Calm and the inner turmoil

I had an interesting discussion with a colleague today about data management and how the trends are shifting in the may we are going to start managing information. She didn't understand. That is okay, she will. It is interesting though considering the field that we work in that she can't see the direction of where data management is going and to me at least, it is through being siloed.

Most people are in informational silos even though they feel they see quite clearly as our world gives us snippets of views and make us believe that what we see is all there is to see. And then, before we look more closely, the next shiny object is put in our line of sight. When one works in a company doing a specific thing and getting told a certain story, it is common that they get the impression that they know all they need to know.

Do you know all you need to know?

It is an interesting question really as, how can you know? Is it the results one gets, the feedback from peers? Do you know all you need to know to reach your potential or are you lacking key bits of information that hold you back. When you have knowledge gaps that cover vital bits of information it is very easy to feel victimized by results as one feels that they are doing their best. Technically of course, they are doing their best based on what they know and are wiling to act upon.

Knowing isn't doing.

One interesting thing that people often overlook when talking about the state of Steem and how it effects newcomers is what they are generally doing is projecting their opinions on how it affects themselves from their perspective and experience. It is impossible to know how a newcomer will experience Steem in the future because, that newcomer could have a completely different view and set of expectations about what a Steem experience is.

It is easy to see if in a company they make changes and people complain but those who come onto the company after the changes are implemented, know no better than what they know and, accept the job as is. People who experience change always complain. Well, nearly always unless they are the ones to benefit directly from the changes.

What I like about Steem is that it is always changing and it will continually to organically grow and warp in all kinds of ways for as long as it is in existence. The growth of Steem is what keeps it alive and when it stops shifting, it stagnates and, the experiment has failed. This is the strength of a decentralized network when it comes to innovation and growth because nodes of user groups and individuals can implement and trial their own versions. Some will succeed and some will fail but as long as the process keeps going, the ecosystem evolves with the needs of the community.

This doesn't mean that everyone benefits and it definitely doesn't mean that everyone benefits at the same time as while anyone can try, alignment of resource and need is important. People seem to get well ahead of themselves on Steem and expect it to deliver all of their desires while the infrastructure is no where near ready to deliver that kind of diversity at the levels required. And then, when development is proposed that could take the chain toward a more equitable future, people complain because in the short-term, it isn't they who will benefit immediately.

It is a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation but because of the weakness of decentralization (at this time), decisions are slow to get made and very rarely well implemented. I add 'at this time' in brackets because while people like the idealistic view of responsibility and accountability, they don't actually want to take that responsibility or be held accountable for non-performance. The world is not ready for full decentralization but, the world is going to have to learn.

What is likely to happen in my opinion is that eventually there is going to be a web of trust built that can accurately evaluate ones position of trustworthiness within the network, even if anonymous. What that would mean is that there would essentially be a social score for non-performance. While this might seem dystopic, it is interesting because people expect that those who get paid for a job actually complete that job. Why should it be any different when it comes to social equity?

Everyone wants to be included in the benefits of the group but few are willing to actually provide equity for that group to leverage. Relationships are circumstances of exchange but it is not always goods, services or currency that gets exchanged. between parties. It can be ideas or support, hatred or love. What is interesting on Steem is that people make an assumption that whatever they offer has value because they have invested their effort into it but, they forget that this is a place of relationships and if one is unable to build relationships required, content is in the proverbial attic.

This could perhaps be the way Steem operates at the moment in some way but it is not the way it has to operate for eternity. However, if one doesn't understand the ecosystem they are injecting their effort into, how do they know that the content or the way they deliver it has value or is the right way? They don't know what they don't know and when they feel slighted by change, they look to blame others and the system still unknowingly. Victimized by the unknown.

This is both a very complex system and one that is insanely simple at the same time. The problem most have is that they ignore the complexity as if it isn't there and assume that their simple view can be applied to the system and bear fruit to become successful. Where is the proof of brain?

People think that proof of brain is in the content one delivers but I disagree quite heavily as what I see as proof of brain is learning to understand the environment enough to be able to adapt one's behavior suitably to align with goals. Goals are always future based and while some set their sights on tomorrow, others might look a decade ahead. If one has been able to develop a dual vision and can only plan for the immediate moment, is it someone else's fault who has positioned themselves to be able to look long?

It seems on Steem, everyone has an excuse as to why they can't look long and perhaps there is a high level of selection bias here that separates groups. Some came here in a good position looking to push technology or their content and perhaps with the idealistic view of future potential - others came here to earn money to satisfy their immediate needs. Some from each group switched their goals too.

This sets up various alignment problems between these groups but since it is a stake based platform, it is the stake that decides, those who have managed to likely prove themselves from a stake perspective well before they ever entered into Steem. From a development and direction perspective, who would you want to have say over the future of your company - those looking long or those who need any positive result now? One position will always need an immediate result, the other is likely to be able to build resources so that the immediate needs will eventually be covered.

For a very long time now I have had to go with the immediate needs of the moment because I have failed to use my brain to effectively provide for a cushion. There are several reasons for this but I am working my ass off continuously until I have the conditions that I am able to satisfy my immediate needs and provide for a future for more than just myself.

Working my ass of is not something to celebrate or respect as it is through continuous failure to adapt well that has led to this position. Nor is working hard going to necessarily get rewarded for the same reason. It is not good enough to work hard - one has to work hard at the right things also.

The question arises again and again though; how do you know what you do is the right thing if you don't know what you don't know? You might feel that you deserve more than you have and a lot more than you get but, that doesn't mean you are correct.

I have worked hard my whole life - just at the wrong things.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]