OT: NYT article on, among other things, the limits of our ability to acknowledge what we don’t know

[desmond]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=Jim Jones]Can we bury the Palin argument without choosing a winner and move back onto the original topic the thread was created to discuss?

A truce please![/quote]

Jim: Exactly. In Eavesdropper’s defense, she’s a very intelligent poster, decidely not partisan and did an excellent job of explaining her choice of using Sarah Palin (and in a way that was NOT a political threadjack).

Desmond, however, cannot seem to either grasp this, or is unwilling to accept a well-reasoned and well-explained rationale. I credit Eaves for trying to walk him through this, but, at some point, you have to realize that this person is either unable to understand or unwilling to listen.

Eavesdropper: Your attempt was well done, but clearly fell on deaf ears. Leave him be to go mutter in the corner now.[/quote]

Thanks Allan, that was a low blow. I have never talked politics, E tried to imply that I would be happy to read about Barney Frank, etc. I can’t stand any of them, I am tired how most threads turn to some political analogy and the people that side with the poster then bash the other side. I am not a super intellect as you can see from my threads. I never mutter in any corner, I just like to point out the obvious (at least to me).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=walterwhite]i think we are encouraged to suffer from this. i read an article in a recent trade journal about “confidence” in my line of work. a successful person said when she was young, she was asked by senior partner if she knew how to do a particular task ona tight timeline. she said ‘sure!” she gave this as an example of the correct way to be at work to move ahead. i understand a can-do attitude, and “fake it till you make it”, the problem is, dude, you may be the guy who leaks a billion barrels int he gulf or whatever. on the other hand, president is so complex a task no one is really competent, i suppose.[/quote]

Scaredy: I work in an environment where risk of a bad event (defined in this case as an accidental blast or terrorist attack) drives all other business decisions. Interestingly, the engineers are the last ones consulted. The attorneys and accountants are first (“How big is the potential liability/litigation and how much might it cost us”), followed by various (clueless) managers and management teams and finally the engineers.

I don’t know if this is what happened at BP Deep Horizon (and they should probably rename it “BP Event Horizon”), but I wouldn’t be surprised.

I bring this up because we’ve now reversed (or perverted) risk, including risk analysis and risk management. We’ve seen mispricing and misunderstanding of risk in the financial markets, and we’re now seeing examples in oil/gas, mining and Petrochem. Instead of letting the problem drive the solution and finding the best people who can actually solve the problem, we spend an inordinate amount of time and money trying to either evade the problem or shift blame.

I know, for a fact, that the White House was flooded with calls from literally hundreds of genuine experts trying to offer their services on the Gulf spill. Obama could have and should have put together a “strike team” of experts, instead of relying on BP (which clearly and sadly has no clue) and the Coast Guard (which ain’t in this line of work).

As an attorney, what are your thoughts on this?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=walterwhite]i think we are encouraged to suffer from this. i read an article in a recent trade journal about “confidence” in my line of work. a successful person said when she was young, she was asked by senior partner if she knew how to do a particular task ona tight timeline. she said ‘sure!” she gave this as an example of the correct way to be at work to move ahead. i understand a can-do attitude, and “fake it till you make it”, the problem is, dude, you may be the guy who leaks a billion barrels int he gulf or whatever. on the other hand, president is so complex a task no one is really competent, i suppose.[/quote]

Scaredy: I work in an environment where risk of a bad event (defined in this case as an accidental blast or terrorist attack) drives all other business decisions. Interestingly, the engineers are the last ones consulted. The attorneys and accountants are first (“How big is the potential liability/litigation and how much might it cost us”), followed by various (clueless) managers and management teams and finally the engineers.

I don’t know if this is what happened at BP Deep Horizon (and they should probably rename it “BP Event Horizon”), but I wouldn’t be surprised.

I bring this up because we’ve now reversed (or perverted) risk, including risk analysis and risk management. We’ve seen mispricing and misunderstanding of risk in the financial markets, and we’re now seeing examples in oil/gas, mining and Petrochem. Instead of letting the problem drive the solution and finding the best people who can actually solve the problem, we spend an inordinate amount of time and money trying to either evade the problem or shift blame.

I know, for a fact, that the White House was flooded with calls from literally hundreds of genuine experts trying to offer their services on the Gulf spill. Obama could have and should have put together a “strike team” of experts, instead of relying on BP (which clearly and sadly has no clue) and the Coast Guard (which ain’t in this line of work).

As an attorney, what are your thoughts on this?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=walterwhite]i think we are encouraged to suffer from this. i read an article in a recent trade journal about “confidence” in my line of work. a successful person said when she was young, she was asked by senior partner if she knew how to do a particular task ona tight timeline. she said ‘sure!” she gave this as an example of the correct way to be at work to move ahead. i understand a can-do attitude, and “fake it till you make it”, the problem is, dude, you may be the guy who leaks a billion barrels int he gulf or whatever. on the other hand, president is so complex a task no one is really competent, i suppose.[/quote]

Scaredy: I work in an environment where risk of a bad event (defined in this case as an accidental blast or terrorist attack) drives all other business decisions. Interestingly, the engineers are the last ones consulted. The attorneys and accountants are first (“How big is the potential liability/litigation and how much might it cost us”), followed by various (clueless) managers and management teams and finally the engineers.

I don’t know if this is what happened at BP Deep Horizon (and they should probably rename it “BP Event Horizon”), but I wouldn’t be surprised.

I bring this up because we’ve now reversed (or perverted) risk, including risk analysis and risk management. We’ve seen mispricing and misunderstanding of risk in the financial markets, and we’re now seeing examples in oil/gas, mining and Petrochem. Instead of letting the problem drive the solution and finding the best people who can actually solve the problem, we spend an inordinate amount of time and money trying to either evade the problem or shift blame.

I know, for a fact, that the White House was flooded with calls from literally hundreds of genuine experts trying to offer their services on the Gulf spill. Obama could have and should have put together a “strike team” of experts, instead of relying on BP (which clearly and sadly has no clue) and the Coast Guard (which ain’t in this line of work).

As an attorney, what are your thoughts on this?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=walterwhite]i think we are encouraged to suffer from this. i read an article in a recent trade journal about “confidence” in my line of work. a successful person said when she was young, she was asked by senior partner if she knew how to do a particular task ona tight timeline. she said ‘sure!” she gave this as an example of the correct way to be at work to move ahead. i understand a can-do attitude, and “fake it till you make it”, the problem is, dude, you may be the guy who leaks a billion barrels int he gulf or whatever. on the other hand, president is so complex a task no one is really competent, i suppose.[/quote]

Scaredy: I work in an environment where risk of a bad event (defined in this case as an accidental blast or terrorist attack) drives all other business decisions. Interestingly, the engineers are the last ones consulted. The attorneys and accountants are first (“How big is the potential liability/litigation and how much might it cost us”), followed by various (clueless) managers and management teams and finally the engineers.

I don’t know if this is what happened at BP Deep Horizon (and they should probably rename it “BP Event Horizon”), but I wouldn’t be surprised.

I bring this up because we’ve now reversed (or perverted) risk, including risk analysis and risk management. We’ve seen mispricing and misunderstanding of risk in the financial markets, and we’re now seeing examples in oil/gas, mining and Petrochem. Instead of letting the problem drive the solution and finding the best people who can actually solve the problem, we spend an inordinate amount of time and money trying to either evade the problem or shift blame.

I know, for a fact, that the White House was flooded with calls from literally hundreds of genuine experts trying to offer their services on the Gulf spill. Obama could have and should have put together a “strike team” of experts, instead of relying on BP (which clearly and sadly has no clue) and the Coast Guard (which ain’t in this line of work).

As an attorney, what are your thoughts on this?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=walterwhite]i think we are encouraged to suffer from this. i read an article in a recent trade journal about “confidence” in my line of work. a successful person said when she was young, she was asked by senior partner if she knew how to do a particular task ona tight timeline. she said ‘sure!” she gave this as an example of the correct way to be at work to move ahead. i understand a can-do attitude, and “fake it till you make it”, the problem is, dude, you may be the guy who leaks a billion barrels int he gulf or whatever. on the other hand, president is so complex a task no one is really competent, i suppose.[/quote]

Scaredy: I work in an environment where risk of a bad event (defined in this case as an accidental blast or terrorist attack) drives all other business decisions. Interestingly, the engineers are the last ones consulted. The attorneys and accountants are first (“How big is the potential liability/litigation and how much might it cost us”), followed by various (clueless) managers and management teams and finally the engineers.

I don’t know if this is what happened at BP Deep Horizon (and they should probably rename it “BP Event Horizon”), but I wouldn’t be surprised.

I bring this up because we’ve now reversed (or perverted) risk, including risk analysis and risk management. We’ve seen mispricing and misunderstanding of risk in the financial markets, and we’re now seeing examples in oil/gas, mining and Petrochem. Instead of letting the problem drive the solution and finding the best people who can actually solve the problem, we spend an inordinate amount of time and money trying to either evade the problem or shift blame.

I know, for a fact, that the White House was flooded with calls from literally hundreds of genuine experts trying to offer their services on the Gulf spill. Obama could have and should have put together a “strike team” of experts, instead of relying on BP (which clearly and sadly has no clue) and the Coast Guard (which ain’t in this line of work).

As an attorney, what are your thoughts on this?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=desmond]
Thanks Allan, that was a low blow. I have never talked politics, E tried to imply that I would be happy to read about Barney Frank, etc. I can’t stand any of them, I am tired how most threads turn to some political analogy and the people that side with the poster then bash the other side. I am not a super intellect as you can see from my threads. I never mutter in any corner, I just like to point out the obvious (at least to me).[/quote]

Desmond: That was a snide comment and I apologize. I was irritated and popped off, which is no excuse, I realize. Again, my apologies.

However, I would point out that Eaves went to great lengths to explain not only her position, but her rationale, which was interesting. While I now understand that you cannot stand politicians (and who among us really can?), hers was a compelling example. And, like it or not, politics and politicians occupy an outsize piece of our national consciouness right now and are therefore quite likely to be used as an example, especially in a thread like this one.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=desmond]
Thanks Allan, that was a low blow. I have never talked politics, E tried to imply that I would be happy to read about Barney Frank, etc. I can’t stand any of them, I am tired how most threads turn to some political analogy and the people that side with the poster then bash the other side. I am not a super intellect as you can see from my threads. I never mutter in any corner, I just like to point out the obvious (at least to me).[/quote]

Desmond: That was a snide comment and I apologize. I was irritated and popped off, which is no excuse, I realize. Again, my apologies.

However, I would point out that Eaves went to great lengths to explain not only her position, but her rationale, which was interesting. While I now understand that you cannot stand politicians (and who among us really can?), hers was a compelling example. And, like it or not, politics and politicians occupy an outsize piece of our national consciouness right now and are therefore quite likely to be used as an example, especially in a thread like this one.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=desmond]
Thanks Allan, that was a low blow. I have never talked politics, E tried to imply that I would be happy to read about Barney Frank, etc. I can’t stand any of them, I am tired how most threads turn to some political analogy and the people that side with the poster then bash the other side. I am not a super intellect as you can see from my threads. I never mutter in any corner, I just like to point out the obvious (at least to me).[/quote]

Desmond: That was a snide comment and I apologize. I was irritated and popped off, which is no excuse, I realize. Again, my apologies.

However, I would point out that Eaves went to great lengths to explain not only her position, but her rationale, which was interesting. While I now understand that you cannot stand politicians (and who among us really can?), hers was a compelling example. And, like it or not, politics and politicians occupy an outsize piece of our national consciouness right now and are therefore quite likely to be used as an example, especially in a thread like this one.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=desmond]
Thanks Allan, that was a low blow. I have never talked politics, E tried to imply that I would be happy to read about Barney Frank, etc. I can’t stand any of them, I am tired how most threads turn to some political analogy and the people that side with the poster then bash the other side. I am not a super intellect as you can see from my threads. I never mutter in any corner, I just like to point out the obvious (at least to me).[/quote]

Desmond: That was a snide comment and I apologize. I was irritated and popped off, which is no excuse, I realize. Again, my apologies.

However, I would point out that Eaves went to great lengths to explain not only her position, but her rationale, which was interesting. While I now understand that you cannot stand politicians (and who among us really can?), hers was a compelling example. And, like it or not, politics and politicians occupy an outsize piece of our national consciouness right now and are therefore quite likely to be used as an example, especially in a thread like this one.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=desmond]
Thanks Allan, that was a low blow. I have never talked politics, E tried to imply that I would be happy to read about Barney Frank, etc. I can’t stand any of them, I am tired how most threads turn to some political analogy and the people that side with the poster then bash the other side. I am not a super intellect as you can see from my threads. I never mutter in any corner, I just like to point out the obvious (at least to me).[/quote]

Desmond: That was a snide comment and I apologize. I was irritated and popped off, which is no excuse, I realize. Again, my apologies.

However, I would point out that Eaves went to great lengths to explain not only her position, but her rationale, which was interesting. While I now understand that you cannot stand politicians (and who among us really can?), hers was a compelling example. And, like it or not, politics and politicians occupy an outsize piece of our national consciouness right now and are therefore quite likely to be used as an example, especially in a thread like this one.

[desmond]

Allan,

Accepted, thank you.

[desmond]

Allan,

Accepted, thank you.

[desmond]

Allan,

Accepted, thank you.

[desmond]

Allan,

Accepted, thank you.

[Author]

Posts