Radical Centrism and the Future
 
 
Ernie:
Helpful comments, some of them, anyway.
 
You, personally, have done enough. That is, it would be far better for  me
to see what I can come up with on my own, see if it flies, and if it  
doesn't, 
there are several other airplanes in the hangar that maybe will.
 
Some of what I said, that you interpreted, assumed what you seem to  think
was not taken for granted. When Tom Sawyer gets his million $$ check, 
for instance, if the purpose is developing a pilot, that money not only  
pays him
is pays for carpenters to build sets, hairdressers for actresses, dollies  
for
studio cameras, lawyers, talent scouts to line up and sign up actors,  and
you name it. I don't know what his cut is, but maybe 5% of the  total;
he writes the script, consults with the director, etc, and makes sure
the whole thing is done right. If the pilot looks good, then comes
the 50 million $$ part of the project, shooting multiple  episodes
for broadcast TV, advertising,  writing and re-writing and everything 
else you can think of. But first the pilot has to be damned good.
And the pilot can be judged from a number of different angles.
 
I'm assuming this process.  
 
Anyway, to get anything done requires, first and foremost,  commitment.
After that comes, in order, talent (plus knowledge to make talent  
possible),
and resources to get the job done. Depending on the project /  product
there may be a need for teamwork and in all those cases without it
there is no possibility of success.
 
 
I look at RC as a noble cause, the political equivalent of a  religion.
Well, OK, the analogy is imperfect, but to make a point.  If a  political
or philosophical cause is not as important as a religion it sometimes  is,
and at times it may be more important.
 
This being the case, and for me it is  -whatever it may be for  you or 
anyone else- 
it deserves commitment  and  the  action that follows from  commitment.
And maximum feasible investment. All that I have to give is time
but I'm not sure what else is more valuable.
 
This cannot mean 100% of my time but I'd guess that, all things added up, 
it certainly  comes in at 55% or so.
 
You have seen only a fraction of what I have done  -partly  because
a good deal of it still is incomplete, 2/3rd of project A completed,
1/4th of project B, half of project C, and so forth. You'll have to take  me
at my word, but there is a lot of stuff and all of it, at least when it  
survives
final edits, is first rate material. New America has some good stuff  too,
and in some areas (think of Fallows' work)  I cannot compete at  all.
But what is more relevant, Lind and Halstead, I don't see where
they compete at all  with  my work.
 
That's the magnitude of what is going on.  "Magnitude."  The word  has
meaning even if the $25 million or so New America budget is a drop
in the bucket compared with Apple.
 
But you look at RC as a minor factor in the grand scheme of  things.
You've never said any such thing but I cannot conclude something  else.
 
Unfortunately, the way it seems to me, you are working with a concept
whereby RC  -our "West Coast" version-  is no better than a hobby  horse.
Strictly a side show, not all that important, easy to defer for 10  years.
As if, to use the religion analogy, my religion is so "important"
(said sarcastically)  that if I defer it for 10 years, so  what?
 
To use another metaphor, the Right is career obsessed, the Left is
Cause obsessed. On that scale I am utterly Cause obsessed
and there is no other way for me to look at RC.
 
I look ahead and, politically, I see Important Issue #1 in 2014 as RC
and the same for 2015, 2016, 2017, etc, as far ahead as you can take  it.
For you   -my perception, but based on things you've actually  said-
whatever is number uno for this year or next, RC doesn't  really
kick in until 2025 or thereabouts.
 
This, it seems to me is where we have a serious difference.
 
I cannot really disentangle my religious views from my understanding
of RC,  one reinforces the other, each are essential. So I cannot  imagine
saying  -or even thinking-   my religious views will only  become important
to me in 2025. Its a package, in other words. I don't see where -which  may 
be
a function of not knowing some things which maybe simply you have not  said-
RC is much of a  Cause  in your mind,  something  worth time commitment  
-until, in one scenario anyway, there may be time for it, in 2025 or  
thereabouts.
 
 
Anyway,  there is no point in belaboring any of this.  The effort  is 
totally useless.
You have already made a different kind of commitment   -and in  one sense
it is as smart as anything gets-  that the future is Apple and the  
corporate world.
My commitment is to creating a philosophy that might, some day,  change
the entire society, starting with its political system, in dramatic  ways,
toward a very different future than anyone in corporate America
is remotely thinking.
 
I know very well who has 90% of political power. Basically,  I am  seeking
to eventually deny all political power to those who now have it.  
The way I look at it, this is fundamental to RC.  We are  governed
by amoral incompetents and this cannot be allowed to stand.
For all I know it may take until 2025 to bring this about
but it is as clear as anything gets that if I don't take this deadly
seriously each and every year between now and 2025
there is no chance at all that there could possibly be
significant changes in 2025.  Simple as that.
 
I know what I have to do, as much as I can do it. I know  what I could
do with professional level resources but since they are not available
at this time, I will need to do what I can, regardless. But I'll tell  you
one thing, the minute there are professional-level resources
is the minute I will  do my damnedest to organize a  movement.
That is, to do everything possible to create a team of talented
and dedicated people to make RC happen.
 
RC isn't some kind of "hobby" for me. 
 
It is superior to all other political philosophies now in existence. 
 
I wish I could give it more than 55% but physically that is  impossible,
but it has that 55%.
 
If you prefer to call this "whining" that it up to you.
 
I prefer to think of it as being prophetic.
 
 
Billy
 
 
========================================
 
 
 
2/5/2014 4:56:22 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]  
writes:

HI  Billy,

On Feb 4, 2014, at 3:21 PM, [email protected] wrote:

>  Ernie:
> Somewhere along the way I came across some sage wisdom to the  effect
> that the best way to kill creativity is by reflexive  nay-saying.
> This can be annoying when the premise of the nay-saying is  factually 
incorrect.

I feel like you want to get credit for *having* an  idea.

I only give people credit for *developing* an  idea.

>> (1)Ideas are almost worthless. (2)Execution is  everything.
>  
> (1) Not literally true, but I get the  point
> (2) Well, yeah.  However, you yourself made it a point to  me a year ago
> how the high-rollers in the computer biz do things,  ie,
> no real business plans, essentially kick ideas around and  those
> that pass the smell test are green-lighted

I think you  may be misunderstanding what ‘green light’ means

> Thinking about  it, while I am aghast, I believe I understand how this is 
 possible.
>  
> Hot Idea #4, say, gets the go-ahead. Why? Joe  Blow has certain talents
> and X amount of 'bankable' knowledge   -everyone know this.
> Similar to what Tom Sawyer has said about the  TV/Movie biz
> A studio knows what Tom can do, all he needs are some  rough ideas
> and if studio execs see a market then it is "run with it,  here's a 
million $$"
> Only then, check in hand, does Tom develop a  pilot or write a script.


The full statement is:

“Ideas are  worthless APART from a development process AND a deployment  
mechanism.”

If you *know* what the process is for developing and  deploying an idea, 
THEN the idea can be extremely valuable.

The reason  large companies can make bets like that is that they KNOW the 
process that  will be used to develop the idea and deploy it to the market.   
They  almost NEVER write a blank check for the full amount.  They create  
various intermediate milestones, and release funds each step of the way as 
the  idea is proved out.

> Actually I think I do need some capital so  that I can get some damned
> good ideas off the ground. But, so I take  it, since the ideas are
> not relevant to Apple they are, by definition,  meaningless.
> Not about everything, to be sure, but as a rule of  thumb.
> I have long ago figured that much out. Ernie says it is a bad  idea.
> Does it fit in with the Apple universe? If not, therefore it is  a bad 
idea
> no matter how good it actually is.

Not fair.   Some of your ideas really are bad, but most of them are good 
ideas.  But  they’re *just* ideas.


> I don't need money ???
>   
> Oh, yeah?

Of course you WILL need money.  But first you  need to *prove out* you idea 
to the point where it is worth investing  in.

http://www.quora.com/Startup-Advice-and-Strategy/As-first-time-entrepreneurs
-what-part-of-the-process-are-people-often-completely-blind-to/answer/Mike-S
ellers

>  An idea is not a design
> A design is not a prototype
> A  prototype is not a program
> A program is not a product
> A  product is not a business
> A business is not profits
> Profits  are not an exit
> And an exit is not happiness.

The reason I get  annoyed is that you whine about nobody giving you money 
to build a Product  when all you have is an Idea.

You do NOT need money to turn an idea  into an actual design.   That just 
takes time and effort. And I know  you’re fully capable of doing the research.

But the critical factor in  a good design is *making the right tradeoffs*.  
 Which requires  understanding where previous attempts made the *wrong* 
tradeoffs, and  ruthlessly cutting anything that isn’t essential for the 
survival of the  product.

Show me a solid *Design* that demonstrates you understand and  are willing 
to make the necessary tradeoffs, and I WILL work with you to get  the money 
to build a Prototype.

— Ernie  P.





-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to