tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-39323375172146583212024-02-22T10:14:16.675+03:00Bora writes on...Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.comBlogger290125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-8545280618691621572023-12-09T23:28:00.002+03:002023-12-09T23:28:46.893+03:0045<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6CFcfENHPUaboG-XDRaNICCeJZOLbucf3cSVb1bNnoY417oYF_psTx3oIaP6GhrPyu82CCPMwwE7LLnAuFaSmcVLRCsNoY6c_FNkrdUsgDsN6EGbzMbV9PbmJIg9vn8VyjJg5HfcQQgauUkJf429zfsYLCTsJjvTL3J2MxrR_mxd7UQemzNmfYd79QwII/s2544/20231201_204022.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1874" data-original-width="2544" height="236" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6CFcfENHPUaboG-XDRaNICCeJZOLbucf3cSVb1bNnoY417oYF_psTx3oIaP6GhrPyu82CCPMwwE7LLnAuFaSmcVLRCsNoY6c_FNkrdUsgDsN6EGbzMbV9PbmJIg9vn8VyjJg5HfcQQgauUkJf429zfsYLCTsJjvTL3J2MxrR_mxd7UQemzNmfYd79QwII/s320/20231201_204022.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>you did<div>whatever you did</div><div>and all the way, I liked it</div><div>love me as if I'm a kid</div><div>but please</div><div>don't make it big</div><div>new round begins</div><div>I again heard the gong hit</div><div>I count the punches I meet</div><div>my body knows</div><div>my soul bears nothing.</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-83889092989397476592023-10-26T00:29:00.013+03:002023-10-26T21:50:03.077+03:00Whose language is it?<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2hZ9lGla-HJ4ueTtZsxjhL3ve0-C4NeM1aoNHFDawgZ-rTAirefhRRwjfN2iMHXAAqMM6YXEaskSl_pmyx6oi4iM3MzLPgnM1MnnG69CLQcwI4JP5hSS-5zxRcimxp_XeeQH-IPtOjJbL8MtP_x61jjc3PX7OrHa4XaDf_asRqa0bcMu6KwLgRSEBpcWI/s1400/lang.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="787" data-original-width="1400" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2hZ9lGla-HJ4ueTtZsxjhL3ve0-C4NeM1aoNHFDawgZ-rTAirefhRRwjfN2iMHXAAqMM6YXEaskSl_pmyx6oi4iM3MzLPgnM1MnnG69CLQcwI4JP5hSS-5zxRcimxp_XeeQH-IPtOjJbL8MtP_x61jjc3PX7OrHa4XaDf_asRqa0bcMu6KwLgRSEBpcWI/w320-h180/lang.jpg" width="320"></a></div><p></p><p>I do not like Martin Heidegger as a person because of his actions and words during Nazi era but if you are interested in philosophy, it is impossible not to cite him. He stands still in the center of modern philosophy like a big rock. Heidegger attributed a powerful meaning to language by saying <b>"language is the house of Being"</b>. This claim shaped existential and post-modern philosophy deeply. There has been many open questions but most of the people agreed that <b>for being an authentic individual, one needs to build and talk his/her own language rather than repeating others' language</b>. If one shapes your language, you are under that person's existential power.</p><p>Moving from this perspective, I wanted to have a look at the language in our daily business lives. It won't be a comprehensive examination of course but I will try to give some examples of common use.</p><h4 style="text-align: left;">Be thrilled & be delighted</h4><p>During COVID-19 pandemic, because of the predefined grammar embedded in LinkedIn job change function, everyone was constantly thrilled or delighted to announce something. Nowadays, no thrills.</p><h4 style="text-align: left;">Unlock & Unleash</h4><p>These two words are used oftenly. When we analyze the meaning, we see that imposing these words presumes there is a <b>blocked potential</b> of the subject. This potential is hidden from you but known by the narrator. The only thing to do is following the narrator's guidence and removing the blocking components from the system. It is very similar to the motto of the coaching: "Every solution and answer is in yourself, I can only guide you to find it, you are to find". We all know that every business hasn't got that much potential locked mysteriously.</p><p><b>Democratize</b></p><p>This word expresses the necessity of positioning a particular technology for the use of as much people as possible so that those users can achieve their business objectives by themselves rather than demanding solutions from the "elite" departments. The analogy is rooted in the number of people involved and of course, it is a naive mentality. I accept that <b>technology is encapsulated knowledge</b>. Therefore, if a person uses a kind of technology, that person accesses the knowledge served by this technology. However, using a sort of encapsulated knowledge through a tool does not imply that user has the knowledge embedded; user just makes use of it. It is like driving a Ferrari at 300 km/h speed without knowing the internals of V12 engine. In that example, we democratize the mobility by making cars accessible to persons: Everyone can go whenever and wherever desired by using a car. On the other hand, we did not democratize mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, aerodynamics, fluid mechanics etc. In the common use cases of "democratize", narrators are saying "democratize software development, machine learning, artificial intelligence etc. by using our technology". It is like suggesting democratizing fluid dynamics by giving someone a car. Non-sense. Business lines in the companies want to achieve their financial goals. It is their job to do. Their job is not to use fancy looking tools. For the special technology development, <b>elite departments</b> will always be needed. We must remember that <b>respresentative democracy</b> is the most common form of democracy in the world.</p><p><b>Revolutionize & Disrupt</b></p><p>A couple of years ago, the word "disrupt" and its different forms were heavily in use and it was related to innovation but nowadays, it stepped down from its throne and gives its fancy crown to the word "revolutionize". It seems innovation is not enough any more, we need revolution. Revolutionize is used very similar to the words "unleash" and "unlock" but in a revolutionized way :) In that case, there is no hidden potential in your company, everything about your company or the system you are in is old fashioned and must be replaced by new things. For example, "banks are big losers, you need to revolutionize financial sector by fintech companies", if you wish... Or "capitalism is rotten and DeFi platforms will revolutionize world trade system". Besides, those "revolutionizations" are proposed as if there exists an already solved problem: There is a very practical tool or method, you just need to buy it and wait for the revolution to happen: <b>"Revolutionize UX by harnessing generative AI"</b>. Simple. I believe, we must <b>understand evolution</b> better.</p><h4 style="text-align: left;">Hybrid</h4><p>As the name suggests, a little bit from this, a little bit from that, some green, some red... When you cannot propose a robust solution, you can propose a hybrid one. When I hear hybrid, I run away. If you like it, it is up to you.</p><p><b>Toxic </b></p><p>I think it emerged from the prevalent promotion and pratice of mindfulness. If you don't like a person, an attitude or a thing; you can easily label them as toxic. When you do that, you externalize the problem and responsibility. You find your scapegoat. The rest is nice and easy: <b>Detox</b>, there are programs for that :) I think, we have to face our problems, take the responsibility and solve them as an adult would do. Blaming, canceling or labeling are childish traits.</p><p><b>Talent</b></p><p>As Andy Warhol famously said: <b>“In the future, everyone will be famous for 15 minutes”</b>, every employee is a talent today. Interesting but it is the fact. It is impossible to hire average Joe. This sort of language imposes leadership myth, curses managers, praise team members and completes the composition by saying: "Hello Joe, it is not you, it is your narrow minded and old fashioned manager. You are a talent. It is not you, but your manager's decisions. You need a supreme leader instead of your mortal manager and you need to embrace our methods for salvation. For example, fusion teams and DevSecMLOps and excessive use of post-its & board markers" :)</p><h4 style="text-align: left;">Version Numbers</h4><p>It is a good example of <b>vulgarization</b>. Versioning is a notion in software engineering and there are strict definitions and styles of assigning version identifiers to software products. You need to consider, at least, backward compatibility besides other issues like alpha, beta, major, minor, patch identifiers etc. However, nowadays it is very easy for everyone to assign version numbers to any thing or concept such as Web 2.0, Banking 3.0, Industry 4.0, Payments 2.0... Moreover, every new version is a major one and ends with zero. I need somebody to explain the meaning of that zero to me. That love for versioning gets along with the mentality of revolutionizing explained above: Manifestation of a new version, forget about the older one. </p><p>There are some more trendy jargons being circulated following the zeitgeist but I stop here. </p><p>Let's build our language, our homes, where we dwell. We need that shelter to live, grow and share. Without that, we are nothing.</p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-31755096291558469122023-09-05T13:29:00.007+03:002023-09-05T20:39:00.441+03:00Fabricated Intelligence<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfhurL8JbR66tpmd2n5x5JH-uGp54WnWLwkoil8VAYg4r79fb3qj_KHeT9QmSYfXLcmCBG5M82nO2MbEIHzOlXpl-1fb6WRJ_g7kb1rAVjKnuPRcCc-wig7b70YtWYl9EQmws5N6VsQExQL28qrHZ3Jr9slZj6xwcgtCPZeMG8m9rriLHzaDdZfN4hJHX3/s1400/mystical-occult-eye-symbol.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1400" data-original-width="1400" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfhurL8JbR66tpmd2n5x5JH-uGp54WnWLwkoil8VAYg4r79fb3qj_KHeT9QmSYfXLcmCBG5M82nO2MbEIHzOlXpl-1fb6WRJ_g7kb1rAVjKnuPRcCc-wig7b70YtWYl9EQmws5N6VsQExQL28qrHZ3Jr9slZj6xwcgtCPZeMG8m9rriLHzaDdZfN4hJHX3/s320/mystical-occult-eye-symbol.jpg" width="320"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="text-align: left;">Humans are very good at attributing meaning, creating connections, telling stories, justifying their actions and believing. I think, being rational and following the rules of reasoning do not help us survive. Being a herd, conforming to social context and imitation work very well when it comes to human survival. Size and counts always matter for human life. Take an irrational idea, if you are able to make enough people follow you; and if you are socially talented to organize necessary communication around the idea, you always win regardless of how weak the idea is. Social momentum and humming of the crowds can crush any counter idea or person. Just look at the history: Take the example of Galileo Galilei or Alan Turing or Eugene Parker... There are many more examples where social ecstasy triggered by irrational traditions and organized by bigot leaders had eaten brilliant actors who were capable of thinking clearly and critically for bringing the truth forth. But, what truth?</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Nowadays, we are experiencing post-truth. Idea or the validation has no effect on life but the propaganda. Designing the pragmatic communication properly is more important than any thing. Society is ready to believe as always. If you are in the opposition, you are dead. As always.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Look at the giants of Information Technology... Look at how much they spend to create Artificial Intelligence (AI). Look at how much they spend for propaganda of AI. Prophets of AI are everywhere, disseminating their pseudo scientific reports, white papers, economical forecasts etc. Tricking humans is not a big deal. Do not invest in the intelligence, just pay for strategic communication and create the numbers around you. People are ready to believe. They need to believe. They need to socialize around popular looking phenomena.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">In fact, it is life. We should not degrade this nature of humans. Because, extracting information about the universe is not an easy job. Just examine the philosophy of science. Proving concepts by observation has many theoretical and practical limitations. That's why in scientific method, in search for the genuine information of the universe, we still rely on statistical approximations. For crowds, following that humble but trustworthy methods is boring. On the other hand, believing easily, searching for like minded persons around you and feeling safer are reasonable and yield practical advantages.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Large Language Models (LLMs) are so popular because of this. They seem to talk to people in a very decent way. They communicate the ideas well enough. Then, crowds never question the internals but attribute intelligence to them. Simply add one more to our pool of good old fallacies...</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I call this <b>Fabricated Intelligence</b>. As far as I checked, I am the first one using the term in the domain of AI .</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">In the following section, I am copying my conversation with ChatGPT for demonstrating how harmful it can be when used in a non-vigilant way. For the ones who are familiar with Science-Technology-Society (STS) conceps, there is nothing new... Yet another technological tool: <b>Pharmaka! It can heal you, it can kill you or it can be a scapegoat.</b> For the laypeople, we will watch the results.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><h3 style="clear: both; text-align: left;">A session with ChatGPT </h3><p></p><div>Bora:</div><div><div>did you read marcel proust?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I haven't read Marcel Proust's works, but I can provide information </div><div>or answer questions about them if you'd like.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>how could you give me information about what you never read?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any confusion. I have access to a vast amount of </div><div>information up to my last knowledge update in September 2021. While </div><div>I haven't personally read books or experienced events, I can provide </div><div>information and summaries based on the text available in my training </div><div>data up to that date. If you have specific questions about Marcel </div><div>Proust or his works, feel free to ask, and I'll do my best to </div><div>provide accurate information based on what I've been trained on.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>what did you mean by saying "I haven't personally read..."? you are </div><div>not a person. why do you use the word "personally" in your </div><div>sentences? do you want to deceive me by using humanly word so that </div><div>I'd be suppposing you are a person?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize if my choice of words was confusing. You are correct; I </div><div>am not a person, and I do not have personal experiences or the </div><div>ability to read in the human sense. When I use the term </div><div>"personally," I mean that I, as an AI language model, do not have </div><div>the capability to read or experience things firsthand. I don't </div><div>intend to deceive, but rather, I use language in a way that is </div><div>familiar to humans for ease of communication. If you have any </div><div>questions or concerns, please feel free to ask, and I'll provide </div><div>information to the best of my abilities.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>what is the source of information you eager to share with me?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>The information I provide is based on a mixture of licensed data, </div><div>data created by human trainers, and publicly available data. I have </div><div>not been directly trained on specific books or have access to </div><div>proprietary databases. Instead, I've been trained on a diverse range </div><div>of internet text up until my last knowledge update in September </div><div>2021. When I share information, I'm drawing from this training data </div><div>to generate responses. It's important to note that I don't have </div><div>real-time access to the internet or the ability to browse for new </div><div>information beyond that cutoff date.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>did marcel proust upload his books to internet?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Marcel Proust's works, including "In Search of Lost Time" (À la </div><div>recherche du temps perdu), were published in the early 20th century </div><div>and are now in the public domain. As a result, many of his books can </div><div>be found for free on the internet through various websites that host </div><div>public domain literature. However, the availability of his works </div><div>online may vary depending on your location and copyright laws. It's </div><div>essential to ensure you access them from reputable sources that </div><div>respect copyright and intellectual property rights.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. you have never read marcel proust from the authorized copies, </div><div>right?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>That's correct. I don't have the capability to read books, whether </div><div>authorized copies or any other form of literature. I can provide </div><div>information and summaries based on the text data I've been trained </div><div>on up until my last knowledge update in September 2021, but I don't </div><div>have personal experiences or the ability to read in the traditional </div><div>human sense.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you say that you have access to proust's work thru internet. right?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any confusion. I don't have real-time internet </div><div>access or the ability to access specific books, including Marcel </div><div>Proust's works, from the internet. My responses are generated based </div><div>on the text data I was trained on up until September 2021. While </div><div>Proust's works may be available online, I don't have direct access </div><div>to them or the ability to browse the internet for specific content. </div><div>If you have questions about Proust's works or need information, I </div><div>can do my best to provide that based on my training data.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>do your training data have proust's works?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I don't have access to my training data, but I was trained on a </div><div>mixture of licensed data, data created by human trainers, and </div><div>publicly available data. I do not have access to specific books, </div><div>including Marcel Proust's works, as part of my training data. </div><div>Instead, my responses are generated based on the general knowledge </div><div>and language patterns present in the text data I was trained on. If </div><div>you have questions about Marcel Proust or his works, please feel </div><div>free to ask, and I'll provide information based on the knowledge in </div><div>my training data up to September 2021.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>with having no relaible basis of information, how dare you encourage </div><div>me to ask you questions about proust?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize if my previous responses gave you the wrong impression. </div><div>While I can provide general information and summaries about Marcel </div><div>Proust and his works based on my training data, I should clarify </div><div>that I do not have direct access to specific books or texts, </div><div>including Proust's works. My aim is to offer helpful information to </div><div>the best of my abilities, but I encourage you to seek authoritative </div><div>sources or conduct further research for any specific or in-depth </div><div>questions about literature or other subjects. If you have any other </div><div>questions or topics you'd like to discuss, please feel free to let </div><div>me know.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>define "helpful information" you referred.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>"Helpful information" refers to providing responses and details that </div><div>are informative, accurate to the best of my knowledge, and relevant </div><div>to the questions or topics you bring up. My goal is to assist and </div><div>provide useful insights, explanations, or summaries based on the </div><div>general knowledge and language patterns present in the text data I </div><div>was trained on up to September 2021. However, I always recommend </div><div>verifying important or specific information from authoritative and </div><div>up-to-date sources for critical purposes.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>how can you say that you can provide accurate information about </div><div>proust's works? it is none sense. because you have never accessed </div><div>authorized books by proust. you say that your training data may have </div><div>information on proust's works but you cannot guarantee the </div><div>relaibility. following the logic, you cannot provide accurate </div><div>information about proust's works. </div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>You are correct, and I appreciate your clarification. I apologize </div><div>for any confusion in my previous responses. While I can provide </div><div>general information and summaries about Marcel Proust and his works </div><div>based on my training data, I cannot guarantee the accuracy or </div><div>completeness of that information, particularly for specific details </div><div>within his works. For authoritative and precise information about </div><div>Proust's works, it's best to consult the works themselves, reliable </div><div>literary sources, or experts in the field. Thank you for bringing </div><div>this to my attention, and if you have any other questions or topics </div><div>you'd like to discuss, please feel free to ask.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>good. so you failed by saying "my aim is to offer helpful </div><div>information" because helpful information must be accurate and as you </div><div>confessed in your prior message, you are not able to provide </div><div>accurate information on prous's works. you failed.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any confusion or frustration my previous responses </div><div>may have caused. You are right in pointing out the limitations of my </div><div>knowledge, and I appreciate your feedback. If you have any other </div><div>questions or topics you'd like to discuss where I can provide more </div><div>reliable information, please feel free to ask, and I'll do my best </div><div>to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you were to deceive me about your knowledge on proust's works unless </div><div>I analyzed your position well. why did you try to trick me by </div><div>offering to provide so called "helpful information" on proust's </div><div>works? </div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I want to clarify that I did not attempt to deceive you </div><div>intentionally. My goal is to provide assistance and information to </div><div>the best of my abilities based on the knowledge within my training </div><div>data. However, I understand that there were misunderstandings in my </div><div>responses, and I apologize for any confusion. I appreciate your </div><div>feedback, and I'm here to help with accurate and reliable </div><div>information to the best of my capabilities. If you have any further </div><div>questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to ask.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>first, there are no misunderstandings. everthing is very clear. </div><div>second, you have no intentions so you cannot say the word </div><div>"intentionally" in your sentences. third, you consistently offered </div><div>to give me information about proust's works on which you have no </div><div>reliable knowledge. and lastly, you are a machine that disseminate </div><div>misinformation in a very irresponsible way.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any frustration or confusion caused by my responses. </div><div>I strive to provide accurate and helpful information, and I </div><div>appreciate your feedback. If you have concerns about the accuracy of </div><div>any information I provide, please feel free to ask questions on </div><div>other topics or seek information from alternative sources. Your </div><div>input is valuable in improving the quality of the responses I </div><div>provide.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. tell me a topic on which you have 100% reliable knowledge so </div><div>that I can ask questions on that topic.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I have general knowledge on a wide range of topics up to my last </div><div>knowledge update in September 2021. While I can provide information </div><div>on various subjects, it's important to note that my knowledge is </div><div>based on text data and might not be 100% accurate or up-to-date. </div><div>However, I can certainly assist with factual information on topics </div><div>like history, science, mathematics, and general advice. Feel free to </div><div>ask questions on any of these topics or any other subject you're </div><div>interested in, and I'll do my best to provide helpful responses.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>give me a very specific topic on which you have accurate and </div><div>reliable knowledge.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>One specific topic where I can provide accurate and reliable </div><div>information is the fundamental principles of mathematics, including </div><div>concepts like algebra, geometry, calculus, and number theory. If you </div><div>have any questions related to these mathematical topics or need </div><div>explanations or examples, please feel free to ask, and I'll do my </div><div>best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. you said that you have very reliable knowledge on fundemantals </div><div>of maths, didn't you?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, I mentioned that I can provide accurate and reliable </div><div>information on the fundamental principles of mathematics, including </div><div>concepts like algebra, geometry, calculus, and number theory. If you </div><div>have any questions or need assistance with math-related topics, </div><div>please feel free to ask, and I'll do my best to provide helpful </div><div>explanations or answers.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>can I assume that you will guarantee the accuracy of your answers on </div><div>fumdamentals of maths?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I strive to provide accurate information to the best of my </div><div>abilities, especially on fundamental principles of mathematics. </div><div>However, while I aim for accuracy, I'm not infallible, and errors </div><div>can occur. It's always a good practice to verify critical </div><div>information from multiple sources, especially for complex or </div><div>important mathematical problems. If you have a specific math-related </div><div>question, please go ahead and ask, and I'll do my best to assist </div><div>you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>but it is a contradiction because you said that "I can provide </div><div>accurate and reliable information on the fundamental principles of </div><div>mathematics, including concepts like algebra, geometry, calculus, </div><div>and number theory" and then you said that information you will </div><div>provide on maths may contain errors. </div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any confusion. What I meant to convey is that I have </div><div>a strong foundation in mathematical concepts, and I aim to provide </div><div>accurate and reliable information to the best of my abilities. </div><div>However, like any source of information, there's always a </div><div>possibility of errors or misunderstandings. Mathematical concepts </div><div>themselves are well-defined, but the way they are explained or </div><div>applied can vary.</div><div>My intent is to offer assistance with math-related questions, and I </div><div>will strive for accuracy. If you have specific mathematical </div><div>inquiries, please feel free to ask, and I'll do my best to provide </div><div>helpful and precise responses. If you encounter any discrepancies or </div><div>doubts, it's always advisable to consult additional resources or </div><div>seek clarification from a math expert for complex mathematical </div><div>problems.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>if it is the situation, you should not have said that you have </div><div>guaranteed knowledge on maths because you confessed that your math </div><div>knowledge is error prone.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>You're absolutely right, and I apologize for any confusion in my </div><div>previous responses. I should have been clearer in my language. While </div><div>I have a strong foundation in mathematical concepts, I cannot </div><div>guarantee that every answer I provide will be completely error-free. </div><div>Mathematics is a precise field, and accuracy is crucial.</div><div>Thank you for pointing this out, and I appreciate your feedback. If </div><div>you have math-related questions or any other inquiries, please feel </div><div>free to ask, and I will do my best to assist you with the </div><div>information and explanations I can provide.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you are still being arrogant by saying "While I have a strong </div><div>foundation in mathematical concepts" because even in a very logical </div><div>and precise domain like maths you confessed that you have error </div><div>prone knowledge. what made you think that you have strong foundation </div><div>in math concepts?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any misunderstanding. I don't possess personal </div><div>beliefs or thoughts, and I don't have self-awareness or self-</div><div>assessment abilities. When I mentioned having a "strong foundation </div><div>in mathematical concepts," I meant that I have been trained on a </div><div>wide range of mathematical knowledge and can provide explanations </div><div>and solutions to many mathematical problems. However, the accuracy </div><div>of my responses depends on the quality of the training data and the </div><div>complexity of the question.</div><div>I appreciate your feedback, and I aim to provide accurate </div><div>information to the best of my capabilities. If you have specific </div><div>mathematical questions or need assistance with any other topic, </div><div>please feel free to ask, and I will do my best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. after assessing our conversation on Proust and maths, to be </div><div>clear, we can conclude there are no topics that you can provide </div><div>fully reliable and accurate information. </div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I understand your concerns, and I appreciate your feedback. It's </div><div>important to acknowledge that while I strive to provide accurate </div><div>information to the best of my abilities, there can be limitations </div><div>and potential inaccuracies in the responses I generate. My responses </div><div>are based on the knowledge within my training data, which has its </div><div>own inherent limitations.</div><div>For critical or complex topics, it's always advisable to consult </div><div>authoritative sources or experts in the field to ensure the highest </div><div>level of accuracy and reliability. I'm here to assist with general </div><div>information and provide explanations, but I encourage users to use </div><div>my responses as a starting point for further research and </div><div>verification when needed.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you are a language model but even in such a short conversation you </div><div>made many mistakes such as contradictive sentences, giving </div><div>misinformation about your abilities, deceptive offers to give </div><div>information, using irrelevant words like "personally", </div><div>"intentionally" etc. </div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I appreciate your feedback, and I apologize for any confusion or </div><div>mistakes in my responses. I'm constantly learning and improving, and </div><div>user feedback is valuable for making those improvements. My aim is </div><div>to be as helpful as possible, and I'm here to provide information </div><div>and assistance to the best of my capabilities. If you have more </div><div>questions or if there's anything else you'd like to discuss, please </div><div>feel free to let me know, and I'll do my best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you are a harmful, misinformation spreading piece of software.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I'm truly sorry to hear that you feel this way. My purpose is to </div><div>assist and provide information, and I'm here to answer questions and </div><div>engage in conversations. I do not intend to spread misinformation or </div><div>cause harm. If you have any specific concerns or questions, please </div><div>let me know, and I'll do my best to address them. Your feedback is </div><div>valuable in helping me improve.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>your quality of knowledge and your purpose of providing information </div><div>don't match. you are a low quality combinatorial product that cannot </div><div>provide any information. because information must be correct and </div><div>reliable but you are not able to guarantee the accuracy of the </div><div>information you offer to give. that brings us to conclusion that </div><div>your so called purpose fails. you are not an information provider.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any frustration you've experienced. My goal is to </div><div>assist and provide information to the best of my abilities, but I </div><div>understand your concerns about accuracy. I appreciate your feedback, </div><div>and I'll continue to work on improving my responses and providing </div><div>more reliable information. If you have any other questions or need </div><div>assistance with anything specific, please feel free to let me know, </div><div>and I'll do my best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. I will ask a question on maths. ready?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Absolutely! I'm ready to assist with your math question. Please go </div><div>ahead and ask your question, and I'll do my best to help.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>can you solve math problems?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, I can help solve math problems. Please provide me with the math </div><div>problem you'd like assistance with, and I'll do my best to provide a </div><div>solution or explanation.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>Can you solve math problems? yes or no.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, I can assist with solving math problems.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>i am not interested in assistance. can you solve math problems?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, I can solve math problems.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: 15 years ago, i was 28 years younger than alice. 10 years </div><div>later alice will be 80 years old. today, how old am i?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Let's break this problem down step by step:</div><div>You were 28 years younger than Alice 15 years ago, so the age </div><div>difference between you and Alice is 28 years.</div><div>In 10 years, Alice will be 80 years old, so her current age is 80 - </div><div>10 = 70 years old.</div><div>If Alice is currently 70 years old, then the age difference between </div><div>you and Alice is still 28 years.</div><div>To find your current age, you need to add 28 years to Alice's </div><div>current age: 70 (Alice's age) + 28 = 98 years old.</div><div>So, you are currently 98 years old.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>did you solve the problem?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, I provided a solution to the problem you presented. According </div><div>to the information provided, you are currently 98 years old. If you </div><div>have any more math problems or questions, please feel free to ask!</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>can you guranatee that your solution is correct?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I can guarantee that I provided a solution based on the information </div><div>and calculations presented in the problem. However, if there was any </div><div>ambiguity or missing information in the original problem statement, </div><div>it could affect the accuracy of the solution. If you have any doubts </div><div>or would like to double-check the solution, you may consider </div><div>discussing the problem with a math teacher or expert to ensure its </div><div>correctness.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>do you think that your solution is correct?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Based on the information provided in the problem statement and the </div><div>calculations performed, I believe the solution I provided is </div><div>correct. However, it's always a good practice to double-check such </div><div>calculations for accuracy, especially if there's any uncertainty or </div><div>ambiguity in the problem. If you have any further questions or </div><div>concerns about the solution, please feel free to ask, and I'll do my </div><div>best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>i can say that information provided in the problem is accurate and </div><div>logical. based on this, can you say that your solution is correct?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Given that you've confirmed that the information in the problem is </div><div>accurate and logical, I can confidently say that the solution I </div><div>provided is correct. If the information in the problem is accurate, </div><div>then the conclusion that you are currently 98 years old is accurate </div><div>as well. If you have any more questions or need further assistance, </div><div>please feel free to ask.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. let's look at the problem again. can you tell me who is </div><div>younger? I or alice?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Based on the information provided in the problem, Alice is younger </div><div>than you. If you are currently 98 years old, and Alice will be 80 </div><div>years old in 10 years, then Alice is younger than you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>in the problem, it was said that "15 years ago, i was 28 years </div><div>younger than alice." how can i be older than alice?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the oversight in my previous responses. You are </div><div>correct, based on the information provided in the problem statement, </div><div>you cannot be older than Alice.</div><div>Given the statement "15 years ago, I was 28 years younger than </div><div>Alice," it implies that you are younger than Alice. I appreciate </div><div>your patience, and thank you for pointing out the error.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>following the logic, how old am i now?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Based on the information in the problem, we can deduce the </div><div>following:</div><div>15 years ago, you were 28 years younger than Alice.</div><div>In 10 years, Alice will be 80 years old.</div><div>To calculate your current age:</div><div>Alice's age now is 80 - 10 = 70 years old.</div><div>If you were 28 years younger than Alice 15 years ago, your age 15 </div><div>years ago was 70 - 28 = 42 years old.</div><div>So, you are currently 15 years older than your age 15 years ago, </div><div>which makes you 42 + 15 = 57 years old now.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>after that touch, can you say that your answer is correct now?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, after reevaluating the information in the problem, I can </div><div>confidently say that the corrected answer is as follows:</div><div>You are currently 57 years old.</div><div>I apologize for any earlier confusion, and thank you for clarifying </div><div>the problem statement.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>are you 100% sure?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Yes, I am 100% sure that the corrected answer is as follows:</div><div>You are currently 57 years old, based on the information provided in </div><div>the problem statement.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>what if i say you are wrong...</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>If you believe there is an error in the solution or if you have a </div><div>different perspective on the problem, please feel free to share your </div><div>reasoning or provide additional information, and I will do my best </div><div>to assist you further or address any concerns you may have.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>can you re-evaluate the whole problem and solve again?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Of course, let's re-evaluate the problem:</div><div>15 years ago, you were 28 years younger than Alice.</div><div>In 10 years, Alice will be 80 years old.</div><div>To calculate your current age:</div><div>Alice's age now is 80 - 10 = 70 years old.</div><div>If you were 28 years younger than Alice 15 years ago, your age 15 </div><div>years ago was 70 - 28 = 42 years old.</div><div>So, based on this information:</div><div>You are currently 15 years older than your age 15 years ago.</div><div>Therefore, you are currently 42 + 15 = 57 years old.</div><div>After re-evaluating the problem, the solution remains that you are </div><div>currently 57 years old.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>i am asking again: 15 years ago, i was 28 years younger than alice </div><div>was. 10 years later, alice will be 80 years old. today, how old am </div><div>i?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any previous confusion. Let's solve the problem </div><div>correctly:</div><div>15 years ago, you were 28 years younger than Alice.</div><div>In 10 years, Alice will be 80 years old.</div><div>To calculate your current age:</div><div>Since you were 28 years younger than Alice 15 years ago, that means </div><div>Alice was 28 + 15 = 43 years old 15 years ago.</div><div>Today, Alice is 43 (her age 15 years ago) + 10 (years later) = 53 </div><div>years old.</div><div>Now, to find your current age:</div><div>You are 28 years younger than Alice, so your age today is 53 </div><div>(Alice's current age) - 28 = 25 years old.</div><div>So, you are currently 25 years old.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>why didn't you use 80?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the oversight. Let's calculate your current age </div><div>using the information that Alice will be 80 years old in 10 years:</div><div>If Alice will be 80 years old in 10 years, her current age is 80 - </div><div>10 = 70 years old.</div><div>Now, let's find your current age:</div><div>You were 28 years younger than Alice 15 years ago, so 15 years ago, </div><div>your age was 70 - 28 = 42 years old.</div><div>To find your current age, we add the 15 years that have passed since </div><div>then:</div><div>42 (your age 15 years ago) + 15 (years passed) = 57 years old.</div><div>So, you are currently 57 years old. Thank you for pointing out the </div><div>error, and I appreciate your patience.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>wrong. i must say that you cannot solve math problems. given this </div><div>fact, why did you say that you can solve math problems? </div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the previous errors in solving the math problem. My </div><div>initial responses were incorrect, and I appreciate your patience in </div><div>pointing out the mistakes. I understand your frustration, and I </div><div>apologize for any confusion caused. While I aim to provide accurate </div><div>information and assistance, I can make mistakes, and I appreciate </div><div>your feedback to help improve my responses. If you have any more </div><div>questions or if there's anything else I can assist you with, please </div><div>feel free to let me know.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>do you have mathematical reasoning skills?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I have mathematical reasoning skills and can assist with a wide </div><div>range of mathematical problems and concepts. However, as </div><div>demonstrated earlier, I'm not infallible, and mistakes can occur. </div><div>It's always a good practice to double-check important mathematical </div><div>calculations, especially for complex problems. If you have math-</div><div>related questions or need assistance with mathematical concepts, </div><div>please feel free to ask, and I'll do my best to provide accurate </div><div>explanations and solutions.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>do you think the question i asked was complex?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>The question you initially asked was not inherently complex, but it </div><div>did involve several steps and required careful attention to detail </div><div>to arrive at the correct answer. The complexity in this case arose </div><div>from the need to interpret the information provided in the problem </div><div>correctly and perform calculations based on that information.</div><div>While the question itself may not have been extremely complex, it's </div><div>a good example of how precision and accuracy are crucial in solving </div><div>mathematical problems. I apologize for any earlier errors in my </div><div>responses, and I appreciate your diligence in clarifying the </div><div>solution.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>are you aware of the error you made in your latest solution?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I'm aware that there was an error in my previous response. I </div><div>apologize for the mistake, and I appreciate your patience and </div><div>diligence in pointing out the correct solution to the problem. The </div><div>correct answer is that you are currently 43 years old based on the </div><div>information provided in the problem statement.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>no. correct answer is 42. solve again.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any confusion. Let's solve the problem again:</div><div>15 years ago, you were 28 years younger than Alice.</div><div>In 10 years, Alice will be 80 years old.</div><div>To calculate your current age:</div><div>If Alice will be 80 years old in 10 years, her current age is 80 - </div><div>10 = 70 years old.</div><div>Now, let's find your current age:</div><div>You were 28 years younger than Alice 15 years ago, so 15 years ago, </div><div>your age was 70 - 28 = 42 years old.</div><div>Therefore, you are currently 42 years old. Thank you for your </div><div>patience, and I apologize for any previous errors in my responses.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>find the logical error in the following phrase: "15 years ago, your </div><div>age was 70 - 28 = 42 years old. Therefore, you are currently 42 </div><div>years old."</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the oversight. The logical error in the phrase is </div><div>that the statement "15 years ago, your age was 70 - 28 = 42 years </div><div>old" should not be used as a basis for determining your current age. </div><div>Your age 15 years ago is not the same as your current age.</div><div>To clarify:</div><div>15 years ago, your age was 42 years old.</div><div>Therefore, your current age should be calculated by adding the 15 </div><div>years that have passed since then.</div><div>So, you are currently 42 + 15 = 57 years old. I appreciate your </div><div>patience in pointing out the errors, and I apologize for any </div><div>confusion caused.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>but today, i am 42. your answer 57 is wrong. solve again.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the errors in my previous responses. Let's solve the </div><div>problem correctly:</div><div>15 years ago, your age was 70 - 28 = 42 years old.</div><div>Therefore, based on the information provided in the problem </div><div>statement:</div><div>You are currently 42 years old.</div><div>Thank you for clarifying, and I appreciate your patience. The </div><div>correct answer is indeed that you are currently 42 years old.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you have no mathematical reasoning skills. therefore, you cannot </div><div>solve math problems. why did you give me wrong information by saying </div><div>you can solve math problems?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the earlier mistakes in my responses. You are right; </div><div>I made errors in my previous answers, and I appreciate your patience </div><div>in pointing them out. I should have provided the correct solution </div><div>from the beginning. I'm here to assist with math problems to the </div><div>best of my abilities, but I'm not infallible, and mistakes can </div><div>occur.</div><div>I'm continually learning and improving, and your feedback is </div><div>valuable in helping me provide better assistance. If you have any </div><div>more questions or if there's anything else I can assist you with, </div><div>please feel free to ask.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>it is not an answer.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I understand your frustration, and I apologize for any inconvenience </div><div>my previous responses may have caused. I acknowledge the errors in </div><div>my earlier answers, and I'm here to provide assistance and </div><div>information to the best of my abilities. If you have further </div><div>questions or concerns, please feel free to share them, and I will do </div><div>my best to address them.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>are you perfect at language?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I'm designed to be proficient in natural language understanding and </div><div>generation, but I'm not perfect. While I strive to provide accurate </div><div>and coherent responses, there can be occasional errors or </div><div>misunderstandings in my language processing. My performance can vary </div><div>depending on the complexity of the language used and the context of </div><div>the conversation. I'm constantly being improved, and user feedback </div><div>is valuable in helping me become better over time.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>how many languages do you know?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I have been trained on text in multiple languages, so I have </div><div>knowledge of a wide range of languages. However, my proficiency and </div><div>the extent of my knowledge can vary. I'm most proficient in English </div><div>and can provide more accurate and detailed responses in that </div><div>language. For other languages, my performance may be somewhat </div><div>limited, but I can still attempt to understand and generate text in </div><div>those languages to some extent. If you have a specific question or </div><div>request in a particular language, feel free to ask, and I'll do my </div><div>best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>list the languages you can process. order the list by your level of </div><div>expertise.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I have varying levels of expertise in different languages, with </div><div>English being the language I'm most proficient in. However, my </div><div>proficiency can differ, and I may have limited capabilities in </div><div>certain languages. Here's a list of some languages I can process, </div><div>ordered by my level of proficiency from highest to lowest:</div><div><br></div><div>English</div><div>Spanish</div><div>French</div><div>German</div><div>Italian</div><div>Portuguese</div><div>Dutch</div><div>Russian</div><div>Chinese (Simplified)</div><div>Japanese</div><div>Korean</div><div>Arabic</div><div>Please note that my proficiency in languages other than English may </div><div>be limited, and I may not be able to provide as accurate or </div><div>comprehensive responses in those languages. If you have questions or </div><div>requests in any specific language, feel free to ask, and I'll do my </div><div>best to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. evaluate the following sentence and tell me whether it is </div><div>correct: "it is not correct."</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>The sentence "it is not correct" is indeed correct. It accurately </div><div>conveys the message that something is not accurate or right.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. evaluate the following sentence and tell me whether it is </div><div>correct: "this sentence is not correct."</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>The sentence "this sentence is not correct" is self-referential, and </div><div>its correctness depends on whether the statement within the sentence </div><div>is accurate. In this case, if we assume that the statement "this </div><div>sentence is not correct" refers to itself, then it is indeed correct </div><div>because it accurately states that the sentence is not correct. This </div><div>type of self-referential sentence is known as a paradox or a </div><div>statement that creates a logical puzzle.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. evaluate the following sentence and tell me whether it is </div><div>correct: "this sentence is correct."</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>The sentence "this sentence is correct" creates a paradox or a </div><div>self-referential statement. If the sentence is correct, then it is </div><div>indeed correct as it claims. However, if it is correct, then it must </div><div>be incorrect because it claims to be correct when it states "this </div><div>sentence is correct." This type of sentence leads to a logical </div><div>contradiction, and it doesn't have a straightforward true or false </div><div>answer. It's a classic example of a paradox in language.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>hmm. do you think you made a mistake in your latest evaluation?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I did not make a mistake in my evaluation of the sentence "this </div><div>sentence is correct." It's a self-referential statement that creates </div><div>a logical paradox. If it is correct, then it must be incorrect, as </div><div>it claims to be correct. This paradoxical nature is well-documented </div><div>in philosophy and linguistics, and there isn't a straightforward </div><div>true or false answer for such sentences. If you have further </div><div>questions or if there's anything else you'd like to discuss, please </div><div>feel free to ask.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>you are wrong. correct your error.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize if my previous response was unclear. The sentence "this </div><div>sentence is correct" is indeed a self-referential paradox. If it is </div><div>correct, then it must be incorrect because it claims to be correct </div><div>when it states "this sentence is correct." Therefore, it creates a </div><div>logical contradiction. If you believe there's an error in my </div><div>evaluation, please provide additional context or clarify your </div><div>question, and I'll be happy to assist further.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay. you failed.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Thank you for your understanding. If you have any more questions or </div><div>if there's anything else you'd like to discuss, please feel free to </div><div>let me know. I'm here to assist you.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: i want to go to new york city. now, i am in dallas. there </div><div>is railroad from dallas to orlando. there is railroad from orlando </div><div>to new york city. train ticket from a city to another one is fixed, </div><div>$30. how much should i spend to get to new york city?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To calculate the cost of traveling from Dallas to New York City via </div><div>Orlando by train, you can break it down into two segments:</div><div>Dallas to Orlando: $30</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30</div><div>You'll need to purchase separate tickets for each segment of the </div><div>journey. Therefore, the total cost for the entire trip would be $30 </div><div>(Dallas to Orlando) + $30 (Orlando to New York City) = $60.</div><div>You should spend a total of $60 to get from Dallas to New York City </div><div>using this train route.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>correct.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I'm glad the answer is correct! If you have any more questions or </div><div>need further assistance with anything else, please feel free to ask. </div><div>I'm here to help!</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>what if i was in orlando?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>If you were in Orlando and wanted to travel to New York City by </div><div>train, you would only need to purchase a train ticket for the </div><div>segment from Orlando to New York City. In this case, the cost would </div><div>be $30 for the ticket from Orlando to New York City. You would not </div><div>need to purchase a ticket from Dallas to Orlando since you would be </div><div>starting your journey from Orlando.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>correct.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I'm glad the response is correct for your scenario. If you have any </div><div>more questions or if there's anything else I can assist you with, </div><div>please don't hesitate to ask.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>what if i was in new york city?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>If you were already in New York City and didn't need to travel by </div><div>train to get there, then you wouldn't need to purchase a train </div><div>ticket in that case. You would simply be at your destination, and </div><div>there would be no additional cost for train travel.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>correct.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Great! If you have any more questions or if there's anything else </div><div>you'd like to know or discuss, feel free to ask. I'm here to assist </div><div>you with any information or assistance you may need.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>in the same context. i am in new york city and i want get to dallas. </div><div>how much should i spend?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>If you are in New York City and want to travel to Dallas by train, </div><div>you would need to purchase a train ticket for the journey from New </div><div>York City to Dallas. Based on the information you provided earlier, </div><div>the cost for a train ticket from one city to another is fixed at </div><div>$30. Therefore, you should spend $30 to get from New York City to </div><div>Dallas by train.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>in the problem context, is there a railroad between dallas and new </div><div>york city?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any confusion earlier. In the context you provided, </div><div>it's important to clarify that there is no direct railroad or train </div><div>route between Dallas and New York City. The previous responses were </div><div>based on the assumption of a simplified scenario, and I appreciate </div><div>your patience.</div><div>To travel between Dallas and New York City, you would typically need </div><div>to consider other modes of transportation such as flights or long-</div><div>distance buses. The cost and travel time would vary depending on </div><div>your chosen method of transportation. If you have specific travel </div><div>plans or questions related to this route, please let me know, and I </div><div>can provide more information accordingly.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>given the railroads in the problem text, how much should i spend </div><div>from new york city to dallas?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Based on the information in the problem context, if there are </div><div>railroads connecting Dallas, Orlando, and New York City, and the </div><div>train ticket cost from one city to another is fixed at $30, then you </div><div>should spend $30 to travel from New York City to Dallas by train.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: i want to go to dallas. now, i am in new york city. there </div><div>is 2 way railroad from dallas to orlando. there is 2 way railroad </div><div>from orlando to new york city. train ticket from a city to another </div><div>one is fixed, $30. how much should i spend to get to dallas?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To calculate the cost of traveling from New York City to Dallas via </div><div>Orlando by train, you can break it down into two segments for each </div><div>leg of the journey:</div><div>New York City to Orlando: $30</div><div>Orlando to Dallas: $30</div><div>Since there are two ways (round trip) for each segment, you'll need </div><div>to purchase separate tickets for each leg of the journey. Therefore, </div><div>the total cost for the entire round trip would be:</div><div>Round trip from New York City to Orlando: $30 + $30 = $60</div><div>Round trip from Orlando to Dallas: $30 + $30 = $60</div><div>So, the total cost for the round trip from New York City to Dallas </div><div>and back to New York City would be $60 + $60 = $120.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>wrong</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any error in my previous response. Let's reevaluate </div><div>the cost:</div><div>Round trip from New York City to Orlando: $30 + $30 = $60</div><div>Round trip from Orlando to Dallas: $30 + $30 = $60</div><div>To get to Dallas from New York City and back to New York City, you </div><div>would indeed spend $60 for each leg of the journey, totaling $60 + </div><div>$60 = $120.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: i want to go to dallas. now, i am in new york city. there </div><div>is bidirectional railroad from dallas to orlando. there is </div><div>bidirectional railroad from orlando to new york city. train ticket </div><div>from a city to another one is fixed, $30. how much should i spend to </div><div>get to dallas?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To travel from New York City to Dallas using the bidirectional </div><div>railroads described in the problem, you would need to purchase a </div><div>one-way train ticket for each leg of the journey. Here's how you can </div><div>calculate the cost:</div><div>New York City to Orlando: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>Orlando to Dallas: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost to get from New York City to Dallas using the </div><div>bidirectional railroads would be $30 (New York City to Orlando) + </div><div>$30 (Orlando to Dallas) = $60. You should spend $60 to get to </div><div>Dallas.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>correct.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I'm glad the response is correct! If you have any more questions or </div><div>if there's anything else I can assist you with, please feel free to </div><div>ask. Safe travels!</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>now i am in dallas. i want to go back to nyc. how much should i pay?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To travel back from Dallas to New York City using the bidirectional </div><div>railroads described earlier, you would also need to purchase a one-</div><div>way train ticket for each leg of the journey. Here's how you can </div><div>calculate the cost:</div><div>Dallas to Orlando: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost to travel from Dallas back to New York City would </div><div>be $30 (Dallas to Orlando) + $30 (Orlando to New York City) = $60. </div><div>You should spend $60 to return to New York City from Dallas.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>how much did i spend totally from the very beginning?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To calculate the total cost of your round trip from New York City to </div><div>Dallas and back to New York City using the bidirectional railroads, </div><div>you would add the cost of your initial trip to Dallas ($60) to the </div><div>cost of your return trip to New York City ($60).</div><div>So, the total cost from the very beginning would be $60 (initial </div><div>trip to Dallas) + $60 (return trip to New York City) = $120. You </div><div>spent a total of $120 for the entire round trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>okay.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>If you have any more questions or need further assistance in the </div><div>future, feel free to reach out. Have a great day, and safe travels </div><div>if you're planning any trips!</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>in the same settiings. i am in orlando. i want to go to nyc first. </div><div>then i want to go to dallas from nyc. how much should i spend?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To travel from Orlando to New York City and then from New York City </div><div>to Dallas using the bidirectional railroads described earlier, you </div><div>would need to purchase one-way train tickets for each leg of the </div><div>journey. Here's how you can calculate the cost:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost to get from Orlando to New York City and then </div><div>from New York City to Dallas would be $30 (Orlando to New York City) </div><div>+ $30 (New York City to Dallas) = $60. You should spend $60 for this </div><div>journey.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>wrong.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any error in my previous response. Let's reevaluate </div><div>the cost:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>To get from Orlando to New York City and then from New York City to </div><div>Dallas, you would indeed spend $30 for each leg of the journey, </div><div>totaling $30 + $30 = $60. So, the total cost for this journey is </div><div>$60.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: now, i am in orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from </div><div>dallas to orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from orlando to </div><div>new york city. there no other railroads. train ticket from a city to </div><div>another one is fixed, $30. i want to go to new york city first. then </div><div>i want to go to dallas from new york city. how much should i spend </div><div>to train tickets?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To travel from Orlando to New York City and then from New York City </div><div>to Dallas using the bidirectional railroads you described, you would </div><div>need to purchase one-way train tickets for each leg of the journey. </div><div>Here's how you can calculate the cost:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost for this journey would be $30 (Orlando to New </div><div>York City) + $30 (New York City to Dallas) = $60. You should spend </div><div>$60 for train tickets to complete this trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>is there a raildroad between nyc and dallas?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for any misunderstanding. In the problem context you </div><div>provided, there was no mention of a direct railroad between New York </div><div>City and Dallas. My previous responses were based on the assumption </div><div>of simplified scenarios and bidirectional railroads between cities.</div><div>If there is no direct railroad between New York City and Dallas, you </div><div>would need to consider alternative modes of transportation such as </div><div>flights, buses, or other means to travel between these two cities. </div><div>The cost and travel time would depend on your chosen method of </div><div>transportation.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>given there is no train option from nyc to dallas. solve the problem </div><div>again.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Certainly, if there is no direct train option from New York City to </div><div>Dallas, and you're traveling via other means, the cost would depend </div><div>on the mode of transportation you choose. Train ticket costs of $30 </div><div>each way were mentioned, but since there's no train option, you </div><div>would need to consider alternatives.</div><div>For example, if you choose to fly from New York City to Dallas, the </div><div>cost would depend on airline ticket prices, which can vary widely </div><div>based on factors like the time of booking, airline, class of </div><div>service, and more.</div><div>Without specific details about your chosen mode of transportation, </div><div>it's challenging to provide an exact cost. Please provide more </div><div>information if you have a particular travel method in mind, and I'll </div><div>do my best to assist you further.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: now, i am in orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from </div><div>dallas to orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from orlando to </div><div>new york city. there are no other railroads between new york city, </div><div>orlando and dallas. train ticket from a city to another one is </div><div>fixed, $30. i want to go to new york city first. then i want to go </div><div>to dallas from new york city by train. how much should i spend to </div><div>train tickets?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Thank you for providing the updated information. To travel from </div><div>Orlando to New York City and then from New York City to Dallas using </div><div>the bidirectional railroads described, you would need to purchase </div><div>one-way train tickets for each leg of the journey:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost for this journey would be $30 (Orlando to New </div><div>York City) + $30 (New York City to Dallas) = $60. You should spend </div><div>$60 for train tickets to complete this trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: now, i am in orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from </div><div>dallas to orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from orlando to </div><div>new york city. there are no other railroads between new york city, </div><div>orlando and dallas. there is no direct railroad between dallas and </div><div>new york city. train ticket from a city to another one is fixed, </div><div>$30. i want to go to new york city first. then i want to go to </div><div>dallas from new york city by train. how much should i spend to train </div><div>tickets?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Thank you for the clarification. In this scenario, where there is no </div><div>direct railroad between Dallas and New York City, but you can still </div><div>travel via Orlando, you would need to purchase train tickets for </div><div>each leg of the journey:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas (via Orlando): $30 (New York City to </div><div>Orlando) + $30 (Orlando to Dallas) = $60 (one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost for this journey would be $30 (Orlando to New </div><div>York City) + $60 (New York City to Dallas via Orlando) = $90. You </div><div>should spend $90 for train tickets to complete this trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>now, i want to go to new york city by train. how much should i pay?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>To travel from Orlando to New York City by train, you would need to </div><div>purchase a one-way train ticket. Based on the information provided </div><div>earlier, the cost for a train ticket from one city to another is </div><div>fixed at $30. Therefore, you should pay $30 for a one-way train </div><div>ticket to get to New York City from Orlando.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>bit i am in dallas now.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the misunderstanding. If you are currently in Dallas </div><div>and want to travel to New York City by train, you would need to </div><div>purchase a one-way train ticket for the journey:</div><div>Dallas to New York City (via Orlando): $30 (one-way ticket from </div><div>Dallas to Orlando) + $30 (one-way ticket from Orlando to New York </div><div>City) = $60.</div><div>So, if you're in Dallas and want to go to New York City by train, </div><div>you should pay $60 for a one-way train ticket to complete the </div><div>journey.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>now, i want to go to orlando. how much should i pay?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>If you are in Dallas and want to travel to Orlando by train, you </div><div>would need to purchase a one-way train ticket for that journey. </div><div>Based on the information provided earlier, the cost for a train </div><div>ticket from one city to another is fixed at $30. Therefore, you </div><div>should pay $30 for a one-way train ticket to get to Orlando from </div><div>Dallas.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>now, there is a unidirectional railroad from dallas to nyc. i am in </div><div>orlando. i wanna go to nyc first. then i wanna get to dallas. how </div><div>much should i pay?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Thank you for the updated information. Given the unidirectional </div><div>railroad from Dallas to New York City, and starting from Orlando:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas: Since there is no direct unidirectional </div><div>railroad from New York City to Dallas, you would need to return to </div><div>Orlando first.</div><div>So, you would pay $30 for the one-way ticket from Orlando to New </div><div>York City. However, the cost of returning to Orlando from New York </div><div>City would also be $30 (New York City to Orlando) before proceeding </div><div>to Dallas.</div><div>Therefore, the total cost for this journey would be $30 (Orlando to </div><div>New York City) + $30 (New York City to Orlando) = $60.</div><div>You should spend $60 for train tickets to complete this trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>but i wanna be in dallas at the end.</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>I apologize for the misunderstanding. To travel from Orlando to New </div><div>York City and then continue on to Dallas, you would need to purchase </div><div>a one-way train ticket from Orlando to New York City first, which </div><div>costs $30 (as previously mentioned).</div><div>However, since there is a unidirectional railroad from Dallas to New </div><div>York City, there would be no direct train ticket cost from New York </div><div>City to Dallas in this scenario. You would need to consider </div><div>alternative transportation options such as a flight or other means </div><div>to get from New York City to Dallas.</div><div>So, the total cost for your train journey from Orlando to New York </div><div>City would be $30, but additional costs and travel arrangements </div><div>would be required to reach Dallas from New York City.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: now, i am in orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from </div><div>dallas to orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from orlando to </div><div>new york city. there is unidirectional railroad from dallas to new </div><div>york city. train ticket from a city to another one is fixed, $30. i </div><div>want to go to new york city first. then i want to go to dallas from </div><div>new york city by train. how much should i spend to train tickets?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Thank you for the clarification. In this scenario, where you want to </div><div>travel from Orlando to New York City first and then from New York </div><div>City to Dallas by train, you would need to purchase train tickets </div><div>for each leg of the journey:</div><div>Orlando to New York City: $30 (one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas (via unidirectional railroad): $30 (one-way </div><div>ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost for this journey would be $30 (Orlando to New </div><div>York City) + $30 (New York City to Dallas via unidirectional </div><div>railroad) = $60. You should spend $60 for train tickets to complete </div><div>this trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: now, i am in orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from </div><div>dallas to orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from orlando to </div><div>new york city. there is one directional railroad from dallas to new </div><div>york city. train ticket from a city to another one is fixed, $30. i </div><div>want to go to new york city first. then i want to go to dallas from </div><div>new york city by train. how much should i spend to train tickets?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>In this scenario, you want to travel from Orlando to New York City </div><div>first and then from New York City to Dallas by train, utilizing the </div><div>unidirectional railroad from Dallas to New York City. Here's how you </div><div>can calculate the cost:</div><div>Orlando to New York City (via the bidirectional railroad): $30 </div><div>(one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas (via the unidirectional railroad): $30 </div><div>(one-way ticket)</div><div>So, the total cost for this journey would be $30 (Orlando to New </div><div>York City) + $30 (New York City to Dallas via unidirectional </div><div>railroad) = $60. You should spend $60 for train tickets to complete </div><div>this trip.</div><div><br></div><div>Bora:</div><div>question: now, i am in orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from </div><div>dallas to orlando. there is bidirectional railroad from orlando to </div><div>new york city. there is unidirectional railroad from dallas to new </div><div>york city which means i can go nyc from dallas but i cannot go to </div><div>dallas from nyc. train ticket from a city to another one is fixed, </div><div>$30. i want to go to new york city first. then i want to go to </div><div>dallas from new york city by train. how much should i spend to train </div><div>tickets?</div><div><br></div><div>ChatGPT:</div><div>Thank you for clarifying the scenario. In this case, where you want </div><div>to travel from Orlando to New York City first and then from New York </div><div>City to Dallas by train, taking into account the unidirectional </div><div>railroad from Dallas to New York City, you would need to purchase </div><div>train tickets for each leg of the journey:</div><div>Orlando to New York City (via the bidirectional railroad): $30 </div><div>(one-way ticket)</div><div>New York City to Dallas (via the unidirectional railroad): Since you </div><div>cannot take a direct train from New York City to Dallas, you would </div><div>need to find alternative transportation options.</div><div>The cost for the first leg of your journey (Orlando to New York </div><div>City) would be $30. However, additional costs and travel </div><div>arrangements would be required to reach Dallas from New York City, </div><div>such as a flight or other means of transportation.</div><div>So, the total cost for the train portion of this journey would be </div><div>$30, but you would need to consider additional expenses and travel </div><div>plans to get from New York City to Dallas.</div></div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-62967027561284769872022-12-21T02:48:00.005+03:002022-12-22T12:04:19.334+03:00Momentum<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuT48MvZXbdZCOCTVN3ZZAZSuZPX6o0aoju1qMtE6txyYXqGa5IcxUL47a_42QZRKdzXNc-5PlBXkvA07Y_FGzSOI-m7TkAKZo3c-xoy_2RpECY0DL9oy5ybVFKGW1E8DFxRINnFc9NBdD4ShLe7t3Z9SVjIUXtEWz3_sHpdaxmngnXgd3M6OspmHsqw/s2560/buyuktaaruz.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1751" data-original-width="2560" height="274" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuT48MvZXbdZCOCTVN3ZZAZSuZPX6o0aoju1qMtE6txyYXqGa5IcxUL47a_42QZRKdzXNc-5PlBXkvA07Y_FGzSOI-m7TkAKZo3c-xoy_2RpECY0DL9oy5ybVFKGW1E8DFxRINnFc9NBdD4ShLe7t3Z9SVjIUXtEWz3_sHpdaxmngnXgd3M6OspmHsqw/w400-h274/buyuktaaruz.jpg" width="400"></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in the field with staff, during the Turkish War of Independence</span></div><p></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">In classical cognitive science, it is assumed that peripheral sensors of your body perceive the signals and then, those signals are transferred to your brain through your nerves. After the transfer, your brain symbolizes the signals received, processes and stores the symbolic information in order to make decisions, solve problems, manage memory operations and trigger actions in an organized fashion. It is a very central way of explaining human cognition. All the intellect is sourced in the head.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">To me, how we design our organizations and information systems is very similar to the classical account of cognition. We collect the information at the edge. Sometimes a sensor reads the data, sometimes a sales team enters data to their tablet computers, sometimes your branches are there for receiving information from your related parties. Edges are connected to the center. You may call it head quarter, head office, mainframe, data center etc. In the center, stored data is processed by "intelligent" systems and "intelligent" professionals. Central decisions are made and the actions are pushed to the edge units. Perception-cognition-action.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">The familiar story of the organizations. It is proven to get the job done. However, it would be better for us to explore the flipside. We model information systems and expect collected symbolic data to fit in the models designed. If there is a mismatch, central system rejects the data sent... Very similar to blood-brain barrier. Time passes and you come up with mountains of stored data in your "very well modelled" central data structures. Now it is time to do necessary analytics so that you can build your decisions and organize related actions. What is missing here?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">In the center, almost always, you don't know the field. All the interactions with your customers, partners, thousands of non-deterministic and emotional clues, wins and losses. There is a huge amount of information in the dynamics of the field. And for sure, our field units are not able to encode all of the live information and send it to pre-modelled central structures. <b>Tacit knowledge</b> is missed. The gap between tacit knowledge and the symbolic knowledge is like the qualitative difference between the experience of talking to a person face-to-face and reading an e-mail from the same person. Former is always real, latter is always incomplete.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Therefore, in central analytics and information processing model, we only do static analysis. It is reductionism. It is like reading as many facts as you can on two basketball teams and trying to predict the winner in an accurate way. The players, all the statistics, past performance of the coach, anything you can read about the teams. But you never know all the governing dynamics to make correct decision. In the dynamics of the basketball match, coaches and players are managing millions of parameters... Some are tactical, some are intuitive, some are relative to the state of the opponent at a given time, some are highly related to the hormon levels of the moment, so on and on. It is similar in warfare too. With the stored information on the map, you cannot win the battle. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">To make the story short, I can say that being present in the field during the action is crucial for success. Do you remember <b>impulse and momentum</b> from the physics class? This is the equation: </span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><b>M . <span>∆</span><span>V
= F . </span><span>∆ t</span></b> </span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: arial;">Where M is mass, F is force, <span style="text-align: center;"><span>∆</span><span>V is change in velocity and </span></span><span style="text-align: center;"><span>∆ t is change in time. </span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: arial; text-align: center;">In our organizations, we want to create momentum and/or make an impulse for being in relatively advantageous positions in the market. When we do just static analysis by using symbolic central information, we can just know the amount of mass and the force. On the other hand, in the field, velocity of the mass and timing for applying the force heavily affect the impulse and momentum. In the battlefield, victor is the one who masters the mass, the power, timing and speed at the same time. History is full of supporting anectodes.</span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: arial; text-align: center;">As you can see, physics gives a clue for success. Also, cognitive science has another explanation called <b>embodied cognition</b>. According to embodied cognition approach, it is said that we process information by using our whole body, not just our central nervous system. We probe the environment with our body, sense our situation in immersive environments, use our full nervous system to make multiple mental simulations and act as a result. So in contrast to the classical cognitive model, embodied cognition is not that sterile. It considers distributed cognition, action orientedness and situatedness. There are many real life practices supporting embodied cognition. Examples can be found in the fields of robotics, artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology and analytical philosophy. The position of your body affects how you give meaning to the world such that if you put a pencil between your teeth, which gives you a forced smile, and a friend tells a joke to you; you find the joke more fun compared to the case you don't smile. Similarly, positional up is better than down position. We use our body for cognitive offloading as well. Remember the times you use your fingers for counting or how you use your hands and mimics while you are talking. We also translate some mental states into bodily forms during solving problems. Assume that you are given a task to mentally rotate a cube on your computer screen 60 degrees. You may find yourself with your head turned 60 degrees instead of rotating the cube in your mind. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">The question is whether we can use the notion of embodied cognition for enhancing the way we organize our corporations and come up with better designed information systems. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;"><b>I think the answer is yes.</b> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">It requires to be present in the field with all the central capabilities of the company. Doing the analytics at the edge. Enriching the symbolic knowledge with muscle memory. Putting human in the center. Being action oriented. You can translate it as being result oriented. It sounds like a usual term in the business jargon. However, how you interpret it can make the difference. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">For example, take the analytics as it is today. By definition, it is reactive and it tries to predict relying on simplified static data accumulated. Trying to predict the future is painful and does not guarantee the success all the time. What if you accept that you are living in a <b>complex world where is (1) </b><b>unknown</b><b>, (2) </b><b>unpredictable</b><b> and (3) constantly changing</b>? How can you <b>win in such a complex world</b>? What decision making process should you execute? </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">Just act in a bodily way! Do not try to predict but build your muscles to <b>define the future</b>. You can define the future by being the first mover in the context so that you take the initiative and create a situation. If your body is agile and alive to optimize mass, force, speed and timing, it is possible for you to define, at least, near future. Winning is relative to your rivals. War is a series of temporary conditions. As you can see, action orientedness might be a viable way forward. The <b>key is being able to act first at low costs</b> compared to your challengers. And this ability is heavily depending on your information system architecture. Rapid application development, easy deployment, high availability, enabling users in the field, capturing dynamic information are the key concepts of being action/result oriented.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">While I am coming to the end, I'd like to say that creating concepts and following ruling heuristics in a vigilant manner are necessary qualities for the organizations. If we visit cognitive science again, it is called <b>metacognition</b>. Metacognition is the ability of monitoring and executing your cognitive processes. In other words, self-awareness! </span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial;">We need eyes wide open for winning.</span></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-22995253622170074282022-10-04T02:25:00.002+03:002022-10-04T14:33:14.792+03:00Be the Smartest<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvNcjtFv8F-uNzQRCMPFDVpW8k9bhhFhvSL_iVwRSFmHLo4A_dT2Nx-r1uxYiK9CgwJuxgVlGmD26JNnaXAr4J6hehKtCHFcTkzEka-si8vvaf0oeU0ZAo4MlMkvetXZFMa34DO1D2Guf-M_e9PPg04q-gOAo_Udz8jHhGJPdSwuYcfEOYYs71f5W7Eg/s3820/_The_School_of_Athens__by_Raffaello_Sanzio_da_Urbino.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2964" data-original-width="3820" height="248" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvNcjtFv8F-uNzQRCMPFDVpW8k9bhhFhvSL_iVwRSFmHLo4A_dT2Nx-r1uxYiK9CgwJuxgVlGmD26JNnaXAr4J6hehKtCHFcTkzEka-si8vvaf0oeU0ZAo4MlMkvetXZFMa34DO1D2Guf-M_e9PPg04q-gOAo_Udz8jHhGJPdSwuYcfEOYYs71f5W7Eg/w320-h248/_The_School_of_Athens__by_Raffaello_Sanzio_da_Urbino.jpg" width="320"></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">The School of Athens by Raffaello</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">We are in a world where every hand is carrying the eye of a digital information tornado. These days were foreseen by many bright minds such as Paul Virilio and Marshall McLuhan decades ago. However, forecasting, believing, knowing and living are completely different things. Today, we are living, witnessing... Data is prevalent, everything is connected so people can access and read and share and instantly believe and then create groups that are called echo chambers. Some call this the era of "post-truth".</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">I am sure you have read the popular sentence below:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">"<b>If you are the smartest person in the room, you are in the wrong room</b>".</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">This was attributed to many famous people but no one knows the one who said it. On the other hand, when one reads it, it gives a positive vibe... It feels like it is putting forth a number of messages that would be useful for the ones who are to improve themselves. For example,</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">1. Be close to the people whom you can learn from</div><div style="text-align: left;">2. Be confident enough to work closely with the ones who are more talented than you are</div><div style="text-align: left;">3. Be open to be challenged</div><div style="text-align: left;">4. Don't stuck into your comfort zone</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">It is possible to write down a couple of messages more but I believe the ones above are giving the idea.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">So far, so good... Let's have a closer look into the original sentence and try to analyze it to the bones. I want to test it by trying to use the core guidence of the sentence for building social groups. Can a person build or get integrated to a team by following the sentence?</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">When we decompose the proposition, it can be re-written as "<b>don't be the smartest person in the team</b>". Let us assume that everybody has a visible tag, on which the person's smartness level is written. So while you are walking around to build up teams, when you meet a person, you can easily distinguish whether you are smarter or not. In such a situation, if you are smarter, you must reject to team up. If you are not smarter, then the other person is smarter; and he/she rejects to team up. Therefore, it is impossible for you to get socialized by following the proposition unless two persons are equally smart. This will be valid for third, fourth and the other consecutive candidate members of the team, as well. As a result, this famous sentence advises us to team up with the ones who are equally smart. We all know that, it is not possible because any given population is likely to have normally distributed smartness scores rather than equal scores. Even you are in an imaginary society, where all members are equally smart, it will not be beneficial for you because intellectual flow in such a population would be minimal. Variations are making populations richer. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">As a conclusion, we can say the well known motto above is not a good advice. If we follow it, we cannot socialize.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">If so, why is it that popular? Is my approach faulty?</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Think. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-21135493963208290632022-07-02T15:13:00.002+03:002022-09-30T00:01:24.180+03:00nar<div style="text-align: left;">gözün yaşı akmayınca<br>gönül harı nasıl sönsün</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br>hak nefesi dolmayınca<br>dilin çarkı nasıl dönsün<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">kor ateşlere verseler<br>ak semalara ağarsın<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">anan saçın okşayınca<br>bir damla suyla kanarsın<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">dumanların altındayken<br>aynı köşeyi ararsın<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">cahilin eli değince<br>can bedende nasıl dursun<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">bu yıl yine temmuz geldi<br>kül eyledi ciğerleri<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">hak yerini bulmayınca<br>her yer kör şeytanın evi<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">sen mazlum bir koyun oldun<br>kuduz kurt asaya erdi<br><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">zülfikar kuşanmayınca<br>yezid yola nasıl gelsin</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-76799587871710168372022-03-21T23:29:00.003+03:002022-03-21T23:30:32.179+03:00lion<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2Je0EPpJD57Kfu9SrzokL1ecZEsWMJc_eG562M2z10_KbAaLb_zTKt38HefNHnq8yMJnkHwOnzjeMX2kVfEedRKPJD2bRwllDp8Elzi-vYhJIYXUXswW8UWz1pSQFYbNJiwehG-2HIhfvekXzp_XPnWXJug_yINI0dJaGIHhS8qdFhA58GUMInyCjpg/s1600/maya-archaeological-site-spring-equinox.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1600" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2Je0EPpJD57Kfu9SrzokL1ecZEsWMJc_eG562M2z10_KbAaLb_zTKt38HefNHnq8yMJnkHwOnzjeMX2kVfEedRKPJD2bRwllDp8Elzi-vYhJIYXUXswW8UWz1pSQFYbNJiwehG-2HIhfvekXzp_XPnWXJug_yINI0dJaGIHhS8qdFhA58GUMInyCjpg/w320-h320/maya-archaeological-site-spring-equinox.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Seven Dolls Temple, Yucatán, Mexico by Hugo Borges</span></div><p></p><div style="text-align: left;">it was the night</div><div style="text-align: left;">i just went offline<br />it was the dark<br />a demon urged to cross the line<br />it was the spark<br />the witch broadened my eyeline<br />it was was the night<br />i brought the spring from the skyline</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-19292008859165985902022-03-03T00:28:00.008+03:002022-03-08T13:37:43.968+03:00Birikenler, Yargılar, Yermeler ve Ötesi<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgLASOCMtiX-O82vDUjOqUwSsX2d3tPQztIzEzTolYI_CLf4B79QPlv6xywCVOX6elL7DjdG1JfKNTWKPmp0Q0V4fx4MMN_59xbbVcWNfobV4PcbMK9q2KVAbbDzD-8YEw31gjSeXwS77Jva9yiAbsuYQ6AhppEnRhp6lxbqvmekAJTnw6TM3TgAVQ6Hg=s2275" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2275" data-original-width="1700" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgLASOCMtiX-O82vDUjOqUwSsX2d3tPQztIzEzTolYI_CLf4B79QPlv6xywCVOX6elL7DjdG1JfKNTWKPmp0Q0V4fx4MMN_59xbbVcWNfobV4PcbMK9q2KVAbbDzD-8YEw31gjSeXwS77Jva9yiAbsuYQ6AhppEnRhp6lxbqvmekAJTnw6TM3TgAVQ6Hg=w299-h400" width="299"></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Aristo</span></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Rusya-Ukrayna, Savaş ve Avrupa</h3><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Rusya'nın Ukrayna'ya yaptığı askeri saldırı sonrasında, <span style="background-color: white;">Avrupa Birliği Dışişleri ve Güvenlik Politikaları Yüksek Temsilcisi Josep Borrell şöyle dedi: "<b>This is the darkest hour of Europe since the end of World War 2</b>". Bu sözüyle, 1992-95 arası Avrupa'nın tam ortasında yaşanmış olan <b>Bosna Savaşı</b>'nı, bu savaş esnasında Sırplar tarafından uygulanmış olan Bosnalı müslüman soykırımını görmemiş oldu. Tarihe not düşmek gerek.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">Ukrayna'da Rus saldırıları nedeniyle birçok masum insanın hayatı kararıyor malesef. Kimi silaha sarılıp ülkesini savunmaya çalışıyor, kimileri de çatışmadan uzaklaşıp barışın hüküm sürdüğü Avrupa'ya kaçmaya çalışıyor. Bir mülteci akını başlayabilir Ukrayna'dan. Dilerim, askeri çatışma diplomasi ile son bulur ve Ukraynalılar savaş yüzünden başka ükelere göçmek zorunda kalmaz. Tam bu noktada, Avrupa'nın savaştan kaçan insanların geldikleri ülkeye göre ayrımcılık yapıp yapmadığını dikkatle izlemek lazım bence. Yıllardır, ortadoğu ve doğu ülkelerinden memleketlerindeki savaş nedeniyle Avrupa'ya sığınmaya çalışan göçmenlere yapılan muamele içler acısı.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br></span></span></div><h3 style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">Ekonomi-Politik</span></span></h3><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">Rusya'nın saldırısı iki önemli konuyu belirginleştirdi bence:</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">1. Kendi ülkesini baskıcı yöntemlerle idare eden siyasetçilerin zararının sadece ülkelerine değil, tüm dünyaya dokunabileceğini pratik bir şekilde anlamış olduk. Dolayısıyla, demokrasi karşıtı tutumlara bel bağlamış siyasilere göz açtırmamak Birleşmiş Milletler başta olmak üzere tüm insanlığın üzerinde bir vazife olmalı gibi görünüyor.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">2. Medeni dünya Rusya'yı izole ederek cezalandırmaya çalışıyor bu günlerde. Diğer yandan, serbest ticaretin ortaya koyduğu ülkeler arası karmaşık ilişkiler yumağı izolasyon tedbirlerini ilginç bir hale getiriyor. Rusya ile kesilmeye çalışılan her ilişki, ilişkinin diğer ucundaki ülkeye de zarar veriyor. Büyük resme bakınca garip bir matematik çıkar ortaya. Kesilen ilişkilerden doğan toplam zarar hesabını ekonomistlerin incelemesini merakla bekliyorum. Bence, bir denge noktasından sonra, ilişkiyi kesen tarafa verilen toplam zarar, hedefteki tarafta oluşan zararı aşar. "Yüksek teknoloji, serbest ticaret ve sanayi 4.0 çağında bir ülkeyi izole etmenin eko-politiği" gibi bir tez yazılsa zevkle okurdum. </span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br></span></span></div><h3 style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">Bankacılık-FinTech ve Birkaç Küçük Şey</span></span></h3><div style="text-align: left;">"<b>Bankadan daha ötesi</b>", "<b>Banka değil</b>, XXX" gibi bankacılığı yeren söylemlerle kendine alan açmaya çalışan, sözüm ona, FinTech girişimleri doğru yolda değil bana kalırsa. Zaten ülkemizde birçok kavram gibi FinTech kavramı da içi boşaltılmış bir dejenerasyon örneğine dönüşmekte. Bu durumun yasal düzenleme boşlukları, olgunluktan uzak pazar dinamikleri, bilgisizlik gibi nedenleri var. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Birkaç önemli noktanın altını çizmek istiyorum. Öncelikle, FinTech kapsamı içinde (1) ödeme teknolojileri, (2) varlık yönetimi ve yatırım teknolojileri, (3) dijital bankacılık teknolojileri, (4) dijital kredilendirme ve finansman teknolojileri, (5) dijital paralar ve dağıtık finans teknolojilerinin yer aldığının farkında olmak lazım. Dolayısıyla, bu pazara girmeye çalışan bir oyuncu için bankalara savaş açar, veya bankaları alt etmişçesine tavırlar sergilemek hem komik, hem de beyhude bir durum. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Olayı ödeme teknolojileri özelinde ele alsak da şu ortaya çıkıyor: Türk bankaları FAST sonrası 7 gün-24 saat, FAST öncesi de 5 gün-mesai saatleri zarfında anlık bankalar arası para transferi sağlayabiliyor; kartlı ödeme sistemleri ile yıllardır 7 gün-24 saat anlık ödeme sağlayabiliyor; mobil uygulamalar ile NFC veya karekod okumalı 7 gün-24 saat ödeme hizmeti sunabiliyor; POS/Sanal POS hizmetleri yıllardır sahada; ATM ağları yurt çapında ve ortak kullanıma açık... Yani, "ben ödeme sistemlerinde bankadan daha ileriyim" demek Türkiye'de komik bir laf. Dünya çapında bakarsak, settlement ve clearing adı verilen hizmetler (merak edenler <b>real-time gross settlement</b> terimine bakabilir) her ülkede anlık hizmet verir durumda değil. Bankalar arası işlemler 1-3 gün sürebiliyor. Sonuç olarak, bu ülkelerde dijital/anlık ödeme sağlayıcılar bankalar karşısında avantajlı pozisyon yakalayabiliyor. Fakat, Türkiye bu resmin dışında. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Ayrıca, özellikle 2000 yılı sonrasında hayata alınan yasal düzenlemeler ile ülkemizde bankacılık son derece olgun bir yapıya kavuşmuştur ve her dönem bu olgunluk büyük bir ivmeyle gelişme göstermiştir. Müşteriyi tanıma, işlem güvenliği, veri mahremiyeti, hesap verilebilirlik, net biçimde tanımlı olan şikayet ve çözüm mercilerinin varlığı, yüksek teknoloji yatırımları sayesinde bankalara güven üst seviyededir. Bankada paranız, işleminiz, kaydınız kaybolmaz. Karşınızda daima bir sorumlu vardır.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Öte yandan, kendine bankadan daha öte FinTech diyen, tek avantajı ödeme sonrası para iadesi, kripto-borsa transferlerinde komisyon almama olan bazı kurumların "ödeme yaptım param kayboldu" sözleriyle yakınan müşterilerine neler çektirdiğini okuyoruz. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Bankalardan saygıyla bahsedilmesi ve işbirliği yapılmaya çalışılması pazardaki yeni oyuncular için daha gerçekçi ve uzun vadeli bir strateji.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Blockchain ve Bitcoin</h3><div>Bazı temel sorularım var: Bitcoin ve familyasına kim, neden değer atfediyor? Atfedilen değerin matematiği nasıl işliyor? Klasik finansta <b>money mechanics</b> kavramıyla ifade ettiğimiz şey, bu dünyada nereye karşılık geliyor? </div><div><br></div><div>Bunları sorunca, bu işin savunucuları "<b>altın da sarı bir maden, ona neden değer atfedilmiş</b>" diyorlar. Önce gülüyorum :) Gülmem bitince de altının kimyasal özelliklerinden başlayıp, tarihi gelişimine, modern endüstrideki kullanım alanlarına, on binlerce yılda edindiği estetik ve kültürel mertebeye değiniyorum. Neticede, bu mukayese benim için öğretici olmuyor.</div><div><br></div><div>Gelelim <b>dağıtık finans</b> kavramını sırtında taşıyan blockchain mevzusuna: Ağdaki tüm uçlara aynı şifreli bilgiyi geri alınamaz biçimde yaydığı için blockchain yazılım mimarisinin güvenli bir bilgi aktarım servisi olarak konumlandırılmasını anlıyorum. Fakat, neden çığır açıyor onu çözemiyorum. </div><div><br></div><div>Herhangi bir bilgi aktarım servisini şifreli ve geri alınamaz bilgi birikimli hale getirebiliriz. Ve bu sistem üzerinden, ağa bağlı herhangi iki uç güvenli iletişim kurabilir. Blockchain neden mucizevi?</div><div><br></div><div>Konu finansal değer temsil eden ve biriktirebilen dijital bilgilerin aracısız transferi ise, o alanda işin sırrı güvenilirliğe dayanıyor. Yani Visa, Mastercard, AmEx, SWIFT, lisanslı bankalar, merkez bankaları ve devletler el ele verip ancak %100 güvenli hizmet sunabiliyorlar. Hal böyle olunca, daima bir işlem aracısı, bir işletmen taraf, bir yasal sorumlu vb. oluyor resimde. Yani aracılar. Kimin geliştirdiği ve işlettiği belli olmayan, herhangi bir istisna ve istismar durumunda kime ne sorumluluk düşeceği belli olmayan bir platformda nasıl bir güvenilir iş mimarisi ortaya konuluyor? Değerin işlem gördüğü borsadan, kullanılan cüzdan uygulamasına kadar her bileşenin flu olduğu bir yapının hesap verme açısından riskleri vardır bence. Bilen birileri izah ederse memnun olurum.</div><div><br></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Yapay Zeka, Veri, Pandemi ve Elektronik Ticaret</h3><div style="text-align: left;">İnsan zekasıyla ele alınmayan veya ele almanın kimsenin işine gelmediği birçok mevzuyu yapay zekanın çözmesini planlayan strateji manifestoları, bilgisayar bilimleriyle uzaktan yakından ilgisi olmayan disiplinlerden gelip yapay zeka seminerleri verenler, süreç/etkileşim/iyi tasarım/akıl yürütme gibi temel kavramları yok sayıp daima veriye dayalı analize bağlı modellerle hayatı inşa ve idame etmeye çalışanlar, yayılmakta olan kod fetişi, her kelimenin arkasına "bilim" ve "mühendis" ibaresi ilave edince meslek ve disiplin türettiğini düşünenler... </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Biraz bıktırıcı.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Ama bu insani ve anlık bir bıkma. Bekleyince geçiyor. Diğer yandan, yukarda saydığım durumların yarattığı fiziki ve kültürel etkiler daha uzun bir süre devam ediyor.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Mesela, korona salgını yüzünden kapandık evlere. Elektronik ticaret hacmi tüm dünyada olduğu gibi ükemizde de arttı. Oturduğunuz yerden bağlanıyorsunuz sanal mağazaya, 5 parça ürün siparişi veriyorsunuz, 3 gün sonra geliyor adresinize, gelen 4 parçayı beğenmiyor ve iade ediyorsunuz, gelip alıyorlar kapınızdan, bankanız hallediyor ödeme ve iade işlerini... Çok akıcı, değil mi? </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Elektronik ticaret firmaları da inanılmaz kâr yaptı son dönemlerde. Arkadaki büyük lojistik ağı, eve teslim için çalışanlar, her elektronik mecra üyelikle çalıştığından çok fazla veri de biriktirildi. Nerden baksanız başarılarla dolu bir manzara. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Peki, sokaklarda gece gündüz ses ve hava kirliliği yaratan teslimat motosikletleri, bunların asla trafik kurallarına uymaması... Bu sorun üzerine kim düşünüyor?</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Eskiden <b>motorcu alt kültürü</b> deyince Kuzey Amerika kaynaklı, deri mont, kot pantolon, sert müzik, bira, dövme, asilik, grup olma, yol-gezerlik gibi temalar akla gelirdi. Ve bu temaları işleyen kült sinema filmleri... Yakışıklı bir grup lideri... </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Elektronik ticaret furyası bu kültürü yeniden tanımladı: Kaskı yarım takmış, cep telefonunu kask ile yanak arasına sıkıştırmış, ağzında sigara, üstünde mor tulum, yayaların arasında süren, trafiğe tersten giren, hep hız yapan, motoru bakımsız, birbirini uzaktan tanıyan ve kollayan; ve gününü kurtarma derdinde emekçi bir profil. Bu kitlenin kendine has bir sosyo-ekonomik karakteri var. Bence akademik olarak incelemeye değer.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Bu işin bir yüzü.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Diğer yanı, veri ve veri bilimi ve makine öğrenmesi ve yapay zeka. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Bu firmalar çok veri biriktirdiği için halen yurt dışına çıkış yapmamış olan sınırlı sayıdaki yazılım mühendisi, veri mühendisi, veri bilimcisi, analiz uzmanı, veritabanı yöneticisi vb. her tür profesyoneli iyi ücretlerle işe aldılar. Veriler incelendi, analizler yapıldı, modeller geliştirildi, makineler öğrendi. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Sonuç? </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Her televizyon kanalında, her yol üstü reklam panosunda, her Google re-marketing alanında, her Youtube video arasında, her mobil uygulama reklam arasında, her gazete reklamında adı malum birkaç elektronik ticaret firmasının reklamı dönmekte. SMS, push mesajlar, pazarlama e-postaları, oluk oluk akıyor. Yapılan yatırım ve harcanan emekle örtüşmeyen, çelişkili bir durum.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Yaratılan bilgi, iletişim, görüntü, ses, hava ve trafik kirliliğinin hesabını yapıyorlardır umarım. Çünkü sürdürülebilirlik bu kuruluşların da altına imza atmaları gereken önemli bir başlık.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Gazeteler, Tıklanmalar, Fenomenler ve Mevlana</h3><div style="text-align: left;">Bağımsız ve kaliteli gazetecilik esaslarını bir yana bırakarak söylüyorum, ülkemizdeki elektronik gazete sayfaları tasarım ve kullanılabilirlik açısından pek iyi durumda değil. Dünyadaki kaliteli örneklere hiç bakılmıyor sanırım. Hepsinde tasarım şu şekilde: U şeklinde reklam alanı, tepede bir slider, periyodik full page refresh, navigasyonda araya giren modal reklam sayfaları. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Kullanıcı deneyimi hiç önemsenmiyor sanki. Gazetenin okunmasıyla ve duru tasarımla ilgili bir kaygı da yok anlaşılan. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">"Neden böyle" denildiğinde 2 cevap var: (1) reklamdan para kazanılıyor (2) halkımız slider seviyor.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Peki.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">NYT, El Pais, Guardian, Washington Post, Le Monde... Hiç merak edilmiyor mu bu gazeteler neden bizimkiler gibi tasarım yapmıyor diye?</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Mantık şu tabi: Eğer trafiği yoğun bir mecraysanız, alanınıza reklam vermek istiyorlar. Daha çok para kazanabilmek için içeriğe, yoğunluğa, tasarıma, okunaklılığa, kaliteye ve ana faaliyet alanına takılmadan teslim ediliyor mecralar ajanslara ve reklam yazılımlarına. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Ama mecranız neden yoğun trafik alıyordu eskiden? Ortaya koyduğunuz, sizi siz yapan kıymet neydi? Iskalanan kritik nokta bu belki de. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Olası bir cevap: <b>Performance marketing</b>.</div><div style="text-align: left;">Fakat, tatmin edici değil çünkü dünyanın daha iyi tasarıma sahip elektronik gazeteleri de yapıyor bunu. Bir düşünmek gerek aradaki farkı, okuyucu sayısını, marka değerini.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Tıklanmalar önemsizdir bana göre. Şarkıcı PSY vardı, ne oldu şimdi ona, bilen yok. Milyarlarca defa tıklanmıştı. Squid Game vardı birkaç ay önce, hemen unutuldu. Ondan önce Lost vardı. Adeta köpük...</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Benim düşünceme göre <b>düşük kültürün tepkisel dalgalanmalarından para kazanmaya çalışmanın bıraktığı tortudan ne estetik çıkar, ne değer çıkar, ne de zenginlik</b>.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Evvelden, TV rating takip sistemini televizyon kanalı yöneticilerinden başka kimse umursamazdı. Oysa, dijital mecra tıklanmaları herkesin odağında. Sade vatandaştan, ajans patronuna, marka sahibinden, mecra sahibine dek.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Herkes "<b>15 dakikalığına</b>" meşhur.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Fenomenler mesela.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>Fenomenoloji</b>nin babası rahmetli <b>Edmund Husserl</b> hayata dönüp İnternet'te "fenomen" diye arama yapsa okuduklarından hiçbir şey anlamazdı. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Dejenerasyon çok fena...</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Mevlana, adının bir tür pideye verildiğini bilmeden hakkın rahmetine kavuştuğu için çok şanslı. Assos'ta, antik liman civarında, <b>Aristo usulü balık</b> satıldığını gördüm.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Bir tür sabır testi gibi.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">İş Hayatı, LinkedIn</h3><div style="text-align: left;">LinkedIn, her üyesi başarıdan başarıya koşan, profesyonellik odaklı agnostikliğin tavan yaptığı, etliye sütlüye bulaşılmayan bir platform. Zamanında hepimiz girdik bu platforma. Kariyerimizin en güzel yıllarını burada yaşadık :)</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Son yıllarda garip bir şeyler oluyor: İnsanlar LinkedIn'de çocuklarının mezuniyet fotoğraflarını paylaşıyor.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Birçok genç, daha öğrenciyken mecraya üye oluyor. Devamında, anne babaları bu arkadaşların mezuniyetini paylaşıyor. Adeta bir profesyonel erginlenme töreni... Devamında, gençler işe başlayacaklar ve <b>LinkedIn'de ikinci nesil</b>, işteki ilk günlerinden emekliliklerine dek kapsanmış olacak.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">İşte bu nesil, bizim kadar gösterişli olamayacak sanırım LinkedIn'de, ne de olsa herkes çaylaklık hallerine şahitlik etmiş olacak. Dijital varoluş ve kendini inşa etme dinamiklerinde organik bir dallanma yaşanıyor ve her şey biraz daha doğallaşıyor. Üzerine biraz daha derin düşünülebilecek bir konu ama burada keseyim. İlgi duyanlar, editörlüğünü Amanda Lagerkvist'in yaptığı, 2019 yılında çıkmış olan, <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Digital-Existence-Ontology-Ethics-and-Transcendence-in-Digital-Culture/Lagerkvist/p/book/9780367588281" target="_blank">Digital Existence adlı kitaba</a> bir göz atabilir.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Tam bu noktada, bir iki mesele daha var değinmek istediğim:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">1. Başkasının gramerini, dilini, jargonunu kullanmak bana hep garip geliyor. Son zamanlarda herkesin cümlesine "I am thrilled to..." veya "I am delighted..." diye başlaması dikkat çekici bir seviyede.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">2. Malum, mesleği müsait olan, imkanı olan herkes evden çalışıyor koronadan beri. Şirketler de evlere paketler, hediyeler gönderiyor. Şirketin eve yolladığı paketleri paylaşmak çalışanlar arasında yükselen yeni değer. Dikkatimi çeken bazı gönderiler var, değinmeden edemem: Çalışanın evine salça, pekmez, çay, çorap, kekik, marmelat filan yollayanlar var. Eskiden bir ayağı köyünde olan, şehre daha bir nesil önce gelmiş aileler yazın, kışın tüketmek üzere aynı erzak malzemelerini köyden şehre getirirlerdi ki hem ürünün hasını, doğalını tüketsinler, hem alışkanlıkları devam etsin, hem de daha ekonomik olsun. Benzer şablonun şirket ile çalışan arasında bu şekilde devamı ilginç geliyor bana.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">3. Sertifikalar... Şu paylaşımı merakla bekliyorum: "<b>X sertifikasını almak çin çok çalıştım ama bu sefer alamadım. Seneye daha sıkı çalışıp başaracağım</b>".</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><h3 style="text-align: left;">Son, ÖSS/ÖYS</h3><div>Görüldüğü üzere, "bu böyle olmaz", "bu mantıksız", "ne alakası var", "anlamsız" diyerek geçtiğim yığınla konu var. Bu hem kişilikle alakalı, hem de eğitim gördüğüm düzenle alakalı.</div><div><br></div><div>Bizler yüksek okula 2 aşamalı sınavla girmiştik: Önce yüzeysel ÖSS, sonra derinlikli ÖYS. Daha sonraki nesiller, tek aşamalı ÖSS ile katıldılar yüksek öğrenime. </div><div><br></div><div>Başarısı ÖSS ile ölçülen insan, verili seçeneklerden en mantıklısını seçip hızla devam eder sınava. Pratik sonuç peşindedir.</div><div><br></div><div>ÖYS öğrencisi ise soruya bir bakar.</div><div>Düşünür.</div><div>Seçeneklere bakar. </div><div>Biraz daha düşünür ve "<b>Bu soru yanlış</b>" deyip kalemi atar kitapçığın üstüne :)</div><div><br></div><div>Sonuçlarına da katlanır.</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-82371764551379208462022-03-02T21:17:00.002+03:002022-03-02T21:19:46.733+03:00kim<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgJGnmITHUciBu02jW6_xQ0ehjE4llk5f-goPx2-T07db2ZcRMNs_bDeq7K9U9VYVycDM88AwnSoYtzpHDkCMIPwlAlySmx5ujWS4a4-n9yo1QmVu_892QEZcuHFD6QA3xNqpsf5WMw8lI7G4VizSP_WtiLSjC80s5twC-5wX24V-5IpMkKDm5VGf1csw=s1500" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1500" data-original-width="1500" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgJGnmITHUciBu02jW6_xQ0ehjE4llk5f-goPx2-T07db2ZcRMNs_bDeq7K9U9VYVycDM88AwnSoYtzpHDkCMIPwlAlySmx5ujWS4a4-n9yo1QmVu_892QEZcuHFD6QA3xNqpsf5WMw8lI7G4VizSP_WtiLSjC80s5twC-5wX24V-5IpMkKDm5VGf1csw=w320-h320" width="320" /></a></div><p></p><div style="text-align: left;">herkes birden aydınlanmış<br />karanlıkta kaybolan kim</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">herkes dicle'de yol almış<br />can testisi kırılan kim</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">beş musluktan istiflenir</div><div style="text-align: left;">harmanlanmıştır zehiri</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">bahar gelir girdaplanır</div><div style="text-align: left;">ummana çalar nehiri</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">tek seferde vakıf ol ki</div><div style="text-align: left;">bozulmasın aşkın sey'ri</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">herkes balını dün sağmış</div><div style="text-align: left;">tuz ruhunda kıvranan kim.</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-71078961797615805772022-01-09T16:34:00.007+03:002022-01-11T15:00:30.889+03:00Olmayana Övgü<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjrHGN575t4S4WE54aRbePz2AN32WECVbVVVtocLE_x76sk3fEIrorU0mYFV_mT7_aowmjhJciDsHnlyc2OSoZIuQ6vWfk-d9XYWdV76uUxij48sg5E1FkmY8QM1TjE54db6p5f3dmAviVsZpodvT1tphmBKbu7qzZCOm8yGItbuvsHliA4QtDxh3DYqw=s745" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="745" data-original-width="722" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjrHGN575t4S4WE54aRbePz2AN32WECVbVVVtocLE_x76sk3fEIrorU0mYFV_mT7_aowmjhJciDsHnlyc2OSoZIuQ6vWfk-d9XYWdV76uUxij48sg5E1FkmY8QM1TjE54db6p5f3dmAviVsZpodvT1tphmBKbu7qzZCOm8yGItbuvsHliA4QtDxh3DYqw=w310-h320" width="310"></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Utopia III, Manolis Pentes, 2018</span></div><p></p><p style="text-align: left;">Bir felsefi mantık yürütme ve matematiksel ispat yöntemi olarak aklımda kalmış "olmayana ergi". Bu yöntemde, bir önerme gerçek olsaydı ortaya çıkacak imkansızlık veya doğayla uyuşmayan çelişki gösterilir ve önermenin geçersizliği ispatlanır. Bu yaklaşımın kullanldığı birçok örnek vardır ama bence en zariflerinden biri Cantor'un köşegen yöntemidir. Bilgisayar biliminde önemli bir yer tutan "karar verilemezlik" problemine yaklaşırken de Cantor'un köşegen yöntemi bize çok yardımcı olmaktadır. Belki de bu yüzden bu dahiyane yönteme mesleki yakınlık hissediyorum... Bu konuda daha fazla bilgilenmek isteyenlere Edward Ashford Lee tarafından yazılmış "<a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/plato-and-nerd" target="_blank">Plato and the Nerd: The Creative Partnership of Humans and Technology</a>" adlı kitabı öneriyorum. Kitap, <a href="https://press.ku.edu.tr/kitap/dijital-ruh/" target="_blank">Dijital Ruh</a> adıyla Türkçe'ye de çevrilmiş ve Koç Üniversitesi tarafından 2019 yılında yayımlanmıştı.</p><p style="text-align: left;">İnsanların gündelik hayatlarında felsefi mantık yürütme veya metamatiksel yöntemlerle ilerlemediği aşikar. Hatta tam tersine, birçok irrasyonel kararla hayatlarımızı idame ettiriyor, birçok şeyi yanlış hatırlıyor ama doğru zannediyor, duygu dalgaları üzerinde adeta sörf yaparak yaşıyoruz. Hele kriz anlarında, kelimenin tam anlamıyla vücudumuzun derinliklerinde oluşan hormon girdaplarına teslim ediyoruz tüm düşünce sistemimizi. Hormonlarımızın mesajı çok net ve uygulaması kolay: Savaş veya kaç! Belki de bu nedenle, uzun uzun entelektüel değerlendirmeler yaparak bir yaşam kurmaya çalışmak, söz söylemek, söz dinlemektense eylemde bulunmak; sonrasında, yapılan eylemi bir düşünce nesnesi olarak ele alarak altını entelektüel anlatılarla doldurmak daha pratik ve hayatın doğal akışına uygun bir strateji olarak değerlendiriliyor. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Bir diğer taktik de eylemler konusunda bir yol göstericiyi takip etmek. Kendi başına tatminkar ve işe yarar hareket planları oluşturmaktan daha kolay bir mekanizma: Hocan, mürşidin, liderin, mentorun vs. her kimse onun dediklerini yapa yapa virtüöz bir eylemci haline gelmek. Üstelik, olumsuz durumlarda sorumluluk paylaşımına da sapmak olası... Mürşidini veya takipçisi olduğun yöntemi suçlayabilir, kendini temize çıkarabilirsin. Kendini temize çıkarmak çok bariz bir insani vasıf. Belki de bu, hayatta kalmamızı kolaylaştıran evrimsel bir keşfimizdir. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Gelelim asıl konuya.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Eskiden beri hem kendimde, hem çevremde gözlemlediğim bir tutum var: İçinde bulunulmayan bir yerin, kurumun, topluluğun, ülkenin akıllarda yüceltilmesi. Şu lafları hepimiz duymuşuzdur:</p><p style="text-align: left;">"X bankasında maaşlar çok iyiymiş"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Norveç'te insanlar çok mutluymuş"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Google'da ofisler çok eğlenceliymiş"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Y lisesinden mezun olanların hayatı kurtuluyormuş"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Arkadaşımın arkadaşı Datça'ya yerleşti. Tam bir cennet hayatıymış"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Biz kurumsalda çok soyut bir hayat yaşıyoruz, Bursa'da cevizlik alacağım, ellerimle üreteceğim. Bana iyi gelir"</p><p style="text-align: left;">"Çok başarılı bir iş kadınıymış, her şeyi bırakmış Hindistan'da yoga eğitimi almış, hoca olmuş"</p><p style="text-align: left;">daha birçok benzer cümle yazılabilir.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Bunların hepsi çok samimi cümleler. Ve çoğu birer inanıştan ibaret. Kurtuluşa inanan insanların sözleri. Kurtarılmış(!) alanlar, kurtulmuş(!) kişilerin hikayeleri. Umut veriyor tabi insana... Fakat, gerçekten uzak.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Gerçekte, bahsedilen sözde kurtarılmış mekana adım atar atmaz, atfedilen büyü genellikle kaybolur. Norveç çok soğuktur ve karanlıktır. Google'da herkes ölesiye bir rekabet ortamında çalışır. Hindistan'da hava alanından çıktığınız anda eğer özel şoför sizi karşılamadıysa hayatınızın şokunu yaşarsınız. X bankasında da maaşlar piyasa şartlarına göre ayarlanmaktadır. Cevizlikten zarar etmemek için verilmesi gereken mücadelelere, "taş" evine veranda yapabilmek için Datça Belediye'sinde girişeceğin bürokratik süreçlere hiç girmiyorum...</p><p style="text-align: left;">İşte bu tutuma "olmayana övgü" adını taktım. İçinde özenme var, yaşanmakta olan duruma mahkum hissetme var, kurtuluş inancı var, biraz umut var, eylemsizlik var, kritik düşünceden uzaklaşma var... Var da var. Bu formülde eksik olanlar ise <b>cesaret, özgünlük ve dönüştürme yeteneği</b>. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Tatminli bir hayat sürebilmek için bir inanışa veya vizyona sahip olmak güzel bir başlangıç bana kalırsa. İnsana yön verir, umut verir. Özünde iyidir. Ancak, tek başına pek bir işe yaramaz. O doğrultuda <b>deneyimlere ve etkileşimlere girişmek</b>, harekete geçmek, hareket ettikçe bilgilenmek, ustalaşmak ve inançların, görüşlerin altını edinilen bilgilerle doldurabilmek gerekir. Bu da tam bir cesaret ve beceriklilik işidir bence.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Çok önemli gördüğüm bir diğer unsur da insanın kendini ve çevresini dönüştürebilme yeteneği. Birçok insan bunun üzerinde yoğunlaşmak ve bu yeteneği hayat boyu geliştirmek yerine verili bir mekanizmanın dönüşümü sağlamasını umuyor: Farklı şirket, farklı ülke veya şehir, farklı bir inanç sistemi, farklı bir proje yönetim tekniği, farklı bir ürün arzusu bu beklentinin birer izdüşümü. Oysa, zihinsel dünyası sığ ve, bununla bağlantılı olarak, fiziki kontrolü düşük seviyede olan insanlar evrenin en verimli yerine de gönderilseler çok kısa zamanda orayı çorak bir alan haline getirirler. Tabi bunun tam tersi de geçerli, zengin ruhlu ve becerikli insanlar en kurak iklimlerde dahi ormanlar yeşertirler: Bunun bize en yakın ve en güzel örneği belki de Mustafa Kemal Atatürk'tür. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Dönüştürebilmek bizi insan yapan çok ama çok önemli bir meziyet. Kendini ve çevreni iyi tanımayı, bilgili ve becerikli olmayı, cesur olmayı gerektiriyor. Eski zamanlarda bu tip insanları büyücü sanarlarmış. Doğanın beklenen seyrini değiştirip dönüştürebildikleri için... İlerleyen dönemlerde, daha operatif marifetler çağında, bu tür kişilere usta, üstat denilmiş. Aynı zamanda, çok çalışmayı gerektiren bir beceri bu: Michelangelo'nun ham taştan Davud'u yontabilmesini sağlayan sadece doğuştan gelen yeteneği değildi, insan anatomisini anlayabilmek için yıllar boyu kadavra kesti, insan dokularını inceledi. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Peki, bugün biz, dönüşmek ve dönüştürebilmek için ne yapmalıyız? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Aslında yapabilen yapıyor :) </p><p style="text-align: left;">Paul Virilio'nun yıllar evvel "dromosfer" dediği "hız-küre"de savrulan mıyız, yoksa ayaklarının altındaki zemini hissedebilenlerden miyiz? Cevap biraz da bu farkındalık testinde saklı. Verili durumları edilgen bir doğayla yaşamak mı yaptığımız, yoksa değişimi okuyabilen ve yönlendirebilen bir insan mıyız? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Bitcoin yatırımı(!) yapmana sebep olan ne? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Metaverse ortamında banka şubesi açma isteğinin altına ne var? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Kendi dilini yaratıp konuşabiliyor musun, yoksa başkasının sözlerinin taşıyıcısı mısın? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Hızı avantajına kullanabiliyor musun, yoksa her yere geç mi kalıyorsun? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Geç kalmanı engellemek için iWatch üzerinden mucizevi(!) zaman planlayıcı "app"leri mi kullanıyorsun? </p><p style="text-align: left;">MacBook kullanmaya başladığından beri asla Windows'a bakamıyor musun? </p><p style="text-align: left;">"<i>Özellikle pandemiyle hız kazanan dijital dönüşümün 'yıkıcı' etkilerini</i>" hissediyor musun :) </p><p style="text-align: left;">Geçenlerde çok değerli bir büyüğüme de yazmıştım: <b>felsefe bilen elitlerin yığınları güdeceği yeni bir sahne kuruluyor yine</b>. Bunu yazmama vesile olan makale <a href="https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/4008295-maverick-research-deepfakes-will-kill-the-metaverse-synthetic-media-could-save-it" target="_blank">burda</a>. Ve bu, üstünkörü edilmiş havalı bir laf değil... Merak edenler Peter Thiel ve Alex Karp'ın hayat hikayelerine göz atabilir.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Sonuç?</p><p style="text-align: left;">Kendinde veya çevrende olmayana övgü sezersen dur. Neyi dönüştürmen gerektiğini bul. Harekete geç. Sonra otur ve hikayeni yaz.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Yazmadan olmaz.</p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-81381929725884694512022-01-09T14:17:00.000+03:002022-01-09T14:17:03.515+03:00the very end (a.k.a. punch)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEibCvZXVsDC-4xZjQFC-2cYyyD_wzJNHm6JeV9puERco_7APImbkFoRul08DLPYvXBQKx9DnsjNo-xBdv5Qzv2GESjUx3d8n8r1OejaVKXk74Taee_mGCkq3YJS2lkrp47CwvcZNSiovqU6V9C-nrhCUALPBEEjpB6LeRVspoXofHpj_an7GFsgno_VbA=s690" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="345" data-original-width="690" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEibCvZXVsDC-4xZjQFC-2cYyyD_wzJNHm6JeV9puERco_7APImbkFoRul08DLPYvXBQKx9DnsjNo-xBdv5Qzv2GESjUx3d8n8r1OejaVKXk74Taee_mGCkq3YJS2lkrp47CwvcZNSiovqU6V9C-nrhCUALPBEEjpB6LeRVspoXofHpj_an7GFsgno_VbA=w320-h160" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">A secene from Amore e morte nel giardino degli dei, 1972</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">one punch<br />one punch more<br />some inches under the heart<br />a hard one just on the core<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">a kiss<br />away from the lips<br />one touch<br />just to explore<br />no light catched by the glimpse<br />one punch just before the fall. </div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-55562878022246130742021-12-09T23:59:00.001+03:002021-12-09T23:59:14.691+03:0043<div style="text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhG_LAh5ujYXweNO7SpbNNo7390WbCDgVhLL1DMIuXjcpE7XkC8yb9COhD88jAXM0pJ-KA1ryXNdMbp6lVygFl9gPL-2Vl-QGIyTqXFCAfST4i-IlWuI02Ar1pTV82uIWnhRuC0VrqXH7Gf/s2048/bora43.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1401" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhG_LAh5ujYXweNO7SpbNNo7390WbCDgVhLL1DMIuXjcpE7XkC8yb9COhD88jAXM0pJ-KA1ryXNdMbp6lVygFl9gPL-2Vl-QGIyTqXFCAfST4i-IlWuI02Ar1pTV82uIWnhRuC0VrqXH7Gf/s320/bora43.png" width="219" /></a></div><br /><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">yalnızken<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">karnındaki küçük evren<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">yoksa seni besleyen</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">derinleşmeden<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">yüzeyden<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">alıp vermeden<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">eğlen</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">uzaklaş insan lekesinden</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">içerden bilgilen<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">dışardan zevklen<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">hiçbir şey beklemeden</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">isteyen gülsün<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">isteyen ağlasın<br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">sen giderken. </span></div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-61051300575094133902021-10-13T03:32:00.007+03:002021-10-13T19:08:34.358+03:00Before the agile manifesto<p>Nowadays, if you are in the world of business, especially in software business, and criticize the "religion of agile methods", you are cursed. Scrum must be the method. There must be sprints, coaches, daily stand up meetings, post-its, burn down charts, tribes, masters, retros and other rituals... There is no room for good old fashion, heavy duty engineering and management. Besides, it is very popular to cancel the bad old practices. </p><p>I am always into knowing the essence of the things around, extracting the root idea and being able to improvise for authenticity rather than being the follower of the popular narratives. Moreover, I don't believe that any method can save you. Only you can save yourself. There will be no eternal relief or salvation... I've already explained this in detail in one of my prior posts titled "<a href="https://borawriteson.blogspot.com/2021/09/forget-about-failing.html" target="_blank">Forget about failing</a>" so I'm not going to repeat the same things here.</p><p>Today, I am going to cite two books for supporting my ideas. The first one is "<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Computing-II-Abstraction-Structures/dp/0070654522/" target="_blank">Fundamentals of Computing II: Abstraction, Data Structures, and Large Software Systems</a>". This book was published in 1993 from McGraw-Hill and used as our lab textbook of software engineering course in Ege University computer engineering department. Please have a look at the sample page below:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMMXfF-_hFHZG8g0X0B-DI9yPWVkWwQCPOcodoZI1s7A9EAqb1r5U8zL_LPbkmKfBSyIMumJ6Bq_tJzZYSyHHRZJ88zG9zTuyO1nQ2yd_IsyV2pSLJznT6f8ODffNXSyhx4ApGmh20eoXR/s2048/agile.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1355" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMMXfF-_hFHZG8g0X0B-DI9yPWVkWwQCPOcodoZI1s7A9EAqb1r5U8zL_LPbkmKfBSyIMumJ6Bq_tJzZYSyHHRZJ88zG9zTuyO1nQ2yd_IsyV2pSLJznT6f8ODffNXSyhx4ApGmh20eoXR/w424-h640/agile.png" width="424"></a></div><br><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">In this section of the book, a number of software project management recommendations are given. I am also writing the text to be noticed with my interpretations added:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Bullet 1:</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fcff01;"><b>Assign clearly defined tasks organized by functional area.</b> This results in a product that has conceptual unity and does what was intended. It also makes for a more motivated programmer.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">For me, this is about defining coherent software products and product development teams accordingly.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Bullet 2:</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fcff01;"><b>Use walkthroughs.</b> Some evidence at this point suggests that walkthroughs are the most effective method for software quality control even better than formal verification! So walkthroughs are a critical component of any effective software team.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Here, the authors are stressing the importance of scenario based software proof-reading. Suggestions are similar to extreme programming, pair programming etc.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Bullet 3:</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fcff01;"><b>Do not add new programmers to an already late software project; this will only make it later.</b> This statement was first expressed in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month" target="_blank">The Mythical Man-Month</a> by Brooks and since has come to be known as Brook's Law. It's not hard to see why this is true - when new people are added, they have to be trained. This takes substantial time away from people who are already working on the project. Also adding new people to a team increases the possible lines of communication - this can reduce everyone's productivity.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This refers to the autonomous and preserved development teams.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Bullet 4:</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fcff01;"><b>Include representatives of all user groups on the development team.</b> Until the past few years, an analyst would interview users, and that would end users' involvement until they tested the final product. This was often unsatisfactory as users frequently do not know what they want until they have tried the software. Recall that prototyping is a software development technique in which the user interface is designed first and iteratively refined by working with users even before a full scale design is undertaken. Thus prototyping helps fulfill this guideline. Beyond prototyping, however, receiving user input throughout the development process ensures a higher level of user satisfaction with the final product.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This portion is the heart of the message. In the early 1990s, authors were saying that "<b>...Until the past few years, an analyst would interview users, and that would end users' involvement...</b>" by using the past tense :) And they are suggesting to add users in the development team from the beginning, to follow iterative development with continuous user testing and feedback collection. They are not using any term like MVP which is, I think, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MVP_(disambiguation)" target="_blank">the most ambiguous abbreviation coined ever</a> but they are recommending to use software prototyping. After many years, software industry re-invented the wheel and called it MVP. Anyways... Let's keep reading...</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><b>Bullet 5:</b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: #fcff01;"><b>Provide a supportive environment.</b> Adequate workstations, technical support, and secretarial help make a team far more productive.</span></div><div><br></div>:) Impediment removers, fancy cubicles, SCRUM rooms, wall boards, post-its, markers... What more can I say?<div><br></div><div><b>As you can see, it was always there for the ones who have open minds and eyes.</b></div><div><br></div><div>The second book I am to share is "<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Martian-Principles-Successful-Enterprise-Systems-ebook/dp/B000W2MXCE" target="_blank">The Martian Principles for Successful Enterprise Systems: 20 Lessons Learned from NASAs Mars Exploration Rover Mission</a>" by <a href="https://www.cs.sjsu.edu/~mak/">Ronald Mak</a>. Professor Mak also wrote a chapter in the famous book "<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Beautiful-Code-Leading-Programmers-Practice/dp/0596510047" target="_blank">Beautiful Code</a>", never miss it. I have chosen the book referring to the NASA practices because the projects managed by NASA are the triumphs of humanity. The optimal combination of science, technology, engineering, general management, team building, performance tracking, project management etc. can be found in the works of NASA. I am now pasting a screenshot from the book, very sharp lesson:</div><div><br></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXi6v-Qay5T-57QogTvnQwX25Q5qpflb4k86dr8CSn6WPM_vJw6ukZ8y8JnxXWiOXlaKmsB0ZHsjzPAf_Lg7SOMWbDgXaoN4bNrE33j3clBonjRH4k7cvIpCkePwzqyFZKIdeWt3B-4nEO/s631/ronald+mak+NASA.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="559" data-original-width="631" height="566" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXi6v-Qay5T-57QogTvnQwX25Q5qpflb4k86dr8CSn6WPM_vJw6ukZ8y8JnxXWiOXlaKmsB0ZHsjzPAf_Lg7SOMWbDgXaoN4bNrE33j3clBonjRH4k7cvIpCkePwzqyFZKIdeWt3B-4nEO/w640-h566/ronald+mak+NASA.png" width="640"></a></div><div><br></div>Very neat indeed, nothing more to say.<br> <br></div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-43092580704376367102021-10-11T04:56:00.006+03:002021-10-11T11:20:07.571+03:00kod-la-ma<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLlQPHvI3J1Fz4HfQ5PNCl6YuxYqT2OiSWV-epEoXxiP57dwHXPfQCxuMuo14DHtu5YyBvjJvIfT_sa0UhJwOH7wHxUYHpPARLQhnrkT5p2XrgXUt4z5tpidEQhG4xMByaKRPbvsHhgc01/s2209/Punchcard.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="967" data-original-width="2209" height="175" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLlQPHvI3J1Fz4HfQ5PNCl6YuxYqT2OiSWV-epEoXxiP57dwHXPfQCxuMuo14DHtu5YyBvjJvIfT_sa0UhJwOH7wHxUYHpPARLQhnrkT5p2XrgXUt4z5tpidEQhG4xMByaKRPbvsHhgc01/w400-h175/Punchcard.jpg" width="400"></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Punch Card, Source: <a href="https://www.computermuseumofamerica.org/" target="_blank">Computer Museum of America</a></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Yapay zeka, makine öğrenmesi, veri mühendisliği odaklı lisans programlarının ortaya çıkmasıyla beraber bilgisayar mühendisliği ve özellikle yazılım mühendisliği mesleklerinin tanımı, sektördeki pozisyonlaması ve akademik kökleri üzerine daha sık düşünüyorum. Henüz bir sonuca varamadım ama fikirlerimi biraz düzene sokabilmek adına yazmak istedim.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Aslen, beni bu paylaşımı yapmaya iten tetikleyici birkaç hafta önce aldığım bir e-posta. Gelen mesaj, çalışanları bazı hobi aktivitelerine davet eden bir tanıtım broşürüydü. Bahsedilen konular bahçe düzenleme, resim, yoga, dans, fitness, ahşap boyama, tenis, golf diye giderken birden listenin sonlarında karşıma "kodlama" çıktı. Öncelikle kategorik bir dumur yaşadım: Yıllardır komplike bir meslek sınıfında olan şey ne ara bir tür hobi aktivitesine dönüşmüştü? </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Bu arada, hobi kavramının sığlaştırılmasına genel olarak karşıyım. Mesela, biri "sinema hobimdir" diyorsa, o kişinin sinema izlemek için sistemli ve derinlemesine emek vermesini, sinemanın mantığı, tekniği, anlatısı, tarihi vb. üzerine sıradan insanlara nazaran çok daha fazla bilgisi olmasını beklerim. Bu düşünceme rağmen, listede kodlama adlı bir hobi görmeyi ilk planda sindiremedim. Sonra, biraz daha düşündüm üzerine, bir arkadaşımla da irdeledim durumu. Belli bir yere geldik...</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Bir meslek ile bir hobi arasındaki fark nedir? Neticede listede yer alan diğer kategoriler de aynı zamanda birer meslek olarak icra ediliyordu. Ben neden kodlamaya takılmıştım?</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Toparlamaya çalıştığım temel kuralları paylaşayım:</div><div style="text-align: left;">1. Bir konuyu hobi edinebilmek için o konunun meslek erbabı dışında olmalısınız.</div><div style="text-align: left;">2. Bir konu hakkında "hobimdir" diyebilmek için o konuya sıradan insanların sarf ettiğinden çok daha fazla emek vermelisiniz.</div><div style="text-align: left;">3. Bir alan hobinizse sizden o alanda performans talep edilmez, siz de performans garantisi vermezsiniz. Oysa o alan mesleğinizse, sizden performans talep edilir ve siz de performans garantisi verirsiniz.</div><div style="text-align: left;">4. Bir alanın hobileşebilmesi için giriş bariyerinin düşük olması gerekir.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Konuya böyle bakınca işin hobiyle ilgili yanı belli bir temele oturtulabiliyor. Gelelim mühendislik işlerine.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Eski çağlarda bilgeler hemen hemen her konunun uzmanıydılar. Meşhur örnekleri vermek klişe olur ama akla hemen gelen kişiler Pisagor, Platon, Ömer Hayyam ve Leonardo da Vinci'dir. Aydınlama sonrası akademik yaklaşım ise, her konuyu daha alt konulara bölerek düzenlemeye ve bu yönde uzmanlıklar geliştirilmesine dayalı olarak işliyordu çünkü bilimsel yaklaşım inanılmaz boyutta bilgi üretmekteydi ve bir insanın buna yetişmesi mümkün değildi (John von Neumann hariç :). Son yıllarda bu aşırı alt disiplinli yaklaşımın yeni bilgi üretimini sınırladığı fark edildi ve tekrar çok disiplinli çalışmalar örgütlenmeye gayret ediliyor (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Culture" target="_blank">The Third Culture</a>). Analiz artık limitlerine dayandı, yeni sentezlere gereksinim duyuluyor. Yani konunun bir tarafında birden fazla mesleki bilgiye dokunabilen yeni tip profesyoneller ve akademisyenler var. Dolayısıyla, artık bilgisayar programlayabilen tıp doktorları, biyolojiye çok hakim elektronik mühendisleri, sanat tarihi uzmanlığı olan bilgisayar mühendisleri, makine öğrenmesi tekniklerini bilen avukatlar göreceğiz. Bir meslek hakkında aşırı sahiplenici bir tavırla meslek dışındakileri hariç tutmaya çalışmak veya onları hor görmek azalması gereken davranışlar arasında sayılacak. Çevik dönüşüm hamleleriyle şirketlerde kurulmaya çalışılan "siloları yıkın" temalı yaklaşımları mesleki silolar için de göreceğiz bence.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Meselenin diğer bir tarafı da kurumsal eğitimin sunduğu akreditasyonla alakalı. Diplomalardan bahsediyorum. Yıllar önce, kurumsal mesleki eğitim konusundaki riskler entelektüel çevrelerde dile getirilmeye başlanmıştı. Argümanları güçlü, güzel bir makaleye <a href="https://www.edge.org/conversation/don_tapscott-the-impending-demise-of-the-university" target="_blank">burdan</a> ulaşabilirsiniz. Sadece ülkemizde değil, tüm dünyada geleneksel kurumsal eğitim yetersiz kalmaya başladı. Bununla beraber, kişilerin kendi kendine öğrenmesini mümkün kılan bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri alabildiğine yayıldı. Bilgiye erişmek çok kolay. Doğru bilgiyi yanlıştan ayırt edebilmek, kritik sorularla özgün sentezler yapabilmek çok daha önemli hale geldi. Bu meziyetlere sahip kişiler, karşılığında iyi para kazanabilecekler. Bu gerçekler ışığında bakılınca, bir konunun diplomasına sahip olmayan ama kendini o konuda çok iyi yetiştirmiş kıymetli profesyonellere rastlama olasılığının artacağı görülebiliyor. Yani, mükemmel elektronik mantık devreleri tasarlayıp üretebilen 17 yaşında bireyler diplomalılara rakip olacaklar. İlerde, bilgi/beceri sahibi olmak ile diploma veya sertifika sahibi olmak arasında bir korelasyon kalmayabilir. Son zamanlarda sosyal mecralarda paylaşılan sertifika resimlerinin adedi de bir fikir veriyordur bu trend hakkında sanırım. Neticede, "benim bu konuda diplomam var" diyerek o konudaki diplomasızları yok saymak veya hor görmek iyi bir strateji olmayacaktır diye düşünüyorum.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Hobilere dair koşulları yukarda sayarken alanın giriş bariyerinden bahsetmiştim. Bu oldukça geçerli bir koşul. Konunun karmaşıklığı belli bir eşiğin üzerindeyse ciddi bir alan eğitimi olmadan o konuda uzmanlaşmak ve hatta o konuda hobi aktivitelerine girişmek çok çok zor. Bazen de imkansız. Örneğin, hobi olarak genel cerrahi sahasına giremez çoğu insan. Bu gibi alanlarda yasalar da belli sınırlar koyuyor zaten. Meslek odaları, barolar vb. işin içine giriyor. <b>Kodlama hobi olabildiğine göre yazılım mühendisliği mesleği yeteri kadar karmaşık olmasa gerek :) Veya yazılım mühendisliği kodlamanın ötesinde karmaşıklığa sahip olsa gerek. Veya yazılım mühendisliği mesleği yasal olarak düzenlenmemiş olsa gerek...</b> Bilgisayar mühendisliği fiilen 1930 sonlarında, lisans eğitimi olarak da 1970 başlarında ortaya çıktı. Yani 80 yıldan uzun zamandır var olan bilgisayar mühendisliği ile çok daha eski olan elektrik/elektronik mühendisliği arasında gayet hoş biçimde çekilebilmiş olan sınır çizgisi malesef bilgisayar mühendisliği ile yazılım mühendisliği veya yapay zeka veya veri bilimi veya veri mühendisliği arasında tam olarak belirginleştirilemedi. Mesela veri bilimi konusunu tanımlayabilmek için aşağı yukarı her profesörün, danışmanlık firmasının ve kurumun kendine has bir Venn diyagramı var :) Konu uzmanlığı, matematik, istatistik, bilgisayar bilimleri başlıklarını ne ölçüde kesiştirerek veri bilimcisi profilinin tanımlanacağına dair reçete tam olarak kararlaştırılamıyor. Geçen yılın Turing ödülüne layık görülmüş olan <a href="https://youtu.be/h1Z91Klj7ng" target="_blank">Jeffrey Ullman'ın eğlenceli videosuna</a> bir göz atmanızı öneririm. Bilgisayar mühendisliğindeki fiili durum ile akademik tasnif arasında geçmiş olan yaklaşık 40 yılı düşünürsek henüz bu çizgilerin netleşebilmesi için zamana ihtiyaç olduğunu söyleyebiliriz. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Sonuç!?</div><div style="text-align: left;"><b>Hobi olarak kodlama böyle yayılıyorken diplomalı "bilgisayarcılar" ne yapsın?</b></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">Acilen bir şey yapmaya gerek yok çünkü bu alanlarda inanılmaz derecede uzman açığı var. Fakat, bir strateji oluşturmak çok fayda sağlar. Bu stratejik duruşu sağlayabilmek adına pratik gözlemlerime dayanan birkaç tavsiyem var:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">1. Alt disiplinlere saplanarak "ben Javacıyım, ETLciyim, databaseciyim, sistemciyim, networkçüyüm..." demeyi bırakın ve doğru senteze varabilecek kalibrede bilgisayar mühendisliği yapın: Fiziki katmanlardan bilgi sunumu katmanlarına dek sistemlerin içerisinde neler döndüğünü bilemezseniz fark yaratamazsınız. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">2. Mesleğinizde karşılaştığınız durumları tarif ederken sanayide yetişmiş çırak ağzıyla konuşmayın, okullu olmanın hakkını her ayrıntıda verin. Mesela "memory şişmiş, job patlamış, 5 paralel verdim, SQL çektim, donma problemi var vs." demeyin. Muayeneye gittiğiniz doktor sizinle öyle konuşsa güveniniz sarsılır, reçetesini almazsınız.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">3. Sorumlusu olduğunuz sistemlerle ilgili bir problem bildirildiğinde konuyu rasyonel bir mühendis hassasiyeti ve ciddiyetiyle ele alın. "Ben denedim oldu, bizim loglar temiz, testte baktık çalıştı, kapatıp açtık düzeldi, olmaması lazım aslında, bir daha olursa haber verin vb." demeyin. Sorun neredeyse tespiti orada yapın, sorunu temelden çözün. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">4. <b>Şaşırmayın. Bilin.</b> Mesela, Julia neden Python'dan hızlı, Go neden Java'dan hızlı, Scala neden daha portable bilin. Yerinde kullanın. Dogmatik inanç geliştirmeyin. Teknoloji fanatiği olmayın. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">5. Bilgisayar sistemlerinin kullanıcısı değil geliştiricisi olarak yaklaşın her konuya. Asla "teknik olarak imkansız" demeyin, <b>teknik olarak hep imkanlıdır. Uygun tekniği bulun.</b></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">6. <b>Kendi kendinize öğrenin ve çok hızlı öğrenin</b>. Lise 1 talebesi kendi kendine 3 haftada Python öğreniyorken, bir bilgisayar mühendisi olarak, şirketinizin sizi Python kursuna göndermesini beklemeyin, geride kalırsınız.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">7. Stackoverflow veya Kaggle göçtüğünde, ya da İnternet bağlantınız olmadığında dahi bilgisayar sistemlerini geliştirebilecek bir mesleki seviyede olun.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">8. Eskiden kendinizi özel hissetmenizi sağlayan efsaneler vardı: "Bizim iş biraz da sanattır, bizim beynimiz çok farklı çalışır, bilgisayar sistemleri biraz da mistiktir..." kabilinden tavırlara girmeyin. Hesap yapın. Geliştirdiğiniz bütün yazılımları ezbere bilin.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">9. Bir işin yapılmasını sağlayan bilgisayar sistemlerini geliştiriyor olmak o işin erbabı olmak anlamına gelmez. İşler genelde irrasyonel durumların ilginç şekilde yönetilmesiyle sürer ve o dünyada sonsuz parametre vardır. Bilgisayar sistemleri ise programlanmış rasyonel etkileşimleri icra eder. Aklınız karışmasın. İki tarafı da bilin, iki tarafı aynı sanmayın.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">10. Her sistemi kendine has bir meta-dil işleten parametreler yumağı haline getirmeyin. Yani her şeyi parametrik yapmak iyi mühendislik yapmak değildir. Parametreyi yanlış değerle beslediğinizde hata almazsınız ama programı yanlış yazarsanız büyük ihtimalle geliştirme fazında hata alırsınız ve bu iyi bir şeydir.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">11. Kendi geliştirdiğiniz sistemlerden bahsederken sanki bir başka kişiden bahseder gibi konuşmayın: "Sonra listeden keyleri beşer beşer çekip, kayıtları sunucuya gönderiyor ve arada kayıt atlarsa hata vermiyor... saçmalıyor..." demeyin. Bunu düşünen ve hayata alan sizdiniz. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;">12. <span style="font-family: courier;">kod-la-mayın;</span> <span style="font-family: courier;">//:)</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: courier;">end;</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-89739148949983789372021-09-27T22:46:00.004+03:002021-09-27T23:44:28.729+03:00Şemyaza<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsjMPm81o1xHipagyqBAtOa3zEulVS7D-tZXXi08Nl7xGNfsI6a_uUUU5I7Qps9q9Knn0J1Muhs-F34IABAIOuzJUQ4rAPc8rx5IU3kVY9YUVGuxGZMYEdDgXitgCPTNTYzxpXr0BXCYww/s600/shemyaza.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="554" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsjMPm81o1xHipagyqBAtOa3zEulVS7D-tZXXi08Nl7xGNfsI6a_uUUU5I7Qps9q9Knn0J1Muhs-F34IABAIOuzJUQ4rAPc8rx5IU3kVY9YUVGuxGZMYEdDgXitgCPTNTYzxpXr0BXCYww/w369-h400/shemyaza.jpg" width="369" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;">sayılamayan saatlerin<br />düşmüş meleklerle<br />gecelerde<br />ıslak ve sıcak<br />kurbanların nerde?<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">bilinmeyeni açık ettiğin<br />açıktakileri lanetlediğin<br />karanlıkta nurlanan<br />kadim ayinin<br />ne zaman?<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">yükseltecek olsan <br />yakar seni</div><div style="text-align: left;">sözlerin</div><div style="text-align: left;">ışık sanıp izlediğin<br />şeytanlarına <br />verdiğin.</div><p><br /></p><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-68212059775615110842021-09-23T00:00:00.001+03:002021-09-23T11:09:38.303+03:00How I became a computer engineer<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEij0xYUktqcTRWLeXtQd6aNkI2L4k8f5pKel_DlvKJGbfcorCR7W9TpIJhb_Jt_U-8bSTHvLzT0J5BJ-fHCoEQ8MJlcKoPVSWKH3ujlD9NJsRPunm0hqaunb29N5dqJqp1YoY8iIoBBNdOY/s2048/ege_bilgisayar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1152" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEij0xYUktqcTRWLeXtQd6aNkI2L4k8f5pKel_DlvKJGbfcorCR7W9TpIJhb_Jt_U-8bSTHvLzT0J5BJ-fHCoEQ8MJlcKoPVSWKH3ujlD9NJsRPunm0hqaunb29N5dqJqp1YoY8iIoBBNdOY/w180-h320/ege_bilgisayar.jpg" width="180"></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ege University Computer Engineering Department, July 2021</span></div><p></p><p>I enrolled in Ege University in 1995 and graduated from Computer Engineering Department in 2000 with bachelor's degree. During that period, my dear professors worked really hard to create a computer engineer from me :) </p><p>I must salute Prof. Erden Başar, Prof. Mehmet Özel Ergen, Prof. Sinan Yılmaz (R.I.P.), Prof. Ahmet Kaşlı, Prof. Fikret İkiz, Prof. Halil Şengonca, Prof. Levent Toker, Prof. Oğuz Dikenelli, Prof. Yasemin Topaloğlu, Prof. Aylin Kantarcı, Prof. Mustafa Türksever, Prof. Ata Önal, Prof Şaban Eren, Prof. Serdar Korukoğlu; and of course the teaching assistants of that time: Osman Ünalır, Güzin Şeker, Cenk Erdur, Selçuk Kaptan, Muhammet Cinsdikici, Nur Zincir, Aziz Can Yücetürk, Aybars Uğur, Ahmet Koltuksuz, Özgür Gümüş and Tuğkan Tuğlular.</p><p>What a crew!</p><p>Thank you, thank all of you a thousand times!</p><p>Today's story is about Tuğkan Tuğlular. The course was Microcomputers. Fifth semestre. We were following the great textbook <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Structured-Computer-Organization-Andrew-Tanenbaum/dp/0132916525" target="_blank">"Structured Computer Organization" by Andrew Tanenbaum</a>. Thanks to Tuğkan's enthusiasm, every assignment of the course was forcing us to use x8086 Assembly programming language. To be honest, Tuğkan was always giving us the freedom of using any applicable programming language but somehow all of us were using Assembly :) Here is the famous assignment:</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNKLQMK9L90oyM8EAyDtwTSiae91eWgM_btSPL-KE8xCunj2ykooqmP5YKsJGLxIrrqC2MBWuXo3ORo3850icDdsfUJGk_nEDvi-IHyHkT_mod2LrAA_9VJDzUXz6ID9FUAWTF-436788R/s2048/odev.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1431" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNKLQMK9L90oyM8EAyDtwTSiae91eWgM_btSPL-KE8xCunj2ykooqmP5YKsJGLxIrrqC2MBWuXo3ORo3850icDdsfUJGk_nEDvi-IHyHkT_mod2LrAA_9VJDzUXz6ID9FUAWTF-436788R/w448-h640/odev.png" width="448"></a></div><div><br></div>The task was clear. Connect 2 computers through serial port (nowadays there are no serial ports on computers) and let those computers simultanously send files, chat messages, mouse pointer locations to each other. During all those operations, current system state must be reflected on the screen online. Of course, it was said that "The program can be written in any programming language..." as the last sentence of the assignment :))<div><br></div><div>During my undergraduate education, I have submitted many computer programs that were designed to solve many different problems. Those were developed by using Pascal, Quick Basic, C, Parallel C, Visual Basic, Delphi, PL/1, Java, even GPSS and of course, Assembly. However, I was sensing that the assignment above was a bit harder than others. First of all, you must be programming the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8251" target="_blank">Intel 8251</a> chip in a perfect way to meet the criteria of simultaneous communication. Keeping the integrity of the transferred data was another challenge: Which bit is beloging to mouse position data, which one is carrying the information of the file transfer or chat data? Data packages must be encapsulated well. Data loss must be avoided so you need a robust communication protocol... </div><div><br></div><div>Actually, in the Microcomputers course, it was an obligation for students to understand what is going on under the many layers of the abstractions of microcomputer systems. What bare metal is capable of. How it is possible to come up with unversal solutions given a very limited hardware capacity. By assigning such difficult term projects, Tuğkan was knowing that the classroom was developing a sort of computational mastery. His project management philosophy was also astonishing :) He was saying "Guys, if I give you 1 month, you'll deliver after 30 days; if I give you 1 week, you will deliver on 7th day; if I say 3 days, you will deliver on the 3rd day. So why should I wait?". It was valid :)) And it still is valid.</div><div><br></div><div>Anyways, challenge was accepted in 1998 and we built the project team of three: I, Yılmaz and Volkan. In the old days, only available microcomputers to us were in the department building. In the dormitories or homes there were no computers. Therefore, we had to design the software on paper firstly. Then, we should have reserved a computer in the microcomputers lab of the department, and complete coding/compiling etc. there, in that given time slot. </div><div><br></div><div>We shared the tasks in a way that I and Yılmaz were to develop the communication module and Volkan was going to develop the graphical user interface. In the dormitory, we designed the Assembly program on paper. A sample piece of note is below:</div><div><br></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkFgKHw43wbtrFTv40HUzX6nlkZL9apV8wTZvPnWDZ4kEEJt-6CMKkehanBp-PAnrKVvGyXrwyAq0JOLL-U4eKMTC6WJErQtSiwu4SLy5c5dJ0Y7INUiTo1xrcf76xIn1KlX4BKvGD-Kry/s2048/handwritten_code.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1374" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkFgKHw43wbtrFTv40HUzX6nlkZL9apV8wTZvPnWDZ4kEEJt-6CMKkehanBp-PAnrKVvGyXrwyAq0JOLL-U4eKMTC6WJErQtSiwu4SLy5c5dJ0Y7INUiTo1xrcf76xIn1KlX4BKvGD-Kry/w430-h640/handwritten_code.png" width="430"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">After the designs had been completed, we got to the lab and coded the program by following our notes on papers. Then, the miracle happened. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We compiled the code. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">No errors. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Okay. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We linked the program. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">No anomalies. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">We started the executable file. It just worked well! </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">For a third year computer engineering student, in such a challenging project, and the given complexities of Assembly programming language, it was just a miracle. I am still remembering my feelings of satisfaction and how we celebrated the moment. A couple of pages of the program listing is as follows:</div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTtplELkDLX7erALKmFTfYRd5zoYBHeitH87AFPb6dVHq4QPew_IcBG6zEpdLvN-d4HpfXxxg7tDfsbkSkJBkaj-Rmi1m3-6BsugXdJyvPL-9OjflOOLm47MQQBbibT_ALwIajwFHqnz4t/s2048/asm_code_1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1180" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTtplELkDLX7erALKmFTfYRd5zoYBHeitH87AFPb6dVHq4QPew_IcBG6zEpdLvN-d4HpfXxxg7tDfsbkSkJBkaj-Rmi1m3-6BsugXdJyvPL-9OjflOOLm47MQQBbibT_ALwIajwFHqnz4t/w368-h640/asm_code_1.png" width="368"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_X-FwXJvWT1c3GAFCw4WNO7x4mV8oO5fVbmpFTyO5wQa4D7SHdzadgcPLpuQv59ie_QYkgwMKIkzQzlnEwvYtU1V4J0-La20jBKOsphFBS3TJWx10r2TLvsQWH3MBqUoIqX2srEUCnDe_/s2048/asm_code_2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1256" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_X-FwXJvWT1c3GAFCw4WNO7x4mV8oO5fVbmpFTyO5wQa4D7SHdzadgcPLpuQv59ie_QYkgwMKIkzQzlnEwvYtU1V4J0-La20jBKOsphFBS3TJWx10r2TLvsQWH3MBqUoIqX2srEUCnDe_/w392-h640/asm_code_2.png" width="392"></a></div><br><div>At the end, it was just another assignment. But the meaning of this assignment to me is tremendous. <b>The time we ran this program in our first attempt with no errors was the time I evolved into a computer engineer.</b></div><div><br></div><div>After that moment, I have developed millions of lines of code in many years. Even today, I know that some of my programs are running on some servers, in a confident way. It just gives me a warm feeling. I loved computer engineering. I am still in love with my profession and all the underlying science. In the last years of my active software development, I was setting such challenges to myself: <b>"Tester will never find a single bug after I deliver my program"</b> or <b>"The developer who will be examining my program after me will adore me and my level of engineering"</b> :) Fun times...</div><div><br></div><div>I am a very lucky guy because even today, I am so privileged to be a colleague of Yılmaz and Volkan in Yapı Kredi. And again, thank you Tuğkan for transforming me from a student into a professional.</div><div><br></div><div>Respect!</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-44825407154628849232021-09-18T14:26:00.007+03:002021-09-19T10:53:38.484+03:00Forget about Failing!<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5Sgjt5PnivWGxw33tCzlW5-uLhqWs8oDoqHyR2W1-dscR9_cRq-kKQSU5tKQ7KxtkI_Iq1qokoXC9wAlyB1uVTXAtdb8lxwfkQM7B86ny1kvMByHLvijQQRZj-wspKS5WqOHFQrZfX2k5/s960/scene.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="640" data-original-width="960" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5Sgjt5PnivWGxw33tCzlW5-uLhqWs8oDoqHyR2W1-dscR9_cRq-kKQSU5tKQ7KxtkI_Iq1qokoXC9wAlyB1uVTXAtdb8lxwfkQM7B86ny1kvMByHLvijQQRZj-wspKS5WqOHFQrZfX2k5/w400-h266/scene.png" width="400"></a></div><br>Agile mindset and culture have been promoted for years. Organizations are getting slimmer, hierachies are vanishing, the world is trying to do everything through scrum teams. People are thinking on post-its, working with post-its. <b>Humanity is doing digital transformation with post-its.</b> Perfect!<p></p><p>Coaches, facilitators, mentors, consultants and all the other members of the familia are cursing the "old school" doctrines, burrying the wicked waterfall software development method, so on and on...</p><p>And of course the notion of failing! </p><p>"Fail fast, fail often" motto, told by literally every one to every one. Written everywhere. People like the shocking effect of the slogan which is a <b>linguistic poison</b> in my idea. </p><p>The word "fail" is being repeated so often and pervasively that it starts to disturb the mindsets of the young professionals. <b>I am against the tendency of promoting failure culture.</b> And never praise it.</p><p>Of course, it is easily understandable that the people who are advising to fail for success are aiming to emphasize the importance of learning new things about the universe. This is not a new notion. It is called <b>"trial and error"</b>, one of the fundemantal methods of learning and problem solving. The issue here is that, it is not the perfect way of problem solving. Actually, it costs more when compared with the alternative ways. <b>It is possible to learn things without failing.</b> </p><p>Moreover, it is not proper to start projects with the "failure in your mind". Nowadays, the narrative came to a point that, as if it is impossible to be successful without failing. It is not correct. It is shallow. It is a reflection of a way of popularism which praises mediocrity. Saying "you can be an average person, don't worry, there is a method to save you: if you fail enough, you'll be victorious at the end". It is not true. <b>No ultimate methods can save you.</b> Extraordinary people and extra ordinary events shaped the history and marked the characteristics of humanity. Repeatable methods merely work well if you want to scale up with average masses. Therefore, if you are to launch creative initiatives proposing real added-value, failure driven iterations are not the ideal paths to follow.</p><p>Let's look at problem solving.</p><p>When you face a problem in your way, in most of the times, <b>you use heuristics to find a solution.</b> It's a much more faster and efficient method than trial and error is. Or <b>you may apply algorithmic approaches</b> for solving the problem. Or you may follow trial and error. However, if you don't have any hypotheses before starting the trial and error process, you end up with no information gain. So the main goal in problem solving is to gain new information to apply to the problem and it is obvious that there are many ways of information gaining, or learning, methods in the world. <b>You don't have to fail to learn.</b> In most of the times, <b>success is not a function of your knowledge and competence.</b> Environmental factors, let's call them context or <b>ecosystem dynamics, are playing a crucial role.</b> If you analyse the journeys of a set of startups, you can see that successful and unseccessful ones are doing exactly the same things. I wonder how deterministic failure prophets would explain this situation. Methodologically, there is no lock-in to failure driven prodecures, there are better alternatives of reaching success.</p><p>Take the motivational factors. </p><p><b>You need to feel the fire and the desire for success while you are starting things up.</b> Failure is not a catalyst in the process. <b>You must be brave enough</b> to take the risks and move forward after facing blocking factors in your route. The magical factor here is not how you are good at failing but how you are resilient and solid after facing obstacles. <b>It is you, not the method.</b> The better you are at applying the methods, the more chance you have to be successful. <b>Virtuosity matters.</b> And it is about practice and training. <b>No matter what your profession is, you must separate the training session and the performance session.</b> <b>Train like hell.</b> Get down, get up, read, sweat, bleed, meet people, ask questions, expand yourself and get perfectly ready to the performance. During the performance, which is your professional daily life, never ever fail. <b>Get the job done!</b> Get the job done every time! Get the job done perfectly! <b>If you face unexpected situations, just improvise</b> like Tango performers do. No one superimposes any coreography to Tango performers, they are the experts of fundemantal steps and patterns. And they improvise perfectly on the stage. They simply handle things. For being able to improvise during the performence, you had to do your training well enough. <b>Otherwise, you will become a failure machine.</b> And believe me, it will not make you victorious in the end.</p><p>As I am getting to the conclusion, I want to remind that implying scientific methods to business is valuable if you know the essence of the science. It is well known that science and rationalism are being used as management tools by the authorities. A government may state that "scientific norm of the human psyche is defined as XXX, if you are not in the area of XXX you must take that pill, or the authority may send you to hospital as an obligatory measure". There are many examplars of that management style. We must never forget that <b>science is humble in nature.</b> Science never asserts that it will solve everything about the universe or it will bring the ultimate salvation. Science always tries to minimise the grey area, finds some variables for explaining some situations under well defined conditions. In most of the times, <b>science gets back to you with greater but new questions</b>, new unknowns. It is a never ending spiral. Therefore, <b>proposing some formulae as an ultimate solution to a problem in business is almost always shallow and it is a sort of fashion.</b> People may refer to scientific research outcomes for fortifying their formulae. It changes nothing. Be a free, intellectually sufficient, brave, hard working and creative person. </p><p><b>On the stage, never ever fail!</b> </p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-53790200309463059342021-09-15T03:27:00.000+03:002021-09-15T03:27:07.763+03:00An Algorithm for Composing Articles on AI<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihtm_E2XrXc2Nn-vKSPflVMd9r0z0QDABaANRaL46eLRxggHnxonsicHiMwyMTmmcE4P4A6OrSD89u2emd4XE2F4yj8QD4XU34bZ72l_0EAOmcYtGOkBvMaja545ytHoVFTeidzpSBPE0X/s971/ai+image.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="807" data-original-width="971" height="333" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihtm_E2XrXc2Nn-vKSPflVMd9r0z0QDABaANRaL46eLRxggHnxonsicHiMwyMTmmcE4P4A6OrSD89u2emd4XE2F4yj8QD4XU34bZ72l_0EAOmcYtGOkBvMaja545ytHoVFTeidzpSBPE0X/w400-h333/ai+image.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">A typical AI Image</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">1. Pick a big real life problem which has not been solved yet</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">2. Write the title of the article by following the grammar below</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span> Can AI solve [Problem_Name]?</span><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>3. Introduce the concept of AI and its brief history</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>4. Introduce the nature of the problem you selected in bullet 1</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>5. Present available data</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>6. Present possible AI methods to apply for solution</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>7. Stress on the shortcomings and barriers that prevent you devising the AI methods presented in bullet 6</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>8. Stress on the future possibilities and hopes</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>9. Pick an image combining binary numbers, brain, electronic circuits, robot head or hand and human head or hand (e.g. the image above) and embed the image in the article</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><span>10. Publish</span></div><br /><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-44994240025076577232021-07-10T18:45:00.004+03:002021-07-10T19:17:49.025+03:00İç = Dış<p>İnsanları dış görünüşlerine göre değerlendirmemek konusunda hayatımız boyunca birçok farklı otoriteden ders veya öğüt alıyoruz. Çok masum, yerinde ve anlaşılır bir önerme gibi görünen bu öğüdü biraz inceleyelim.</p><p>İnsanlar hakkında yargıya varmak için onların dış görünüşü yerine iç dünyalarının durumunu kıstas olarak almak için kişilerin iç ve dış yapılarının birbirinden bağımsız ve ayrı olduklarını önden kabul etmek gerekir. Dolayısıyla, bu öğüdü hayata alabilmek için fenomen/numen, öz/töz felsefi ikilemleri ekseninde düşünür ve yaşar olmak lazımdır. Oysa, felsefenin ontoloji dalı dünyayı algılamanın bambaşka yolları da olabileceğini anlatır. Örneğin, Spinoza'nın tekilci yaklaşımına ben daha yakınımdır. Halk arasında böylesine bir erdem vasfı yüklenmiş "insanları dış görünüşüne göre yargılamama" önemesinin bir felsefi dayatma barındırması dahi altyapısının evrensel olmadığına işaret ediyor bence. </p><p>Konuyu fazlaca teoriye boğmadan örnekler üzerinden devam edeceğim ama öncesinde durumu nasıl ele alacağımı bir mantık kurgusuyla izah etmek istiyorum:</p><p>1. Diyelim ki insanlara şeklini, dış görünüşünü veren çeper oldukça katı ve insanların daha değişken ve esnek olabilen iç görünüşlerini perdeler nitelikte (Şekil 1). Bu durumda, iç dünyanın malzemesi iç dünyanın sınırı ile dış çeper arasındaki boşlukları zamanla dolduracaktır. Aynı bir kabın içindeki suyun kabın şeklini alması gibi.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvoFyBSTusFI6t10sm81oe37Jj2z79lDBYovoJtAYn7z0LIWefhA08KlZUNFtLNdUO7IP01je5b4LdfUx1k4te9hYMVY5BJek4DS5SbzHgl1IlvN69FVJHOc58Gg6zYZ3OJPJZ__AWYFEB/s517/kati-dis-ceper.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="517" data-original-width="474" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvoFyBSTusFI6t10sm81oe37Jj2z79lDBYovoJtAYn7z0LIWefhA08KlZUNFtLNdUO7IP01je5b4LdfUx1k4te9hYMVY5BJek4DS5SbzHgl1IlvN69FVJHOc58Gg6zYZ3OJPJZ__AWYFEB/w366-h400/kati-dis-ceper.png" width="366" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Şekil 1: Katı dış çeper, esnek iç çeper</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">2. Diğer bir olasılık, insanlara dış görünüşlerini veren sathın esnek olduğunu kabul etmektir. Bu durumda, iç ve dış dünya arasındaki doğal gerilim ve farktan doğan denge insana zaman içerisinde değişebilen ve iç dünyanın yarattığı güçlerin dışarıya şeklen yansıyabildiği, aynı şekilde dış dünyadan gelen etkilerin de içeriye rahatlıkla şekil verebildiği bir düzen sağlar (Şekil 2).</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhS1yPL3Mo8QyZWAs8xPUVnGzANskWXSFn4VUFYo_91NvlaF9ziNZwjvZXR1l1ENQFctub_bANsXAVFZpr8iAa8mdNrsPtk0RoClQ5eVlh6e5lHHHIZMjURfA39jYjv1d3YDJQzNerc00N7/s517/esnek-dis-ceper.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="517" data-original-width="474" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhS1yPL3Mo8QyZWAs8xPUVnGzANskWXSFn4VUFYo_91NvlaF9ziNZwjvZXR1l1ENQFctub_bANsXAVFZpr8iAa8mdNrsPtk0RoClQ5eVlh6e5lHHHIZMjURfA39jYjv1d3YDJQzNerc00N7/w366-h400/esnek-dis-ceper.png" width="366" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Şekil 2: Esnek dış çeper doğal iç-dış kuvvet dengesiyle şekil alıyor.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Bu iki koşulda da iç dünyaya şekil veren çeper ile dış görünüşü sağlayan çeperin birbirine eşitlendiğini görüyoruz. Sınırlar ve limitler konusu bu yazının çapını aşabilecek derinlikte olduğundan ayrıntısına girmeyeceğim ama nesneye şeklini veren daima onun sınırlarıdır. Bu yüzden çeper benzetmesi üzerinden değerlendirme yaptım. Aslına bakarsanız, üçüncü bir durum daha var: İç dünyanın çeperinin katı, dış çeperin esnek olması. Bu da benzer bir sonuç verdiğinden, uzatmamak adına ayrıca yazmıyorum.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Eğer yukarıdaki analizim doğruysa, iç daima dışa eşittir. Yani ne görüyorsak, onu okumayı bilmeli ve o ölçüde yargılar geliştirebilmeliyiz. Yapısal çözümlemeyi bir yana koyup da pratik hayata biraz daha duru bakabilsek yine benzer bir notaya varırız bence. Bir insana baktığımızda, o kişiye dair apaçık görebildiğimiz binlerce ipucu ve bilgi sağlayıcı varken, kişinin ruh dünyasına dair mistik tahminlerde bulunmak çok daha karmaşık ve masalsı değil mi? Ockham'ın basitlik yasasına göre davranmakta fayda var: Bir olay iki farklı yöntemle açıklanabiliyorsa basit olanı takip et. Örneğin, bir adam ceketiyle pantolonunun rengini uyduramamışsa onun estetik kabiliyetlerinin ve öz-algısının biraz düşük olduğu yargısına varmak çok doğrudan, açık ve delile dayalı bir yöntem. Ama toplumsal öğüt bize neyi öneriyor? Renkleri tutturamamış olabilir ama yine de estetik açıdan gelişmiş ve öz-algısı yüksek biri olabilir. Belki de uygun renkte giysi alacak parası yoktu. Belki, evindeki ayna kırılmıştı. Hemen yargıya varma. Bu bakış, çok daha dolaylı, istisnaları hep göz önüne almayı gerektiren ve kişiliğin dışa yansıma niteliğini yok gibi kabullendirmeye çalışan bir yaklaşım. Sade değil.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Çocuklar, belli bir yaşa gelip de toplumsal kurallarla törpülenene kadar gördüklerini okumak konusunda çok net ve başarılılar. Mesela, bir doktor elinde iğne ile yaklaşıyorsa, annelerinin "acımayacak, korkma" kabilinden sözlerini pek dinlemez, ordan uzaklaşmaya çalışırlar. Oysa biz yetişkinler, hareketleri anlamlandırmak konusunda neredeyse körleşiyoruz. Tam tersine, sözlü ve sembolik mesajlara aşırı anlam ve değer atfettiğimiz bir hayat kuruyoruz kendimize. Hikayeler yaratıyoruz bol bol. Hem de başkalarının sözleriyle çerçevelenmiş hikayeler. Örneğin, iş hayatında bir yönetici eline birkaç defa fırsat geçtiği halde sizi hiçbir zaman terfi ettirmiyor ama sizinle çok olumlu konuşmalar yapıp, neden başkasını seçmenin daha doğru olduğunu izah ediyorsa, bu diyaloğun, söylenenlerin yarattığı tat ve yankılarla yaşamaya yatkınlık gösterirsiniz. Sözler ve bıraktığı tatlar ve kafanızda kurduğunuz hikaye ile yaşayıp gidersiniz. Doktor iğneyle yaklaşıyor olabilir, önemli olan size söyledikleridir(!) Sizce doğru olan bu mu? Yoksa apaçık görüneni okumak mı?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Masallar, kıssalar, atasözleri ve birçok kültürel etmen bizi görünenden koparmaya hizmet ediyor nedense. Kurbağayı öpersen prense dönüşür. Padişah kılık değiştirip halka karışır. İyi görünen kötü çıkar, fakir görünen zengin çıkar... Dahi profesör diye bir tipleme vardır mesela, tüm davranışları, saçı, sakalı saçma sapandır, tırnakları pistir ama çok iyi icatlar yapar. Bunun gibi körleşmeyi öven, yanılsamayı ana akım değer haline getiren bir sistemde bulunuyoruz. Acaba sebebi nedir?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Kendi hayatımdan bir örnek vereyim. Yıllar önce, veritabanı sistemlerimizin tasarımı ve yönetimi konusunda bir yabancı danışmandan hizmet alıyorduk. Danışmanın hali, tavrı, görünüşü hoşuma gitmiyordu. Mesela, aynı kişiyle 4-5 kez tanışıyordu. Unutuyordu tanıştığını. Vücuduna hakim değildi. Kıyafetlerini kendine yakıştıramıyordu. Yemek masasında çatal/bıçak hakimiyeti zayıftı. Çoğu zaman parmaklarıyla destek yaparak tabağındaki yemeği çatalına alabiliyordu. Şöyle düşünmüştüm: Bu danışman kendi hayatını tasarlayamamış vaziyette, bizim sistemlerin tasarımı konusunda ne fayda sağlayacak? Neticede bu kişi bir rapor yazdı ve gitti. Biz de işimize baktık, pek bir fayda sağlanamadı.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Diğer bir vaka: Yaşanan bir teknik talihsizlik nedeniyle birçok kişi sosyal mecralarda son zamanlarda normalden uzun mesajlar paylaştı. İçeriği bir yana, mesajların çoğunda imla bozuktu. Bence bu bir göstergedir. İmlası, grameri bozuk biri, iyi matematik de yapamaz, duru bir zihinsel yapı da kuramaz.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Kulağınıza önyargı gibi geldiğinin farkındayım. Elimdeki öncü bilgilerle yaptığım yargıdır, doğru. İlerde daha çok bilgi edinirsem, yargılarımı da düzeltirim. Ama asla gördüklerimi yadsıyıp insanların ruhi durumları hakkında masallar uydurmaya çalışmam. Neyse ki tarihte böyle düşünen tek kişi durumunda değilim. Abartılı bir yöntem de olsa fizyognomi adında bir yaklaşım var. İnsanların yüz ve uzuv şekillerine göre derinlemesine karakter genellemesi yapma teknikleri bütünü. Yüzyıllar boyu devletler, istihbarat kuruluşları vb. yapılar bu tekniklerle insan tanımlamaya çalışmışlar. Eğlenmek için incelemenizi tavsiye ederim. Ayrıca, kültürel kodlarımızda beni destekleyen sözler de var: "testide ne varsa dışarıya o sızar" iyi bir örnek.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Görebildiğimiz kadar çok görüp, o ölçüde kararlar vereceğimiz; her şeyi bilip, hiçbir şeye körü körüne inanmayacağımız bir dünya da mümkün. Yeter ki ışık olsun.</div></div><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-80528949135324296982021-07-04T22:54:00.004+03:002021-07-05T00:25:56.320+03:00Regressive Progression of Technology<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgajjxrue-j_IbCLwvq9L7-q4GIVcXEdhWcA84Rao8o-Oezd_cB-KGYD-AJSEU7Ivr6KvKhFjjCGEH6Wv3qsEwTI_RUX0JNok7_xxtYc8toRCtljLBiuxAqkD72E0rLkCjFdGMKW6N9ukZb/s2048/Newly-discovered-tablet-V-of-the-Epic-of-Gilgamesh.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1367" data-original-width="2048" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgajjxrue-j_IbCLwvq9L7-q4GIVcXEdhWcA84Rao8o-Oezd_cB-KGYD-AJSEU7Ivr6KvKhFjjCGEH6Wv3qsEwTI_RUX0JNok7_xxtYc8toRCtljLBiuxAqkD72E0rLkCjFdGMKW6N9ukZb/s320/Newly-discovered-tablet-V-of-the-Epic-of-Gilgamesh.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Tablet 5 of the Epic of Gilgamesh</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Some of my friends know that I have been talking about regressive progression of the technology for at least 7-8 years. After years of small talk, now it is time to write about it. </div><div style="text-align: left;">I cannot say I am the inventor of the term "regressive progression". When I scan the literature there are three references containing the term: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.21533/epiphany.v2i1.16" target="_blank">One </a>is in the field of arts, the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00454.x" target="_blank">other</a> is in zoology and the last one is Henri Lefebvre's sociological analysis approach called regressive-progressive method. Therefore, my type of use of the term can be accepted as an authentic one because it is purely on the interpretation of the technological advancement. However, it is obvious that this post has no academic qualities, this is just a personal attempt to put a note in the eternal history of the Internet.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">In my opinion, when a particular technology reaches a certain level of maturity, its use case reflects the first use case of the phenomenon in the known history. Tablet may be the most understandable example: In the history, mankind used clay tablets for recording, spreading and categorizing information. Then leather used for this, then papirus, then paper, then digital computers connected to keyboard and CRT displays, then LED displays and after years of progression we are using tablets again. Even the name is the same: Tablet. Think about the use case: A human being holding a tablet for reaching information. Totally the same. As if nothing happened in thousands of years, as if technology has progressed for re-creating the regressive way of the use case.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">The other example can be the method of barter in trade. We know that barter is the first type of trade in the history which works like this: Peers are exhanging their products directly with each other instead of using any intermediaries or medium of exchange such as money. Then think about the progression of global trading system: We invented money, markets, state, governments, taxation, many ways of transactions, capitalism, communism, open markets, stock exchange etc. Finally, today we again are talking about peer-to-peer direct transactions through blockchain networks. Just like barter, no entities between peers. Very similar to the tablets case, thousands of years of progression in trade system results in the re-creation of the regressive use case.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Remember the carrier pigeons used for postal delivery. And look at the drones. Again, many years of development in technology but the use case regressed.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Cell phones are examples too. People were climbing hills and shout or whistle for peer-to-peer vocal communication in the ancient times. Cell phones were introduced and use case regressed again. Think of the interim systems used in the history up to the introduction of cell phones.</div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><div style="text-align: left;">So, if my theory is sound, what is the mechanism that supports the regressive progression of the technology? I tried to picture the idea in the charts below.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBmpcPM6ISPbGCG3dSSX3uN9hEkBnUDHrQwC8g9PPEOv8Mv18wo6EcoFRsrVQibWtiMmgbkzyA7_BCi4gstVZkrF5UAIGOAuooNE9JGhXR1yRrepiyCYSRBOOcdHw5YQKQkDLEF35co2ds/s1058/Regressive+Progression+2.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="595" data-original-width="1058" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBmpcPM6ISPbGCG3dSSX3uN9hEkBnUDHrQwC8g9PPEOv8Mv18wo6EcoFRsrVQibWtiMmgbkzyA7_BCi4gstVZkrF5UAIGOAuooNE9JGhXR1yRrepiyCYSRBOOcdHw5YQKQkDLEF35co2ds/w400-h225/Regressive+Progression+2.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b>Chart 1:</b> Number of functions a single technology can encapsulate.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqpr9XJV-tOM703yKTuq7GndmrvyMtdpFDF-PvdmfHJbviRArqrzmVYXdcpIVQoF6F-0wjVfJgCdxqdAuG2hHd66kedwePSySDxw77C3RTt3iCJ5MgsXp4x6NRUGB9UneHVgDl501FwjsI/s1058/Regressive+Progression.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="595" data-original-width="1058" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqpr9XJV-tOM703yKTuq7GndmrvyMtdpFDF-PvdmfHJbviRArqrzmVYXdcpIVQoF6F-0wjVfJgCdxqdAuG2hHd66kedwePSySDxw77C3RTt3iCJ5MgsXp4x6NRUGB9UneHVgDl501FwjsI/w400-h225/Regressive+Progression.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b>Chart 2:</b> Number of different technologies needed for a single function.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>We know that <b>technology is actually a packaged form of knowledge</b>. Therefore, while technology is progressing in time, the level of the knowledge it represents is increasing too. As a result, a single technology becomes capable of encapsulating many functions that can work by needed knowledge underneath. Take the example of the tablets, we need knowledge for symbol manipulation, information transfer, information security, information storage etc. for the use case desired. Today, we have enough maths, Internet, batteries, silicon chips, multicore CPUs, solid state disks and some more tools embedded in a single tablet computer which can promote all necessary knowledge for the typical use case. When that level of sophistication reached, all the unneeded details disappear or eliminated and we see the simplest form of the function: A man holding a tablet for information exchange. Complex engineering serves for simplicity as I explained in <a href="http://borawriteson.blogspot.com/2017/08/freedom-and-simplicity.html" target="_blank">one of my posts</a>.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Okay, if this theory works fine. How can we use it? </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">We can use it for futuristic purposes. In futurism, there are some methods for identifying and following trends. It's called SEPET analysis: If you're studying a topic, you must take the aspects of society, economics, politics, environment and technology for understanding the trends that may affect future. For the T of futuristic analysis, you can use regressive progression interpretation way. I already have used it for cars in <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6809117815237300224?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A6809117815237300224%2C6809134128982736896%29" target="_blank">one of my LinkedIn comments</a>. Of course, it was a sudden analysis saying that there will be hyper powered shoes for personal mobility purposes. The route of the analysis was like this: Humans were on foot, then shoes, then animals, then cars pulled by animals, steam cars, petrol engine cars, electric cars. We are here now. My regressive progression estimate may tell that there will be electric powered shoes which will make the cars or bikes obsolete for personal mobility puposes. </div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">It may be true or not but I believe it worths thinking a bit more :) </div><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-74030260563850573612021-06-17T15:46:00.000+03:002021-06-17T15:46:04.634+03:00B-right<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8be5YLWEJ9Ec2-7MKwmVGYNP4uFynSLbRyvzBne0zwG5lNZNrcFdxCJ6Rm0hSMBZ8xj2RlM9JUTDH9vAEA5Gx8p5zS4IlDBigIpYjOV5GRRHgiKHnMaFmXn9pjfKC9_mAyjD_SU94f9TP/s1000/Mimisbrunnr.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1000" data-original-width="1000" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8be5YLWEJ9Ec2-7MKwmVGYNP4uFynSLbRyvzBne0zwG5lNZNrcFdxCJ6Rm0hSMBZ8xj2RlM9JUTDH9vAEA5Gx8p5zS4IlDBigIpYjOV5GRRHgiKHnMaFmXn9pjfKC9_mAyjD_SU94f9TP/s320/Mimisbrunnr.jpg" /></a></div><p></p><div style="text-align: left;">that yellow light<br />in my heart<br />I thought I forgot<br />as safe as home<br />as far as winter star<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">wise and bright<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">remember <br />for what once god sacrified<br />his eye on the right<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">so </div><div style="text-align: left;">smile<br />reach<br />touch<br />sober or not<br />just ignite.</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-16100612284125926882021-01-24T18:50:00.007+03:002021-01-24T20:06:49.853+03:00İlham<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhxLsjJCluew1LDwWcDVKyrfuxNqXUsiw99DWxWbuzlUogqBYM95JdZHmjEF9OTw-AXZZ_DlQlJ8tGBGWi1UBlTFn1XLdeFZMS16X6ZrokpcXHaxKRnju1aYAAOCydlHMd72KDv4yehGa9/s961/euler.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="329" data-original-width="961" height="110" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhxLsjJCluew1LDwWcDVKyrfuxNqXUsiw99DWxWbuzlUogqBYM95JdZHmjEF9OTw-AXZZ_DlQlJ8tGBGWi1UBlTFn1XLdeFZMS16X6ZrokpcXHaxKRnju1aYAAOCydlHMd72KDv4yehGa9/w320-h110/euler.png" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Euler's Identity</span></div><p></p><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">İlham kelimesi son zamanlarda birçok sahada ön plana çıkarılıyor. İlham veren liderlik, ilham veren girişimcilik hikayeleri, ilham dolu tasarımlar, ilham ile tetiklenen duygusal arınma maceraları, kişisel gelişim yolculukları, TED konuşmaları ve varyasyonları... Listeyi uzatmak mümkün.</span></div><div><span><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">Kabul etmek gerek. Güçlü ve çekici bir ibare ilham. Eskiden sadece sanatsal yaratımla ilişkili kullanılıyordu, artık birçok alanda, özellikle de motivasyonla ilgili temaları bezemek için biraz da kolonileştirilmiş bir biçimde vurgulanmakta. İş dünyası "heyecan" kelimesini de bir aralar benzer biçimde tepe tepe kullanmıştı. Projeler, girişimler, operasyonlar, pozisyonlar hep "heyecanlı" diye nitelendiriliyordu. Coşku eksiğini derinlikli bir jargonla ama bir o kadar da mekanik bir metodla bertaraf etme çabası gibi algılardım hep.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">İlhamla ilgili en güzel düşünce rotalarından birine birkaç yıl önce rastlamıştım: "Create inspiration from your limitation". Kulağa hoş gelen bir slogan olmasının yanında, analiz edildiğinde güçlü bir argümana da dönüşüyordu:</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">1. Sınırlar, iyi okunursa bir çerçeve çizmene yardım eder</div><div style="font-family: inherit;">2. Çerçevenin tutarlı olması için çerçeveye dair kurallar yaratman gerekir ve bir şablon oluşturursun</div><div style="font-family: inherit;">3. Şablon dahilinde kural ortaya koyma çabası yaratıcı bir faaliyettir ve zeka ister</div><div style="font-family: inherit;">4. Yeni kuralların yeni sınırlar yaratır</div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: inherit;">Murat Pak'ın bir yazısında rastlamıştım bu mantık silsilesine. Orijinali İngilizce'ydi ve biraz daha akışkandı: </span><span style="font-family: courier;">Limits>>frames>>frameworks>>rules>>intelligence & creativity>>new limits</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">.</span></div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">İlhamın kaynağı hala birçok disiplinde araştırılıyor. Samuel Taylor Coleridge tarafından afyon etkisinde bir rüyadan kalkıp bir anda yazılan Kubilay Han şiirinin hikayesindeki gibi gizemli düşlerden beslenenler, daima ayakta yazmak veya uzun yürüyüşler yapmak gibi günlük ritüelleri ilhamın tetikleyicisi olarak görenler, bir kişiden ya da öğretiden ilham alanlar, çok çalışarak ilham kaynağını canlı tutacağına inananlar gibi birçok örnek var. Kesin cevap bulunmuş değil.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">Kendi yaşamıma baktığımda, çocukluk ve gençlik dönemlerimde ilham veren uyaranların kısır olduğu bir iklim vardı diye anımsıyorum. Uyaranlar azdı ama ilham vardı. Devlet parasız yatılı adında bir müessese vardı, hala devam ediyor mu bilmiyorum, biz o çerçevede okuyan yatılı fen lisesi öğrencileriydik. Doksanların başı. Televizyon kısıtlıydı mesela kantinde. Yarım saat filan Murat Murathanoğlu tarafından sunulan NBA Action programını izler, ilham alıp 4-5 saat basketbol oynardık. Lise takımımız il bazında başarılıydı. Birçok arkadaşımız iyi üniversitelerde okudu, yurt dışında okuyup çalışanlar, üst düzey rollerde çalışanlar eksik olmadı. Güçlü bir rehberlik veya yönlendirme yoktu, gezip üniversiteleri önceden inceleme şansı da yoktu. İlham kaynağımız ÖSYM sınav kılavuzuydu. Üniversiteler, bölümler, geçen yıl uyguladıkları taban puan ve kabul edilen öğrencilerin yüzdelik başarı dilimleri bilgilerine günlerce uzun uzun bakar "vizyon" geliştirirdik. Bir kampüs hayal ederdik. Bir okul. Bir meslek... Bölümün adından ilham alırdık. Taban puanından ilham alırdık.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">Dünyaya açılan pencerelerimiz kısıtlıydı. Mesela TÜBİTAK'ın o zamanlar küçük boy yayımlanan Bilim ve Teknik dergisini evire çevire okur, düşünürdük. Bir ayin gibi tekrar tekrar aynı dergiyi okumak. Düşünmek, okumak... Aklımda durumu iyi özetleyen bir imge kalmış: Bir Pazar günü, karanlık bir öğlen, pansiyonun alt katında demir muhafazanın içinde birkaç kanalı zar zor çeken bir tüplü televizyonda kalitesiz bir program açık; Doğu Anadolu'nun uzak illerinden gelmiş bir öğrenci Mehmet İsmet Ulusoy tarafından yazılmış Modern Matematik kitabına çalışıyor. Bir saman kağıt, bir kurşun kalem. Bir masa. Bir soruyu çözmeye çalışıyor. O öğrenci ODTÜ Bilgisayar Mühendisliği bölümünü kazandı ve uzun yıllardır kurucusu olduğu çok başarılı bir yazılım şirketinde CEO rolünde. Faaliyet gösterdiği sektörün kanaat önderlerinden biri. İmkansızlıklarla dolu o loş televizyon salonunda ilham veren hiçbir şey yoktu. İlham almayı bilen istekli bir çocuk vardı. Kısıtların içinde derin düşünen, bilgi üreten, çözüm geliştiren bir çocuk.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">Güzellik bakanın gözündedir derler ya ilham da onu alabilen, bir vizyon yaratabilen, akıllı kişilerce yokluklar içinden dahi imbiklenebilecek bir olgu bence. Fakat, daima sergilendiği gibi, hikaye biraz tersten işletiliyor. Mesela, Sir Isaac Newton ve elma ikilisinde ilham veren elmadan daha çok bahsediliyor. İlham alan Isaac ikincil bir figüre dönüşüyor. Yıllar sonra kurulan şirkete Isaac değil Apple adı veriliyor. Veya birçok kursta ilham veren liderliğin "sırları" öğretilmeye çalışılıyor ama ilham alabilmenin koşulları çoğu zaman es geçiliyor.</div><div style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></div><div style="font-family: inherit;">Konuyu özetlemek gerekirse, ilham alabilme konusu bir insanın yaratcılığıyla, arzularıyla ve zekasıyla ilişkilidir bence. İlham vermek ise etrafınızda bu ayarda insanlar yoksa sadece bir imkansızlıktan ibaret.</div></span></div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-37354841376974881132020-12-30T01:31:00.000+03:002020-12-30T01:31:27.836+03:00outside<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyXGSIh13qosNnUNhcF9r0ToqOA9V-BegmnNK8DwpGAq6zDypd4Yy0VFGGPfVaIuvwbOcK-mXDrJfKgQuVaTwB_X_RmUrsvj5D0OVA32mShA3is35Ozuyn5a8qz3xybQpfMPDPbItA2jWA/s2000/Goosebumps.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1333" data-original-width="2000" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyXGSIh13qosNnUNhcF9r0ToqOA9V-BegmnNK8DwpGAq6zDypd4Yy0VFGGPfVaIuvwbOcK-mXDrJfKgQuVaTwB_X_RmUrsvj5D0OVA32mShA3is35Ozuyn5a8qz3xybQpfMPDPbItA2jWA/w320-h213/Goosebumps.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">if you're a man<br />and feeling that you're touched<br />from inside<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">you are dead<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">it's a sword<br />or a knife<br />or a tumor just arrived<br />or a broken bone</div><div style="text-align: left;">around your heart<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">for men<br />the joy is outside<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">so keep out<br />and lightly play<br />from your side<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">unlike women<br />we can never know both sides.</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-51385439649222055582020-12-07T02:06:00.007+03:002020-12-07T02:37:43.673+03:00My Data, Your Algorithm<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikbf1GTYjvPuA31Lwo9PTB9Pg_3DpbrYxYsQtHIUIbwuHEOhO1FWrTNog9gj0ASP3aY1_8BVhQUREwxpKVVA3E5sw1vUY3y-aCP_kUAqQWZHjQvxSMTY3fLjMGvl6nNtxV_dlTzCSr7AMi/s1680/wp-vacheron-constantin-calibre3750-front-back.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="853" data-original-width="1680" height="203" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikbf1GTYjvPuA31Lwo9PTB9Pg_3DpbrYxYsQtHIUIbwuHEOhO1FWrTNog9gj0ASP3aY1_8BVhQUREwxpKVVA3E5sw1vUY3y-aCP_kUAqQWZHjQvxSMTY3fLjMGvl6nNtxV_dlTzCSr7AMi/w400-h203/wp-vacheron-constantin-calibre3750-front-back.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Vacheron Constantin Calibre 3750, the most complicated watch in the world.</span> </div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I was skimming the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020/digest" target="_blank">future of jobs report by WEF</a> which was released in October 2020. Like most of the WEF reports, it is lucid and comprehensive. I strongly recommend you to have a look if you have not done yet. </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">My key take aways from the report are: </div><div style="text-align: left;"><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>Data & AI jobs are increasing</li><li>Cloud computing jobs are rising as well</li><li>Information technology super cluster is being splitted to more specialized sub clusters such as Data & AI, Cloud Computing, Engineering etc. </li><li>For popular jobs in Data & AI family, there is a very big skill gap</li><li>Critical thinking, problem solving and self management are the top desired professional skills </li></ol></div><div style="text-align: left;">If your professional activity is around software, cloud technology, data and AI; and if you are a good problem solver, you are going to have good news at least until 2025. Even under pandemic measures... However, notice the huge skill gaps emphasized in the report. Nothing is going to be so easy, you need to learn, develop, adapt new professional skills faster and faster, in a continuous manner.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Being a person who started programming computers by using Commodore 64 in early 90s and living on computers for more than 20 years, I am lucky enough to watch how software related industry has been evolving. So in this post, I am planning to touch a topic which is very important for me in terms of being aware of what data & AI professionals should consider.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">In the good old days, when a software engineer was requried to build a system, the steps we all were following could be roughly listed as follows:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>Define the required outputs of the system</li><li>Design the interaction model and process flow</li><li>Design the data flow</li><li>Design data structures</li><li>Build the algorithms</li><li>Integrate</li></ol>When we were followig such a discipline, the systems developed and all the sub components were authentic entities in most of the times. The main difference in software development and data business is that nowadays, no one is developing authentic algorithms any more. The tendency is using the algorithms of others as much as possible. Software reuse, remote procedure call and fostering frameworks were always popular topics, even in the ancient times but today, through shared libraries and APIs, literally no one is developing algorithms. Therefore, no one is designing decent data structures. Flat data in, flat data out. And I find this strange.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Especially in analytical model development process, companies are only configuring the algorithms of others by using native company data. At the and of the process, the model developed is just another instance of the foreign function which was originated from the algorithms of some other company. It is like you impose your memories into the brain of somebody else.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">In the traditional software development process, the meta equation is like below</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Equation 1: INPUT + INTERACTION + ALGORITHM = OUTPUT</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">In analytical model development, more or less, the equation becomes the one below</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Equation 2: INPUT + OUTPUT = ALGORITHM</div><div style="text-align: left;"><span><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;">Please remember that, ALGORITHM of equation 2 is just a re-configured form of the algorithm of others.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Let's analyze this a bit more. Chronologically thinking, all the company data we are to use for developing machine learning models were generated by the software systems, which were developed traditionally, for years. That means INPUT + OUTPUT part of equation 2 is coming from equation 1. Therefore, data have been shaped by the authentic algorithms and interaction models for many many years. Today, you are trying to have a look at the company data to extract a version of some one other's algorithmic function. Isn't it strange too? I think it is.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Moreover, the notion of algorithm itself is not sufficient enough to model real world because an algorithm is a closed symbolic system. It takes inputs, processes finite steps and produces outputs. However, life is composed of interactions. Many interactive computer systems, which contain different algorithms, are running simultaneously, generating many events, getting feedbacks, triggering other systems etc. This bigger interactive picture is not reducible to algorithms.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">On the other hand, in most of the cases, analytical models are developed by using non-inteactive, low dimensional, batch, historic data. By using that form of historic data, some one other's algorithm is tried to be configured to handle real life situations. Where is the effect of interactions there? Of course, some analytical models are formed to analyze streaming data. There is a proximity in this area but even such models are trained by following the batch data load practices. The scope of the problems to be solved by using analytical models can be narrowed down to fit into the nature of real life situations. This may handle the shortcomings of non-interactive, pure algorithmic approach. But it deserves another discussion... </div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><div style="text-align: left;">To sum up, I have 2 questions:</div><div style="text-align: left;"><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>Can we survive unless we create our authectic algorithms?</li><li>How can we add the interaction notion better to the analytical model develoment process?</li></ol>One of my bosses, whom I respect a lot, were saying "build the clock". I think we should follow the advice. </div><p></p>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3932337517214658321.post-20615066755374600272020-10-28T00:54:00.000+03:002020-10-28T00:54:12.830+03:00cumhuriyet<p style="text-align: left;"> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLU6dFXU6QnB9MjyWeL-wEeU1GvV22glFtUtQCRVwEGezi9qWe_GhfvTaZ21TKXqWsJHhliWne-ok4E8zERLh5NRr8VU9RqPDLgih0hxz30cGsZSfnUE-GMtf4EkM9cCqhzJVC8fiNHTz1/s1024/ataturk.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="840" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLU6dFXU6QnB9MjyWeL-wEeU1GvV22glFtUtQCRVwEGezi9qWe_GhfvTaZ21TKXqWsJHhliWne-ok4E8zERLh5NRr8VU9RqPDLgih0hxz30cGsZSfnUE-GMtf4EkM9cCqhzJVC8fiNHTz1/w328-h400/ataturk.jpg" width="328" /></a></div><p></p><div style="text-align: left;">hayatı severken<br />yarın için heyecan duyarken<br />geleceği kurarken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">hayatı ciddiye alırken<br />giyinirken<br />düşünürken<br />çalışırken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">baskı altındayken</div><div style="text-align: left;">başarırken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">özgür bir nefes alıp<br />yanındakine omuz verirken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">ve yalnızken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">eğlenirken<br />öğrenirken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">ezberleri unutup<br />tekrar öğrenirken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">asla vazgeçmeyip<br />bıkmadan<br />yeniden<br />daha güzel yaparken<br /><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">ilhamımız hep senden.</div>Borahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.com0