3 ms·

>But the GOBN is part of leadership. Are you saying that the ability to network is a part of leadership? Perhaps I'm a dullard but could you clarify what you m

by phaus 13y ago

>But the GOBN is part of leadership. Are you saying that the ability to network is a part of leadership? Perhaps I'm a dullard but could you clarify what you meant?

gumby 13y ago
I'm saying that being embedded in the matrix of movers and shakers is necessary (although not sufficient) to become one yourself. "Ability to network" is not sufficient -- I am well networked into an infrastructure of nerds. But by declining to go to Harvard for university and instead choosing to go to MIT, I cut myself off from that network. ⅓ of my graduating class (13/39) did choose to go to Harvard and they all landed on their feet one way or another. The whole point of scholarships was to try to inject some meritocracy into this network. Look at many of the most successful tech entrepreneurs and you'll see this same GOB phenomenon. Bill Gates' mother was on the United Way board with the CEO of IBM. Chad Hurley (at Youtube) was the son in law of Jim Clark. etc etc. These connections are not usually mentioned in the hagiographies. By the way here's another example: my high school and harvard university are about the same age and there is a lot of interlinkage between the institutions. So it's not surprising that a large proportion of its graduates go there. The high school is super aggressive about not admitting kids of the GOB network since they'll do OK anyway. But sadly it wasn't alway so.
- phaus 13y ago
  >I'm saying that being embedded in the matrix of movers and shakers is necessary (although not sufficient) to become one yourself. That's kind of what I was getting at. The people who are already in charge generally get to pick the next generation of leaders. While this is the way things are done in our current reality, it doesn't give current leaders, future leaders, or the institutions that prop them up a legitimate claim to natural leadership ability. Basically, all our democracy has managed to accomplish lately is to prove that monarchies don't necessarily depend on blood-relations to function.

by phaus 13y ago

>But the GOBN is part of leadership. Are you saying that the ability to network is a part of leadership? Perhaps I'm a dullard but could you clarify what you meant?

gumby 13y ago

I'm saying that being embedded in the matrix of movers and shakers is necessary (although not sufficient) to become one yourself. "Ability to network" is not sufficient -- I am well networked into an infrastructure of nerds. But by declining to go to Harvard for university and instead choosing to go to MIT, I cut myself off from that network. ⅓ of my graduating class (13/39) did choose to go to Harvard and they all landed on their feet one way or another. The whole point of scholarships was to try to inject some meritocracy into this network. Look at many of the most successful tech entrepreneurs and you'll see this same GOB phenomenon. Bill Gates' mother was on the United Way board with the CEO of IBM. Chad Hurley (at Youtube) was the son in law of Jim Clark. etc etc. These connections are not usually mentioned in the hagiographies. By the way here's another example: my high school and harvard university are about the same age and there is a lot of interlinkage between the institutions. So it's not surprising that a large proportion of its graduates go there. The high school is super aggressive about not admitting kids of the GOB network since they'll do OK anyway. But sadly it wasn't alway so.

phaus 13y ago
>I'm saying that being embedded in the matrix of movers and shakers is necessary (although not sufficient) to become one yourself. That's kind of what I was getting at. The people who are already in charge generally get to pick the next generation of leaders. While this is the way things are done in our current reality, it doesn't give current leaders, future leaders, or the institutions that prop them up a legitimate claim to natural leadership ability. Basically, all our democracy has managed to accomplish lately is to prove that monarchies don't necessarily depend on blood-relations to function.