Docker is in trouble
zdnet.com
zdnet.com
Or Oracle??
All of Docker’s tech is commodity at this point. Their enterprise offerings still address a niche market, but Kubernetes ecosystem has outgrown it with companies like Rancher.
Docker Hub is nice to have public registry, but everyone else, including Microsoft’s GitHub has already implemented the docker-registry protocol. Github can now serve docker images.
Or maybe Oracle could so diabolically implode Docker like a Las Vegas hotel, that everyone will move to something with a much better security model and stop with the containers in VMs nonsense.
Yes, everyone except those on the biggest cloud vendor using its containerized application platform [1].
The collar is in place to hold the tie, you don't need a tie, you don't need a collar, so don't wear one
It seems that the safe and generally accepted path is 'underdressed' and 'fitting in' and I'm telling you this is causing the entire industry to optimize for false signals which leads to social issues and frankly leaves tons of money on the table for ordinary people who are struggling to find proper career prospects
> The collar is in place to hold the tie, you don't need a tie, you don't need a collar, so don't wear one
A collar can also be popped to provide extra shade to the neck, it has it's own functionality independent of the tie. I'm not sure if these execs are getting enough sun that it matters, but I certainly do.
The audience of this video is processing visual information and then audio, in that order, if you want your message to have some kind of impact you need to provide more visual cues than an unbuttoned neckline
It's simply that tech professionals who ought to know a thing or two about data science, statistics, human psychology, color theory etc would notice how naively they've optimized for a very narrow band when it comes to personal and professional branding
My question is how many are doing that because they are simply copying each other and trying to signal that they are indeed tech execs, how many are simply clueless and how many just don't care
Why isn't there a one except say Masayoshi Son and Mark Zuckerberg who dresses all the way up every now and then? Is it because they care what other people think -- and using the same argument, wouldn't there be a case for over dressing if you care about what people think?
This should be old hat to professionals who specialize in statistics and human behaviour and who understand concepts like the central limit theory, branding and other advanced topics but to a man they all seem to prefer looking like they just got off a private jet and didn't have time to get dressed on the way to the conference and it's getting tired and boring
It seems they want to over-optimize for being 'casual and approachable' and never for being 'authoritative and distant' and then their companies tank and they move onto other companies -- leaving the ordinary people to scrounge for new career prospects in an increasingly cynical job market
Another thing is that it's subtle you may not begin to notice it for weeks or years, but it's there, just because the rational mind doesn't see it doesn't mean other layers of the mind don't.. apparently the mind has all sorts of filters maybe when those filters are activated the very fact of their activation provides some other sort of feedback? It's a pretty complex machine
I'll give you a few ideas -- mind you this is only one particular spin on the idea, there are many others that point to 'wear the damned tie'
Network effects
As an executive, you're setting a tone on what's good enough and what's expected within the organization. Ostensibly the organization's eyes are on you and people are consciously and subconsciously judging you on your habits (dress being a rather big one; whether you like it or not, people will be reading into the way you dress and can glean a lot about your habits based on the way you dress, even in the modern day when everyone claims to ignore these sorts of cues, people aren't always ignoring these types of cues)
Now as an executive, if every single day of the year you're skipping the tie, you're sending a very clear message that skipping the tie is not only fine, it's practically mandated and I'm telling you that's a very slippery slope for an organization --
One thing people have gotten distorted from traditional values is the idea that leaders are meant to be just that much better than their people, i.e. they must try that much more because a true leader expects more of themselves before they begin expecting more of others it's simple courtesy -- I recall someone perhaps George Washington once said that a leader must be 15% earlier, 15% better prepared and 15% better dressed (the meaning of `dress` here being dress(3): `treated or prepared` and it's no coincidence that dress(4) has the meaning of `drawing up troops to proper alignment` -- the corporate structure mirrors the military but only when it's convenient I guess?)
However in the modern era, it's taken backwards: people must be just that much worse than their superiors.. so it devolves as it trickles down.. people see the CEO skipping the tie, it immediately means they would be out of line to wear one -- can you see the network effects that come into play? the VP layer will begin skipping the collar shirt even, you'll begin seeing sweater vests and other paraphernalia
By the time it trickles down to the engineering layers the people will practically be disrobed because management is walking around in blue jeans and sneakers, it must be alright to come in with the odd hole in your pants, right? or maybe your favourite punk band T-shirt fifty days out of the year? you're not customer facing after all...
And so morale takes a huge hit it's no secret people are being treated like slaves in the bull pens (a conversation for another day) and I'm of the opinion it all starts by how leadership signals 'good enough'
--
I'll go one step further
Based on how people dress, I can also tell you how they pack when they travel. No chance in hell a guy who never wears a tie would even pack a tie for a conference, right?
Well what if a big investment opportunity with Softbank or some other unicorn maker came up during that conference? The gregarious C level exec would have to show up with popping collars looking like the most unbuttoned guy in the room and well.. some people just don't like that, especially ones that have billions to play with and can't risk any details being out of place?
So like suddenly our chief executive becomes our chief liability because we're all depending on him to pull through and he's going to the conference completely oblivious as to the chance that maybe just maybe he'll bump into Bill Gates or whoever
It's the same as leaving your house without your camera -- you're saying 'today there will be no picture opportunities'
So the necktie for men has become a missing conversation piece to the detriment of opportunities that may have turned out otherwise. After a long enough while 'casual and approachable' begins to reek of 'entitled and comfortable' and that's no way for leadership to connote
Treating a business dealing as a game perhaps it could be viewed as a variation of the Prisoner's dilemma or Donation game -- i.e. the decision to cooperate or not based on the incentives to do so or not
So depending on whether you're playing the Prisoner's Dilemma or the Donation game, a tie could be an important signal your intention and can be used to affect the outcome --
Perhaps in "Prisoner" economics the tie indicates the intention to act in one's own greedy self interest but in "Donation" economics it may connote the understanding that one's self interest is also the common self interest?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma#Special_c...