Obama Appoints Non-Tech Guy As CTO 252
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "President Barack Obama has named his chief technology officer, and the appointee is not a Silicon Valley name like so many predicted. He is Aneesh Chopra. As the Secretary of Technology for the Commonwealth of Virginia, his job has been to 'leverage technology in government reform, promote Virginia's innovation agenda, and foster technology-related economic development with a special emphasis on entrepreneurship.' But Chopra's not a tech guy. Before he got his secretary job in 2005, he was a managing director at the Advisory Board Company, a public-market health care think tank, as well as an angel investor."
O'Reilly Radar is running an article discussing why Chopra is a good choice for federal CTO.
Open Source Alternatives (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
From the linked article, I'd say he's onboard with Open Source
(easiest quote to find: Virginia having "the first officially-approved open source textbook in the country")
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that he's not a tech guy himself; he won't be expected to go out and do the techy work. What the job requires is an understanding of technology and government, and the ability to get stuff done by supporting the right things, managing people... in short he doesn't need to be a geek so long as he has the right geeks working for him.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
he doesn't need to be a geek so long as he has the right geeks working for him
Is that really true? I'm a lawyer. No way on God's green earth would I work under the supervision of a non-lawyer.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you can understand technology enough to be an effective CTO without being a hands-on tech guy yourself.
He's demonstrated by his history that he "gets it", so let's hope he does a good job here too.
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't you work for non-lawyers all the time? They defer to you because you -are- a lawyer, but I think you might have to rescind your comment :)
I do IT, and not everyone in the chain of command knows more than I do about IT. They do know more about other things, like management, or sales, or marketing. My job in IT is to enable them to do their jobs, and so I have to know a little bit about their job, and they have to know a little bit about mine, but that's all.
If we were to live in some upside down world where we demanded everyone paying us had to know more about what we're doing than we do, no one would get anything done. Why are they paying you if they know more than you?
And this applies to you too, Ray. Your clients pay you, or your firm, or however you have it set up, and they don't know nearly as much as you do. If they did, they wouldn't be paying you.
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't you work for non-lawyers all the time? They defer to you because you -are- a lawyer, but I think you might have to rescind your comment :)
I do IT, and not everyone in the chain of command knows more than I do about IT. They do know more about other things, like management, or sales, or marketing. My job in IT is to enable them to do their jobs, and so I have to know a little bit about their job, and they have to know a little bit about mine, but that's all.
If we were to live in some upside down world where we demanded everyone paying us had to know more about what we're doing than we do, no one would get anything done. Why are they paying you if they know more than you?
And this applies to you too, Ray. Your clients pay you, or your firm, or however you have it set up, and they don't know nearly as much as you do. If they did, they wouldn't be paying you.
My clients pay me; they do not "supervise" me. When I did work under supervision (1974-1983) it was the supervision of people who did exactly what I did but had been doing it longer. That is the only kind of supervision I could accept. It was one of the main reasons I went into a "profession".
I consider information technology a profession, and entitled to the same level of respect and dignity. If you know what you are doing and have someone "supervising" who doesn't fully grasp what is going on, and doesn't understand where you are coming from, it is degrading, insulting, and counterproductive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My boss doesn't know anywhere near as much about technology as I do but -- and this is the crucial bit -- he trusts my opinions and my judgment.
Which is very nice for you, but it's only nice for the company if the tech people in your company
(a) are always right about everything
(b) are never wrong about anything,
(c) have nothing left to learn,
(d) need no leadership or guidance, and
(e) are all well qualified to perform their tasks.
Personally, if I were a shareholder in such a company, I would rather have someone in charge of technology who actually is a technologist, who understands what technologists do, and can understand their problems, limi
Re: (Score:2)
I do IT, and not everyone in the chain of command knows more than I do about IT. They do know more about other things, like management, or sales, or marketing.
However, they have to know at least enough about IT to be able to know what they know, and to know what they don't know. That way, they know when to defer to you.
For example: A marketing guy may know that a 20 ghz (single-core) machine might sell much more than an 8-core 2.5 ghz machine. However, as a tech guy, you know that the 20 ghz machine is likely physically impossible. I'm actually OK, though saddened, when the marketing guy doesn't know that, too. But they have to at least have the humility to belie
Re: (Score:2)
he doesn't need to be a geek so long as he has the right geeks working for him
Is that really true? I'm a lawyer. No way on God's green earth would I work under the supervision of a non-lawyer.
Supervision as in "we should handle this case in this way", of course. But what about things like "case X will have a huge impact, so focus on getting it right and let the newer people handle A, B, and C."? Ie, setting general policy rather than direct supervision.
If this guy can prioritize between "nobody's databases can talk to eachother" and "we can't get bugfixes for Important Software X because the vendor went bankrupt" and "new employees are stting on their thumbs for 8 weeks while their computer acco
Re: (Score:2)
If this guy can prioritize between "nobody's databases can talk to eachother" and "we can't get bugfixes for Important Software X because the vendor went bankrupt" and "new employees are stting on their thumbs for 8 weeks while their computer accounts get set up", then as long as he doesn't meddle beyond saying "how much will it cost to fix this" and "fix this next, because it gets us the most bang for our buck" it doesn't really matter if he personally doesn't know anything about how to fix it.
As long as he actually accepts the "how much will it cost" figures -- and also the "how much will it cost us not to fix this" figures. The Daily WTF is rife with stories of management deciding it wasn't worth a few thousand dollars to fix a problem which, in the long run, ended up costing a few million dollars, and a few years of delay, because it wasn't fixed when IT said it should be.
I value guidance between those tickets, when I honestly don't know which I should be focusing on. However, when I say "This
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure?
Would you work under someone who had an MBA, was a pre-law, and was responsible for the legal department at a largish company? Because that's the exact structure of my company's legal department. Last I heard our head council had wide latitude, but technically worked for a MBA toting pre-law.
Point is, in any large organization you need someone to make the translation from management to rank and file. That person needs aptitude in both, rather than narrow specialty in one. I have had many ma
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure? Would you work under someone who had an MBA, was a pre-law, and was responsible for the legal department at a largish company?
N.F.W.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that he's not a tech guy himself;
I'm certain its a good thing. Tech guys tend to focus more on the tech side of things - look at this, that or the other flash stuff we can do. some of that is good, but a lot of it is useless to the end-user. Techn guys tend to get a bit put out when they show their cool new tech to the end user only to be told that it doesn't help much at all. (I've been there myself :( )
As he's not one of those guys, he's going to be far more conc
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there's also the whole "iTunes U" thing. How well does that work for those who can't or won't use iTunes? DRM-free is only part of the solution -- basing it on actual standards, so third-party clients can be used, is the other part.
Never mind the whole iPhone App thing...
Re: (Score:2)
I had trouble loading that textbook.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not screw around here: Is he Mac or PC?
He's a Mac, no doubt. He's been involved in use of the iPod and iPhone in education, he's fascinated by social networking systems, and he likes to gloat about how Virginia had the first settlement of what would become the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
and he likes to gloat about how Virginia had the first settlement of what would become the USA.
The residents of St. Augustine might beg to differ, as might the cliff dwellers of the Southwest, for that matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not screw around here: Is he Mac or PC?
He supported a partnership with iTunes with education in his state and a project to produce educational apps for the iPhone. I'm thinking he's a Mac, or at least a Mac user.
If we can't find a reason to hate this guy, there's going to be a lot of unhappy people.
I like some of Obama's appointees and others I strongly dislike. This is another one that at least doesn't seem terrible on the surface. We'll have to wait and see if he does any good.
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno...with a name like Aneesh Chopra, I gotta think he'll help promote more H-1B visas...just what we need with declining employment opportunities in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno...with a name like Aneesh Chopra, I gotta think he'll help promote more H-1B visas..
So because he is of Indian descent he must have a particular point of view? There is a name for that sort of prejudgement: Racism.
Re: (Score:2)
Not racism, dood, but good future intentions. If Mr. Chopra aids in the complete offshoring of the US Congress, plus any and all administrations, government workers, etc., that can only be a good thing.....no more clowns for those EVIL lobbyists who actually run the country to be around to take their money.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think it's necessarily unreasonable to make assumptions that people of certain cultural, ethnic, or national backgrounds are more likely to hold specific views. If someone made the assumption that I would be more lenient toward Australians (I'm American), they might be right: Part of my heritage is Australian. Would I consider it racist if someone speculated about my leni
Re: (Score:2)
What is his stance on the open source revolution?
Well, in Virginia he pushed (and succeeded) to get an open-source textbook approved for schools, the first in the US.
I'm unaware of any particular stance he's taken on open source operating systems. He seems to be a bit of an Apple fanboy, tho', judging by the attention he's given the iPod and iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
What is his stance on the open source revolution? Linux/Open Office/Open Source solutions can contribute to massive savings for school districts but it's been beaten down/back by those with financial interests.
He seems to be fairly OSS neutral, at least as the Slashdot community would interpret it (which is very pro-OSS from the average). He has supported several projects in the past that provide some hope, including the open source physics textbook. He also has supported numerous innovative projects that use existing closed source technologies, like education partnerships with Apple using iTunes. He was recommended for the position by several strong OSS supporters and he seems fairly competent.
As for Linux and O
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
FOAD AC.
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree wholeheartedly with you on this. Unfortunately, you will not find anything even remotely resembling that philosophy in any public school that I've attended or even heard of.
Instead, you'll find schools where a lot of kids are afraid to take advanced classes or be on accelerated-learning tracks because the other students taunt, revile, and even physically assault them. One of the reasons that I'm so good with my hands is because I attended Houston's so-called "Magnet Program" in middle school. I w
Re: (Score:2)
The purpose of a school is to enable students to cope with change.
CC.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'd say teach using things like Ubuntu, Open Office, etc. for the most part. Then have some specific classes that teach the differences between Ubuntu and Windows, Open Office vs Microsoft Office, etc.
By doing so, you can literally give the students all the software they need at home, from which they'll learn all the skills they'll need.
And with the class that specifically covers Microsoft's products differences, they'll know the quirks of said products and it will require far less money, because they won't
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Really? You want to waste the student's time by teaching them the diff between Open Office and Microsoft Office? Perhaps with 5-year-old textbooks? I'll bet your students will be super excited! Not.
Why not teach them the difference between Photoshop and Gimp? That, at least, would have been useful for me, because as an amateur photographer I kinda got sucked into PS and now it's keeping me from switching back to Linux from OS X. Wait, there was no GIMP when I was in school. /sarcasm
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
You grew into OS office software and can go back any time, if needed. Those kids won't be able to do that. You'd effectively be crippling them.
Are kids dumber now that they ever were? The first computer I had contact with through school was an Apple IIe, did this crush my ability to learn to use Windows when it finally came out? Really, that is one of the most innane arguments I have heard. If we expose our children to many different computers/OSs/software suites, it leaves them with adaptability.
Hell, it wasn't until rather late in high school that I actually found a computer, in school, using Windows, with Office on it, and all the other "standard" stuff, before that there was some nice DOS boxes, a few early Macs, a TON of Apple IIes, and I even think a lowly C64 and Amiga in there. All of these with their seporate and very different OSs, different "productivity" software, and different ways of interacting with the computer. I, for some reason, doubt that this hindered my ability to exist in society much, much less... you know... use a computer. It probably helped greatly with the second bit, since it kept me from getting locked in to any particular scheme of computing.
Children are adaptive by nature, and the more we make them experience novel situations, the smarter they get. It forces them out of the rote "click x in menu y to do z", and into the the actual basis of the experience itself into a "I want to do z, now what?" mindframe.
I know several people who can't use the GUI in Ubuntu/Gnome, just because it doesn't look exactly like Windows, even though it almost exactly the same mechanically. I would rather our children don't become this.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If that's true then we can continue teaching them Microsoft Windows in the class room instead of Ubuntu and Open Office and they will be able to do the same thing, "I want to do z, now what?".
Otherwise, you're teaching them GNOME under Ubuntu and if they have to move to a Windows interface, they will be as confused as if they were trained on Microsoft and have to move to a GNOME based user interface. Chances are, they'll run into a Windows interface far more often than a GNOME interface.
Re:Open Source Alternatives (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
bingo.
Re: (Score:2)
Are kids dumber now that they ever were?
Yes. And getting dumber. (Though this might vary by locality.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They just need a few smart people for the brainy stuff. The rest they can use for other stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
[snip]
It's not that they are just dumb, they are also lazy. Those that actually want to learn the software and technology will thrive in this adaptable environment, but those that are more obsessed with sports or their own popularity will flounder and fail under the amount of choices available to them.
Good. That's their problem. Don't want to learn? Fine, don't learn... but don't expect an easy "A" on your report card either.
Re: (Score:2)
Schools are meant to teach pupils how to function in the real world. Not your little OSS fantasy world.
If a generation of students were trained on OSS, that "fantasy world" could become a reality.
You grew into OS office software and can go back any time, if needed. Those kids won't be able to do that.
OpenOffice looks and feels very much like most versions of Office. I see no reason they wouldn't be able to adapt, especially if they were trained on how to learn and discover different systems.
You'd effectively be crippling them.
More so than current schools, which only teach MS Office?
it'll be in the form of new clever minds in the workspace that have no idea how to use the software actually used there.
...or these clever new minds would be able to clearly evaluate which software is actually best, not merely which "is actually used", or which is already there, or which
Re: (Score:2)
...or these clever new minds would be able to clearly evaluate which software is actually best, not merely which "is actually used", or which is already there, or which they are familiar with.
Excel databases, Screenshots in Word, GUIs on a server, IE for anything, Windows-based ATMs, emacs as a text editor...
Re: (Score:2)
Excel databases, Screenshots in Word, GUIs on a server, IE for anything, Windows-based ATMs, emacs as a text editor...
*sigh*... Holy wars begin here...
Re: (Score:2)
all the schools around me use eMacs and iMacs. Use your brain.
Re: (Score:2)
all the schools around me use eMacs and iMacs. Use your brain.
I didn't realize how strapped for cash the government was. How the fuck do you get OS X on that/those (or do you?)?
Before exploding in fury (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Before exploding in fury (Score:4, Funny)
But.. but.. he isn't one of us!
I mean, did Obama even consider the CowboyNeal option?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But.. but.. he isn't one of us!
I mean, did Obama even consider the CowboyNeal option?
I'm sorry. We already had a cowboy president and that didn't work out. I think we're going to stay away from cowboys for the next few years.
I'm really curious.... (Score:5, Interesting)
O'Reilly is someone for whom I have respect.
I'm really really curious about what the Slashdot community has to say on this.
Usually I'm writing on legal issues, which I know something about.
But I am not a technologist, and I have no expertise in government or in policy.
Re:I'm really curious.... (Score:5, Insightful)
taking someone who is not very tech-oriented/aligned and putting them as CTO is just like taking politicians and lawyers and asking them to draft bills on technology.
See how well that's been working for us?
Re: (Score:2)
taking someone who is not very tech-oriented/aligned and putting them as CTO is just like taking politicians and lawyers and asking them to draft bills on technology. See how well that's been working for us?
Hope you get modded up for that one.
Re:I'm really curious.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I find a great deal of irony in your original post and this reply, because while you are obviously a lawyer, your original post demonstrates *exactly* the behaviors I believe are the full requirements I would expect from a great tech executive or politician.
First, you obviously read a tech article on your own, in your free time, displaying interest. Second, you formed an opinion. Third, you reformed your opinion based on a respected expert. Fourth, and most importantly, you went to a large community of experts (to varying degrees) in order to modify your opinion with the input of people with a greater professional interest in the subject than your own.
In all seriousness, Mr. Beckerman, despite being a lawyer and not a professional technologist, you would make a better CTO (or politician) than the vast majority of the rest of us. I would even venture to say that technologists shouldn't be forming large policies for as diverse and large an organization as the federal government. They are more likely to have biases and pay less attention to technologies they are less familiar with through professional experience.
As a side note, if you could chair the FCC or hop on in some tech position at the FTC, I would really appreciate it.
Re: (Score:2)
I find a great deal of irony in your original post and this reply, because while you are obviously a lawyer, your original post demonstrates *exactly* the behaviors I believe are the full requirements I would expect from a great tech executive or politician. First, you obviously read a tech article on your own, in your free time, displaying interest. Second, you formed an opinion. Third, you reformed your opinion based on a respected expert. Fourth, and most importantly, you went to a large community of experts (to varying degrees) in order to modify your opinion with the input of people with a greater professional interest in the subject than your own. In all seriousness, Mr. Beckerman, despite being a lawyer and not a professional technologist, you would make a better CTO (or politician) than the vast majority of the rest of us. I would even venture to say that technologists shouldn't be forming large policies for as diverse and large an organization as the federal government. They are more likely to have biases and pay less attention to technologies they are less familiar with through professional experience. As a side note, if you could chair the FCC or hop on in some tech position at the FTC, I would really appreciate it.
Thank you very much for your kind words. And I did indeed do the things you said I did (read a tech article, form an opinion, reform my opinion based on a respected expert, and go to a large community containing many experts to further modify my opinion). But I would not feel qualified to supervise those experts. I would like to learn from them, yes. I would like them to learn from me, yes. But I would not want to tell them how to do their jobs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
about this. My first reaction was that it was wrong not to appoint a technologist as CTO. Then I read O'Reilly's article, which argues cogently that the appointment makes a lot of sense.
This guy is a sensible choice, but perhaps not the best one. On one hand, he clearly is a technophile; he's had some nifty ideas and isn't afraid to hear new ones.
On the other hand, he seems to very much be a politician first and a technologist second. The video [oreilly.com] embedded in O'Reilly's commentary is telling: in the first four minutes, he uses the word "humbled", passively, five times. He can't resist buzzwords: "begin a conversation for dialogue" indeed. And if I hear him say "long-term strategic roadmap"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Up front, let me say that my response will be colored by the fact that I was in running for a CTO position of a fairly large company. I do not have any government background also.
CTO jobs generally mean different things in different companies. In situations where there is a CIO and CTO, generally CTO works within guidelines and strategies visualized by CIO and other C-level executives. CTO is concerned primarily with operational parameters like capacity building, capability building, and even confidence bui
Re: (Score:2)
"But I am not a technologist, and I have no expertise in government or in policy."
That never stopped anyone around here. Fire away - tell us what you really think.
Re: (Score:2)
I am deeply skeptical that a non-technologist can perform as well in this role as a similarly qualified candidate that additionally has a technology background. I am equally skeptical that no such candidate could be found.
Re: (Score:2)
O'Reilly is even more backwards and loud mouthed than most people his age. I can't wait for the old generation to just die out already. Their legacy superstitions and bigotry have encroached far beyond what any reasonable person would find appreciable.
Uh oh. I think that includes me.
Re: (Score:2)
His ways are of a higher purpose (Score:5, Funny)
non-tech Chief Technology Officer (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen this at a lot of organizations, the CIO is invariable a non-techie hired on for his skills at schmoozing management than any tech knowledge. Management find real techies a threat as they might get found out. They mostly spend their time quoting the tech press and spouting phrases like 'integrated innovation' and 'empowerment'. The top man specifically hires people dumber then him, else they could be as threat to his job. In turn the CTO hires someone even dumber than he is, and so on down the line. If something 'technical' comes along they hire in a 'consultant', fire him and take credit for his work. Of course any real in-house techies have to be transferred before they figure out just how stupid the CIO really is. So you end up with a business where the longest serving employee has been there less then ten months. Eventually the company goes down the tubes ...
From what I know about the technology world, you have hit the nail on the head! So why is O'Reilly wrong? What is the fallacy in his thinking?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know if he is wrong, but going from that article, I just get a slight wave of nausea. When ever I see market-speak in a 'technical' document it invariably means that it's aimed at the non-technical sector with just enough buzz phrases to keep them warm and fuzzy. Just check out some of the key phrases:
"The responsibilities of the CIO are to use informatio
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't because there's a flaw in the structure; it's a flaw in the implementation. From my experience of the world of commerce, most managers aren't really managers. They may have 'business qualifications' and a long period of rising through the ranks of a company, but it doesn't make them managers.
A true manager exists to use the available resources in the best way to tackle a problem, and to do logistics support for th
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about how 'technical' the management chain is (I've seen some huge screwups because the management was highly technical, just didn't really understand the business well enough to co-ordinate the implementation of systems that actually did what the business needed, rather than doing what was technically a good system. Just practically wrong). It's how generally savvy the manager is.
I'm not saying that technical knowledge is the only component of being a good technology leader. Being a good manager consists of many qualities. But to me, one of the qualities in being a "savvy" technology leader is to have a true understanding of the technology.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen this at a lot of organizations, the CIO is invariable a non-techie hired on for his skills at schmoozing management than any tech knowledge. Management find real techies a threat as they might get found out. They mostly spend their time quoting the tech press and spouting phrases like 'integrated innovation' and 'empowerment'. The top man specifically hires people dumber then him, else they could be as threat to his job. In turn the CTO hires someone even dumber than he is, and so on down the line. If something 'technical' comes along they hire in a 'consultant', fire him and take credit for his work. Of course any real in-house techies have to be transferred before they figure out just how stupid the CIO really is. So you end up with a business where the longest serving employee has been there less then ten months. Eventually the company goes down the tubes ...
I can't believe your comment got a downward moderation as "flamebait"; I think it deserves to "+5 Insightful". I've even reproduced it on my blog here [blogspot.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Jeez, thanks, it's nice to be appreciated. As for getting modded down, that's known as mod trolling ..
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The reason you were modded down as 'flamebait', is because this place is crawling with "non-technical mgt. idiots", & you were/are COMPLETELY correct about them. They are threatened by anyone that knows more than they do and that can expose them for the MBA bearing fakes they really are, as far as the art & science of computing. I too agree, that the "company will go down the tubes" with a blind-man @ the wheel (in other words, someone running the show in a company that deals in tech, but has NO tech under his skills belt whatsoever) & the entire nation of the United States has fallen victim to these "slogan spouting rats" that have no clue/idea whatsoever in the areas they are "leading" & thus they make HUGE mistakes, because they have no inkling of what's going on. I suppose it sort of "boils down" to something like this - I personally most certainly wouldn't want to go to a surgeon that had never performed surgery for instance, and I don't think anyone sane would either.
I agree with you. I don't think a person not trained in technology should be supervising in the field of technology. It is a profession, and should be accorded the dignity of a profession. No lawyer can be supervised by a non-lawyer; no doctor can be supervised by a non-doctor; no technologist can be supervised by a non-technologist.
But what I'm trying to understand is this: if O'Reilly is wrong, why is he wrong?
Bag of Air Says What (Score:3, Insightful)
- Let me fill the DOJ with RIAA lawyers.
The current tech laws need reform.
- Let me appoint another windbag politician to do it instead of someone who actually knows what the hell bittorrent is.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm gonna reform copyright. The laws are faulty.
- Let me fill the DOJ with RIAA lawyers.
The current tech laws need reform.
- Let me appoint another windbag politician to do it instead of someone who actually knows what the hell bittorrent is.
That was my initial reaction. But O'Reilly makes a cogent contrary argument. What is flawed in what O'Reilly is saying?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
O'Reilly's discourse is generalized and vague enough to land me a job as a teacher at MIT, if I use the same level of granularity in my resume'. While the guy may have actually done something, I do not get a Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Linus Torvaldis, etc kind of feel about his accomplishments.
I'd probably fail miserably at that teaching job, and this guy seems similarly equipped for his position.
I hope I am wrong. I also hoped i'd be wrong about a dem President+Congress combo meal. That combo is going to g
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
- Let me appoint another windbag politician to do it instead of someone who actually knows what the hell bittorrent is.
People in charge aren't supposed to know everything, that's why they have advisors. A techie as CTO will get lost in details and won't be able to think outside the box or will probably be too biased (e.g. Windows vs. Linux) and won't make a fair judgement. What we need is a bright leader and I believe that's what he is.
Re: (Score:2)
You want a technology-AWARE person. Someone who's been in the field, and done some hardcore programming, network design, or a combination of tech skills and project management/people management combined with a tech background. Ultimately, the CTO/CIO is a manager that comes FROM a tech background, not moves TO one. That last part highlights my issue with this guy.
And that is my issue with this guy.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with this is non-tech savvy CTOs invariably hires the wrong advisors, consultants, employees under him/her. So then the entire IT department is staffed by incompetent people. You need someone with current tech knowledge but with the ability to manage and make decisions. The ability to manage means that the person has the insight to know when to delegate and not get wrapped up in the details. To say that a non-technical person is better at making management decisions is patently false.
Exactly my thinking. If I may analogize, once again, to my own field, in the legal profession, one of the most important professional tasks a senior lawyer performs for his or her clients is to hire, and retain, the right kind of junior lawyers to work on their matters, and to get rid of those who can't be trusted to provide superior legal skills and judgment. Only a lawyer, and only a good lawyer, could possibly make that call. There are plenty of people walking around in the legal field, who look and talk
Here's the question (Score:2)
Here's the question:
Does Open Source Software stand a chance with this guy or do we have to educate him on what OSS is all about [opensource.org]?
Good Choice (Score:5, Interesting)
I worked with Aneesh earlier this year on an open government project here in Virginia. He asked me to function in a very small role in developing stimulus.virginia.gov, basically to serve as a programmer/open government guy to advocate from the inside for increased openness and strong adherence to public, open data exchange standards on the website and its API. Aneesh isn't a geek, but he "gets it," if I may return to that old chestnut that we all employed round about 2000. He might not know Unicode from Latin 1, but he surrounds himself with people who do know the difference, he gets the gist of it from them, and chooses the path that provides the most accessibility for the most data to the most people.
The guy is, incidentally, utterly exhausting to try to keep up with. I'm somebody to whom people say constantly "when do you sleep?", and even I find Aneesh an absolutely whirlwind of activity.
The only downside for me here is that Aneesh had expressed interested in me joining Governor Kaine's cabinet as "Senior Advisor for Open Government" (or something like that). I'd been in talks with my employer about taking a leave of absence. Now, of course, that won't happen. But since the (apparent) tradeoff is having Aneesh as the nation's CTO, that's A-OK by me.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get it... (Score:2)
...can someone from the USA please explain to me, what this C*Os have to do with anything in the government, and how they relate to it. Because I thought (from my noobish simplified perspective) you had a parliament that is elected by the people, and a second one, that is elected by the first parliament. And a president that is somehow directly, but yet still indirectly elected by the people.
But if you have chief anything officers of everything, who are chosen by the president saying so (after whatever happ
glorified secretaries (Score:2)
all the chief whatsits and suchandsuch czars don't have any power... Think of them as glorified advisors / secretaries and you're closer to the mark.
-T
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
'leverage...promote...foster w/ a special emphasis (Score:2)
Yeah, those are the sorts performance goals I look for in a job too.
I'm sure he'll be great.
Why a techie with leadership skills is better (Score:2)
Qualifications for National CTO:
1. He/she has to know what he does and does not know.
(Debugging code teaches you this, and the appropriate level of humility, in spades.)
2. More generally, he/she has to have a rational enough mind about what is going to work and what not, based on scientific principles, including scientific sociological principles.
3. He/she has to be creative enough to understand and be appropriately excited by other most creative "next big things". i.e. he/she has to be able to imagine the
I smell astroturf (Score:4, Insightful)
you know, I've been noticing a lot of similiar posts whenever Obama is mentioned... Stuff like:
"both parties suck, don't bother"
"Obama lied to us"
and lots of just little slams. Nothing concrete. Just little jabs here and there.
I look... and a lot of these are from ACs, or people who seem to have just registered and have very few comments on their record. I smell viral marketing at work....
Lets face it, Obama didn't run as a left wing ideologue. He's been in 100 days, and although many here are peeved at the appointment of RIAA folks to the DOJ, and everyone is pissed at the bailouts (although I suspect they'd be more pissed if it all tanked and they lost their jobs/houses/etc).... for the most part, Obama has been careful and pretty center of the road. He didn't yank us out of Iraq (which would have been pretty irresponsible IMO). He is yanking funding for stupid military projects that were money sinks. Good for him. He has pushed at teachers unions... Not a very socialist thing to do. He has pushed for healthcare. People get pissed at this, but I suspect they don't realize that when someone without healthcare goes to the ER, we foot the bill anyway. He has scruitinized his appointments more than anyone else.... You think tax problems for political appointees JUST NOW became a problem?
bah, this is just my opinion. Feel free to have your own....
The point is, he's been pretty calm, politically centered for a Dem, and careful in his actions. I think he's doing fairly well given the situation. If there is an attempt to influence public opinion... I Hate Viral Marketing.
Turn your internal virus detectors on folks.
-T
Experience (Score:2)
Well, Obama has no real leadership experience either, so why not be consistent?
I guess its better then appointing a fox to watch the henhouse like has happened in other cases recently.
From Virginia... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know how much Aneesh is responsible for, but I've been pleasantly surprised by my home state's technology initiatives. We do pretty much everything online these days - DMV, property values, utilities, car taxes.
A number of years back the virginia state government charged you an extra ~$10 to make payments online, compared to sending the same credit card number to them in the mail to be processed by hand. That nonsense is long gone, thankfully.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Note that the Obama-hater is unable to use a calendar.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you know? A non-IT guy for CTO. Brilliant. Now THAT is hope and change! Oh well, I guess we should be getting used to these shockingly bad decisions by the Obama administration. What's next? Emeril in change of the military? Norman Schwarzkopf in charge of healthcare? Ann Coulter in charge of the HUD (oh wait, she's not eligible, she paid her taxes)?
How about putting RIAA lawyers in charge of the Department of Justice? Would that work?
Re: (Score:2)
No, but I do believe that a President *should* have spent time in the military, preferably as an enlisted man not an officer. Hell, even Plato argued that leaders should have military experience a couple thousand years ago. But sadly, we don't seem to nominate philosopher kings.
Re:Say it ain't so, Obama (Score:5, Funny)
McCain would have been superior because of his ideology that is actually backed up with a lifetime record of achievement supporting those beliefs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The troll moderators are out in force. I guess their Sat. Morning Cartoons are over now.
Just because you don't agree doesn't mean the post is a troll. Didn't they teach you that when you watched Barney this morning?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you on that, 100%. Partly because I've been on the receiving end of such crap (disguised as -1 Offtopic !) and mostly because I see very insightful posts that say what has to be said even if it's unpopular, modded down.
This site should encourage the spelling out of unpopular but truthful views.
Re: (Score:2)
From everything I'm reading about the guy, he seems qualified for the job.
Re: (Score:2)
This gentlemen lacks the academic credentials, actual work experience in a nuts-and-bolts IT role, and the track record of success in such a role to be an effective leader in this appointment. Bachelor of Arts? Masters in Public Policy? Please. The idea that managers in one field (ie healthcare) can be interchanged into another (ie IT) is a myth. It's a bush-league mistake and one that is very costly and damaging.
And one that is probably at the root of much of what is wrong in American business, today. Professional managers whose primary area of expertise is making themselves look good.
hiring a non-medical Surgeon General .. (Score:2)
A good Surgeon General would be someone with a medical background and the ability to talk to the politicians and captains of industry. Given two equal candidates, what would be the logic in hiring the non-medical one.