gala spectacle – the famous playoff run.

It’s the time of year when one morning, Oilers GM Kevin Lowe wakes up at 3am, in a cold sweat,

“Honey! I just had a horrible nightmare that we’re about to miss the playoffs!”

“I’ve got some bad news for you, dear…”

Oilers fans have a love hate relationship with the playoff run. We wish that once, just once, the Oilers would condescend to do things the easy way. It’s the fan’s dream that they would come together one year and say,

“Ok boys, let’s win a whole bunch of games up front this year.”

Of course, there’s no drama like a successful playoff run, and Oilers fans can say with pride that no team is better at swiping the eighth and final spot, at the very death, than the Oilers.

So here we are again. Success for the Oilers this year would be nothing less than epic.

But why do I have a terrible feeling that Oilers fans will be treated to a big dose of “almost-epic” this year?

comments: 2 »

Mercenary Blogging

March 16, 2008 under metablogging

I expect that there are a great many people who start blogs and are disappointed when their blogs never generate much interest on the general internet.

It’s not surprising. Blogs have immense potential, and the power of personal publishing to a global audience is not to be underestimated. Given the grand scale of what an arbitrary blog *could* be, it would be surprising if a little bit of hope and expectation *didn’t* rub off on Joe Q. Blogger.

Blogging brings people into the publishing world: a world with which they are not immediately familiar. Furthermore, blogging shoehorns people into multiple roles: reporter, author, editor, marketer, customer service associate…

Blogging also exposes people to the intense competition for eyeballs which exists within the publishing world. Given that the number of people in the world has a constant upper bound, and the number of hours in a day is constant, there are a limited number of eyeball-hours to be shared among all publishers.

Blogging is like professional poker – superstar bloggers are loved by all, make a full time living from their previous hobby, and are able to evangelize the masses (ok, so poker pros don’t get to evangelize the masses). Joe Q. Average decides, “That’s the life for me – anyone can do it.” Joe Q. Average makes an investment and suffers an experience which is decidedly unlike that of the superstar’s. Any one can do it, but not every one can.

Good blogging is hard. At the core of blogging is the creation of content that is genuinely interesting and attractive to people. This content requires writing, editing and marketing. None of these activities are simple or easy.

There’s a minor tragedy at work. I suspect many people take blog failure personally, and infer things from the failure which are not necessarily the case. As with everything else in life, the failure to manage expectation correctly leads to either dissatisfaction or disappointment.

The answer, of course, is to apply expectations retroactively, which is what I do :-)

P.S. If thre are any typos in this pst, don’t worry, I’ll be okay with them later.

comments: 0 »