My shallow capitalistic self

Meet mr. Shallow, yours truly. Over the last year, I've tormented myself by allowing my friends to update me with their statuses be it via Facebook, Twitter, or Friendfeed. Some statuses are fun, others are interesting, and some, a 5% of them, are 95% repetitive and annoying.

So there's this one person, no names, who I "follow," because it would be rude not to. It is an actual friend, not an internet friend. And that person has found a hobby in an area that I despise: new age, hippy, self-help. I despise it for many reasons: years of trying to find my own productive self, School for Scoundrels ("You can't help yourself, if your self sucks"), the entire hype of it all, and, of course, that it doesn't actually help you (case in point: Derek Sivers on how Self Help didn't help him)!

Here comes the shallowness part. So my friend has a site, it's the one he uses to feed all his content to my eyes. For months I have avoided going there, out of principle. Then I did this morning, and what did I see? Adverts Everywhere!

And somehow that made me feel better about him. Finally, someone that at least, tries to help himself. The world is right again.

Of Crime and Punishment

C&P by Dostoyevsky was a book I read when I was 20. Somehow, even thought I only read it once, it resonated with me. I think it came to me just now when I thought about a way I reacted to a crime being committed towards me.

My reaction was: "I'll be ok with the consequences of your actions, but the real question is whether you'll be ok with the consequences of your actions."

We all probably heard of the phrase "It's not a crime if you don't get caught." But of course, the policeman that is always present is your own self, your morals if you will. Those come from your upbringing mostly, at least that is how I think of them.

I seem to remember reading that criminals often come from a troublesome upbringing, a single parent, an abusive parent, a foster-home, etc. There are no morals to be taught there and as such that policeman in your mind just isn't there.

That to me is the insight of Dostoyevsky Crime and Punishment. That the ultimate punisher for an act of crime is yourself. And if you really don't think you have the policeman in you, then it's time to go the route of the Sopranos.

/End

The pretty simple principle of productivity

I had a moment of micro-reflection of why I don't blog so much and what mindset I was in back when I blogged a lot. Back then, I thought that anything was possible and that if we wanted to write x many words per day on www.techiteasy.org, then we would make it happen.

The other day, I had a conversation with someone about multi-tasking. Person x was convinced that (s)he was able to juggle many things at once and criticised those around them that they couldn't do the same. From everything I researched, multi-tasking is a myth. It's the reason that people aren't allowed to call on the mobile while driving, because it's been scientifically proven that juggling these two tasks will lead to a higher probability of having an accident.

Put these two together: when doing something frequently, you are in a mind frame to do much of it and hopefully do it well. And you're better off doing one thing at a time.

The pretty simple principle of productivity is: do one thing frequently, don't give up on it, make it a routine, and you will be the most productive s.o.b. out there. Now, go fly little ones.

The key to writing is to begin from nothing

Last night, I read the introduction to Larry Niven's N-Space. It's a collection of accounts about meeting the author, as well Larry Niven remembering his early days in the business. The first account is by author Tom Clancy (of The Hunt for Red October and Splintercell fame) writing mostly about his own creative process. According to him, he can't write while reading other authors (except Larry Niven).

I thought a little about this also in reflection of what I wrote previously about 'writing heroes.' In my early days of writing, I noticed that I was often influenced by other authors' writing styles and universes, which I emulated. Even later, after beginning to blog, authors like Fred Wilson, Robert Scoble, and most recently Penelope Trunk snuck in there somehow.

But all of that is limited, and that is perhaps what Tom Clancy is trying to say. By using a crutch, you limit the leverage of your "writing arc" as it where. It can lead to a few pages / posts, but to produce a whole blog, day-in-day-out, you need a more important creative source: your own brain.

Influences from the blogosphere are dwindling, in my opinion, ever since the rise of the group blog and the demise of the "A-list" blogger. It shouldn't matter, really, except if the whole industry of blogging is being surplaced by something else. Even that shouldn't take away from the creative part of the writer's brain however.

It seems like a fair thing to write considering the long silence this blog and some other blogs I write on have been experiencing. For me, it's not just a matter of creative blockage, it's a matter of time and finding the energy to come up with interesting stuff. But at least once every few days I think about writing something and consider it a personal challenge to get back into the routine.

Well, that's all for now.
Vincent

An exercise in keeping it short

In a few weeks, I'll be leaving Luxembourg. I'll be in search for new adventure, road uncertain, but certainty often leads to complacency, i.e. it's an illusion anyway.

Ideas:

• start an innovation consultancy
• work in innovation consulting
• work in innovation.

That is all. Leads appreciated.
Vincent

The all-too-human quality of Dexter

Dexter, a cop who is also a serial killer, wears a mask 99% of his everyday life. I wonder if the story is inspired by the masks that we all really wear, that there is some kind of Dexter in all of us? The show is very popular, I hear, so I guess some quality of the story finds an ear with the audience. For me it is definitely the honesty / dishonesty of the character; if people had any idea what goes on in my head, day-in-day-out… well, maybe that is why our brains are on the inside and not the outside. :)

An Angel & Demons-inspired post about people that I disrespect

1. Tom Hanks for choosing money over art… a second time
2. Ron Howard: Ditto
3. Ewan MacGregor for knowing how terrible the Da Vinci Code was and still choosing to do the second movie
4. Any other actor involved in the second movie
5. Those that read Da Vinci Code and decided to watch the movie
6. Those that read Angels and Demons and decided to watch the movie
7. Those that read either Da Vinci Code or Angels and Demons and decided to read another book by Dan Brown
8. Dan Brown, Dan Brown, Dan Brown, Dan Brown
9. Guy Richie for making a Sherlock Holmes movie that looks suspiciously like it's banking on Da Vinci Code's success
10. Me, for knowing that the Da Vinci Code book would be terrible and still succumbing to the hype
11. Me, for wasting my money on the DVD-rental also, which was turned off after 10 min.
12. Is that 10, I don't know? Oh, it's 12.

I will watch or read Dan Brown's stuff only against steep payment.