A few weeks back my book review of two “the robots are taking over” came out over on The New Stack. Here’s some responses, and also some highlights from a McKinsey piece on automation. Don’t call it “automation” From John Allspaw: There is much more to this topic. Nick Carr’s book, The Glass Cage, has a different perspective. The ramifications of new technology (don’t call it automation) are notoriously difficult to predict, and what we think are forgone conclusions (unemployment of truck drivers even though the tech for self-driving cars needs to see much more diversity of conditions before it can get to the 99%+ accuracy) are not.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

A nice discussion that highlights the complexity id trade policy and, thus, rhe high risks of fucking it up. I like this critique of trade criticism: What makes Navarro’s critique challenging is that it’s not wholly wrong, at least from the American worker perspective, yet it’s not particularly actionable. So often, that last part is overlooked: you have to actually be able to on something, despite the past. Until we have time machines, finding flaws and suggesting how we should have fixed them is little use on its own.

The big takeaway is that small increases in IT budgets are the new normal. Unlike previous recoveries, we have not seen a large jump in IT spending over the past five years. So if a CIO is only seeing a two or three percent increase this year, he or she should understand that is pretty much in line with other companies. See more guidance charts on IT priorities, n=190.

The big takeaway is that small increases in IT budgets are the new normal. Unlike previous recoveries, we have not seen a large jump in IT spending over the past five years. So if a CIO is only seeing a two or three percent increase this year, he or she should understand that is pretty much in line with other companies. See more guidance charts on IT priorities, n=190.