So today I had the test, that I mentioned yesterday. To make the bureaucratic part short: It went well. I got a 2,7 (or 2,3? - Don't remember, first one is probable.) So after the really bad 5 in the written part, I got my ass secured with this oral test. And actually I was really good, I think... I could have even deserved some better.. but who cares. I don't care that much about grades and titles and stuff.. what I do care about, came after the test! :)
I always liked all the people of that area of expertise "business management". They are looked at very differently by the students, some even seeing them as real assholes. I always saw them as some pretty bright people, thinking further than their area of expertise asks them to do. Well, with this pretty megalomanic area of expertise (setting goals, controlling humans, putting everything together, etc.) you better are interdisciplinary - sure! But I've seen a lot of professors, who despite of such restrictions see their area of expertise as the one and only (and sometimes they even didn't really know, what they talk about). Well, as I said, different story here, from my point of view. And I got an endorsement today!
After the test we (a girl and me, the planned third guy didn't appear) had to go out of the bureau of the prof(Mr. Oelsnitz), so that he and the accessor could discuss the grades, they'll give us. Well, we came back in and both passed. A little discussion was held about, what was good and so on, bla, bla..
Then I asked a thing, that came to my mind about a question, that the girl didn't find an adequate answer to in the test and I talked about with her in between. "Normative Knowledge-goals". I came up with Google's "Don't do evil!". The prof first dismissed it as being just a normal guideline, that is being given out as strategic guidance. I was prepared for that, I think about it the same way. But I see this as some very smartly coined sentence. Google does all it does just with knowledge and information. Their whole business works because of it and with it! So don't do evil is a very strong statement, if you think of the bad usage, that other companies do with it. I'm not going to bash Microsoft here, but take a much better example: TV-stations! They indoctrinate people, just because they can (and must, for that matter).
Well, from all this emerged some very interesting discussion about network effects, power of the masses, self-regulation of complex systems and the like. Mr. Oelsnitz seemed pretty interested in hearing about direct-democracy models and we had a good talk about that, too! On top it was nice to hear, that he sees George Orwell's total-control-vision as being pretty likely, that he can see it already growing all around us. I first tried to say, that it is a little too pessimistic, but then had to admit, that I just learned to not tell those thoughts too openly - people take one as an insane idiot, if you speak like that about the government. Well, some live lesson learned here about social conditioning and learning! ;)
The accessor (Mr. Busch) - whom I also see as some great guy, though a little bit too shy for his bright mind - also had smart things to say and he put great closing words by saying, that the best thing to change is oneself! That's what you can influence. Systemic thinking is great, but don't forget to work there, where you can have real impact!
All in all it was a very interesting talk, that was much more worth than all this damn test-stuff!
After pretty much in the end coming to the Open Source model, which Mr Oelsnitz sees as a very great idea, we concluded, that there is one big fancy interesting experiment going on in the world and we will see who is right.
The idealistic amette or the more realistic Oelsnitz. ;)