2,398 karma · joined March 5, 2017
Backend systems, architecture, tooling.
Photography. Singer-songwriter. West Coast Swing.
Nearly all my photographs from such events use some kind of intentional camera movement together with a delayed or early flash sync. Slow sync flash is a delightful technique that you can be really, really creative with. Try it with double exposures, for instance, or with weirdly synced monoblocs.
I've seen great photos taken of dancers and animals in movement done that way. Moreover, this technique (if you've got it buried in your camera settings somewhere), sets you free to really disregard some of the holy tenets of photography, which is to never, ever move the camera, ever. Nay, in fact it prompts you to be dynamic and jittery, to lounge forward into the music, and let the final image really SHOW how great that moment really was.
A prequel would be the life and times of her now dead guests.
Don't get me wrong, a sequel would be cool too! Perhaps we could get a glimpse into Miss Sophie's legacy after she passes away, and how her butler needs to contend with her snarky relatives who wants to get rid of that infernal tiger on the floor, only to replace it with an even larger bear pelt.
People love to hear success stories, and in turn they might spend money on hearing those stories in order to learn the secrets of the survivor as it were. This is why there are so many such stories, yet one may wonder how many simply live off selling stories like that, instead of actually reaping the rewards of their purported success...
IMHO if a guy can give out good advice for free, because he's already making enough on his success, then it's more authentic than a guy who sells his success stories. OTOH I get that successful people might be pressed for time, and that time taken away to tell the story might get in the way of following up on his actual success. In this way I guess success breeds success. And that's why you see a lot of people pushing their success stories due to survivor bias.
We're actually talking pedagogy here. The perspective of a survivor is quite different than a guy still struggling. So the question really being asked is, how can the survivor better explain to the struggler how to succeed? It's difficult to answer, and it may entail such things as silent knowledge, or details that are hard to convey. The path to success is different for people, and some do indeed have it far easier than others.
So how do you learn from that? Is the lessons from one-who-had-it-easy valuable? Well, sure, if those lessons lead to finding an easier route. But it could equally be a dead end. There is little to learn from one who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, for instance, if your own spoon is made of lead.
On the flipside, there might not be as much to learn from someone who struggled a lot, because what if that person simply made a lot of mistakes? Perhaps he is cognizant of those mistakes; well, then you may learn from them. But if not, then perhaps it isn't as valuable. Though in general, when you reflect over mistakes—your own, or others—there is perhaps a lot to learn from that, as you'll at least learn what to avoid.
* Frantic Googling *
Oohhhh! So that's what it is! How useful!
The work is simply the contractual agreement between you and your employer. He or it has a notion about how long it's supposed to take, and you do too. And so on your end, you have to be willing to give up a certain amount of freedom in order to stay productive enough for the workplace to want to award you for the time spent in their service, whether that time is productive or not.
On their end, they of course want you to be as productive as possible, but they also know that it's not possible 100% of the time. And so that is the basis for the contract.
Then there are ways around it. Say you can make a hack that'll make you able to complete the job in half that time, or less. Lots of people get paid obscene amounts of money for very little "work" but the value of that work is simply that high, and so that's what they're paid for it.
So instead in thinking in terms of hours or work, I tend to want to think in terms of how much time I need to provide value. And the less time that is, the better - for both parties. They get better value for money, and I get more time to dream up better ways of creating value.