The Modern Manager Confronts Old Realities in an AI World
December 18, 2024
This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. No smart software was used.
Beleaguered
I read and got a kick out of “Parkinson’s Law: It’s Real, So Use It.” The subtitle: “Yes, Just Set That Deadline.” The main idea is that deadlines are necessary. Loosely translated to modern technology lingo: “Ship it. We will fix it with an update.”
The write up says:
Projects that don’t have deadlines imposed on them, even if they are self-imposed, will take a lot longer than they need to, and may suffer from feature creep and scope bloat. By setting challenging deadlines you will actually get better results.
Yesterday evening I received an email asking for some information related to a lecture we delivered earlier in the day. My first question was, “What’s the deadline?” No answer came back. I worked on a project earlier this year and deadlines were dots on a timeline. No dates, just blobs in months. We did a small project for an AI outfit. Nothing actually worked but I was asked, “How’s your part coming?” It wasn’t.
I concluded from these 2024 interactions that planning was not a finely tuned skill in four different, big time, high aspiration companies. Yet, here is a current article advocating for deadlines. I think the author has been caught in the same weird time talk my team and I have.
The author says:
Deadlines force a clear tempo and cadence and, fundamentally, they make things happen.
I agree. Deadlines make things happen. In my experience, that means, “Ship it. We will fix it with updates.” (Does that sound familiar?)
This essay makes clear to me that today’s crop of “managers” understand that some basics work really well. However, are today’s managers sufficiently informed to think through the time and resources required to deliver a high value, functional product or service. I would respectfully submit that there are some examples of today’s managers confusing marketing jabber and the need to make sales with getting work done so a product actually works. Consider these examples:
- Google’s announcements about quantum breakthroughs. Do they work? Sure, well, sort of.
- Microsoft’s broken image generation function in Copilot. Well, it worked and then it didn’t.
- Amazon’s quest to get Alexa to be more than a kitchen timer using other firms’ technology. Yeah, that is costing how much?
Knowing what to do — that is, setting a deadline— and creating something that really works — that is, an operating system which allows a user to send a facsimile or print a document — are interdependent capabilities. Managers who don’t know what is required cannot set a meaningful deadline. That’s what’s so darned interesting about Apple’s AI. Exactly when was that going to be available? Yeah. Soon, real soon. And that quantum computing stuff? Soon, real soon. And artificial general intelligence? It’s here now, pal.
Stephen E Arnold, December 18, 2024
Technology Managers: Do Not Ask for Whom the Bell Tolls
December 18, 2024
This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. No smart software was used.
I read the essay “The Slow Death of the Hands-On Engineering Manager.” On the surface, the essay provides some palliative comments about a programmer who is promoted to manager. On a deeper level, the message I carried from the write up was that smart software is going to change the programmer’s work. As smart software become more capable, the need to pay people to do certain work goes down. At some point, some “development” may skip the human completely.
Thanks OpenAI ChatGPT. Good enough.
Another facet of the article concerned a tip for keeping one’s self in the programming game. The example chosen was the use of OpenAI’s ChatGPT open source software to provide “answers” to developers. Thus instead of asking a person, a coder could just type into the prompt box. What could be better for an introvert who doesn’t want to interact with people or be a manager? The answer is, “Not too much.”
What the essay makes clear is that a good coder may get promoted to be a manager. This is a role which illustrates the Peter Principle. The 1969 book explains why incompetent people can get promoted. The idea is that if one is a good coder, that person will be a good manager. Yep, it is a principle still evident in many organizations. One of its side effects is a manager who knows he or she does not deserve the promotion and is absolutely no good at the new job.
The essay unintentionally makes clear that the Peter Principle is operating. The fix is to do useful things like eliminate the need to interact with colleagues when assistance is required.
John Donne in the 17th century wrote a poorly structured sonnet which asserted:
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
The cited essay provides a way to further that worker isolation.
With AI the top-of-mind thought for most bean counters, the final lines of the sonnet is on point:
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
My view is that “good enough” has replaced individual excellence in quite important jobs. Is this AI’s “good enough” principle?
Stephen E Arnold, December 17, 2024
We Need a Meeting about Meetings after I Get Back from a Meeting
December 10, 2024
This blog post flowed from the sluggish and infertile mind of a real live dinobaby. If there is art, smart software of some type was probably involved.
I heard that Mr. Jeff Bezos, the Big Daddy of online bookstores, likes chaotic and messy meetings. Socrates might not have been down with that approach.
As you know, Socrates was a teacher who ended up dead because he asked annoying questions. “Socratic thinking” helps people remain open to new ideas. Do new ideas emerge from business meetings? Most of those whom I know grumble, pointing out to me that meetings waste their time. Michael Poczwardowski challenges that assumption with Socratic thinking in the Perspectiveship post “Socratic Questioning – ‘Meetings are a waste of time’”.
Socratic-based discussions are led by someone who only asks questions. By asking only questions the discussion can then focus on challenging assumptions, critical thinking, and first principles-dividing problems into basic elements to broaden perspectives and understanding. Poczwardowski brings the idea that: “meetings are a waste of time” to the discussion forum.
Poczwardowski introduces readers to Socratic thinking with the steps of classification, challenge assumptions, look for data/evidence, change perspective, explore consequences and implications, and question the question. Here’s my summary done my a person with an advanced degree in information science. (I know I am not as smart as Google’s AI, but I do what I can with my limited resources, thank you.)
“The key is to remain open to possibilities and be ready to face our beliefs. Socratic questioning is a great way to work on improving our critical thinking.
When following Socratic questioning ask to:
• Clarify the idea: It helps us understand what we are talking about and to be on the same page
• Challenge assumptions: Ask them to list their assumptions.
• Look for evidence: Asking what kind of evidence they have can help them verify the sources of their beliefs
• Change perspectives: Look at the problem from others’ points of view.
• Explore consequences: Explore the possible outcomes and effects of actions to understand their impact”
Am I the only one who thinks this also sounds obvious? Ancient philosophers did inspire the modern approach to scientific thought. Galileo demonstrated that he would recant instead of going to prison or being killed. Perhaps I should convene a meeting to decide if the meeting is a waste of time. I will get back to you. I have a meeting coming up.
Whitney Grace, December 10, 2024
More Googley Human Resource Goodness
November 22, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
The New York Post reported that a Googler has departed. “Google News Executive Shailesh Prakash Resigns As Tensions with Publishers Mount: Report” states:
Shailesh Prakash had served as a vice president and general manager for Google News. A source confirmed that he is no longer with the company… The circumstances behind Prakash’s resignation were not immediately clear. Google declined to comment.
Google tapped a professional who allegedly rode in the Bezos bulldozer when the world’s second or third richest man in the world acquired the Washington Post. (How has that been going? Yeah.)
Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.
Google has been cheerfully indexing content and selling advertising for decades. After a number of years of talking and allegedly providing some support to outfits collecting, massaging, and making “real” news available, the Google is facing some headwinds.
The article reports:
The Big Tech giant rankled online publishers last May after it introduced a feature called “AI Overviews” – which places an auto-generated summary at the top of its search results while burying links to other sites. News Media Alliance, a nonprofit that represents more than 2,200 publishers, including The Post, said the feature would be “catastrophic to our traffic” and has called on the feds to intervene.
News flash from rural Kentucky: The good old days of newspaper publishing are unlikely to make a comeback. What’s the evidence for this statement? Video and outfits like Telegram and WhatsApp deliver content to cohorts who don’t think too much about a print anything.
The article pointed out:
Last month, The Post exclusively reported on emails that revealed how Google leveraged its access to the Office of the US Trade Representative as it sought to undermine overseas regulations — including Canada’s Online News Act, which required Google to pay for the right to display news content.
You can read that report “Google Emails with US Trade Reps Reveal Cozy Ties As Tech Giant Pushed to Hijack Policy” if you have time.
Let’s think about why a member of Google leadership like Shailesh Prakash would bail out. Among the options are:
- He wanted to spend more time with his family
- Another outfit wanted to hire him to manage something in the world of publishing
- He failed in making publishers happy.
The larger question is, “Why would Google think that one fellow could make a multi-decade problem go away?” The fact that I can ask this question reveals how Google’s consulting infused leaders think about an entire business sector. It also provides some insight into the confidence of a professional like Mr. Prakash.
What flees sinking ships? Certainly not the lawyers that Google will throw at this “problem.” Google has money and that may be enough to buy time and perhaps prevail. If there aren’t any publishers grousing, the problem gets resolved. Efficient.
Stephen E Arnold, November 22, 2024
Management Brilliance Microsoft Suggests to Customers, “You Did It!”
November 21, 2024
No smart software. Just a dumb dinobaby. Oh, the art? Yeah, MidJourney.
I read an amusing write up called “Microsoft Says Unexpected Windows Server 2025 Automatic Upgrades Were Due to Faulty Third-Party Tools.” I love a management action which points the fingers at “you” — Partners, customers, and anyone other than the raucous Redmond-ians.
Good enough, MidJourney. Good enough.
The write up says that Microsoft says:
“Some devices upgraded automatically to Windows Server 2025 (KB5044284). This was observed in environments that use third-party products to manage the update of clients and servers,” Microsoft explained. “Please verify whether third-party update software in your environment is configured not to deploy feature updates. This scenario has been mitigated.”
The article then provides a translation of Microsoftese:
In other words, it’s not Microsoft – it’s you. The company also added the update had the “DeploymentAction=OptionalInstallation” tag, which patch management tools should read as being an optional, rather than recommended update.
Several observations:
- Pointing fingers works in some circumstances. Kindergarten type interactions feature the tactic.
- The problems of updates seem to be standard operating procedure.
- Bad actors love these types of reports because anecdotes about glitches and flaws say, “Come on in, folks.”
Is this a management strategy or an indicator of other issues?
Stephen E Arnold, November 21, 2024
Management Brilliance or Perplexing Behavior
November 15, 2024
Sorry to disappoint you, but this blog post is written by a dumb humanoid. The art? We used MidJourney.
TechCrunch published “Perplexity CEO Offers AI Company’s Services to Replace Striking NYT Staff.” The New York Times Tech Guild went on strike. Aravind Srinivas, formerly at OpenAI and founder of Perplexity, made an interesting offer. According to the cited article, Mr. Srinivas allegedly said he would provide services to “mitigate the effect of a strike by New York Times tech workers.”
A young startup luminary reacts to a book about business etiquette. His view of what’s correct is different from what others have suggested might win friends and influence people. Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.
Two points: Crossing the picket lines seemed okay if the story is correct and assuming that Perplexity’s smart software would “mitigate the effect” of the strike.
According to the article, “many” people criticized Mr. Srinivas’ offer to help a dead tree with some digital ornaments in a time of turmoil. What the former OpenAI wizard suggested he wanted to do was:
to provide technical infra support on a high traffic day.
Infra, I assume, is infrastructure. And a high-traffic day at a dead tree business is? I just don’t know. The Gray Lady has an online service and it bought an eGame which lacks the bells and whistles of Hamster Kombat. I think that Hamster Kombat has a couple of hundred million users and a revenue stream from assorted addictive elements jazzed with tokens. Could Perplexity help out Telegram if its distributed network ran into more headwinds that the detainment of its founder in France?
Furthermore, the article reminded me that the Top Dog of the dead tree outfit “sent Perplexity a cease and desist letter in October [2024] over the startup’s scraping of articles for use by its AI models.”
What interests me, however, is the outstanding public relations skills that Mr. Srinivas demonstrated. He has captured headlines with his “infra” offer. He is getting traction on Twitter, now the delightfully named X.com. He is teaching old-school executives like Tim Apple how to deal with companies struggling to adapt to the AI, go fast approach to business.
Perplexity’s offer illustrates a conceptual divide between old school publishing, labor unions, and AI companies. Silicon Valley outfits have a deft touch. (I almost typed “tone deaf”. Yikes.)
Stephen E Arnold, November 15, 2024
Meta and China: Yeah, Unauthorized Use of Llama. Meh
November 8, 2024
This post is the work of a dinobaby. If there is art, accept the reality of our using smart art generators. We view it as a form of amusement.
That open source smart software, you remember, makes everything computer- and information-centric so much better. One open source champion laboring as a marketer told me, “Open source means no more contractual handcuffs, the ability to make changes without a hassle, and evidence of the community.
An AI-powered robot enters a meeting. One savvy executive asks in Chinese, “How are you? Are you here to kill the enemy?” Another executive, seated closer to the gas emitted from a cannister marked with hazardous materials warnings gasps, “I can’t breathe!” Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.
How did those assertions work for China? If I can believe the “trusted” outputs of the “real” news outfit Reuters, just super cool. “Exclusive: Chinese Researchers Develop AI Model for Military Use on Back of Meta’s Llama”, those engaging folk of the Middle Kingdom:
… have used Meta’s publicly available Llama model to develop an AI tool for potential military applications, according to three academic papers and analysts.
Now that’s community!
The write up wobbles through some words about the alleged Chinese efforts and adds:
Meta has embraced the open release of many of its AI models, including Llama. It imposes restrictions on their use, including a requirement that services with more than 700 million users seek a license from the company. Its terms also prohibit use of the models for “military, warfare, nuclear industries or applications, espionage” and other activities subject to U.S. defense export controls, as well as for the development of weapons and content intended to “incite and promote violence”. However, because Meta’s models are public, the company has limited ways of enforcing those provisions.
In the spirit of such comments as “Senator, thank you for that question,” a Meta (aka Facebook), wizard allegedly said:
“That’s a drop in the ocean compared to most of these models (that) are trained with trillions of tokens so … it really makes me question what do they actually achieve here in terms of different capabilities,” said Joelle Pineau, a vice president of AI Research at Meta and a professor of computer science at McGill University in Canada.
My interpretation of the insight? Hey, that’s okay.
As readers of this blog know, I am not too keen on making certain information public. Unlike some outfits’ essays, Beyond Search tries to address topics without providing information of a sensitive nature. For example, search and retrieval is a hard problem. Big whoop.
But posting what I would term sensitive information as usable software for anyone to download and use strikes me as something which must be considered in a larger context; for example, a bad actor downloading an allegedly harmless penetration testing utility of the Metasploit-ilk. Could a bad actor use these types of software to compromise a commercial or government system? The answer is, “Duh, absolutely.”
Meta’s founder of the super helpful Facebook wants to bring people together. Community. Kumbaya. Sharing.
That has been the lubricant for amassing power, fame, and money… Oh, also a big gold necklace similar to the one’s I saw labeled “Pharaoh jewelry.”
Observations:
- Meta (Facebook) does open source for one reason: To blunt initiatives from its perceived competitors and to position itself to make money.
- Users of Meta’s properties are only data inputters and action points; that is, they are instrumentals.
- Bad actors love that open source software. They download it. They study it. They repurpose it to help the bad actors achieve their goals.
Did Meta include a kill switch in its open source software? Oh, sure. Meta is far-sighted, concerned with misuse of its innovations, and super duper worried about what an adversary of the US might do with that technology. On the bright side, if negotiations are required, the head of Meta (Facebook) allegedly speaks Chinese. Is that a benefit? He could talk with the weaponized robot dispensing biological warfare agents.
Stephen E Arnold, November 8, 2024
Microsoft 24H2: The Reality Versus Self Awareness
November 4, 2024
Sorry. Written by a dumb humanoid. Art? It is AI, folks. Eighty year old dinobabies cannot draw very well in my experience.
I spotted a short item titled “Microsoft Halts Windows 11 24H2 Update for Many PCs Due to Compatibility Issues.” Today is October 29, 2024. By the time you read this item, you may have a Windows equipped computer humming along on the charmingly named 11 24H2 update. That’s the one with Recall.
Microsoft does not see itself as slightly bedraggled. Those with failed updates do. Thanks, ChatGPT, good enough, but at least you work. MSFT Copilot has been down for six days with a glitch.
Now if you work at the Redmond facility where Google paranoia reigns, you probably have Recall running on your computing device as well as Teams’ assorted surveillance features. That means that when you run a query for “updates”, you may see screens presenting an array of information about non functioning drivers, printer errors, visits to the wonderfully organized knowledge bases, and possibly images of email from colleagues wanting to take kinetic action about the interns, new hires, and ham fisted colleagues who rolled out an update which does not update.
According to the write up offers this helpful advice:
We advise users against manually forcing the update through the Windows 11 Installation Assistant or media creation tool, especially on the system configurations mentioned above. Instead, users should check for updates to the specific software or hardware drivers causing the holds and wait for the blocks to be lifted naturally.
Okay.
Let’s look at this from the point of view of bad actors. These folks know that the “new” Windows with its many nifty new features has some issues. When the Softies cannot get wallpaper to work, one knows that deeper, more subtle issues are not on the wizards’ radar.
Thus, the 24H2 update will be installed on bad actors’ test systems and subjected to tests only a fan of Metasploit and related tools can appreciate. My analogy is that these individuals, some of whom are backed by nation states, will give the update the equivalent of a digital colonoscopy. Sorry, Redmond, no anesthetic this go round.
Why?
Microsoft suggests that security is Job Number One. Obviously when fingerprint security functions don’t work and the Windows Hello fails, the bad actor knows that other issues exist. My goodness. Why doesn’t Microsoft just turn its PR and advertising firms lose on Telegram hacking groups and announce, “Take me. I am yours!”
Several observations:
- The update is flawed
- Core functions do not work
- Partners, not Microsoft, are supposed to fix the broken slot machine of operating systems
- Microsoft is, once again, scrambling to do what it should have done correctly before releasing a deeply flawed bundle of software.
Net net: Blaming Google for European woes and pointing fingers at everything and everyone except itself, Microsoft is demonstrating that it cannot do a basic task correctly. The only users who are happy are those legions of bad actors in the countries Microsoft accuses of making its life difficult. Sorry. Microsoft you did this, but you could blame Google, of course.
Stephen E Arnold, November 4, 2024
The Reason IT Work is Never Done: The New Sisyphus Task
November 1, 2024
Why are systems never completely fixed? There is always some modification that absolutely must be made. In a recent blog post, engagement firm Votito chalks it up to Tog’s Paradox (aka The Complexity Paradox). This rule states that when a product simplifies user tasks, users demand new features that perpetually increase the product’s complexity. Both minimalists and completionists are doomed to disappointment, it seems.
The post supplies three examples of Tog’s Paradox in action. Perhaps the most familiar to many is that of social media. We are reminded:
“Initially designed to provide simple ways to share photos or short messages, these platforms quickly expanded as users sought additional capabilities, such as live streaming, integrated shopping, or augmented reality filters. Each of these features added new layers of complexity to the app, requiring more sophisticated algorithms, larger databases, and increased development efforts. What began as a relatively straightforward tool for sharing personal content has transformed into a multi-faceted platform requiring constant updates to handle new features and growing user expectations.”
The post asserts software designers may as well resign themselves to never actually finishing anything. Every project should be seen as an ongoing process. The writer observes:
“Tog’s Paradox reveals why attempts to finalize design requirements are often doomed to fail. The moment a product begins to solve its users’ core problems efficiently, it sparks a natural progression of second-order effects. As users save time and effort, they inevitably find new, more complex tasks to address, leading to feature requests that expand the scope far beyond what was initially anticipated. This cycle shows that the product itself actively influences users’ expectations and demands, making it nearly impossible to fully define design requirements upfront. This evolving complexity highlights the futility of attempting to lock down requirements before the product is deployed.”
Maybe humanoid IT workers will become enshrined as new age Sisyphuses? Or maybe Sisyphi?
Cynthia Murrell, November 1, 2024
Apple: Challenges Little and Bigly
October 28, 2024
Another post from a dinobaby. No smart software required except for the illustration.
At lunch yesterday (October 23, 2024), one of the people in the group had a text message with a long string of data. That person wanted to move the data from the text message into an email. The idea was copy a bit of ascii, put it in an email, and email the data to his office email account. Simple? He fiddled but could not get the iPhone to do the job. He showed me the sequence and when he went through the highlighting, the curly arrow, and the tap to copy, he was following the procedure. When he switched to email and pressed the text was not available. A couple of people tried to make this sequence of tapping and long pressing work. Someone handed the phone to me. I fooled around with it, asked the person to restart the phone, and went through the process. It took two tries but I got the snip of ASCII to appear in the email message. Yep, that’s the Apple iPhone. Everyone loves the way it works, except when it does not. The frustration the iPhone owner demonstrated illustrates the “good enough” approach to many functions in Apple’s and other firms’ software.
Will the normal course of events swamp this big time executive? Thanks, You.com. You were not creative, but you were good enough.
Why mention this?
Apple is a curious company. The firm has been a darling of cored fans, investors, and the MBA crowd. I have noted two actions related to Apple which suggest that the company may have a sleek exterior but the interior is different. Let’s look at these two recent developments.
The first item concerns what appear to be untoward behavior by Apple and those really good folks at Goldman Sachs. The Apple credit card received a statement showing that $89 million was due. The issue appears to be fumbling the ball with customers. For a well managed company, how does this happen? My view is that getting cute was not appreciated by some government authorities. A tiny mistake? Yes. The fine is miniscule compared to the revenue represented by the outstanding enterprises paying the fine. With small fines, have the Apple and Goldman Sachs professionals learned a lesson. Yes, get out of the credit card game. Other than that, I surmise that neither of the companies will veer from their game plans.
The second item is, from my point of view, a bit more interesting than credit cuteness. Apple, if the news report in the Washington Times, is close to the truth, is getting very comfortable with China. The basic idea is that Apple wants to invest in China. Is China the best friend forever of the US? I thought some American outfits were somewhat cautious with regard to their support of that nation state. Well, that does not appear to apply to China.
With the weird software, the credit card judgment, and the China love fest, we have three examples of a company operating in what I would describe as a fog of pragmatism. The copy paste issue makes clear that simplicity and attention to a common task on a widely used device is not important. The message for the iPhone is, “Figure out our way. Don’t even think about a meaningful, user centric change. Just upgrade and get the vapor of smart software.”
The message from the credit card judgment is, “Hey, we will do what we want. If there is a problem, send us a bill. We will continue to do what we want.” That shows me that Apple buys into the behavior pattern which makes Silicon Valley behavior the gold standard in management excellence.
My interpretation of the China-Apple BFF activity is that the policy of the US government is of little interest. Apple, like other large technology outfits, is effectively operating as a nation state. The company will do what it wants and let lawyer and PR people make the activity palatable.
I find it amusing that Apple appears to be reducing orders for its next big iPhone release. The market may be reaching a saturation point or the economic conditions in certain markets make lower cost devices more appealing. My own view is that the AI vapor spewed by Apple and other US companies is dissipating. Another utility function which does not work in a reliable way may not be enough.
Why not make copy paste more usable or is that a challenge beneath your vast aspirations?
Stephen E Arnold, October 28, 2024
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
