Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “Startuppery”

[twenty twenty-five day ninety-eight]: the appearance of done doesn’t mean you did it right

centaur 0

One by one, trees and bushes on our property have been dying. The property is large - when we fled the fires in California during the pandemic, we lucked out in finding a large place that had been on the market for quite a while - so at first we thought that was simply par for the course. But they kept dying.

Eventually, what we discovered is that many of the trees on the property were planted without the removal of their transport cages. This can cause the roots to get choked, to turn back on themselves, and as the tree grows, the increasingly packed root ball topped by the increasingly heavy tree turns into a weighted ball bearing, waiting to tip over in heavy winds, heavy rain, or just from the tree's own starved weight.

But it's easier to not remove it, the problem is practically invisible, and the tree looks good for a while - and by the time the tree falls, it will be almost impossible to identify who made the initial mistake.

This is a beautiful house on beautiful land, but many of the things in this house are like that. Trees are planted with their transport cages still on, so they eventually fall over. Gutter drains were buried without covering them with fabric, so they fill with dirt. Soil pipes are buried without cleanouts. Drywall in access rooms has random holes punched in it.

And, most spectacularly, a door was installed in a storage room which was too small for the safe stored in that room to be removed. I mean, what were they thinking? I guess they weren't - or, perhaps that was a security feature, to prevent it from being stolen? Certainly, you can't sneak it out of the room, but, also, it likely weighs around a ton, so no-one can run off with it - they didn't need to wall it in.

But, regardless, hey! We get a safe.

Now, we were dealing with the problem with our drains, and the foreman told us he'd need to take up the last man standing in a row of bushes near one of the drains. These had been dying, one or two per year, since we arrived, and the last one was literally held together with zipties. So I agreed.

And when he dug it up, he found that it - and all the bushes in that row - had cages on their root barrels. You can see him holding one of these in the banner image from this post. The root system was so tight inside it that he was surprised that it had survived that long.

So my point, and I did have one, is that doing a job that looks right from the outside may not be doing it well enough for the job to be done right. And right, in this case, I define as not failing unexpectedly long before its time because someone simply didn't want to finish the work.

I suspect that the people who managed this properly previously were focused on forcing it, no matter how much money it took. As my wife put it, you put in a lawn, let it grow, then cut that growth and take all the nutrients that it harvested out of the soil away, forcing you to fertilize the lawn with chemicals to keep it alive. You can do that, but it's like driving down a mountain road at too high a speed, constantly riding the wheel, brakes and accelerator to keep yourself on the road. We prefer a healthier approach, where, when possible, things are left to biodegrade where they are, or you create compost out of the clipping.

That doesn't always work, and, in a way, it's a luxury all its own. But regardless of how you run your lawn, if you take the time to cut the root balls off and to properly wrap your drains, you'll find yourself spending less money in the long run fixing problems that should never have happened in the first place.

-the Centaur

Pictured: The cage that our foreman discovered once they dug up the bush, and the gutter downspout drain that our foreman replaced for us once we all figured out what drains needed to be replaced.

[twenty twenty-five day ninety-seven]: the biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it took place

centaur 0

So, yes, it's late and i'm tired, but i couldn't just leave it at that, because the above quote is so good. I ran across this from George Bernard Shaw in a book on mentoring (which I can't access now, due to cat wrangling) and snapped that picture to send to my wife. In case it's hard to read, the quote goes:

The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place.

This was a great quote to send to my wife because our first vow is communication, yet we have observed problems with communication a lot. Often, when the two of us think we are on the same page, frequently we have each communicated to each other something different using similar-sounding language.

I was struck by how hard it is to get this right, even conceptually, when I was skimming The Geometry of Meaning, a book I recently acquired at a used bookstore, which talks about something called something like a "semantic transfer function" (again, I can't look up the precise wording right now as I am cat wrangling). But the basic idea presented is that you can define a function describing how the meaning that is said by one person is transformed into the meaning that is heard by another.

If you pay attention to how communication fails, it becomes clear how idealized - how ultimately wrongheaded - it is. Because you may have some idea in your head, but you had some reason to communicate it as a speech act, and something you wanted to accomplish inside the hearer's head - but there's no guaranteed that what you said is what you meant, and much less whether what was heard was what was said, or whether the interpretation matched what was heard, much less said or meant.

But even if they took your meaning - even if the semantic transfer function worked perfectly to deliver a message, there is no guarantee that that the information that is delivered will cause the appropriate cognitive move in the hearer's brain. Perhaps we're all familiar with the frustration of trying to communicate an inconveniently true fact to someone who stubbornly won't absorb it because it's politically inconvenient for them, but the matter is worse if your speech was designed to prompt some action - as Loki and one of the kittens just found out, when he tried to communicate "stop messing with me, you're half my size, you little putz" as a speech act to get the kitten to leave him alone. It had the opposite effect, and the kitten knocked itself onto the floor when it tried to engage a sixteen-pound ball of fur and muscle.

So what does that have to do with drainage?

My wife and I have had a number of miscommunications about the cats recently, ones where we realized that we were using the same words to talk about different things, and didn't end up doing things the way each other wanted. But it isn't just us. The cats stayed indoors mostly today, because workmen came by to work on a drainage project. I went out to sync up with the foreman about adding a bit to the next phase of work, and he offhandedly said, "sure, now that we're finished with the front."

"But wait," I said. "What about the drains in the front?"

"What drains in the front?" he asked.

We stared at each other blankly for a moment, then walked around the house. It rapidly became clear that even though we had used the same words to talk about the same job related to the same problem - excess water tearing through the mulch - we had meant two completely different things by it: I had meant fixing the clogged drains of the downspout of the gutter that were the source of the water, and he had took that to mean fixing the clogged drains where that water flowed out into the rest of the yard. A rainstorm soon started, and we were able to both look at the problem directly and agree what needed to be fixed. (The below picture was from later in the night, from another drain that was clogged and in need of repair).

It turns out the things that I wanted fixed - the things that had prompted me to get the job done in the first place - were so trivial that he threw them into the job at no extra cost. And the things that the foreman had focused on fixing, which also needed to be fixed but didn't seem that important from the outside, were actually huge jobs indicative of a major mis-step on the original installation of the drainage system.

We resolved it, but it took us repeatedly syncing up, listening for issues as we spoke, and checking back with each other - in both directions - when things didn't sound quite right for us to first notice and then resolve the problem. Which is why I found it so apropos to come across that Shaw quote (which I can look up now that the cats have settled down, it's in The Coaching Habit) as it illustrated everything me and my wife had been noticing about this very problem.

Just because you've said the words doesn't mean they were heard. And just because they're said back to you correctly doesn't mean that the hearer actually heard you. If you spoke to prompt action, then it's important to check back in with the actor and make sure that they're doing what you wanted them to - and even if they're not, it's important to figure out whether the difference is their problem - or is on your end, because you haven't actually understood what was involved in what you asked them to do.

So, yeah. The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place - so rather than trust the illusion in your mind, take some time to verify the facts on the ground.

-the Centaur

Pictured: "Shaw!", obstreperous cats, and a malfunctioning drain.

[twenty twenty five day sixty-two]: Seventy-Five Percent of a Project is Worth Less Than Nothing

centaur 0

Recently Internet guru Seth Godin blogged about “Halfway Projects”: you can get value from eating half of a pear, but half a canoe is worth less than no canoe at all. I like that. It’s a great metaphor for project management, where quitting a project just before the finish line doesn’t deliver any of its value—but leaves you with all of the costs.

Now, I misremembered Godin’s example a bit - what he actually said was “half a pear might deliver 85% of its value”. But the principle is sound: half a battery charge might let you do 85% of your work … but half a parachute is definitely worth less than no parachute at all, because it might encourage you to take risks that you shouldn’t.

For project management, though, the idea helps explain my long-running idea “work just a little bit harder than you want to.” Often, when working on a project, we get exhausted, and decide to give up - but working just a little bit harder can take us over the finish line. Our instinct to save us effort can actually thwart the work we need to do to achieve success.

For example, recently I was working on a machine learning project that just wasn’t working. We’d spent enormous effort on getting the learning system up and running, without good learning results to show for it, and the arbitrarily imposed deadline was coming up to show something impressive, or the project would be axed.

But, if you know anything about machine learning, you know most of the effort goes into data preparation. We had to modify the system to log its data, massage it into a format that was useful for learning, and spend further coding effort to speed it up so it was useful for development (taking the data load from 36 hours to 36 seconds!).

The point is, we only got the data running in mid-February, and were trying to compress months of experimentation into just ten days. Finally, as the deadline approached, I got philosophical: we’d done all the work we needed to do to start learning, and my recommendation was that the team keep working on it, with or without me.

But … I didn’t stop there.

Before the final presentation, I spent time cleaning up the code, checking things in, and getting a few of the most promising programs ready to collect “baselines” - long runs of the system set up for comparisons. And the next morning, I reviewed those baselines to present a report to the team about which one was most promising.

Long story short, one of the simplest models that we tried was actually sort of kinda working. Once I realized we had a scaling issue in the output, a simple tweak made the system get even better. I spent another hour tweaking the graphs to put the human input and the system results onto the same graph, and the good results leapt out into sharp relief.

I could have just decided that the system was a failure - but then I wouldn’t have done that extra work, making it a self-fulfilling prophecy. I call this the “Sunken Cost Fallacy Fallacy”. For those not familiar, the “Sunken Cost Fallacy” kicks in when you keep doing something that isn’t working because of the effort you’ve spent, even though you have a better option.

But you can’t “decide” that something is a better option because you’re a Decisive Decider™. It actually has to be a better option, or what you’re doing is simply throwing away the effort that you’ve spent to date because you want to throw your weight around. No, if you suspect a cost is sunken, there’s no substitute for doing your due diligence - is the project working?

If it isn’t, sure, then quit. But often, that little bit of extra work can unlock the solution to the problem. During my presentation, the team asked natural about the simple model that turned out to be the most successful - and those questions made me realize it could be improved. Over the weekend, I applied those fixes - taking merely good to excellent.

Last week, as of Thursday night, I was pretty down on the possibility of success for our project. But I did my due diligence anyway, and by Friday morning, I had a working solution. By Friday afternoon, all the team knew it – and by Sunday evening, I was composing an email outlining our machine learning “recipe” that we can build on going forward.

Quitting just before the finish line wastes all the effort you spent on the project. Before you quit, work a little bit harder than you want to and do your due diligence to check whether it is working. If it isn’t, you can stop with no regrets; if it is, you will have not just saved the value of your project - you will have saved yourself from shooting yourself in the foot.

-The Centaur

Pictured: The project team. Three-quarters of them want to try a new direction, but the old seasoned hand isn't quite so sure.

[twenty twenty-four day thirty-nine]: space cadet crashes to earth

centaur 0

When you've got a lot to do, sometimes it's tempting to just "power through it" - for example, by extending a meeting time until all the agenda items are handled. But this is just another instance of what's called "hero programming" in the software world, and while sometimes it's necessary (say, the day of a launch) it isn't a sustainable long-term strategy, and will incur debts that you can't easily repay.

Case in point, for the Neurodiversiverse Anthology, my coeditor and I burned up our normally scheduled meeting discussing, um, scheduling with the broader Thinking Ink team, so we added a spot meeting to catch up. We finalized the author and artist contracts, we developed guidance for the acceptance and rejection letters, and did a whole bunch of other things. It felt very productive.

But, all in all, a one hour meeting became three and a half, and I ended up missing two scheduled meetings because of that. The meetings hadn't yet landed on the calendar - one because we were still discussing it via email, and the other because it was a standing meeting out of my control. But because our three and a half hour meeting extended over the time we were supposed to follow up and set the actual meeting time, we never set that time, and when I was playing catch up later that evening, I literally spaced on what day of the week it was, and didn't notice the other meeting had started until it was over.

All that's on me, of course - it's important to put stuff on the calendar as soon as possible, including standing meetings, even if the invite is only for you, and I have no-one else to blame for that broken link in the chain. And both I and my co-editor agreed to (and wanted to) keep "powering through it" so we didn't have to schedule a Saturday meeting. But, I wonder: did my co-editor also have cascading side effects due to this longer meeting? How was her schedule impacted by this?

Overall, this is an anthology, and book publishing has long and unexpectedly complex and tight schedules: if we don't push to get the editing done ASAP, we'll miss our August publishing window. But it's worth remembering that we need to be kind to ourselves and realistic about our capabilities, or we'll burn out and still miss our window.

That happened to me once in grad school - on what I recall was my first trip to the Bay Area, in fact. I hadn't gotten as much done on my previous internship, and started trying to "power through it" to get a lot done from the very first week, putting in super long hours. I started to burn out the very first weekend - I couldn't keep the pace. Nevertheless, I kept trying to push, and even took on new projects, like the first draft of the proposal for the Personal Pet (PEPE) robotic assistant project.

In one sense, that all worked out: my internship turned into a love of the Bay Area, where I lived for ~16 years of my life; the PEPE project led to another internship in Japan, to co-founding Enkia, to a job at Google, and ultimately to my new career in robotics.

But, in another sense, it didn't: I got RSI from a combination of typing every day for work, typing every night for the proposal, and blowing off steam from playing video games when done. I couldn't type for almost nine months, during the writing of my PhD thesis, which I could not stop at, and had to learn to write with my left hand. I was VERY lucky: I know some other people in grad school with permanent wrist damage.

"Powering through it" isn't sustainable, and while it can lead to short-term gains and open long-term doors, can lead to short-term gaffes and long-term (or even permanent) injuries. That's why it's super important to figure out how to succeed at what you're doing by working at a sustainable pace, so you can conserve your "powering through it" resources for the times when you're really in the clinch.

Because if you don't save your resources for when you need them, you can burn yourself out along the way, and still fail despite your hard work - perhaps walking away with a disability as a consolation prize.

-the Centaur

Pictured: Powering through taking a photograph doesn't work that well, does it?

[twenty twenty-four day eighteen]: something clever (un)evaporates

centaur 0

Don't you hate it when you think of something clever to say, but forget to write it down? I do. My wife and I were having a discussion and I came up with some very clever statement of the form "if people do this, they don't end up doing that", but now I can't remember it, so please enjoy this picture of a cat sending an email.

Just a moment. Just a moment.

"If you haven't climbed a mountain before, thinking about what you'll do when you get there is a distraction from starting the journey towards it. Climbing a mountain seems hard, but they're only a few miles high, and perhaps ten times that wide; most of your journey towards it will be on the plain, and that deceptively level terrain is the hardest part. Speculating about what parka to wear on the upper slopes does nothing to get you walking towards that slope; set out on your journey, and you can buy a parka when you're closer."

This bit of armchair wisdom was designed to encapsulate why it's better to start work on your business than it is to speculate on how to grow it into a multibillion-dollar conglomerate. Sure, it's great to have a grand vision, but you don't need to worry about mergers and acquisitions before you've found any customers - if you've never built a business before, that is.

If you are someone who has built many businesses, it's okay to build on your experience to guide your steps - but most of us have not, and our grand dreams can actively get in the way of figuring out how to make your product, how to get it in front of your customers, and how to make your product excel in their eyes so that they choose you over the alternatives.

Phew. Strangely enough, that first image was load-bearing: I picked a "random" recent picture for this blog, but it so turned out that our cat had been playing with his catnip laptop right around the time that Sandi and I had been discussing strategies for startups.

Feed your memory with enough cues, sometimes you get a retrieval.

Cogsci out.

-the Centaur

Pictured: Loki, sending emails on his catnip laptop, and resting on his laurels after a hard day at work.

[twenty twenty-four day seventeen]: we’re stronger with each other

centaur 0

No, this isn't a post about family, though it could easily be adapted to that topic. Nor is it a post about generic togetherness - that's why I said "each other" instead in the title. No, this is a post about how we're often stronger when we take advantage of the strengths of those around us.

Often at work we have our own perspective, and it can be easy to get caught up in making sure that our way is the way that's chosen, and our work is the work that is credited. But if we do, we may miss out on great suggestions from our coworkers, or on the opportunity to benefit from the work of others.

Just today at one of my contracting jobs, I had to present our work on the project so far. While most of the machine learning work on the project was mine, a lot of the foundational analysis on the data was done by one of my coworkers - and I called him out specifically when presenting his graphs.

Then, we came to the realization that collecting the amount of data we would ideally like to have to learn on would literally cost millions of dollars. I presented a few ways out of this dilemma - but then, one of our senior engineers spoke up, trying to brainstorm a simpler solution to the problem.

I'd been hoping that he would speak up - he had shown deep insight earlier in the project, and now, after a few minutes of brainstorming, he came up with a key idea which might enable us to use the software I've already written with the data we've already collected, saving us both time and money.

Afterwards, the coworker whose contributions I'd called out during the meeting hung on the call, trying to sketch out with me how to implement the ideas the senior engineer had contributed. Then, unprompted, he spent an hour or so sending me a sketch of an implementation and a few sample data files.

We got much farther working together and recognizing each others' contributions than we ever would have had we all been coming to the table just with what we brought on our own.

-the Centaur

Pictured: friends and family gathering over the holidays.

[seventy-eight] minus eighty-two: tl;dr: get to the point

centaur 0

tl;dr: get to the point in the first line in your emails, and also in the subject.

"TL;DR" is an acronym meaning "Too Long; Didn't Read" which is used to introduce a quick summary of a longer document - as I did in the first line of this email.

Often when writing an email we are working out our own thoughts of what should be communicated or should happen - which means that the important point usually comes at the end.

But people don't often read to the end. So it's important, when you get to the end of your email, to port the most important point up to the top (which I typically do with the TL;DR tag).

And, even better, if you can put it in the subject line, do that too.

Your email is more likely to work that way.

-the Centaur

Pictured: our wedding dragon lamp, sitting on a side table with our wedding DVD, which is sort of a coincidence; and a very cool light bulb.

Discussed: a topic I swear I've written about in this blog, but I cannot find via searching past posts.

[thirty] minus twenty: why i wouldn’t work for elon musk at twitter

centaur 0

Because he took Twitter private. Look, I'm not against private companies per se: I'm part of one (Thinking Ink Press) and have started another (Logical Robotics). And I'm not against Elon Musk per se either: I have some criticisms of how he's running Twitter, but those criticisms are not material to my point, and, hey, he has made me a great deal of money over the years as a Tesla and Twitter shareholder, so, perhaps he knows what he's doing in this case (though, based on how it's going, I seriously doubt it.)

No, my issue is, it's not a public company anymore. I strongly believe most large companies should be public, and that I would not work for a large private corporation if I could possibly help it. Private corporations exist to serve their shareholders; public corporations exist to serve the public. We structure them for the benefit of shareholders to encourage people to create companies and improve the economy, but going public places the company under increased oversight to ensure it is serving the public interest.

Public corporations place structure between the shareholders and the business: shareholders elect a board, which selects a CEO, who selects the employees of the company and directs its business. So at a public corporation, both the lowliest employee and the CEO work for the company, not the shareholders.

This insulation creates a great equalizer. In the end, everyone at the company, from the CEO to the mail room temp, are all responsible for serving the company. At a public company, you don't work for your manager; you both work for the company, and you both should act in its best interests.

At a private company, this is no longer the case. And at Twitter, this is definitely no longer the case. Elon Musk is removing security features and artificially boosting his own engagement and firing anyone who contradicts him, much less disagrees with him, which is a big problem since he doesn't realize he's incompetent at running software companies (this kind of nonsense is what got him fired from the company that became PayPal, after all) and he's desperate to cut costs and boost revenues before the debt payments eat them alive.

At a healthy company - a public company - you have the moral right to say, "No, sir, that doesn't work that way," or "No, ma'am, I won't do that; that's harmful to the company." Admittedly, this can get you fired, but you still have the moral right to do it.

At Twitter, however, it's Elon's show. And he has the right to run it the way that he wants - he certainly paid enough for it. So, if I worked at Twitter ... I think I would have to have taken the severance, if offered, because while I will work for a public company, I won't work in a feudal kingdom.

The King can boost his own tweets.

-the Centaur

Pictured: More graffiti, from an undisclosed location.