Splitting Chains
"Splitting Hairs" means to become hyper-focused on small differences that might not be very important in the grand scheme of things. I believe that since we have the ability to find information on anything at our fingertips, we have become even more decisive based on these small differences, worrying more about being right on the minutiae, than being right with the overall outcomes. Yes, the devil is in the details, but perhaps these days that means that we spend all our time in discussing detail, very little time doing something productive.
I think that it is an optimization problem, where in order to optimize, people spend an inordinate amount of time optimizing some aspects of the process, whilst others become bottlenecks. I think that when it comes to personal approach, a line of best fit where heuristics are used is probably the better way, As whilst each aspect might not be as effective as it could be, together they benefit from compounding and flow effects, so the overall output is higher.
Don't skip leg day
Details are important to get right, but they aren't always the best way to get started. It is good to do the research, but finding an "okay" approach and giving it a go is a great teacher and then, refinement can happen. This is what I have recommended to good effect in skill development, and I think it is pretty much the same with everything. The people who get too stuck on the details rarely end up ever getting past the details, because there is always a higher resolution, more accuracy possible.
At some point, one has to pull the trigger and put what is learned into practice, but when there has been so much effort in the details, it can be hard, because the cost of failure goes up. Rather than failing fast, reviewing and reiterating, it is a drawn out process that puts more and more pressure on the release. For example, one of my colleagues was working on a project whilst at Nokia for two years and the release date kept getting pushed back further and further, as tiny adjustments kept being made and the project manager was not ready to release until perfect. A competitor released the feature and even though they then released the following day, it was too late, all that work by hundreds of people was wasted, as it made little market impact, the first mover took the lion's share.
I am more of a "learn as I go" kind of person, which results in a lot of fail fast activity, but activity nonetheless. I was talking to a Sales Leader today about some of our internal processes I am looing to define and improve upon and they mentioned how one of the problems is, that there has to be activity. No matter how good the process is, if it isn't put into practice, it is useless - and I completely agree. As an enablement manager, not only is the target audience always in my mind when I create anything, so to is how I am going to engage that audience and get them moving. Too many businesses I have dealt with forget that no matter the usecase, tools are only useful when used.
And sometimes, this is a bit of a problem within organizations, especially when developing a new process that requires different activities, because people want "proof" that it works, before it has been implemented and trialed. So, what many do is take the comfortable route where they don't have to change what they are currently doing, even if what they are doing isn't working well.
Over the years, I have seen a lot of this attitude in crypto, where the people who do not understand the technology, economics or proposition, look into the details and compare it to what they know. It is too slow, it is too complicated, it isn't physical, it is unsafe, it is used by criminals..... Yet, they haven't actually investigated how what they know stacks up to the points. For instance, to transfer money to Australia through banks takes several business days and a 12% "handling" fee, despite it being a digital transaction that has zero human interaction. Or ask the question what gives fiat value and watch the blank stares.
Rather than actually investigating, they look at the details they think they know and dismiss, so that they needn't be the ones to change. How many times I have heard the argument that "crypto can't be used anywhere" and then watched them get surprised that there have been cards that carry crypto and can be used anywhere, even with proximity pay. The "details" they carry are no longer relevant, yet, they are still making an opinion based upon what they know.
If however they just gave it a go and started to get involved, trying various things, they would very quickly learn how it works and, how the economy that they thought they knew, really works too. It is interesting how many people will talk about how the economics of crypto can't work, but don't actually now the basics of economics. Earning and spending doesn't make an economist.
And then, the thing that I find really interesting in the comparison is that they continually compare current state of the decentralized technology to the current state of the centralized processes, without considering what could be. Everything has advanced and it really wasn't that long ago when people believed that electric cars could never be viable, because they can't compete against combustion. Yet, they also don't recognize that at some point, the combustion engine couldn't compete against a horse and cart.
For better or worse, technology progresses and will always go through cycles of development that kill off some parts, so that others can grow. While there are rules of economics in nature, the financial economy is a technology and as such, it is going to evolve and advance, driven by our own behaviors. Assuming that because the current economic conditions of the traditional economy is all we know and therefore all we can know, is nonsensical and I suspect going to be very costly.
Whilst it might not be for everyone to ape into crypto as an early adopter or innovator, dipping a toe and staying abreast of the basics should be the least someone does. Because if the economy does start to shift into decentralized waters, being even slightly ahead of the curve would be highly valuable, because it isn't like a product like a car that gets bought as an end user, it is a process that gets used in everyday living. And understanding the benefits means being able to fill gaps on the product surface, either as developers or skilled support, as the technology emerges and improves.
In the grand scheme of the economy, do you think that the current conditions are the best they can be and will remain the same throughout your lifetime? If you believe that is the case, you best double-down and learn all the details you can about it and play the game well. If however you think that things could change, in which direction do you think it will move and how do you think you can take best advantage? What are the things you need to know, before you can act?
The risk isn't in the investment into a new technology, it is in the assumption that the old technology is good enough that it won't change.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha
My personal idea is that success in the economy is based on the linkage of several variables, namely: time, quantity, quality, security, reputation, and a very important one, personal knowledge. I am a sceptic that luck has anything to do with investments.
With a good database that is being updated every 10 minutes, in relation to our subject matter in which we specialise, say, for example, the behaviour of cryptocurrency; and with the interpretative knowledge of the information contained therein, we can be more assertive about the medium-term future.
In these times of globalisation, it is imperative to keep up to date with information, with world events. An oversight in any variable can lead to great losses.
Luck factors into all parts of it in my opinion. For instance, knowledge depends on learning processes, which are genetic and also developed or not in childhood. Intelligence plays a part in investing also, as does emotional strength. Some people are also more naturally inclined to be risk takers or conservative and the list goes on. While we can affect these things, most of it comes down to things we cannot choose directly, like where or to whom we are born, our genetic makeup, brain functions and access to support.
That said, we can affect our outcomes.
I am one of the people who think, Mr. Taraz, that the current times keep us distracted, especially when we assume in a personal capacity, projected in the risks, product of immediacy, We do not pay attention to what is a priority when segmenting or postponing things.
It's simple because we don't want to miss anything that happens in the world, knowing that knowing it, maybe, won't change anything in our life, because we can't buy time... which by the way is finite, as well as the energies. If you waste them on tasks that are not aligned with your plans, then you will have nothing to move forward...
I'm moving in the direction of what's important to me.
Learn learn learn
These kind of people thst you have mentioned should be called impatient people in cryptocurrency world. I wrote an article about them a few minutes ago. A lot of people fail to learn just the basics of cryptocurrency talk less of the whole thing but they keep coming out to say that cryptocurrency is complex or complicated whereas, they don't understand anything about it.
What they need to do is learn and these people feel like the could make billions of money overnight from cryptocurrency and it still does not work that way.
Everything is complex to a person unwilling to learn about it. Even the simplest parts of our life that we take for granted are incredibly complex, so we create basic rules to navigate our world. For instance, we can create a relatively healthy meal, without knowing much about how our body functions in detail.
We can count on change as it is constant a hell of a lot more than any investment. Yes things are always changing. I would make good money if I invested in the probability of change if it were a stock. But other crypto or financial investment would wane pale in comparison.
Who would take the bet of "it will stay the same" versus "it will change" :)
Whoever thinks so, they are wrong. The technology today might be enougg, but it will ceratinly will change according to the needs of tomorrow.
It has to change and it will change. The more it changes and improves, the more value and when there is value, people will invest more, changing it more.
For me, crypto and blockchain are disrupters on technology and finance levels. The decentralization are not the opportunity and challenge we have to work through in order for it to become ready for the early majority.
As far as getting things done, there is a benefit to having an eye for the detail up to a point. I find myself discovering that I have taken it to the point of majoring on the minors which is when I like to back it up a step and let it fly.
It wasn’t always this way with my competitive nature, laziness/efficiency penchant, and sales background. As a sales guy, I would hunt the woods for the elephants (big deals) which are fewer and further between than the rabbits which kept me fed during the hunt. Taking a poor or premature shot can scare the big game off and it doesn’t come back. So it is a balancing act.
I got over this by adopting the mantra from martial arts: you win or you learn. So, there is no failure unless you refuse to learn and get better from the setbacks. Marketing has pushed that one step further because you don’t really know what is going to reach the market. You have to try, see, measure, adjust, try again and repeat til you have the right answer. So, I have come to advise clients that we will try to hit a homer on the first try but can learn as much from a single or even good at bat.
I also know that culture eats process alive so it is the culture in business and blockchain we should set before expecting big results.
And I think this causes some of the problems for many, as the tech people don't usually get the finance side and the finance don't get the tech, so they look at it from their perspective, without combining the two.
This is something I am struggling with for a few people now. They obviously want the big deals, but they are shooting randomly into the forest, rather than targeting their message.
This is vital and one of the reasons I believe that Hive needs to be clear on the scam, spam and plagiarism etc. It sets a cultural expectation and if the best among us aren't setting an example, the worst are going to get even worse.
This post has been manually curated by @steemflow from Indiaunited community. Join us on our Discord Server.
Do you know that you can earn a passive income by delegating to @indiaunited. We share more than 100 % of the curation rewards with the delegators in the form of IUC tokens. HP delegators and IUC token holders also get upto 20% additional vote weight.
Here are some handy links for delegations: 100HP, 250HP, 500HP, 1000HP.
100% of the rewards from this comment goes to the curator for their manual curation efforts. Please encourage the curator @steemflow by upvoting this comment and support the community by voting the posts made by @indiaunited.
oh man, that one hit uncomfortable close to home. 😹😬
I think… ☯️
As in, they’re fantastic in some regards for some people, and horrible for others in other circumstances. And in general, many of us here in these crypto worlds have foreseen the changes coming, educated & positioned ourselves accordingly to be on the ‘better’ side of it.
‘Remain the same?’ Overall, absolutely not. Haha!! However again, that it isn’t just a matter of “luck” to end up on the more benefic sides of change - and that for those who’ve really been smart and putting in the proper work in the right direction, it may likely get even better, while those who’ve slacked and overinvested in the old systems tanking like the titanic… well, you get the picture…
The better side and if in failure, at least we tried to do something, rather than maintain a status quo that we knew is going to fail most of us.
At some point, do they cut their losses and make the move in, or will they stubbornly hold their ground until they have nothing left to hold?
my bad on the super delayed response. wasn't entirely sure if that was a literal or rhetorical question at the end, haha.
i think both - like, some will, some won't. no way to generalize everybody in one shot.
also think it's highly likely that there is a middle ground too that's less dramatic than many predict - whether its some psyop that has people thinking everything is gonna collapse or some innate survival mechanism that expects the worse out of fear, there are alot of extremist "all or nothing" views on these matters - whereas it might actually be probable that things don't go as bad as some say/expect, and that many with traditional investments don't lose everything. even those invested in mutual funds and shit - enough of those funds are managed by people who are probably reallocating portions to emerging sector and hedging their bets, so while they likely won't do as well as those who invest directly in the cryptos and stuff that skyrockets, will have ended up with enough overall long-term stability to ride out the natural market storms. granted, there are so many different segments with different strategies and particularities, there's be some who are overleveraged in crap that's gotta die who go down cuz they wouldn't adapt, just as there'll be others who at least start making a few correct moves to balance things out, and probably a bit of everything in between... 🤷♂️☯️
I was just talking with my manager today about something I was trying to solve. I wanted to get it completed but it wasn’t very impactful on my overall work. We spent 5 minutes on it, couldn’t get it to work as expected and moved on. I think it’s important to be able to do that, figuring things out is great but at the same time nothing is going to really be worth spending 3-4 hours on if the end results are only 5% of the time spent on the issue. Some of my colleagues don’t seem to get that philosophy and work 12-14 hour days. No thanks! Lol.
I think one of the biggest challenges right now is that technology on the computer side is changing so rapidly that people can’t keep up. I don’t know if we can truly keep up but we are trying being in the realm we are in.
In the industrial revolution it took 100 years to make improvements that didn’t occur in thousands of years of human civilization. We are now doing it in 20, then 10. These are massive changes and quite scary if you think about it and what the possibilities are. Eventually people won’t be able to keep up and we will take several steps backward if we aren’t careful.
Back to the Splinterlands topic - I’ll check it out for the next release probably. I’m saving up my DEC to buy a bunch of packs, if that’s even worth it lol and will give it a go again. I will see how it all goes, I miss playing but I also really needed the mental time away from the game anyway lol
Just yesterday (or the day before), this came up for me too at work., where we were talking about features we maintain and build, but they don't actually add much value to the customer, even if nice to have. there is an 80/20 rule in it, where 20% of what we deliver generates 80% of the value. Get rid of half the 80% and we can still deliver 95% of the value with far more efficiency.
I haven't really wrapped my head around it yet, but what does quantum computing do to blockchain?
A long time ago I wrote a post about the speed of information transfer using the time to travel across east to west of the US as an example. It has gone from years, to months, to days, to hours and as far as information moves, seconds now. It is an incredible ramp.
It is good to get some space and thankfully, we have Hive to spend time on too :)
Sometimes we make a huge reaction on little happenings that are not much important. Its all a part of our life. We all have different sentiments and different views to observe all around.
Good content. 👌
There is a term coined by Freud called "narcissism of small differences" that describes this. The people who are the most similar, tend to focus on the differences to argue about.
It's weird but I agree that action is needed. Things are always changing with time and we have to adapt. If you get left behind, then you can't blame anyone by yourself. I find that I learn more by taking things into action because the experience teaches you a lot of things and it reminds me of an argument that I saw online about games. In the past, information about games was hard to find and most people tend to want to experience things in games themselves but now a lot of people just do whatever the meta is online. Would playing the game blind versus playing using a guide the best choice? I don't really know.
An interesting question!
If looking at it from a different angle, would investing into what everyone else is investing into yield the best ROI? I don't think so.
But in sports where specific skills are necessary, one has to be competent at all and very good at a few to make an impact.
Perhaps in gaming, it is more like sports, but being the outlier and delivering the unexpected to win, will slowly change the meta and then, one would have to change again. For instance in Splinterlands if two accounts line up an identical team, it is an automatic draw. When everyone is doing the same thing, there are no winners.
Will have to think more on this one :)
Yea. I think people have to change things up and it gets kind of old if everyone does the same things every single time.
I have noticed upto age of 35 you tend to meet a lot of such people who are in your way as an obstacle. And you feel desperate to bypass them and you pull your hairs. I had a lot of such frustration, and feel totally burn out due to such people and days in the past. Now slowly with age I feel I can easily ignore and skip as the things for which I was desperate are gone and I don't have something to do struggle and so nobody is in my way.
Have you noticed that on Hive, the people who are likely among the most successfully, tend to be a bit older? It is due to experience and like you said, the ability to skip the unnecessary arguments and skip to what has value. It is interesting.
It's the same deal with 3d (both modelling and animating), you generally start with blocking (get your basic shapes/base model/positioning and other big movements) and then add detail (features, key movements/gestures) and then keep adding more detail. If you get too carried away obsessively detailing this one bit it's kind of crippling when you realise that it's in the wrong spot as moving/adjusting can be harder than scrapping it and starting again XD
In the example of your colleague I guess they didn't quite have enough oblivious fantards to negate the first mover advantage XD I remember Android having swipe keyboards for ages and ages, and then Apple finally years later (I think it was actually literal years) did swipe keyboards as well and it was seen as this huge revolutionary innovative thing, but when it was pointed out that Android had been doing it for ages the usual pushback was lol who cares Apple did it better.
there's probably a number of other things as well but that was the first one to come to mind as when I ran back to Apple from Android that was the only thing I missed
Is it people that firmly believe that their results are "good" (regardless of what the actual results are or what other people think of them) that are the most resistant to change or is it a general across the board thing? As I always (probably incorrectly) thought that if someone could see that their processes were inefficient they'd be happy to try something that might be more efficient.
And now I'm wondering if there's any correlation between the people who think like that and the one who can't conceive of the possibility of ever using anything other than what the government etc decrees as "safe and effective".
Still a fan of the classics: BTC, ETH, BNB.
Got a few more long positions on smart contract coins: ADA, DOT, MATIC, SOL.
Got some actual long position in digital gold: PAXG - gold ounces held in PAXOS Trust.
Of course my biggest position is Splinterlands cards and tokens.