Human OS = witchcraft wannabe

[bill woodruff]

The McCarthy's use the rhetorical devices of circular reasoning, mystification,
and the coinage of esoteric catch-phrases like "The Core" to try and suggest
they have discovered some unique insights into group dynamics in technical
collaboration.

Funny that they can't talk about "it" directly : but whatever "it" is, they
have "it," and you must get "it" from them.

Such semantic devices and tones invoke in me the immediate protective recitation
of the mantra (falsely attributed to P.T. Barnum) : "a sucker is born every
minute."

This piece of writing SHOULD, indeed, be compared to the vague cultic mystifications
of technology applied to human psychology such as the large-scale frauds
of Scientology.

How unfortunate that the space occupied by this article could not have been
devoted to a discussion, say, of the nature of consciousness and computer
programming beginning with Turing's ideas and ending with Kurzweil's.

Strange that on the way to the Forum, the McCarthy's somehow never mention
the significant body of research and experimental knowledge of task-oriented
small group behavior whose roots are in the works of Moreno, Homans, and
(pre acid-freak-out) Timothy Leary (yes, he did some serious research on
small group dynamics before dedicating himself to the destruction of synapses
through chemistry).

Strange that there's no mention of more modern (early 1990's)attempts to
use technology to facilitate meetings and collaboration such as the interesting
work of Bernard DeKoven using outlining software and trained meeting note-takers
and facilitators (see www.technography.com).

No mention of such (now somewhat dated) classics such as "The Mythical Man
Month" by Brooks which was so influential in the deveopment of cultural awareness
of the psychology of computer programming and teamwork that even its chapter
headings now have the status of folklore : "Plan to throw one away," for
example.

No mention of the substantial and long-term r&d at Xerox Parc that explored
computer whiteboards and other tools for technical collaboration.

And no mention of the post-Internet explosion of ideas and tools for collaboration
and teamwork such as the brand-new "zaplet" concept (see www.zaplet.com)
which uses e-mail as a base for collaboration and dynamic update.

Are we to belive that these happy technical trainers have, like astronauts
gazing back at the earth from some extra-planetary perspective, had some
cosmic revelation which they can only impart, without words, to those in
their presence ?

I am led to wonder if their "core" revelation has left them enlightened or
stupefied.

But one thing I am sure of : I will not be paying cash to find out.

Bill Woodruff (former board certified member of the American Academy of Group
Psychotherapy and Psychodrama who's over all that now and is very happy programming
in VB)

[Zane Thomas]

On 1 Nov 2000 23:39:45 -0800, "bill woodruff" <billw@dotscience.com>
wrote:

>How unfortunate that the space occupied by this article could not have been
>devoted to a discussion, say, of the nature of consciousness and computer
>programming beginning with Turing's ideas and ending with Kurzweil's.

Aw shucks, we don't have to end somewhere just yet do we? :-)

Btw, thanks for giving the McCarthy's the treatment they deserve for
trying to sell their snake-oil on devx. I can only wonder what the
editors were thinking when they decided to publish it. Guess they just
don't know nuttin about nuttin.



---
Homie Z

You're just mad because the voices don't talk to you.

[Tom Koch]

Hi Zane,

< I can only wonder what the editors were thinking

All available evidence suggests that they weren't.

--
Tom Koch
Awareness is free.

[Karl E. Peterson]

> < I can only wonder what the editors were thinking
>
> All available evidence suggests that they weren't.

Porkies rides again!

news://news.devx.com/39ff1180$1@news.devx.com

[Robert Scoble]

> < I can only wonder what the editors were thinking
> All available evidence suggests that they weren't.

Probably not, but I find this forum one of the best pieces of reading every
morning and it came about because they decided to publish that piece.

By the way, they are serious. Jim McCarthy presented an early version of
this article at a VBITS about a year ago.

Why did I sign him up? Cause I like keynotes that make people think. Even
wacko ideas make us look at the world differently and make us consider a new
approach.

_

Robert Scoble

Editor, Thunder Lizard Productions

Fawcette Technical Publications, Inc

http://63.192.218.207 <<--Fawcette's Speaker FAQ

http://conferences.devx.com <<-- Fawcette's Main Conference Web Site

Phone: 650-688-2442

Fax: 650-321-3818

I'm also the founder of the NetMeeting Zone at
http://www.netmeeting-zone.com and the Train Simulator Fan Site at
http://communities.msn.com/TrainSimulatorFanSite/

###

[Zane Thomas]

On Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:23:57 -0800, "Robert Scoble" <rscoble@fawcette.com>
wrote:

>Why did I sign him up? Cause I like keynotes that make people think. Even
>wacko ideas make us look at the world differently and make us consider a new
>approach.

Wow, great idea! Btw, I hear L. Ron Blubbard's wife is looking for
opportunities to present her wacko ideas. I can only assume you're
interested.

Geesh, wacko ideas? There are so many much much better decent ideas
around. If you want to make a hit at a conference invite someone with a
brain and a clue, someone like Dennett will really get people thinking.



---
Homie Z

You're just mad because the voices don't talk to you.

[Robert Scoble]

> Wow, great idea! Btw, I hear L. Ron Blubbard's wife is looking for
> opportunities to present her wacko ideas. I can only assume you're
> interested.
> Geesh, wacko ideas? There are so many much much better decent ideas
> around. If you want to make a hit at a conference invite someone with a
> brain and a clue, someone like Dennett will really get people thinking.

Well, remember, I signed up Alan Cooper too. I remember a lot of developers
thinking he was a wacko too.

<grin>

Robert Scoble

[Zane Thomas]

Robert,

>Well, remember, I signed up Alan Cooper too. I remember a lot of developers
>thinking he was a wacko too.

And rightly so. Apparently he got delusions of grandeur (with significant
help from *some people*) after originating VB - leading to that new-age
babble-thon called a UI book.

><grin>

Ok, time to wipe that silly grin off your face. :-)



---
Homie Z

You're just mad because the voices don't talk to you.

[Tom Koch]

> Porkies rides again!
>
> news://news.devx.com/39ff1180$1@news.devx.com


ROFL! Thanks for that, Karl.

--
Tom Koch
Awareness is free.

[Nancy Folsom]

In article <3a01ab3f$1@news.devx.com>, karl@mvps.org says...
> > < I can only wonder what the editors were thinking
> >
> > All available evidence suggests that they weren't.
>
> Porkies rides again!
>
> news://news.devx.com/39ff1180$1@news.devx.com
>
>
>
Does that go somewhere? Apparently Gravity doesn't handle URLs. :-(

[Karl E. Peterson]

Hi Nancy --

> > > < I can only wonder what the editors were thinking
> > >
> > > All available evidence suggests that they weren't.
> >
> > Porkies rides again!
> >
> > news://news.devx.com/39ff1180$1@news.devx.com
>
> Does that go somewhere? Apparently Gravity doesn't handle URLs. :-(

Sorry to hear that. Yeah, see below.

Time to get a "real" newsreader? <bg>

Later... Karl


"Karl E. Peterson" <karl@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:<39ff1180$1@news.devx.com>...
> Hi Dan --
>
> > Sorry, but I don't think you're taking the Language Stability issue
> > very seriously. It's almost insulting.
> <snip>
> > You (and the .net folk) need to think about this from the 'big
> > picture" standpoint. I assure you others will be.
>
> You heard about the recent hackjob on MS servers, right? Well, "someone"
> surreptiously forwarded the following private journal entry (below), found deep
> within the bowels of the dotnet group. Though provoking, no?
>
> Later... Karl
> --
> http://www.mvps.org/vb
>
>
> > It started out innocently enough.
> >
> > I began to think at parties now and then to loosen up. Inevitably
> > though, one thought led to another, and soon I was more than just
> > a social thinker. I began to think alone - "to relax," I told
> > myself - but I knew it wasn't true.
> >
> > Thinking became more and more important to me, and finally I was
> > thinking all the time. I began to think on the job. I knew that
> > thinking and employment don't mix, but I couldn't stop myself.
> >
> > I began to avoid friends at lunchtime so I could read Thoreau and
> > Kafka. I would return to the office dizzied and confused, asking,
> > "What is it exactly we are doing here?"
> >
> > Things weren't going so great at home either. One evening I had
> > turned off the TV and asked my wife about the meaning of life.
> > She spent that night at her mother's.
> >
> > I soon had a reputation as a heavy thinker. One day the boss
> > called me in. He said, "I like you, and it hurts me to say this,
> > but your thinking has become a real problem. If you don't stop
> > thinking on the job, you'll have to find another job."
> >
> > This gave me a lot to think about.
> >
> > I came home early after my conversation with the boss. "Honey," I
> > confessed, "I've been thinking..."
> >
> > "I know you've been thinking," she said, "and I want a divorce!"
> >
> > "But Honey, surely it's not that serious."
> >
> > "It is serious," she said, lower lip aquiver.
> >
> > "You think as much as college professors, and college professors
> > don't make any money, so if you keep on thinking we won't have
> > any money!"
> >
> > "That's a faulty syllogism," I said impatiently, and she began to
> > cry.
> >
> > I'd had enough. "I'm going to the library," I snarled as I
> > stomped out the door. I headed for the library, in the mood for
> > some Nietzsche. I roared into the parking lot and ran up to the
> > big glass doors... they didn't open. The library was closed. As I
> > sank to the ground clawing at the unfeeling glass, whimpering for
> > Zarathustra, a poster caught my eye. "Friend, is heavy thinking
> > ruining your life?"
> >
> > You probably recognize that line. It comes from the standard
> > Thinkers Anonymous (TA) poster.
> >
> > Which is why I am what I am today: a recovering thinker. I never
> > miss a TA meeting. At each meeting we watch a non-educational
> > video; last week it was "Porky's."
> >
> > Then we share experiences about how we avoided thinking since the
> > last meeting. I still have my job, and things are a lot better at
> > home. Life just seemed... easier, somehow, as soon as I stopped
> > thinking.
>

[Nancy Folsom]

In article <3a02f31d@news.devx.com>, karl@mvps.org says...
> Hi Nancy --

> > Does that go somewhere? Apparently Gravity doesn't handle URLs. :-(
>
> Sorry to hear that. Yeah, see below.
>
> Time to get a "real" newsreader? <bg>

Got one, thanks. The bozo bin is excellent.

Thanks for the text. I liked it.

[Bob Reselman]

Colleagues:

Let us not forget the importance of our vocation. Please remember that we
are software developers. We
really do run the world.

Those of us who have been making software for a while know that it is not
a job, any more than making c
the Cathedral at Chartes was. It is a way of life. The power and associated
responsibility of our way of
life is awesome and breathtaking. We are as we behave. And, the way we behave
is the way the world
will be.

Therefore, I implore each and everyone of you act in a civil and humane manner
when discussing and
critiquing the work of a fellow developer. Name calling, meanness, ridicule
and trivializing dishonor us.

Trashing an idea does not make a better idea. It's the quality and subsequent
impact of the idea that
counts.

Nobody likes a bully, be the bully physical or intellectual. Believe me.
I know. I was one. I have
to be ever vigilant not to revert to that all too easy behavior again.

Respectfully,
Bob Reselman

[Zane Thomas]

On 3 Nov 2000 11:26:25 -0800, "Bob Reselman" <bob@CogArtTech.com> wrote:

>Trashing an idea does not make a better idea.

Not necessarily, but it exposes a bad idea.



---
Homie Z

You're just mad because the voices don't talk to you.

[Nancy Folsom]

In article <3a031161$1@news.devx.com>, bob@CogArtTech.com says...
>
> Colleagues:
>
> Let us not forget the importance of our vocation. Please remember that we
> are software developers. We
> really do run the world.
>
> Those of us who have been making software for a while know that it is not
> a job, any more than making c
> the Cathedral at Chartes was. It is a way of life. The power and associated
> responsibility of our way of
> life is awesome and breathtaking. We are as we behave. And, the way we behave
> is the way the world
> will be.
>
> Therefore, I implore each and everyone of you act in a civil and humane manner
> when discussing and
> critiquing the work of a fellow developer. Name calling, meanness, ridicule
> and trivializing dishonor us.
>
> Trashing an idea does not make a better idea. It's the quality and subsequent
> impact of the idea that
> counts.
>
> Nobody likes a bully, be the bully physical or intellectual. Believe me.
> I know. I was one. I have
> to be ever vigilant not to revert to that all too easy behavior again.
>
> Respectfully,
> Bob Reselman
>

I started out thinking your post was satire, but at the conclusion, I
think it's not. I'm sorry you were offended by the critiques. There
wasn't any name calling. Were they sharp? Yes, certainly as any bad or
badly expressed ideas generally are. Heck, I heard the BBC today and
noted the hooting, cat calls, and general derision that resounded in the
background of the story. Rather lively, and those guys are really
classy. <g>

The article in question wasn't some newsgroup posting off the top of
someone's head that was being responded to, and spending 6 months *****-
footing around isn't going to help anything, either.

Now. So far there hasn't been an iota of refutation of the criticism. Or
scientific support for the position.

If it's science fiction, fine, label it so. If it's science, the article
needs...work.