My first computer game design was in 1977–I came up with a version of Star Wars. It was almost nothing like the movie, but it was a pretty good game for something running on a mainframe.
The Godfather isn’t a perfect retelling of the book. But it’s a better movie as a result.
A really good recording doesn’t sound like a live concert or what you’d hear sitting in the studio. It sounds like a really good record. And when Alan Dean Foster and I turned Shadowkeep from a computer game into a novel, the goal wasn’t to replicate a computer game, it was to create a good novel.
When a medium arrives, or time shifts, it’s sometimes tempting to aim for a complete reconstruction of what came before. Follow the rules, don’t innovate. But that’s a mistake–a safe choice that’s actually a trap.
People desire media that is in and of itself. Each form of media has its own character, and fidelity from one form to another is a compromise that rarely works.
Because the world has changed, original isn’t original anymore. It can’t be, even if we want it to, because now it’s out of place. Just as we can’t step in the same river twice, each innovation in media forces us to walk away from fidelity to honor what’s possible.
Fidelity might feel like an option, and it takes effort and care. But is fidelity the best you can do?
When we switch media, or time zones, or cultures, or technology, it’s up to us to make the idea what it can become, not simply an unpalatable simulacrum of what it was over there.
March 16, 2022
Benchmarking involves looking at every element of what you offer and comparing it to the very best element of any of your competitors.
So your door handle is as good as the Audi’s, and your brake pedal is as good as the Volvo’s and…
It’s pretty tempting to do this. Who wants any element of what they do to be inferior to a competitor’s?
And yet…
That’s almost never what makes something remarkable (it’s worth noting that the Ford Taurus was the car that brought benchmarking to my attention… who wants a Ford Taurus?).
What makes something remarkable is a combination of its internal synergy—the parts work together as a coherent whole—and its imbalance. Something about it is worth talking about. Something about it is hard to find. Something about it helps us achieve our goals if we talk about it.
This uneven allocation of attention is the opposite of benchmarking. Find your edge and go over it.
March 15, 2022
Whatever “it” is.
That’s probably a mistake.
People don’t know what you know, don’t believe what you believe, don’t fear what you fear. They’re not equally skilled, equally fast and equally equipped.
“If I were you” isn’t that helpful.
March 14, 2022
Who decided that this was a good way for a group to interact?
It’s all the worst elements of synchronous and asynchronous discussion rolled into one. It prioritizes speed of reply over thoughtfulness, and creates a hard-to-manage non-coordinated sort of discovery and decision making.
If it’s worth taking the time of the team, it’s worth doing it in a shared doc or in real-time. Neither is as convenient, both reward thinking hard about how we want to move things forward.
March 13, 2022
The system is lazy. It focuses on the things that are easy to measure: How fast can you type, what was your score on the test, how many followers do you have?
One way to move forward is to learn discernment. You can discover overlooked value by measuring things that are difficult to measure.
And finding the energy and commitment to do things that others might not easily measure in the short run is the best way to make a difference.
March 12, 2022
A simple approach to learning how to solicit and receive feedback: Begin by showing a well-meaning peer someone else’s novel, painting, design or business plan…
You might discover that when you show it to a friend (“here’s a chapter from a novel I’m writing” or “Here’s the logo my firm is considering”) you get harsh, direct criticism, filled with certainty and warning.
It’s easier to hear, because it’s not your work. They’re busy criticizing a chapter that JK Rowling wrote, or a logo that the late Milton Glaser created.
“Oh,” you’ll realize, “this isn’t about the work, it’s about me, it’s about someone trying to help me avoid heartache later.”
It turns out that most people are unpracticed and unprofessional at giving useful feedback. Learning to differentiate well-meaning fear-on-your-behalf from actually useful insight is a great first step in understanding who to ask when it really matters.
We don’t need unwarranted criticism or simple reassurance. In fact, we need someone who understands genre and has the insight to share what they know in a way we can use.
March 11, 2022
It’s scary. That’s the point.
Pick a date certain. You’re on the hook.
Describe a particular type of client, or even choose one by name.
Be really clear about the change you seek to make.
Put your name on it.
Charge a fair price.
Assert that you’ve got something to say.
Know what you are doing and then act like it.
Avoid gimmicks and hustle.
These are all ways to put yourself on the hook. Is there any better place to be?
March 10, 2022
It probably doesn’t pay to buy your prom dress when you are 12 years old. You’re not sure of the size, not sure of what styles will be like and not even sure you want to go.
On the other hand, filing your taxes an hour before the deadline is a risk that doesn’t really pay off.
The last minute is an easy habit to fall into. Once you start focusing on crises, it makes it really difficult to find the focus and energy to begin planning ahead. But the last minute can be risky and expensive.
If something is:
- Far off
- Unlikely to happen
- Cheap to fix if it does
- Not sensitive to advance planning
the last minute might be a smart strategy. On the other hand, events that have some combination of:
- Certainty
- Known variables
- High cost later (lower cost now)
lend themselves to the discipline of planning ahead.
If it’s not worth the time to do the calculation, it’s probably not worth waiting for the last minute.
March 9, 2022
Technology/science
Resources
Information
For a long time, we had no clue. We didn’t know about germs or viruses. We thought that ulcers were caused by pastrami sandwiches. We went to the barber for bloodletting and didn’t understand genes or evolution.
Technology in medicine, the science of understanding and intervening, has made huge leaps. There are more to come, but most of what ails us is very well understood.
As we’ve developed more of an understanding of technology, we’ve also dramatically increased the number of resources we put into healthcare. Particularly in parts of the privileged world, but also worldwide, we spend more on clean water, pharmaceuticals, surgery etc. than we ever did before.
The real problem of healthcare in this moment is information. We hamstring well-meaning healthcare professionals, burdening them with forms and scans and processes simply because their institutions don’t have a better way to collect and share information. We suffer from cranks, trolls and charlatans because we don’t have a systemic, trusted way to share what we already know about how our health works. And all of us make damaging lifestyle choices that erode the world’s health far more than any disease.
Information about technology and resources is the key to using the tools we already have. Who needs help, when they need help and what help they need–we’re doing a lousy job of this.
In one sense, the information problem is good news. Because we keep getting better at information. In two decades, we went from a visit to the library to Google. We have access to more science, more location and historical data and more behavior insight in the last few years than in all of recorded history before that.
Humans are always going to be fearful and superstitious when it comes to our health. We’ll probably continue to fall into bad habits and make panicked choices. The answer might not be a scientific breakthrough or more money spent on a new device. It might simply be allowing skilled practitioners to bring their care and insight to the right people in the right moment.
March 8, 2022
To make an album of music good enough to make it to the Top 40, it used to cost a million dollars. Now you can do it in your bedroom.
To make a commercial for network TV, a minute of footage cost about a million dollars…
And that same million was what it would cost to create an email engine for permission-based marketing in 1996.
And you needed a million dollars to build a website that could hold up under a lot of traffic, or to build a social media presence that would reach a million people.
All of these things are now incredibly cheap.
A veteran marketer’s first reaction is relief at how inexpensive so many tools now are.
But the reality is that the reduction in cost means that price is not a barrier, and when it comes to producing your message, your movie, your song, your site, your book–everyone else is now doing it as well.
And yet, more than a decade into this dramatic compression of the gap, big-time marketers and industry players are still acting as if the gap is still there, as if their ‘professional’ creations are only competing with each other for attention.
Abundance creates new kinds of scarcity.
March 7, 2022
