I once heard a quote by Anthony Robbins that there are 6 human needs that drive all behaviours:
1) certainty,
2) variety,
3) significance,
4) love and connection,
5) growth and
6) contribution
Interesting to match to the 4 desires…
131 karma · joined September 12, 2013
Or was it that there has never been any leak across the whole structure when docked in wet?
Is it as simple as that? (1) There is a continuum from dirty bombs to full Nukes that makes it a bit more messy. (2) Are Nukes not more "hideable" than this? For example, why has NK not had theirs bombed?
My opinion (see below for how I have defined these)
Outsider expert > establishment expert for public ally challenging and overturning norms
Any expert > layperson on the basic facts (ignoring statistical aberrations, of course)
“Outsider” being unconstrained by norms, not afraid to be cast out of a long established peer group
“Expert” has deep grasp of contemporary facts, second and third order consequences, puts in controls to remove cognitive biases, deep curiosity and healthy scepticism.
“Layperson” being someone who is probably intelligent, but grasps quickly onto unfamiliar concepts and data and makes heuristic calls based on limited data.
Step 1: find the "Regulortunities"
Entrepreneurs typically rate low. They rely on goodwill and reciprocity and great relationships to get things done as they have zero power. Early power comes from getting people to buy into your vision.
Corporate middle / senior managers rate higher because it it generally all about the power.
The interesting insight was that as an entrepreneur, when your business scales it is hard to retain the “low Machiavelly” approach. This is where a lot of the growing pains come from..
Edit: add link https://www.harleytherapy.co.uk/counselling/machiavellianism...
I had a quick google on this and loved what I saw. But I couldn’t find anything on how to do this in a life/business sense.
Do you have any further tips or references on how to get better at structuring aphorisms?
Result = overspend on the wrong things, managed by an inadequate team...
Seriously - I was drinking far too much coffee during lockdown and have switched 2 days ago to decaf. Too early to tell, but it feels like less triggering of hyperness...
WRT finding interesting ideas...
We used to talk about "increasing your surface area of luck" by meeting more people, getting exposed to more ideas/ opportunities etc.
If "Innovation happens at the intersection", then the more you come into contact with, the more your chances of finding an interesting (non-obvious) intersection between problem and solution, or two entirely different solution domains.
WRT executin: Gary player = "The more I practice the luckier I get"
US Politics: - Stacking the supreme court Vs the court case strategy itself - Gerrymandering Vs Winning votes on merit - How you play the Caucus nominations Vs policy
Business (internal to large companies): - Gaming how funding flows vs Getting funding on merits
Business (external market) - Finding the grey area in policy (e.g. Uber/ Airbnb) - Lobbying
Would this be a correct understanding?
I learned diving. It was great - taught me how to slow down entirely - you need to be 100% "immersed" in what you are doing - you have to breathe consistently and calmly
I loved it and it helped me heaps (in addition to doing all the other good things mentioned above!)
For those of you who don't know cricket - one of the ways to get your opponent out is to knock off the bails (two pieces of wood) from the three wooden "stumps" that they are balancing on.
Cue Jack's rendition of cricket in the outback!
And for those of you who don't know possums...
I took a prototype of a new app to one of Sydney's top real estate people.
He told me to sit down for a frank chat: "Good real estate agents focus their energy on selling houses. Great ones focus all of their energy on signing up new listings." Anything that is just there to benefit the client is really of no interest unless it achieves the latter.
My first visit was 2006. On my return visits in 2008/9 I was accompanied by security who were probably over-protective as well.
As far as my wife is concerned, we travelled a lot throughout Pakistan - perhaps we were too cautious - although we did come up against a lot of anti-Indian sentiment. We found attitudes vary a lot from place to place about a lot of things, and this is no different.
I remember a well educated guy I knew telling me that he stopped going to the Wagga border post near Lahore for fear that he would throw a rock at the Indian border guards in the heat of the moment...
I was told I was lucky to survive my first day without getting shot - I hung out on Karachi beach with the locals on National day which apparently made me a huge target for theft or kidnapping.
While I was in Islamabad the Taliban took over the military headquarters, the city was bombed a few times, and I spent one day in Karachi moving between safe houses as rival gangs took to shooting each other in the streets.
My wife is half Indian - we had to hide her identity when she visited (we went with "Persian").
The country was one of amazing contrasts. Kindness and terror, beauty (natural) and ugliness (man made).
I say "fortunate" because of the (a) new perspectives gained while being there; (b) having the pleasure of working with some of the brightest and hard-working people I have ever worked with; (c) being part of a project that has helped empower tens of millions of people.
The most beautiful place I ever went in over 40 countries I have visited was the foothills of K2 mountains, and watching a Polo match at the birth place of Polo in Baltistan (despite my Indian wife and I being surrounded by 15000 men chanting "Death to India" while war raged on in the SWAT valley a few hundred km's away).
A last footnote. Pakistan has been in the middle of so many proxy wars and have such a crazy history that most people I met have woven together the fabric of truth and fantasy to create some of the most amazing conspiracy theories you could ever imagine.
There are two sides to every story - we didn't adjust well to being bossed around. But at the end of the day, once they decided to get us out, they played to screw us over entirely. All I expected was to be treated fairly - how naive. For example, their lawyers pounced on me as I was leaving my moms funeral (still in the church grounds) - knowing that this was where I was. Eventually I just wanted out - I took a ridiculous offer of just getting my initial investment back because I was disgusted at them and wanted to move on. Next time I would dig in more!
Edit: ONce I left it took a while to get over, but my life has been amazing since then, so all good!
Firstly - go straight to see a lawyer. Do not consider anything else before you have done this. Play hard, don't blink!
Secondly. If things don't go your way, play the long game and take your time. Make sure that they know that this will not be resolved quickly, and that having this hanging over them will frustrate their attempts to raise capital.
Behind the scenes this is what I think is going on:
1) The CTO is more experienced, and thinks he is entitled to more than you as a result (you seem to agree that you are relatively inexperienced). He cares little about loyalty and honour as he was not there to see you slogging it out in the early days.
2) What you have set up must be worthwhile and be starting to get valuable, otherwise you would not have attracted a "good" CTO.
3) My thoughts are this is part of the play to attract equity:
- They probably don't want to dilute too much, so would love to grab your shares back before the deal so that they can neaten things out for the new investor
- They probably want the new deal to include shares for the CTO. He is probably niggling for this, and the CEO would prefer to take yours than dilute his.
- They want to put forward a team that has the most value for fund raising. They want solid credentials, and probably feel that yours don't fit the bill.
Good luck hey!
I agree that the government is incompetent, partly because of cronyism and largely because of terribly applied affirmative action.
However, I did think that the enormous international support combined with international pressure would have helped mitigate this. They seem to respond well to international pressure - I always believed that most of their best achievements (of which there are a few) have come as a result of the perpetual pissing contest with neighbouring Singapore (not that I am sure Singapore even cares!).
Examples of this are the delay between the two comms engines being switched off; the Rolls Royce engine data; and their military satellites.
All of this information was gleaned from reliable sources [their own military, the engine manufacturer, the normal ATC systems], and you are 100% correct in that it should have been verified before being released. But, my point is that the delay between the time the information first came to light [even through leaks] in release was just too excruciating long to comprehend. In the interim flatly they denied that the information even existed. I can only assume that some of the leaks from "official sources" were in part because they knew that materially[1] important reliable information was being held back.
On another note - I do feel for the families. The mis-information, delays and incorrect denials are only adding to the speculation. There must be a better way to report information.
[1]= Materially important to quelling speculation. Material to re-directing the futile searches in the wrong places.
The plane was hijacked and there has been contact with Malaysia/China/USA. One of the conditions for hostages to be held safely is that the Authorities do not make this public.
This would explain:
- the otherwise unbelievable delays and pure misinformation by the Malaysian government. Stalling for time.
- the fact that they did not publicly do background checks on all passengers until recently. They already know who the hijacker is. Now that there is pressure because of elapsed time and that people are seeing holes in the story, they need to be seen to be doing something.
What makes this implausible:
- it still does not explain where the plane landed and has been hidden without trace in the interim (perhaps they know - NW Pakistan, NE Afghanistan maybe, and just can't get to it without harming the hostages)
- it would be a diplomatic nightmare to have countries using their assets in a futile search when Malaysia already knows what has happened. (On the other hand, if they took 20 countries into their confidence then they would definitely have had a leak by now.)
- talking of leaks - I am sure even if it was a tightly held secret that they were in hostage negotiations, someone would have made it public by now. That's just the way things are these days.
EDIT: Formatting