• Sort Blog:
  • All
  • Book Reviews
  • EA Rotterdam
  • Essays
  • Flotes
  • Goals
  • Links
  • Series
  • Short Stories
  • Uncategorized

Just Babies

“We can create the environments that can transform an only partially moral baby into a very moral adult” – Paul Bloom

Lessons learnt: Morality is innate. Morality needs to be shaped, strengthened and expanded by your experiences. Put yourself in other people’s shoes to expand your moral circle.

Just Babies

Thomas Jefferson once wrote to a friend “The moral sense, or conscience is as much part of man as his leg or arm. It is given to all human beings, in a stronger or weaker degree, as a force of members is given them to a greater or lesser degree.” Now, more than 200 years later, Paul Bloom confirms this earlier insight in his brilliant book Just Babies: The Origin of Good and Evil.

Just Babies follows the path laid by Predictably Irrational and Thinking, Fast and Slow, by combining fundamental research with understandable examples. The book also relies on cutting-edge discoveries and brain scanning techniques, as well as philosophical ideas pondered by Adam Smith, Sigmund Freud and Thomas Jefferson. In the end, it tries to answer the question: Where does morality come from?

Paul Bloom takes a strong stance about this at the beginning of the book: morality is innate. Babies are born with a feeling for right and wrong, they know the basics without having to learn them. But, and this is a big but, they do need training, feedback and exercise to further develop their moral senses. Let’s find out how!

Moral Insights and Moral Studies

First, what is morality? Morality is concerned with right and wrong (judgemental elements), and with generosity, humanity, kindness, compassion and friendship (altruistic elements). Morality is partially universal (e.g. to love thy neighbours) and partially cultural (e.g. whether to bury or burn the deceased). In essence, morality is the appreciation of the difference between right and wrong.

So how do you figure out why a person is moral? One way of doing this is by studying people that are clearly amoral, psychopaths for instance. Interviews with them have established that they can empathise with another person (and are actually master manipulators). But when they were asked about the suffering of their victims, all of them could not get their minds around the problem, they lacked compassion.

Research nowadays has made it possible to peak into the human brain. This has allowed us to find the mechanisms that are responsible for many of moralities underlying principles (e.g. compassion). One way this works is via mirror neurons. These are neurons that light up in your brain when you see someone experiencing something, as they would do if you engaged in it. In psychopaths, they didn’t fire when they saw people who experienced fear.

Paul Bloom states that compassion and empathy are two different mechanisms of morality. Both can exist independently of each other and without the one or the other you can still be a moral person. But, without caring for other people there would be no morality.

Other ways of studying the morality of mankind are through experiments. On the subjects of fairness, status and punishment many experimental games have been played. These games often offer participants the choice of sharing, giving away or taking away money (or coins) from other players. In most variations, it’s best for the whole group to work together, but best for the individual to have everyone cooperate and then sneakily take away all of the gains.

Through games like this and other games and experiments more suitable for babies, we can study the development of morality. Where babies at a very young age already get upset by seeing injustice done (e.g. not dividing candy appropriately), only at a later age do they see that they themselves also have to adhere to these rules. So without going through the book word for word, it suffices to say that morality is both innate and learned.

“Morality is not the doctrine of how we may make ourselves happy, but how we may make ourselves worthy of happiness.” – Immanuel Kant

How to be Good

Many seemingly altruistic (moral) acts actually serve a self-interested purpose. But whilst the rich man gives away money, he also improves his standing in society. And the volunteer at the homeless shelter truly helps but also gets renewed energy from the people he’s helping.

At the same time, there are people who give away their money without letting others know. People even sacrifice their lives to defend their loved ones. Although our morality is not innately perfect, we can make it better, we can enhance our morality.

One way to do this is to convert thoughtful moral behaviour into mindless habits. Intertwine your moral virtues into your daily life. For instance, make it a habit to always help people who are in need. Or if you are donating, make it an automated payment. Or say to yourself, every day I’m going to make the world a little better.

Another way to enhance your morality is to increase your moral circle. This is the circle, or range of people, you care (or even know) about. You can make this circle larger by meeting new people (i.e. via a meetup group). Another way is to read books that offer another perspective on life/politics/religion (fiction or non-fiction). And a third way to become more moral is to reason once every while, just to sit and think…

The Alliance

“Our goal is to provide a framework for moving from a transactional to a relational approach.” – Reid Hoffman

Lessons learnt: Employer & employee goals can be aligned, but you have to be very clear about it.

Work relations have changed dramatically over the past few decades. Where once a person was likely (and expected) to work at one company for his whole life, nowadays no-one considers you crazy if you’ve worked at 3 employers in the past 10 years. In The Alliance Reid Hoffman, Ben Casnocha and Chris Yeh present a framework on how to consider this new paradigm. In less than 200 pages they introduce The Alliance, what it means for different stakeholders and how to apply the framework in a different situation.

The problem that The Alliance tries to solve is the budged relationship between an employer and employee. The authors state that from the start the conversation between the two parties is dishonest. The employer expects an employee to be loyal to them forever, but at the same time will be most likely to lay off the new employees when things don’t go their way. In short, the authors want to restore trust.

Employers and employees should make an alliance and set synergetic goals for a set period of time – or in their lingo; Tours of Duty. Because of the finite term of the tour of duty both parties have a crisp focus. It also faces the reality that an employee might leave afterwards. Because of this, it’s up to the employer to convince the employee to stay and be challenged once again at his present company.

In The Alliance we are met with three kinds of tours of duty:

  1. Rotational – not personalized and highly interchangeable
  2. Transformational – personalized for a specific mission
  3. Foundational – a permanent relationship

All are explained in their own right. Each one is for a different stage in a person’s career and picking a tour should be done with great care. And each additional tour of duty should further align the core mission and values of the employer and employee.

“Tours of duty have to be systematic, consistent, and transparent.” – Reid Hoffman

The latter few chapters discuss how you can best implement tours of duty in your own company. They also stress the importance of networking and how your relationship doesn’t (have to) end when an employee leaves a company. The book is easy to read and chock full of information, so please read it when you have the time.

Sicario

Yesterday I saw Sicario (2015), a movie about an idealistic FBI agent (Emily Blunt – playing Kate Mercer) who joins a task force to battle the drug violence that takes place on the USA-Mexico border. The movie is directed by Denis Villeneuve and it’s one that will leave you thinking for a while. As a first on this blog, I would like to dissect the movie (minor spoilers) and reflect on what real-life implications it has.

The Movie

The first scene of the movie features the FBI team of Mercer raiding a house. The house is owned by a drug dealer who lives in America but is (of course) not directly connected to any of the illegal activity. Some 10 minutes into the movie Mercer is introduced to two ‘DOI consultants’. They plan on taking down the drug dealers by going to Mexico. All that follows can’t be described as legal and that is where the moral questions come to the surface.

Before Mercer was targeting stash houses, getting the money from the traffickers, but it seemed to have no impact. Now they are actually going into Mexico, taking down top guys and causing a stir in the whole drug cartel. Their intentions are good (more on that later), but there are shout-outs where civilians are present, innocent people might also die. And also, think of how you can get good intel on the bad guys, not only from poster boys.

Policing

So, can we play the nice guys or do we (democratic countries) have to get down into the dirt. We have laws, a Geneva convention and many other ways of protecting the rights of (all) people. But what if you can only get the information by mingling with the bad crowd (think Collin Farrell in True Detective season 2). And how much of that is happening in, for instance, The Netherlands?

I do believe that Hollywood movies have made us more receptive to the prototypical ‘hero’ that does everything to save the day (Jack Bauer, 24). And I think that in the real world there is a lot more planning, digging and ‘boring’ desk work involved. But how much do these movies and tv series influence our policy makers? If you have read a lot about torturing you know that we are doing it, it doesn’t work, and we still continue doing it. Are movies like Unthinkable (2010) shaping our beliefs that we have to become the bad guys to do good in the end?

Global Powers

The same goes for global terrorism, is fighting back with more force the way to go? In Homeland (season 4) an extremist man says something like “give me one drone strike [on my people] and I will give you 100 willing suicide bombers”. Recently I was, once again, blown away by a podcast by Dan Carlin (Common Sense, episode 299). In this episode, he argues that we are fighting a war of ideas, not weapons. I already (kinda) knew this, but he words it so wisely, that you start to wonder, aren’t we also fighting the war of ideas at home (e.g. against populistic ideas)?

Sicario is a gripping movie and will really make you think about what we (our police/other forces) are doing and what you think is the right way to go. I don’t have any definitive answers and with my 25 years of age, I think I don’t have had the time to take in the full picture. The only thing to do is keep educating ourselves, learning more about the world and enjoy our comfortable lives we have right here, right now!

ps The world is actually the safest ever, we’re getting there, merry X-mas.

The Hard Thing About Hard Things

“That’s the hard thing about hard things – there is no formula for dealing with them.” – Ben Horowitz

Lessons learnt: There are no rules in Entrepreneurship. Take care of people, products, profits – in that order.

Many books start with titles such as ‘How to cook a meal in 5 minutes’ or ‘With these 3 steps you will succeed in life’. Ben Horowitz has chosen the exact opposite, in The Hard Thing About Hard Things he argues that there are no simple solutions. In entrepreneurship, he states you have to figure out everything as you go along.

This doesn’t mean his book is without advice or practical tips. The latter chapters contain many guiding questions and thought activating statements. But these are all based on his own experience, express his view and don’t – in no way – pretend to be a one-size-fits-all solution. So let’s get to it.

Lessons from my 20’s-40’s 

The first chapters of the book deal with Ben Horowitz’s own life experiences (from boyhood to selling Opsware). In it, he describes how he made a friend (“Do not judge things by their surface”) and what he believes leadership is (“The ability to get someone to follow you even if only out of curiosity”). And only shortly after introducing us to his life he jumps into business.

One of the sub-chapters is called “If you are going to eat shit, don’t nibble”, so that was it for the niceties. With this Horowitz means to say that you should face the facts, don’t hide behind beautiful projections, see what is going on and adapt! In the chapter “I will survive” he motivates the reader to ask different questions – which relates perfectly to a recently reviewed book, A More Beautiful Question. He argues not to reconsider set rules and see how you can serve your customers in non-traditional ways.

From having 60 days of cash left to selling his business to HP, Horowitz describes the roller-coaster in all its honesty. Whilst reading it you will be stunned by how resilient (or ignorant) he was the whole time. With his vision, he turned nothing into $1.65 Billion. So what did he learn on the way there?

It’s Still Very Difficult

The Struggle – fighting for your company, being alone, the land of broken promises – is where greatness comes from. It is through hardship that you learn the most. But going through hardship is not easy and many people would rather give up. For them Horowitz has no advice to give, there are no shortcuts.

So “spend zero time on what you could have done, and devote all of your time on what you might do”. Don’t worry, be productive. And do this with other people at your side. These can be friends, but ideally are people who are specifically suited for the job you need to be done. And when looking for people hire for strength (being the best at a job) rather than lack of weakness (no bad qualities).

How to be a CEO (sort-of)

The most difficult skill Horowitz acquired (or is still learning) is managing his own psychology. He states that he has become better at this by running a company, there is no other way. As CEO you have to be somewhere in between the following two extremes: 1) taking things too personally, and 2) not taking things personally enough. So yeah, that’s that.

““Well Get on with it Mothe—-.” – Russell “Stringer” Bell

Noways Horowitz runs one of the largest Venture Capitalist funds in the world. With it he invests is many companies such as Facebook and Skype. And when he meets new entrepreneurs he looks for two qualities – brilliance and courage. So once again I leave the question to you – do you have the guts?

Thinking in New Boxes

“Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things”. – Steve Jobs

Lessons learnt: To be creative, change your perspective. Diverge, converge and reevaluate – again, and again.

Think outside the box is a common saying, it’s also wrong. Thinking outside the box leads us to scout the horizon of what we are currently doing. It allows for discovery of related concepts, but won’t protect you from new innovations. Thinking in New Boxes, on the other hand, is focussed on changing your mind and sparking the next big idea. Join me in an analysis of this great book by Luc de Brandere and Alan Iny.

We people make sense of the world by using mental models. We fit things into categories (e.g. mammals, cars, friends and foes). And we tend to think in these mental models, or boxes. We use them to make the world manageable, it’s something we can’t do without. It reduces uncertainty, and people love that.

Thinking in boxes doesn’t sound like a recipe for creativity, and it isn’t. Thinking outside the box is a good first step, it asks a person to challenge the current but it lacks guidance on how to proceed. Thinking in new boxes does provide this guidance. It changes your thinking from deductive to inductive.

The framework (a box in itself) explains thinking in new boxes in 5 steps: (this may already challenge your thinking about creativity as a non-rigid exercise)

  1. Doubt Everything – All your ideas are hypotheses – they are not set in stone
  2. Probe the Possible – Ask questions to define the issues you want to address and objectives you want to accomplish
  3. Diverge – Brainstorm on how to tackle the challenges
  4. Converge – Test your ideas
  5. Reevaluate Relentlessly –  Go back to step 1

Some 300 pages later you will know all there is to know about thinking in new boxes. The authors take their time to explain how each (relatively easy) phase works and use real-life examples and a fictional case to bring their point across. The last few chapters consider how to apply the framework (again, box) to creative problems and business strategy.

“Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything”. –  George Bernard Shaw

Thinking in New Boxes is a must read whether you are innovating, strategizing or leading change of any sort. It will let you doubt everything you do – in a good way.

Van idee tot uitvoering

Kroegentochten, wie heeft er niet aan eentje meegedaan. In Amsterdam, Berlijn, Londen en vrijwel alle andere wereldsteden gaan er dagelijks groepen toeristen op ontdekkingstocht in het uitgaansleven van hun bestemming. Het is gezellig, je leert er mensen en de stad kennen, maar kroegentochten waren er nog niet in Rotterdam.

Na de mooiste kroegentochten en gekke avonden in deze steden wou ik het concept ook naar Rotterdam brengen. Na een paar weken plannen begon ik in begin 2013 ‘International Rotterdam Pubcrawl’ – kroegentochten voor internationale studenten en toeristen in Rotterdam. Het idee klinkt heel simpel en na sterke onderhandelingen met kroegen bleek ook de uitvoering goed te doen zijn. Naast mijn studie was ik met de kroegentochten mijn tweede bedrijfje begonnen.

Wat is een goed idee?

Een goed idee is een idee dat een probleem oplost. Niet meer, niet minder. Steve Jobs staat erom bekend oplossingen (producten) te bedenken waarvan mensen niet wisten dat ze het eigenlijk nodig hadden. Een goed idee is volgens mij op te delen in twee categorieën, evolutionair en revolutionair.

Een evolutionair idee is een kleine verbetering op een bestaand product of dienst. Het is de nieuwste versie van Word of een zuinigere auto. Een revolutionair idee is een nieuwe bril om naar een oud probleem te kijken. Het is Apple wanneer er alleen Windows was, of een elektronische auto wanneer alle auto’s op fossiele brandstof rijden.

Normaliter zijn het de ‘grote’ bedrijven die komen met evolutionaire ideeën, het net beetje slimmer, sneller, beter maken van producten of diensten. Het zijn de mensen van buiten de gevestigde orde die komen met de revolutionaire ideeën. Dit komt enerzijds door hun verse blik, anderzijds door het niet kennen van barrières die mensen van binnen een industrie overal zien. No matter welk soort idee, beide soorten kunnen zeer waardevol zijn.

Is het idee wat waard?

Ok, je hebt een goed idee. Je weet misschien zelfs wat voor een soort idee het is. Nu is de grote vraag of jouw idee wat waard is. Er is maar één manier om hier achter te komen. Dat is door het idee uit te testen, het te vertellen aan vrienden en familie en feedback ontvangen.

Nu zei ik vrienden en familie, maar nog beter is om feedback te vragen aan mensen die jouw product of service mogelijk gaan gebruiken. Vraag ze niet direct “zou jij product X kopen?”. Vraag ze tegen welke problemen ze op lopen. Om nog preciezer te zijn, vraag ze waar ze nu tegenaan lopen (en niet in de toekomst).

Als je het heel slim aanpakt krijg je ook het e-mail adres van de mensen aan wie je de eerste feedback hebt gevraagd, want hier komt deel twee. Dat is het valideren (bevestigen) van je idee. Laat ze een prototype zien of laat ze weten wat jouw service is. Als het goed is lost dit hun probleem op, laat ze jou vertellen of dit zo is. Zo ja, dan heb je een goed idee te pakken. Zo nee, dan weet je nu twee dingen, 1) wat je niet moet doen, 2) hoe je het probleem mogelijk wel kan oplossen.

De eerste kroegentochten

Na het idee komt de uitvoering. Iedereen die ik sprak (lees: voornamelijk studenten) vond de kroegentocht een goed idee. Een paar gratis drankjes, een leuke tour met diverse kroegen. Ik was er klaar voor. En voor een deel ook de internationale studenten. Bij de eerste kroegentocht kwamen er 15 mensen opdagen en ik kreeg de eerste bevestiging van mijn idee.

De week erna kwamen er weer mensen, maar die daarna waren er maar twee toeristen die met de kroegentocht mee wilden. Had ik dan geluk gehad in de eerste paar weken en was Rotterdam nog niet klaar voor kroegentochten, of was er iets anders aan de hand. De uitvoering van je idee is de tweede en misschien moeilijkste fase bij het uitwerken van je idee.

De uitvoering

Een briljant idee staat niet automatisch gelijk aan een winnend bedrijf. Nikola Tesla was een briljante uitvinder met revolutionaire uitvindingen. Echter kennen veel mensen niet Tesla, maar wel de minder (technisch) slimme Thomas Edison. Edison kon iets wat Tesla niet kon, een goed idee in een waardevol bedrijf omzetten.

Hoe doe je dat, een goed (en gevalideerd) idee omzetten in een bedrijf? Dat is een combinatie van timing, doorzettingsvermogen en jouw vaardigheden (in die volgorde). Al in de jaren 70 werd er gesproken van een missie naar Mars, maar pas over 20 jaar (op zijn vroegst) zullen er mensen naar de rode planeet gaan. Of jouw idee op het goede moment in de markt komt hangt voor een deel af van timing, en of die goed is kan vaak de beste analist nog niet voor je voorspellen.

Doorzettingsvermogen is naast timing de tweede factor in het uitvoeren van je idee. Na miljoenen te hebben verdiend met PayPal stond Elon Musk enkele jaren later op de rand van faillissement, z’n raketten waren ontploft (Space X) en de elektrische auto’s stonden nog in de fabriek (Tesla). Maar Musk zette door en vanaf de peilloze diepte is hij omhoog geklommen naar CEO van de twee meest ambitieuze bedrijven in ons zonnestelsel.

“When 99% of people doubt your idea, you’re either gravely wrong or about to make history.” – Scott Belsky

Dan deel drie, jouw vaardigheden. Bouw op je eigen krachten en laat de rest over aan andere mensen. Ben je heel goed in plannen, ga dan niet proberen een creatief probleem op te lossen. Neem mensen aan die goed zijn in de vaardigheden die je zoekt, ook al zijn ze minder in andere vaardigheden. Alleen met het juiste, brede, pakket aan vaardigheden kan je jouw idee omzetten in een waardevol bedrijf.

Rotterdam zonder kroegentochten

Sommige weken waren er veel mensen bij de kroegentochten, andere weken vrijwel niemand. Zo ver ik hoorde vond iedereen ze heel leuk, maar helaas konden veel toeristen het niet aan de volgende groep vertellen, ze waren tegen die tijd al weer weg. Ik had een goed idee, maar miste vaardigheden in de uitvoering.

Ik was beland in de fase van het bedrijf waar andere vaardigheden (promotie) nodig waren dan ik zelf had (planning). Ik was nog groen en kende niemand met de benodigde vaardigheden in marketing. Mijn motivatie ging omlaag en door het wegvallen van mijn businesspartner nam mijn doorzettingsvermogen ook een duik.

De kroegentochten waren een goed idee, misschien zelfs een heel goed idee. Zeker nu Rotterdam ‘hip’ is geworden als wereldstad is er zeker een kans voor een kroegentocht. Hoewel na mijn avontuur vroegtijdig is geëindigd is een bekende van mij doorgegaan met het idee. En zo heeft Rotterdam, twee jaar later, alsnog de kroegentocht die het verdient.

Van goed idee naar waardevol bedrijf

Of jouw idee de markt gaat veroveren weet je niet zonder dat je het uittest in de echte wereld. Begin op kleine schaal en bouw op je eigen vaardigheden. Betrek mensen met andere vaardigheden bij je idee en begin zo met het bouwen van je waardevolle bedrijf.

Niet elk idee is goud waard. Je zal altijd tegenslagen tegenkomen (meer over dat in de volgende blog) en niet elk idee is de volgende gloeilamp of elektrische auto. Met geluk, doorzettingsvermogen en jouw vaardigheden ga je er uiteindelijk wel komen, daar vertrouw ik op!

huh

If you stop searching, you create the possibility that you discover you are already there

huh?! The Technique of Changing your Thinking by Berthold Gunster is all about taking a novel approach to situations that seem to be hopeless. It is not about the glass being half-full or half-empty, it is about a 3rd alternative. As one of the few Dutch (no translation available) books I have read recently it is certainly one of the more inspiring. In short chapters, full of funny examples, Berthold Gunster gets us out of the comfort zone and into change!

The five techniques on which the plenty applications are based read as follows.

  1. Stop with thinking in the same direction as you used to; the reality can (and should) be shaped, it is not set.
  2. Accept the reality; some things cannot be changed – stop fighting the wind.
  3. Observe carefully; we see what we think – not what there is (it is biased).
  4. Start with the premise that problems do not exist; problems are in our head – in reality there are only facts.
  5. Learn to live with stress and instability; thinking in terms of satisfaction is troublesome – good is the enemy of greatness.

With these five techniques, you are now ready to change your thinking.

Of the 15 applications that are explored in the book I will explore only one. The technique of remembering (thinking back). The chapter concerning this technique starts with an urban legend. During the space race, the Americans were looking for a way to write in space, but their conventional pens did not work in space, so they invested millions in inventing a pen that could work in zero gravity. At the same time, Russia was faced with the same problems, they used a pencil. The key message is that a solution does not have to lay in the future, the answer may already be hidden somewhere in the past. The same applies when you have invented something new, you do not have to think about the future needs of people, but how can you satisfy a current need with your new product.

All 15 techniques

1. Wait

2. Accept

3. Validate

4. Respect

5. Persist

6. Focus

7. Remembering

8. Eliminate

9. Import

10. Collaborate

11. Seduce

12. Showcase

13. Change Roles

14. Unsettle

15. Invert

Each of the techniques has its own effect, timing and way it works. Together they can tackle almost any difficult situation and make your life a whole lot easier (and unstable, see the second paragraph). Not every technique is as clear-cut as the next. There is a strong key message: Changing your habits can have a tremendous positive effect. As a trainer for more than 300.000 people, Berthold Gunster has established a great reputation in this field. As his third book, this one gives actionable advice to people who want to implement the different techniques. Reading a chapter every few days is the recommended way to get the most out of it.

 

 

The Book:

huh?! de techniek van het omdenken – Berthold Gunster – ISBN-10: 902299404X| ISBN-13: 978-9022994047

 

More on huh?!:

http://omdenken.nl/ – The Official Website (Dutch)

http://www.ja-maar.nl/winkel/artikel/boeken–magazine/omdenken-in-relaties – Changing your Thinking in Relationships (Dutch)

http://www.ja-maar.nl/ – The Official Website of Ja Maar… (Dutch)

Dune

Update: After originally reading Dune in late 2018, I’ve reread it in June 2020. Great book and it was interesting to see how much I had forgotten.

Here are also some quotes I liked:

  • “When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. Their movements become headlong – faster and faster and faster. They put aside all thoughts of obstacles and forget the precipice does not show itself to the man in a blind rush until it’s too late.”
  • “Hope clouds observation.”
  • “The people who can destroy a thing, they control it.”
  • “Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.” (how prescient)
  • “There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times to develop psychic muscles. — Muad’Dib”

My original subtitle: Intergalactic Feuds, Spice, Deserts and No Robots

“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer” – Frank Herbert, Dune

Dune is one of the best-reviewed books in the sci-fi genre. The book creates a universe that is similar enough to ours, but different enough to be very interesting. There are many relationships (think: Game of Thrones), but you follow one family, and one person, in particular. This is Paul, son of Duke Leto of the House of Atreides.

You will follow him through a journey of betrayal, drugs, power and manipulation. Along the way, you will meet giant sand worms and people who can see the future (whilst high on spice). If you read between the lines, there is a lot of references to real-world settings.

What is different in Dune from other sci-fi books is the total lack of technology. It was only 1965 when the book was written, but Frank Herbert predicted the upcoming AI war (just kidding, hopefully). And instead of technology, some people evolved to take on jobs that you would normally expect computers to do (e.g. navigate ships by being very good at math).

Definitively go ahead and read Dune! And if you want to only know the plot, watch the video below, it’s hilarious.

I found this video on io9.com and OMG what a find.

It’s a summary of Dune, with images from Game of Thrones, Donald Trump, Albert Einstein and more.

It does give away the whole plot. But man, watch it after you’ve read the book.

Want to learn even more, and have some more laughs?

Here is the Thug Notes of Dune, summary and analysis.

Have you read Dune? What did you think?

Running a Marathon

The Day Before

Tomorrow is the big day. Together with my brother Tom, I will be running the marathon. We did the half marathon a few weeks ago and everything went quite well. But doing a full marathon, that’s twice that length!

During my training, I’ve only done 30km and I took some breaks when doing that run. I know I should be able to do the length and I didn’t have any real injuries during the training. I should be fine. But will I be great?

My goal is to run the marathon in 3 hours and 45 minutes. This means that I will have to run exactly 11.252km per hour. In reality, the best (proposed) strategy is to run 1) at an even pace, or 2) go a bit faster in the beginning and account for slowing down during the race. If I want to apply this second strategy this would be a good plan:

  • First half: 1.51
  • Second half: 1.54

Luckily I know that there will be pacers during the race, experienced people who will run the marathon at the best pace. One of those will be running it in 3.45.

What I will also be using is RunKeeper (please don’t fuck up the GPS this time) and the time indications from it. In conjunction with my heart rate monitor (Fitbit), I will get a good bearing if I’m going at my maximum pace or that there is still some more to give.

For food, I will bring along some small snacks. I didn’t have a great experience with them during training (read: upset stomach) so I will use different types of food. One or two gels, and a few bars. And of course, I will be stopping for water at each station. Wow, not stopping of course, running a bit slower and drinking some water.

During the half marathon in The Hague, I ran it in 1.52. That day I was having/recovering from a cold. So let’s see what I still have in me and if I (and Tom) can achieve the time.

 

The Day After

Yesterday was the marathon. And wow, that was quite something.

In the end, I finished in 4 hours and 20 minutes. It was really challenging to do and at the same time also a lot of fun.

What was most challenging was to keep running after 30km, there I really hit the wall. I also had blisters that were quite something and they are still really hurting.

Here are a few things I’ve noticed from the ‘other’ side:

  • I started going slower at 25km
  • At 35km I was walking some parts
  • For next time, I should really do more long training runs (possibly also slower and longer)
  • My resting heart rate is still in the 80’s, I will start doing sports again when it’s around 60 (normal resting heart rate)
  • I want to do a marathon again!

 

http://www.runnersworld.com/race-training/marathon-pace-perfect

  • how to pace

http://running.competitor.com/2013/08/training/the-art-and-science-of-marathon-pacing_16984

  • it’s very difficult to keep a ‘slow’ pace in the first half of the marathon

 

Wow that was something! Have you run a marathon? And what was your experience? Would you do it again?

Paying for people

Automation is what has fueled our economic growth in the last 100+ years.

There is ever increasing progress on machine learning (or AI) and other scientific advances. So we can expect to have out-automated ourselves right? Human labour is no longer necessary.

For the past few years, I thought so too. Heck, I even love this YouTube video by CGP Grey:

But what if we think about human labour the other way around? That human labour is not expendable, but a mark of luxury.

We pay extra to have artisanal coffee brewed, versus getting a quick dose of caffeine at a nameless shop.
We buy beer that has a personal touch (and with names like ‘Jaapie’, ‘Gozer’, or ‘Bea’ (Kaapse Brouwers)).
And robots haven’t yet invaded the personal care arena.

We pay for people because the inefficiency is actually what we are looking for.

To inefficiency!
Floris

ps Read more here