Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (187426)	4/30/2004 1:26:33 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571403

Tenchusatsu, RE: "A monarchy where the ruling family takes care of the poor?" It's very rare for a dictatorship to be good, countries like Singapore are very rare. In a monarchy their system creates a permanent class of poor people, so the system is wrong. But if the system provides building blocks for people to get out of a hole, then how is it wrong? If the system is voted on by a large group or the public, not a select few family members, this maximizes the chances for it to be good. RE: "The system of government and/or society is independent of whether it is aligned with matters of the heart." I disagree. The system of govt or society can be aligned with the matters of the heart. It would be inefficient if it didn't. For example, take the proposal of having a military draft for hightech people. (I'm not going to get partisan on you, so bear with me here, to see my non-political point here) Hightech people by nature are very independent people. Management 101 says you lead by presenting a problem and sprinkle some vision in it. You don't lead by dragging the person kicking and screaming - that would be humiliation and extremely disrespectful. Instead, you appeal to people's hearts and their incredibly intelligent brains and you ask them if they could solve this really huge problem that has some really exciting possibilities to make things so much better. You appeal to the intrinsic desire to solve an analytical problem. But the absolute last thing you do, is to force a hightech engineer to do something they don't want to do at all. And that's the definition of a draft: forcing people to do something they don't want to do at all. There's a huge motivational difference between "asking" for some creative help and forcing someone to do something. Instead, the govt should get creative and change their top-down system and realize we aren't living in the 50s. They should instead appeal to hightech's intrinsic desire to intelligently crack a hard problem. Create a department called, Hightech Special Services - that is not part of the govt, but more of a private organization (somewhat like SAIC, requiring security clearance) but with a chartered goal to help out on various problems. With a little bit of PR, make it sound like an ultra brainy group that does extremely helpful and creative things. But do not use words like "military", "draft". Use words like, "brainy", "mission", "hightech's elite team", "cracking the world's hardest problems". The govt needs to learn to ask, not dicatate. A new environment is needed for a new breed of recruits. People can solve so much more if their hearts are aligned to do so, and when they are motivated with a strong desire to solve a particular problem in a helpful way. The govt's approach of a draft is outdated and simply wrong for hightech. It would not work well, and could cause more problems than it gains. Imagine drafting Tim May under force? But imagine challenging him to join Hightech Special Services to find you-know-who. Same problem, but huge difference in approach, so better results. My point above is a bit of a tangential to the main point. But it's to show that systems and hearts can indeed align, and should align if they are to be efficient and effective. You know how China does their higher-end, secretive govt hightech services? They simply walk up to people and ask them to help out. They pleed to people's innate desire to help. They don't draft them. This is according to an article I read. It's recruitment by asking, rather than by force. Here's some humor: we should copy them for a change. Just kidding! (my joke is because I'm still a tad bit concerned over how they seem a bit slow with enforcing IP protection.) Regards, Amy J