Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

news.cornell.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 354 posts

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#301

Post by Nekorosu »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #260
sp1nningaway wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this also explains some of our political climate. Everything the current administration says sounds like gibberish and equivocation to me, but to its intended audience it is a clear communication about wielding power and grift. Conversely, when someone talks about "decolonizing" a curriculum or "centering" marginalized voices, to me it's a clear statement about who gets to define meaning and whose history cou…

> The Russian language has two different words for what most European languages would describe as lies. One is lozh (ложь), best translated into what we consider to be a lie; something that is the opposite of the truth. There is also vranyo (враньё). Vranyo is more than a simple lie. It is described as: ‘You know I’m lying, and I know that you know, and you know that I know that you know, but I go ahead with a straig…

My first language is Russian. I’m not young, so I remember a bit of the Soviet era and many of the paper books I read as a child. I perceive lozh and vranyo as nearly synonymous, depending on the context. The only difference I notice is that vranyo can occur without ill intent, while lozh is told deliberately to deceive.

I found the source of this new alternative interpretation https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-vranyo-russian-for-w...

I call it BS.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#302

Post by hunterpayne »

sp1nningaway wrote: post #239
jvanderbot wrote: post #164

It's surprising to me that people don't consider these coded language. Sure, the junior manager might use them vaguely to mimic, but IMHO, when vague language comes up at decision tables, it's usually coding something more precise in a sort of plausible deniability. A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time. A senior director…

I think this also explains some of our political climate. Everything the current administration says sounds like gibberish and equivocation to me, but to its intended audience it is a clear communication about wielding power and grift. Conversely, when someone talks about "decolonizing" a curriculum or "centering" marginalized voices, to me it's a clear statement about who gets to define meaning and whose history cou…

[flagged]

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#303

Post by swed420 »

pjerem wrote: post #60
johnsillings wrote: post #44

SOCIOPATHS │ SOCIOPATHS WITH MBAs │ SOCIOPATHS WHO LIKE POWERPOINT │ OVERWORKED DOERS │ CONFUSED PEOPLE │ LOSERS

that's genius.

Then you might enjoy this:

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#304

Post by hunterpayne »

sp1nningaway wrote: post #247
oblio wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "decolonizing" a curriculum or "centering" marginalized voices Can you expand on this?

Those are just examples of academic/progressive jargon that I hear often in the Bay Area and in progressive circles. "Decolonizing," could mean for instance changing world history curriculum to cover non-western civilizations. "Centering" seems like maybe it just means focusing on, but there is a whole academic apparatus for designing curriculum around say, indigenous practices, and centering is the word used for tha…

What you write is true but it is also a bit dishonest. You are culling the questionable ideas being signaled out of your explanation. Really no different from MAGA folks who claim Trump is playing 4D chess or people who defended Hans Reiser because he wrote a really great filesystem. People don't tend to believe things that they don't want to be true (even if they are). Specifically, the fact that people who use this jargon actively oppose meritocracy (and thus aren't actually liberals) but instead want a demographically based quota system for all jobs and positions. This is why they abuse statistics and reasoning so badly in their analysis.

If these people weren't able to influence local governmental policies, then it would be fine to leave out the details. However, they are and so leaving out the bad parts of the policies they push is just dishonest and why the other side's propaganda is working so well right now. The biggest problem with that is that it makes politics more extreme (in both directions) and this is generally bad for the rest of us. So next time, don't leave out the actual practical effects of this type of politics and its messaging.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#305

Post by hunterpayne »

layer8 wrote: post #84
throwway120385 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Design Patterns is more like the Human Factors and Ergonomics Handbook. You can have your building engineered, in which case building walls out of 2x6's 16 inches on center is not off the table, but neither is a mortise and tenon timber frame with partition walls. In that paradigm, the code tries not to be descriptive of an exact technique but only gives you criteria to satisfy. For example you could run all of your…

I disagree with that take. Design patterns are a language for (= give standard names to) patterns that tend to repeatedly occur in code, so that we can efficiently communicate about them. Programmers working in the respective contexts tend to reinvent them sooner or later if they don’t know them already, so it makes sense to circulate the knowledge about them. But that doesn’t mean that they are prescriptive.

You aren't wrong. The problem with this is the overuse of it. Its the main thing people criticize Java for. Even though it doesn't have anything to do with Java language but instead has to do with Java the business ecosystem or culture. When these are overused, that's when it becomes an in-group/out-group jargon thing.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#306

Post by Paracompact »

mikrl wrote: post #245
astrange wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought a mezzanine was when you go see a movie at noon.

That’s a martingale you’re thinking of

Actually, I think he's referring to the resplendent angel of the Kabbalah, Metatron. In the Jewish canon, Metatron is a big film buff.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#308

Post by gzread »

rebolek wrote: post #178
thewebguyd wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I agree. Language has always been a tool for tribal gatekeeping and in-group signaling, but also as a tool for precision. What's specifically interesting about corpo-speak though is it's one of the only version of this (at least that I know of) where it's main purpose is to be euphemistic. In most other fields, the coded language is meant to be more descriptive to the in-group. In management, the coded language…

It's not like they're very subtle about this with their "human resources" horror speak.

That's why they call them People Team now! I still call them HR, but they call themselves and management calls them The People Team.

Can we go back to Personnel or Staffing? Those are nice and neutral by today's standards...

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#309

Post by gzread »

johnisgood wrote: post #233
jvanderbot wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think those are just degree of difference in "context required to understand", not different categories.

You think so, with a term such as "culture building"?

Culture exists and can be built. Building it intentionally is basically impossible, but also an obvious thing to try to do if you don't know that.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#310

Post by gzread »

jonahx wrote: post #90
CGMthrowaway wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a sieve to keep the hordes of fools at bay Corporate speak as a signalling mechanism is only effective among the "clueless" in the Gervais model. If any CEO tried to talk 1:1 to a competent board member that way, they would lose all credibility. Once you've operated at a certain level you get it >a system for turning bullshit into parse errors. This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corpor…

> They have to set vision and direction A prime example of corporate speak that is, as you rightly said, 'only effective among the "clueless"'

No. It means things
Post reply on HN