Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1326240 times)

4 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

artk2002

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 12906
    • The Delian's Commonwealth
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4125 on: July 18, 2013, 05:58:46 PM »

After a while you don't hear the noise of the jets.  I have friends who lived on the approach to a major airport.  The first time I visited, all I could hear was the noise of the jets taking off and landing.  After a few hours, I realized that it was awfully quiet all of a sudden, so I went outside to see what had happened.  About 10 seconds later a huge jet flew so close I could read the numbers on the tail.  Apparently, your brain just tunes it out after a while.

You do. My last apt was near a busy municipal airport. And not too far from a regional trauma center, and also in the flight path for Newark airport.  So you heard stuff in the air all the time, but got used to it. Except when the copters flew so low they rattled the rather old windows in my house!

I grew up in Westchester, CA, where LAX is located. You do get used to the sound, unless you're directly under the flight path (the middle school I was supposed to attend had to be shut down because they'd lose 30-60 minutes of instruction per day due to noise -- it's now the Hertz rental lot.) For a time I lived in an apartment where the back door opened out on the north runway, right where the jets reverse their thrusters to stop. The soundproofing was adequate and simply getting used to it took care of the rest.

I now live under one of the approaches to LAX, but the planes are so high at this point you can barely see them, much less hear them. That didn't stop one resident from demanding that our property manager get the flight path changed because it bugged her.
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bow lines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover. -Mark Twain

afbluebelle

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5361
  • Saving the world one squirrelbot at a time
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4126 on: July 19, 2013, 02:52:33 PM »
A loooong time ago while stationed at Ft. Huachuca, Arizona, the editor of the post newspaper wrote a scathing editorial about soldiers driving military cars off post to have lunch. 

I always wonder if there are ever any write ups in Vegas papers... sometimes when we do training there, we have to live in downtown in a casino... fleets of government vans in the parking garage of a den of debauchery!
My inner (r-word) is having a field day with this one.
-Love is Evol: Christopher Titus-

Tia2

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2876
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4127 on: July 19, 2013, 04:07:22 PM »
An interesting example of what may well turn out to be epic professional Darwinism is in the news in the UK at the moment.

As various people may know, JK Rowling wrote a book for adults under her own name.  It sold really well, but the critics weren't happy with it and there was a lot of sneering that it wouldn't have been published if it hadn't been for who wrote it.

She therefore published her next book using a pen name.  It sold about 5000 copies (which I understand is pretty good for a brand new author who doesn't do any publicity).  I believe it was a detective story written under a male name.  The critics thought it was quite good (a lot of them are being smug about this now).

Apparently, fewer than 10 people knew who the author really was.  Suddenly some random woman posts on Twitter that this person is actually JK Rowling and it all comes out.

There has been a massive investigation and it turns out that Rowling's lawyer (so there is actually a legal duty of confidentiality) told his wife and her best friend and it is the best friend who posted (and then promptly deleted but too late).

There is no update on what Rowling is planning on doing in regard to the lawyer (sue or fire the firm or just insist that particular lawyer no longer works on her file) , but a reputation for blabbing your client's secrets to random people isn't exactly what a high powered lawyer needs.  I suspect he will be fired or resign shortly.

LazyDaisy

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1006
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4128 on: July 19, 2013, 04:15:02 PM »
A loooong time ago while stationed at Ft. Huachuca, Arizona, the editor of the post newspaper wrote a scathing editorial about soldiers driving military cars off post to have lunch. 

I always wonder if there are ever any write ups in Vegas papers... sometimes when we do training there, we have to live in downtown in a casino... fleets of government vans in the parking garage of a den of debauchery!
meh, probably not. It's Vegas. The city is a well known destination for conventions of all sorts since they have the hotel and event space. I imagine that in less touristy cities it stands out more when a government vehicle is parked outside of an entertainment spot. In Vegas, it wouldn't even be a blip on my radar to see the cars in the parking garage or people walking around the hotel or event areas. I might only raise an eyebrow if I saw a group of uniformed people entering/leaving a Thunder from Down Under show.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." — Douglas Adams

NyaChan

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4107
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4129 on: July 19, 2013, 04:51:37 PM »
An interesting example of what may well turn out to be epic professional Darwinism is in the news in the UK at the moment.

As various people may know, JK Rowling wrote a book for adults under her own name.  It sold really well, but the critics weren't happy with it and there was a lot of sneering that it wouldn't have been published if it hadn't been for who wrote it.

She therefore published her next book using a pen name.  It sold about 5000 copies (which I understand is pretty good for a brand new author who doesn't do any publicity).  I believe it was a detective story written under a male name.  The critics thought it was quite good (a lot of them are being smug about this now).

Apparently, fewer than 10 people knew who the author really was.  Suddenly some random woman posts on Twitter that this person is actually JK Rowling and it all comes out.

There has been a massive investigation and it turns out that Rowling's lawyer (so there is actually a legal duty of confidentiality) told his wife and her best friend and it is the best friend who posted (and then promptly deleted but too late).

There is no update on what Rowling is planning on doing in regard to the lawyer (sue or fire the firm or just insist that particular lawyer no longer works on her file) , but a reputation for blabbing your client's secrets to random people isn't exactly what a high powered lawyer needs.  I suspect he will be fired or resign shortly.

I think the lawyer told his wife, who then blabbed to her best friend.  Which is slightly better in theory, but not enough to matter IMO.  I think he should be fired.

Barney girl

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 332
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4130 on: July 19, 2013, 05:10:09 PM »
An interesting example of what may well turn out to be epic professional Darwinism is in the news in the UK at the moment.

As various people may know, JK Rowling wrote a book for adults under her own name.  It sold really well, but the critics weren't happy with it and there was a lot of sneering that it wouldn't have been published if it hadn't been for who wrote it.

She therefore published her next book using a pen name.  It sold about 5000 copies (which I understand is pretty good for a brand new author who doesn't do any publicity).  I believe it was a detective story written under a male name.  The critics thought it was quite good (a lot of them are being smug about this now).

Apparently, fewer than 10 people knew who the author really was.  Suddenly some random woman posts on Twitter that this person is actually JK Rowling and it all comes out.

There has been a massive investigation and it turns out that Rowling's lawyer (so there is actually a legal duty of confidentiality) told his wife and her best friend and it is the best friend who posted (and then promptly deleted but too late).

There is no update on what Rowling is planning on doing in regard to the lawyer (sue or fire the firm or just insist that particular lawyer no longer works on her file) , but a reputation for blabbing your client's secrets to random people isn't exactly what a high powered lawyer needs.  I suspect he will be fired or resign shortly.

I think the lawyer told his wife, who then blabbed to her best friend.  Which is slightly better in theory, but not enough to matter IMO.  I think he should be fired.

Not really. He still owes a duty of confidentiality and should not have been discussing anything to do with clients outside work. It's a material non-compliance and his firm's compliance officer  will have to report the firm to the SRA.

Twik

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 28458
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4131 on: July 19, 2013, 05:20:21 PM »
CynicalTwik wonders if there was a "reveal" planned for some time soon, if not by this specific method.

However, I can't see that they would create a reveal that implicates her lawyer as being unethical (and his wife as being extremely foolish).

And now I want to read the book.  ;)
My cousin's memoir of love and loneliness while raising a child with multiple disabilities will be out on Amazon soon! Know the Night, by Maria Mutch, has been called "full of hope, light, and companionship for surviving the small hours of the night."

Jocelyn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3062
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4132 on: July 19, 2013, 05:26:10 PM »
I don't know British law, but it might be hard to prove that she was damaged by the reveal, since book sales have skyrocketed since it happened.

kherbert05

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10322
    • Trees downed in my yard by Ike and the clean up
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4133 on: July 19, 2013, 06:48:41 PM »
I don't know British law, but it might be hard to prove that she was damaged by the reveal, since book sales have skyrocketed since it happened.

He still broke the law and betrayed his clients. Why should other clients trust him.
Don't Teach Them For Your Past. Teach Them For Their Future

KenveeB

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8518
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4134 on: July 19, 2013, 09:22:38 PM »
I don't know British law, but it might be hard to prove that she was damaged by the reveal, since book sales have skyrocketed since it happened.

He still broke the law and betrayed his clients. Why should other clients trust him.

Yeah, by attorney ethical standards, it doesn't matter if there's "harm." The harm is inherent in violating attorney/client confidentiality. I can't believe a lawyer lucky enough to work with JKR would risk so much!

HappilyInsane

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4135 on: July 20, 2013, 06:02:54 AM »
My Grandfather told me about one years ago from his job. He worked in a cement plant. When it came close to retirement date, employees were brought into the office to go over their files to make sure everything was in order (dates of employment, addresses, etc.).

One employee had a bad habit of imbibing now and then and winding up with a hangover for his next shift. He would then call in and say he had to go have a tooth pulled. In those days, they never thought about asking for a Doctor's note for things like that.

Grandad said when they called this gentleman in to go over his papers, the Boss Man very calmly said to him, "Do you realize in the time you've worked here you have had 53 teeth pulled?".

Library Dragon

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1435
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4136 on: July 21, 2013, 01:53:44 AM »
A loooong time ago while stationed at Ft. Huachuca, Arizona, the editor of the post newspaper wrote a scathing editorial about soldiers driving military cars off post to have lunch. 

I always wonder if there are ever any write ups in Vegas papers... sometimes when we do training there, we have to live in downtown in a casino... fleets of government vans in the parking garage of a den of debauchery!

I could see it.  You can get great rates there.  Or, vehicles from Nellis AFB for a lunch meeting taking advantage of a buffet. 

            Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

*inviteseller

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1821
  • I am Queen Mommy
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4137 on: July 21, 2013, 10:43:27 AM »
The story I heard the other day is a Carnegie Mellon University professor studied the new book, and did some researching by analyzing the style and  key phrases (the university is well known for absolute brainiacs who can figure anything out) then figured out it was J.K. Rowling and made it public somehow and so they are crediting him with the outing.

rose red

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7609
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4138 on: July 21, 2013, 11:48:41 AM »
The story I heard the other day is a Carnegie Mellon University professor studied the new book, and did some researching by analyzing the style and  key phrases (the university is well known for absolute brainiacs who can figure anything out) then figured out it was J.K. Rowling and made it public somehow and so they are crediting him with the outing.

I'm not sure I believe that.  Why would they analyze some random book?  There was no reason to think there was some mystery about the author.

nutraxfornerves

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1983
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #4139 on: July 21, 2013, 12:05:27 PM »
The Science That Uncovered J.K. Rowling’s Literary Hocus-Pocus

Quote
In chasing the scoop, the reporters [for London's Sunday Times] called upon two experts in the field of authorship attribution to determine if “Galbraith” was really Rowling. The experts ran the texts through software programs designed to spot stylistic similarities, and the results were compelling enough for the Times to confront Rowling, who confessed to the pseudonymous work.
One was at Oxford; the other at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. They looked at "machine-readable texts of 'The Cuckoo’s Calling' along with Rowling’s previous novel, “The Casual Vacancy,” and novels by three British women who specialize in crime fiction: Ruth Rendell, P.D. James, and Val McDermid."

Nutrax
The plural of anecdote is not data