<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC
 "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN"
 "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">
]>
<rdf:RDF
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>
<channel rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog">
<title>Confessions of an expert</title>
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog</link>
<description>Thoughts on expertising</description>
<dc:language>en-gb</dc:language>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2012-05-03T15:43:24+03:00</dc:date>
<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://nanoblogger.sourceforge.net" />
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2012/05/index.html#e2012-05-03T15_43_17.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/06/index.html#e2011-06-12T14_58_23.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/05/index.html#e2011-05-23T22_25_57.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/04/index.html#e2011-04-30T15_17_39.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/09/index.html#e2010-09-29T11_48_24.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-24T12_10_16.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-16T17_44_17.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-02T11_59_46.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/04/index.html#e2010-04-21T16_21_33.txt" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/04/index.html#e2010-04-18T15_55_14.txt" />
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2012/05/index.html#e2012-05-03T15_43_17.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2012/05/index.html#e2012-05-03T15_43_17.txt</link>
<title>Good software doesn't have past</title>
<dc:date>2012-05-03T15:43:17+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>
Good software:
<ul>
<li>is young,</li>
<li>is slim,</li>
<li>doesn't say no,</li>
<li>knows what is supposed to do,</li>
<li>makes me look good and</li>
<li>doesn't have a past!</li>
</ul>
</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/06/index.html#e2011-06-12T14_58_23.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/06/index.html#e2011-06-12T14_58_23.txt</link>
<title>Free will</title>
<dc:date>2011-06-12T14:58:23+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>Destiny comes from history and chance comes from future.<br/>If your 
future is guided by your destiny, you have no chance in future.</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/05/index.html#e2011-05-23T22_25_57.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/05/index.html#e2011-05-23T22_25_57.txt</link>
<title>I C</title>
<dc:date>2011-05-23T22:25:57+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>Default is reached by default. Well that is obvious, but when you have defaulted? This meaning that you have reach self-evidence and you are 
observer not a designer.</p>

<p>If you are a fatalist or a modernist, the designers task is to pre see and define something that will be later on self-evident. Maximium of 
this is a faith of universal progress, a singular path of development, a natural order of things. You can only default.</p>

<p>If you are a post-modernist, the designers task is to see the possibilities present so that anything can be possbile. Minimum of this is a 
possibility.</p>

<p>So what can U C?</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/04/index.html#e2011-04-30T15_17_39.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2011/04/index.html#e2011-04-30T15_17_39.txt</link>
<title>Noisence</title>
<dc:date>2011-04-30T15:17:39+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>
<dc:subject>NanoBlogger Help</dc:subject>
<description><![CDATA[<h3>
Noice doesn't lie. It is the absolut truth.
</h3>
<p>
I try to transmit a lie called x.<br/>
My lie is affeted by noise and y emerges.<br/>
y is recieved by reciever.<br/>
</p>
<p>
I transmitted no truth in x, but the reciever can interpet the truth from the y.
</p>
<p>
I try to transmit a truth called x.<br/>
My lie is affeted by noise and y emerges.<br/>
y is recieved by reciever.<br/>
</p>
<p>
I transmitted a truth in x and the reciever can interpet the truth from the y.
</p>

<p>Lie must be designed. Noice is not designed, but it exists, so it is the absolut truth.</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/09/index.html#e2010-09-29T11_48_24.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/09/index.html#e2010-09-29T11_48_24.txt</link>
<title>Plato vs. Aristotle</title>
<dc:date>2010-09-29T11:48:24+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<h4>In this fight Plato wins in theory, but Aristotle in actuality.</h4>
<p>There is no internet. There is no law. There is no abstraction that can be. Many things, that we for 
our convenience call into being, are not. We must remember this or we lose the sanity of our endavour.</p>
<p>RFC1925 addresses this in its 1st rule for networking "(1) It Has To Work."
Abstractions are only usable as long as they actualise output.</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-24T12_10_16.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-24T12_10_16.txt</link>
<title>Who's porblem?</title>
<dc:date>2010-06-24T12:10:16+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>Problems are valuable because they can be turned into solutions and widely applicable solutions are innovations. Problem of problems is that efficient 
planing of problem emergence is close to oxymoron. When no problems emerge on operations there is no addtional value created and the whole process should be 
automated.</p>

<p>Risk management could be re-engineered to a Problem emergence planing, but the precieved best-practises are focused on working into a opposite direction. 
Risk management is seen more as a ensurance sense (every risk that actualises is a cost) and not as a financial sense (every risk that actualises is just 
movement within error margin +/-). In the ensurance paradigm who would buy other entities risks for them selves, but in the finance paradigm risk is the only 
thing worth buying as any other value should have been actualised already.</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-16T17_44_17.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-16T17_44_17.txt</link>
<title>Technology is</title>
<dc:date>2010-06-16T17:44:17+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>Technology = ((Phenomena + Applicability) * User_Base) / Cost_of_Adaptation</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-02T11_59_46.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/06/index.html#e2010-06-02T11_59_46.txt</link>
<title>art of innovation</title>
<dc:date>2010-06-02T11:59:46+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>Artist is a person who has something to say and a way to 
say it.</p>

<p>Innovator is a person who has a problem and some means 
to solve it.</p>

<p>Social innovation needs social problems to be 
innovations?</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/04/index.html#e2010-04-21T16_21_33.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/04/index.html#e2010-04-21T16_21_33.txt</link>
<title>Jargon is not a TLA</title>
<dc:date>2010-04-21T16:21:33+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<h>There are many kinds of Marketing Materials</h>

<p>I like go on vendor sites to Products page and there 
not to Features but to Specifications. I have a hint on 
what the TLAs are about and the jargon on features 
seems redundant. Still to be honest I can't say how 
those specifications are verified and so I would be 
just as informed, if would read through the Features 
page.</p> 
<p>Most likely we all gravitate to what is familiar to 
us. Those who like TLAs go to them. TLA it self carries 
little information and it's interpretation is highly 
contextual. So eventual Specifications page can more 
reflect my hopes than a Features page so I probably make 
less factual informed purchase decisions than non TLA 
declined.</p>
<p>But is the fact that I would make faster decisions the edge 
that actually would make me some what more expert.</p>]]></description>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/04/index.html#e2010-04-18T15_55_14.txt">
<link>http://larry.hlan.net/blog/archives/2010/04/index.html#e2010-04-18T15_55_14.txt</link>
<title>Known, Proven, Trusted</title>
<dc:date>2010-04-18T15:55:14+03:00</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Lari Korpi</dc:creator>

<description><![CDATA[<p>
You establish Trust by Proving you Knowledge.<br/>
You Prove your Knowledge by implementation.<br/>
You get to implement if you are Trusted.<br/>
</p>
<p>
There are two ways to break in to this cycle:
<ul>
<li>discredit someone who is in and offer your self as replacement</li>
<li>co-operate with someone who will move on and recommend you as replacement.</li>
</ul>
</p>
<p>
Machiavelli in Prince asks: Is it better to be feared or loved?<br/>
The conclusion is that not everyone will ever love their Prince, but everyone can fear him. How have you made your moves?
</p>]]></description>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>

