#ossasepia | 2020-02-13

Hide Idle (>14 d.) Chans

← 2020-02-12 | 2020-02-14 → ↓

05:21	whaack	jfw: sorry to hear that, hope you get well soon.
05:23	whaack	jfw: I like the color choice for the slides, the black background fits the "Monster under Bitcoin Bed" title. The last slide made me reflect.
05:27	whaack	idk the context / title of your speech so i'm not sure if it's obvious but if your audience doesn't know that you are also promoting JWRD you may want to mention that you are going to talk about your company at the beginning. This may be just me but personally I tune out when I feel that a presenter has baited me with some interesting opening topic only to start selling their product a few slides in.
		~ 59 minutes ~
06:27	whaack	diana_coman: EOD Report: Good: It only took 2 seconds to get the AC fix in motion. Way to improve: I irrationally connect the work required for a task to how long it will take before that task is done. It may be a week before the AC technician comes in and cleans the filters or w/e but the time it took me to get that started was ~0. Going forward I'll try to actively work against this irrationality and see if there's more easy frui
06:27	whaack	t to pick. Bad: Low motivation during saltines work. WTI: Just muscle through it + By next Sunday create a list of options for next potential job / ways to get cash.
06:30	whaack	jfw: by "title of your speech" i meant how your presentation is displayed on any brochure/itinerary the meetup has. iirc there was a discussion about how the pdf that was shared earlier by dorion did not mention JWRD
		~ 48 minutes ~
07:18	dorion	whaack good point on the potential "bait and switch". on the one hand, he could probably mitigate in the introduction by explaining the outline upfront. e.g. "this is who I am and what I do. I'm going to start talking about some risks few people consider and finish in explaining the service we've developed to help clients mitigate for these risks."
07:20	dorion	on the other hand, if someone that didn't know about any of those risks gets their panties in a bunch that we tell them the solutions we're prepared to provide... perhaps that's a good indication they're not a good fit.
		~ 28 minutes ~
07:48	diana_coman	jfw, dorion as much as I like Taleb's books and writings in general, his message there is supporting what you say but not your main message so that first slide (after title one) is just not fitting at all.
07:51	diana_coman	also, I get that your slides follow the flow of what you are trying to say but understand that presentations are not exactly like articles in that the audience can't just go back and forth as they want/need so you need to do the crucial bit of that for them so they get most of it
07:52	diana_coman	one approach (linked to that reading of stuff 3 times to fully get it) is a. tell them what you'll say b. say it c. tell them what you said
07:54	diana_coman	the a. part can be in this case essentially a juicier bait to make them really pay attention (and tbh I think your quote from MP's http://trilema.com/a-conceit-or-the-importance-of-blogging ) is possibly better in the beginning - even more so if they do not know it/MP because it's new so it has some "interestingness" just in that
07:55	diana_coman	and circling back to it at the end is not a problem i.e. now after all this, you have also some idea as to why that is so, eh?
07:55	diana_coman	jfw, dorion also, please, do write your JWRD credentials on the title slide, why in the world don't you?
07:56	diana_coman	jfw, you are the cto there for all intents and purposes, own it already; dorion, you are the ceo there idem for all intents and purposes and what's the trouble with it?
07:58	diana_coman	jfw: hope you get better soon
07:59	diana_coman	jfw, dorion I hope you'll get to re-use (and refine, sure) those presentations some more at whatever events in there, esp seeing how in the end they took almost a full week to prepare, huh.
08:02	diana_coman	http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-02-13#1018321 - maybe simply write down/think of the actual task that you need to do as opposed to someone else; tbh you do phrase it rather weirdly in that it's never quite fully clear that you'll do ~0 re the AC as such - what you mean to do there is simply to get someone else to do the work, lolz.
08:02	ossabot	Logged on 2020-02-13 02:40:10 whaack: diana_coman: EOD Report: Good: It only took 2 seconds to get the AC fix in motion. Way to improve: I irrationally connect the work required for a task to how long it will take before that task is done. It may be a week before the AC technician comes in and cleans the filters or w/e but the time it took me to get that started was ~0. Going forward I'll try to actively work against this irrationality and see if there's
08:04	diana_coman	so your task there is "schedule AC apptm" or whatever, not "fix AC"; just use the words properly and help yourself already.
		~ 3 hours 50 minutes ~
11:54	jfw	diana_coman: thanks for the feedback, been working it in.
11:56	diana_coman	jfw: glad to hear it made it in time, what can I say.
11:58	jfw	Uploaded monsters-2.{pdf,odp}
12:00	jfw	re my main point, I see it as: there are dangers in what you don't know about your environment, but solutions exist
12:01	jfw	(and let us help you find them!)
12:01	jfw	Certainly I expect to reuse this or large parts of it.
12:03	diana_coman	jfw: yes, the main point is good as stated; the tricky part as usual is to find the best way to fully get it across esp to a ...innocent audience.
12:04	diana_coman	basically to make them properly afraid of their own ignorance (as it's healthy really) and then able to see how you can indeed help.
12:05	jfw	mhm
12:05	diana_coman	jfw: ah, re taleb my point was really about the slide with his pic + book, not necessarily to take out the whole point; the thing is, version 1 looked like you were advertising taleb's book tbh, lolz.
12:06	jfw	heh. I moved him a bit later, to make the point of "okay so there are risks but do they matter? hasn't happened to me"
12:07	diana_coman	jfw: re risks if you have at hand concrete examples work best, ofc.
12:07	*	diana_coman is still going through version 2
12:09	diana_coman	jfw: "We provide qualified individuals a relatively sane," - awww, do not say that
12:09	diana_coman	I know what you mean and why you say it and all that but your clients will hear only the "relatively" and tune out because wtf solution is that
12:10	jfw	hm, it's also one of the few points I didn't write on this pass.
12:11	diana_coman	jfw: what you provide is a working solution to exclude a LOT of the existing risks that are not in fact mandatory and otherwise to mitigate and keep under direct control those risks that still have to be taken.
12:12	jfw	so we do.
12:13	diana_coman	the HOW that solution works is through a tailored (by JWRD computing) computing environment that you can and will customise to meet clients' specific needs and for which you provide full support including but not even limited to in-depth training etc
12:13	diana_coman	literally, you are there to help them not be the turkey, what
12:15	diana_coman	why are you selling yourself so short there with that slide 14, ouf.
12:16	diana_coman	look at it, you focus on founded in 2016 and then began publishing in late 2019 without telling people what really matters...
12:17	jfw	mmf, I see.
12:17	diana_coman	jfw: it's not the founding that matters, nor the beginning of publishing; what matters is: been working since 2016 to develop, revise, review, tune and apply the working solution!
12:17	diana_coman	ie you already have years of practical experience that you are packaging in your offer there!
12:18	diana_coman	they are not buying just a course made like all the rest out of reading "the literature" and 10 slides, ffs
12:19	diana_coman	and re 2019, the point there is that now that you have a fully working solution that has been already deployed (because you did, that's your pilot set!), you also have gained access to and support from the WoT that matters
12:20	diana_coman	and that is important to your audience because a. they are at that specific event precisely on the "oh, not public" - so hit them with the fact that you 2 are the direct link to an even more selective "not public" in that way, ok?
12:21	diana_coman	and b. through that link you can gain for them too more support /different opportunities when/if needed, that's the point.
12:22	diana_coman	jfw: does the above make full sense to you?
12:22	diana_coman	and for that matter to dorion when he wakes up I guess.
12:22	jfw	diana_coman: the key reframing I'm seeing is putting it from the standpoint of what matters to them.
12:22	diana_coman	jfw, dorion you'll have to tell me one day just why couldn't you come with those slides yesterday at 7pm UTC for instance but anyways.
12:23	diana_coman	jfw: exactly! since you are talking to them, please, always and forever to people, not *at people" so yes, what matters to them.
12:25	diana_coman	(that is not to say necessarily what they imagine you should say or other such nonsense but it does matter what they should care about because it is important to what they do/where they are/etc)
12:25	diana_coman	does mean* (instead of does matter above)
12:26	diana_coman	jfw: any questions /anything else atm?
12:26	diana_coman	the rest seems ok at this pass at least.
12:27	jfw	nope, and feeling greatful you gave it that second pass.
12:27	jfw	*grateful
12:28	diana_coman	you're welcome.
12:28	*	diana_coman goes to see about lunch
		~ 1 hours 46 minutes ~
14:14	diana_coman	hanbot_abroad: do you know perhaps of any good refs in English for literary theory and criticism? While I ended up recommending simply Aristotle's Poetics, perhaps there is something in the English space too that I'm just not aware of?
14:14	ossabot	Logged on 2020-02-10 16:25:45 diana_coman: whaack: by the sounds of it you should probably read up first on some literary theory and criticism but now ofc figuring out good English refs for it is a different matter.
14:14	ossabot	Logged on 2020-02-10 16:29:25 diana_coman: whaack: otoh I guess you really can't go wrong reading Aristotle's Poetics
		~ 1 hours 16 minutes ~
15:31	hanbot_abroad	diana_coman, whaack, afaik aside from trilema (particularly annotations, the cs lewis and hayek thingcome to mind for instance), english sorely lacks anything of much use in this vein beyond maybe joseph conrad, and moreover i'm loathe to rec
15:31	hanbot_abroad	ommend reading heidegger or any actual theorists in translation. i think the best avenues are either to read and discuss (with non-us-style-academitards) classical lit, and/or learn german and/or french. or in other words, i heartily agree, haha.
15:36	diana_coman	hanbot_abroad: thanks! I recall I read at some point something quite sensible by Northrop Frye if memory serves but I never properly reviewed him so I can't say if I was just lucky or what.
		~ 32 minutes ~
16:08	hanbot_abroad	hmm, dunno 'im
16:08	hanbot_abroad	but yeah, a major reason why english sucks.
		~ 29 minutes ~
16:37	diana_coman	the other major reason being possibly the lack of swearing depths, as spyked's latest article helpfully reminds us!
		~ 1 hours 40 minutes ~
18:17	whaack	diana_coman: ack re proper wording for the tasks.
		~ 2 hours 1 minutes ~
20:19	hanbot_abroad	diana_coman literature, swearing, expression...i just noticed the other day for instance that the sheer lack of expressivity in this language was tempting me to interpret statements like "he was good" as having heavy implicit negation of the subject's being good anymore --this sort of forced reading between the lines that often enough makes text bizarre and communication difficult.
20:25	diana_coman	hm, makes sense actually; and good technical manuals! /me recalls the horror of French tech texts, lol.

← 2020-02-12 | 2020-02-14 → ↑