|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| OKOK, another hate post...
excuse #1: I am still struggling with my research writing, so I need the constant distraction from realizing how completely talentless I actually am
excuse #2: This really IS a shitty thing.
So hate post excused:
What's up with those people who tell you something, or say something, or ask questions, in manner that are logically, practically, realistically, and utterly impossible to understand or answer? What has happened to their brain?
example 1:
(cell phone conversation)
friend: "hey, I am at an intersection near Berkeley now, and I am lost. I saw a gas station after I got off the freeway. Do I turn left or right now?"
(my thinking) do you expect me to have a damn clue about your location with such a description?
me: "uh, mmm, o.k., which exit did you take? did you head east or west after the exit?"
friend (soon to be not friend!): "hello? do I know this area? the exit says Berkeley on it!"
me: "uh, o...k...., did you head east or west at the exit?"
friend: "LEFT. what east / west. I turned LEFT!"
(me thinking) fucking idiot. let's try to figure out if it were your left or my left, or that grandma passing by the drug store's left or right. can you be even more self-centered than this?!
comment: this dumbo doesn't give a shit about how his question or comment cannot be logically understood by any sane person. and when asked to clarify, get mad at your "useless" response. and my god, after this "incident," i actually started to notice a lot of people talking this way... "I am on Crenshaw, do I turn left or right on Pacific Coast Highway?" FUCKER! at least tell me which way YOU are heading on Crenshaw! ARGH!!!!
example 2:
coworker: (face to face conversation) "oh it's real simple. you just need to go to that conference room, use the workstation there to print out the big poster. call me if you have any question."
me (walking down to the conference room, locate the workstation, and realized it's password protected, and I was not given access. *strike one* after asking random stranger to log-in for me, realize the workstation is littered with tons of randomly named files that all look like the poster to be printed, with slight differences. *strike two* OK, i'd better call...)
me: "hey, which file do I plot?"
coworker: "the one that has the latest update. I am in a meeting, can't talk. bye" (hang up)
me (looking at the files. random file names. not like it's file1, file2, file3, or some sort of logical names that might suggest different versions. the file names were literally "tttttttt, "xxxxx," "abcabc"..... I did NOT edit the file. which one has the latest update??!! *strike three* now i am pissed)
me (texting): hey, I can't tell which one is the latest file. and you didn't name them in any logical way. can you tell me which file is it?
(waiting)
(waiting...)
(waiting.....)
FINALLY! reply! "did you check the modification time on the files?! just the latest one!"
me (ok, now i am even MORE pissed. print the file that has the latest modification timestamp. 20 min later, a huge poster printed on enough paper to kill 500 trees is ready. take it back to the office)
coworker (after her meeting): "hey! that wasn't the latest file! I changed the color of all the icons!"
me: AARGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Conclusion:
These are two REAL examples I had the misfortune to actually experience. One of the dumbo was also a PhD student, too. (and did graduate and found a teaching job at an OK university) Now, given their otherwise respectable achievement in life, I can't outright conclude a deficiency in basic intelligence to explain such an ourageous behaivor. So there are only a few alternative explanations left, ranking from the least upsetting to the most upsetting:
1.) they were too busy, or too nervous to reflect on the quality of their comments/instructions/questions.
(me) OK, that is somewhat understandable. But still. You give instruction, or ask question, to get a particular result. If your instruction or question is so poorly conceived that no good result can ever come of it, then it's YOUR fault that nothing comes of it. You can be as busy as you are, or as nervous as you are, but fuck it, your behavior is not helping, and you are giving me heat for your own lack of ability to communicate.
2.) They have inferior ability to communicate.
(me) OK, fine. people have their strengths and weaknesses. I can take that. But if your inability to communicate is sooooooooooooooooo gigantic and you haven't realized it to have done something about it at this stage of your life, it's entirely YOUR fault. So don't give me shit.
3.) They are complete egocentric people who think their intentions are the center of the whole fucking universe, and others people just need to find ways to understand what they say.
(me) fuck you. nuff' said.
People communicate for a reason. People communicate to get an idea across, to exchange ideas, to convey a message. If one communicates in a manner that no idea can ever gotten across, then what is the fucking point of making the effort to communicate? You might as well just not communicate at all, but still hope for something to happen as you wish. That's equally unrealistic. So for those who insist on being such a moron in communication, this is my advice, in a very clear manner:
1.) make sure everything you say to me is at least logically *possible* to be understood. I don't even ask for clarity. Just at least logically possible.
or,
2.) leave me alone. I am not here to waste my attention or brain cell just to deal with someone who has no serious intention to communicate with me. You want direction? fine, get a GPS. You want the poster printed to your expectation? fine, PRINT IT YOURSELF.
I do not accept any other alternative.
| | |
| I am a doctoral student in strategic management, which is under business administration, and which means I will be, if I successfully graduate and find a job, a professor in business school, teaching, well, "strategy."
What do people think of when they think about MBA, "business strategy?" In all likelihood, the sort of hand-waving, empty discussions of "competitive advantage" or "industry positioning" will come to mind. As someone who did computer science and economics in undergrad, these are phrases I used to associate with, pardon my language, BULL SHITS. Utter bull shit. And I stand by that sentiment today.
Business or management research, at least in the serious academic world, is highly rigorous. (unless you are a mainstream economist, in which case, we are all bull shits, and please quietly walk away from my post, and cleanse it from your brain by doing optimization equations with 1 million variables and prove a solution exists. Yes, I know you can. so stop bragging.) The method, or approach, to serious academic business research, is at the confluence of economics, sociology, psychology, and perhaps even political science. Any top ranked academic journals can serve as concrete evidence for that.
So why do people have such an impression? The reason is complex. A lot of it have to do with the undue prestige our society associates with MBA education, as if MBAs are super smart people who just choose NOT to do rocket science. (The reality is far more complex than that. MBA programs vary a whole lot by content. Sloan MBA at MIT probably is as hard science as rocket science.)
But let's set aside all the real-world complexity and attribute the blame to a single source (coz I feel like it, I need to blame, and I feel the hate, coz I feel my future career will fall victim of such tarnished impression), that source would be none other than HARVARD. Harvard MBA is of a special breed. They talk differently, walk differently, as if they are above ALL people. They behave like they know the solutions to all things business (and in the case of one of their famous alum, Geroge W. Bush, Harvard MBA behaves like they know the solutions to ALL things, period.)
And what gives them such right? First of all, they paid the big bucks to earn the degree. So they must be entitled to it. Secondly, they have the unparalleled talent to master a particular language that is seemingly unhuman: BULL SHIT. They speak BULL SHIT so much, that they think BULL SHIT. Ever success, every cent of profitability to the Harvard type, can be reduced to a few simple concepts. And they are NEVER wrong. Just like fortune tellers manage to be never wrong by being completely fuzzy in their prediction, Harvard MBA do the same thing.
Why single out Harvard, you may ask. Well, I did not make that choice. Harvard did. Among all the major business schools, Harvard is the only one that has a long tradition of hiring almost ONLY Harvard business PhDs. Harvard Business School (HBS) professors publish disproportionately at Harvard Business Review, which is a journal highly regarded (beats me as of why) but undoubtedly fall under the category of "practitioner journal," not "academic journal." HBS's hiring and promition practice, is what other schools would consider IN-BREEDING and actually have rigid rules against. I am at UIUC, so I can bet no matter how well I do, UIUC will never hire me when I graduate. But if I am a HBS doc student, well, I have the highest chance of getting hired at Harvard. So it no longer would seem strange, that it is hard to see HBS professors publish at the top academic journals in business management. The business/management research community, is divided up in a silly "all the rest of the unworthy schools" vs. Harvard as a result. For apparently no good reason other than "because Harvard CAN DO WHATEVER."
Well, why the hate, you may ask? Especially from someone who is supposed to be extremely busy with doctoral work, all this blogging seems rather unproductive use of my time. Well, I am doing this for theraputic reasons. With the overloaded schedule, and all other shits in my life I need to tend to, I spent the entire afternoon today reading the famous Michael Porter articles. For those outside of business, Porter is like THE strategy scholar in the world. He probably thinks of himself as the founding father of the strategy field. (Take that, Dan Schendel, you might have founded the top strategy journal, but who told you to get a job at lowly Purdue? You can't be the founding father from that middle of nowhere West Lafayette, Indiana) Now to be fair, and give credit where it is due, Porter is the one who brought IO ecoomics into strategy. OK, good. It's like I am the one who bring computer into my family (I really was! I was the first one using it). I did not INVENT it, nor did I contribute to its impact on civilation. But Porter brought IO Econ to strategy, and he is the founding father of strategy, as far as he is concerned. OKOK, I lie, as far as a lot of people are concerned.
All these Porter articles are, with some exception (the SMJ 1991 article was actually well written, but then his conclusion quickly went back to the typical Harvard hogwash), nothing more than the display of his mastery of that special language called BULL SHIT. Reasonably intelligent people (of whom I cound myself as one) are expected to think that business strategy is all about silly diagram of 5 forces, or its updated version of "the diamond" diagram, which is nothing but the 5 forces minus one force and the rest of the four slightly rephased. No support was offered. No evidence. No rationale. Why is it true? Well, "common sense" and "Porter said so."
The sad reality is that Porter's influence is probably one of the most prominant in MBA education. And MBA students are all llikely to think of Porter like physics students think of Albert Eienstien or CS students think of Alan Turing. And one day, I will have to be the one TEACHING that shit. I actually think twice before I blog all this, coz it is not something a future business professor might want to be associated with. The kind of contempt, and scathing criticism of one of the most celebrated strategy "scholar." But I have a strong, EXPLODING urge to state the following:
1.) Michael Porter, and the associated Harvard style business education, reminds me of why as CS and Econ udnergraduate student, I used to think of business major as people who are lazy, bull shit speaking, and arrogant SOBs who think their minimal efforts (as compared to CS major, FAR BELOW minimal) entitle them leadership position in our capitalistic society.
2.) Admist the current economic disaster, I can't help but think how much does the Harvard mentality contribute to the meltdown. (well, perhaps one can also blame the Chicago school on account of its market suprimacy, but at least Chicago school economists did it in a rigorous academic manner.)
3.) I will be a business professor. And I will be the one "professing" to a bunch of managers wannabe, or already middle managers. Will I have the balls I have now to blast Porter in my classroom? Let's hope I will retain the academic integrity to do the same then.
This is another 5 hours I want back. Like those hours I spent being forced to watch that crappy ass movie Titanic with ex-girlfriend who really shouldn't have been even a friend. And yes, I am stressed and angry and I am taking it out on Harvard! (As Berkeley grad, I used to do this to Stanford, or private, rich-ass schools in general. But in this matter, Stanford business school is actually very rigorous in its research, with unusually strong tie to its strong engineering school. So Stanford escape the blast for today :)
| | |
| OK, 不要罵我
我是真的忍不住才要說的
前一陣子新聞吵的那麼大
連國慶日都上了國家慶典
連大陸來的陳雲林都要湊熱鬧看的
什麼國片之光
什麼導演不放棄堅持目標的大製作
好 我好好的研究不做
分心了 花了一晚上看了這個傳說中的影片
我只有一個字: 幹！
這樣也可以炒？
這種沒水準的商業片也可以講成什麼感人的什麼故事
頭不接尾
擺明了就是歌星打歌 東拼西湊
一點故事層次都沒有
製作過程一點都不細膩
豎著看橫著看一點都沒有藝術成份
跟電視上一堆沒營養的偶像劇根本沒兩樣的大爛片
這樣也可以炒成新聞？ 搞成什麼風潮？
這是國片之光？ 那推手,喜宴,悲情城市這些真的有水準的電影不就都去死算了？！
這倒好 學到好萊塢商業片的精髓了
反正噁心八拉 沒營養的劇情
只要搞得成流行
就像鐵達尼號這種世紀大爛片也可以搞成萬人空巷
那好 我們的國片倒真的是“長大“啦
這輩子浪費的最沒有意義的兩個小時！
| | |
| 手把青秧插福田，低頭便見水中天，心地清靜方為道，退步原來是向前。 | | |
| I haven't been driving much lately, and was shocked and P.O. to see $4.07 per gallon at the nearby gas station. So I started to think about gas efficiency alternatives (again). Obviously hybrid is way too expensive for a poor doc student, a sub-compact car would be a compromise with around 30 MPG, which just seems like a huge investment for very little saving in gas money, so motorcycle becomes the next best thing.
I started out looking at the current offerings from my old buddy Honda. Nighthawk 250 (the only nighthawk still in production) would get you up to around 70 MPG for about $3700. Nice choice, but for those into motorcycling, a 250 cc is like a girly toy, so mm, what about the manly beefy machine like 919 / Hornet? It asks for around 8500 bucks, but it burns more gas at around 45 MPG.... OK, that defeats the point.
Pretty soon, I found myself just going through all the bikes out there, and gas efficiency is no longer an issue... I guess I am itching for bikes.....
| | |
|
