Here are some of the observations and insights that were shared via Twitter this past week.
@mikeridell62 – “Just as the industrial age ended slave labour the information age is likely to end mass-wage labour.”
@tom_peters – “Winners: Thrive on chaos-ambiguity. Sense of humor. Live by: Try-something-right-now. Celebrate failures. Resilience. Relationships nut.”
@jhagel – Finite Games as Probes in complexity – via @timekord
As I noted above, Carse insightfully points out that boundaries are necessary for finite games while infinite game players seek to undermine all boundaries. Given my preoccupation with the importance of edges, this might appear to be a contradiction. To be clear, I am drawn to edges (what Carse labels as horizons) precisely because they generate possibility, not because they define limits. Edges are fertile ground for an infinite game that draws out potential and possibility in part because finite game players tend to avoid them and they attract those who are more excited by infinite games.
@crumphelen – “an experiment to narrate my work/learning for one day” [good example of PKM]
Tame, Wicked and Critical Problems: An introduction to the Cuckoo Clock Syndrome – via @commutiny
Elegant solutions do not work for Wicked problems because they sit across various difficult cultures and institutions. Not everyone responds well to punitive hierarchical measures. Nor is everyone affected equally by the incentives and support offered by individualists. Rather, what is required when approaching Wicked problems are ‘Clumsy’ solutions; those that broach and draw upon different cultural understandings. Here, Grint emphasises the importance of implementing ‘experimental’ approaches “because we cannot know whether the approach we adopt will eventually work; if we did it would be a Tame or Critical problem.” The key is for policymakers and leaders to act as ‘bricoleurs’ and ‘experimental pragmatists’, eschewing nicely framed Elegant responses which are the preserve of many policymakers.
Yes, government researchers really did invent the Internet [in response to a WSJ op-ed]
In truth, no private company would have been capable of developing a project like the Internet, which required years of R&D efforts spread out over scores of far-flung agencies, and which began to take off only after decades of investment. Visionary infrastructure projects such as this are part of what has allowed our economy to grow so much in the past century. Today’s op-ed is just one sad indicator of how we seem to be losing our appetite for this kind of ambition.
NYT: “Pinterest, Tumblr and the Trouble with ‘Curation.’ Sehnsucht: German for “addictive yearning.” That about nails it.” @CharlesHGreen
Here’s The Awl’s co-editor, Choire Sicha, for instance, on the subject of rebloggers who fancy themselves curators: “As a former actual curator, of like, actual art and whatnot, I think I’m fairly well positioned to say that you folks with your blog and your Tumblr and your whatever are not actually engaged in a practice of curation. Call it what you like: aggregating? Blogging? Choosing? Copyright infringing sometimes? But it’s not actually curation, or anything like it. . . .” To which a commenter added: “My Tumblr isn’t so much curated space as it is a symptom of deeper pathologies made manifest.”