If You Want to Avoid Failure, Map the Path and Refuse It
If you want to avoid failure, analyze the paths that lead to it—and refuse to walk them
If you want to avoid failure, analyze the paths that lead to it—and refuse to walk them
The validity of a model can be judged by whether it unleashes or constrains productive forces, and whether it achieves the goal of reducing costs and increasing efficiency.
The corporate lingo at big tech firms: when departments get together to hash things out, they call it "synergizing"; updating your boss on what's happening on your end is "syncing," and you can't confuse that with "aligning," which is reserved for cross-departmental contexts.
From a company's perspective, repeatability means stability—and stability means profit. If WeChat goes down, Alipay can't process payments, or Huawei devices can't make calls, companies face existential threats in minutes. This is why such systems demand individual stability: the ability to perform these repetitive tasks reliably. #ReadingNotes# The same applies to individuals—only stability brings steady cash flow.
"Good students like to tackle difficult problems," but in some positions, there simply aren't any hard problems to solve. After working long-term in a cog-like role, you slowly end up only capable of doing level 1.0 work, despite having the ability to do level 2.0. "The ultimate meaning of a company's existence is to realize human potential, but in big tech firms, some people are wasted because there are too many talented individuals." #ReadingNotes#