The best simpleminded test of expertise in a particular area is an ability to win money in a series of bets on future occurrences in that area.
The world has shown that if you provide capital and expertise to an area that is starved for capital and expertise, really good things will happen.
Here's the reality, for the next couple of years the Mac OS will experience increasing security threats and mark my words, the company will have to seek outside expertise in the form of a head of security communications in the next 12 months.
When people ask whether virtual reality will be a real thing or just the next 3D, what I always say is, 'Take a headset, walk outside, and the next person you meet, put it on them and see what the reaction is.'
Architects are today routinely indoctrinated against the dumb box. Even advertising urges us to "think outside the box." Why? Because it is thought we all hate the box for being too dumb, too boring, and we want to escape it. If we do escape, by buying the advertised product, we usually find ourselves inside another dumb box populated by boring people just like us. It is clearly possible to live an extraordinary life inside a dumb box. Question: is it possible to lead an extraordinary life in anything other than a dumb box?
To me thinking outside the box means; crossing disciplines and pulling in expertise and perspective from outside of the standard boundaries.
One minute I'm robbing a dope house. Next minute I'm the youngest heavyweight champion of the world. I'm only 20, 19, with a lot of money. Who am I? What am I? I don't even know who I am. I'm just a dumb child who's being abused and robbed by lawyers. I'm just a dumb pugnacious fool. I'm just a fool who thinks he's someone. Then you tell me I should be responsible.
Personally, I've found one of the more stimulating ways of playing in recent times has been to kind of move outside the free improvised area and work with people who are probably improvisers but they have a particular way of working.
They see a blooper here and there, and they just think, 'Oh, he's dumb.' I mean, what can I do? I can't 'at' everyone on Twitter and tell them I'm not dumb. Because that looks dumb.
There is no single grand strategy. Just as the New Left abandoned an overarching program and became a series of like-minded groups advancing area by area, so it must counterattacked area by area.
My basic strategy is to stick to my core business and to my area of expertise.
I don't want to make a half-assed film. It's not my area of expertise.
There's no tradition of scientists knocking down the Sunday school door, telling the preacher, That might not necessarily be true. That's never happened. There're no scientists picketing outside of churches.
The e-mails are mainly about a controversy over a particular data set and the ways a particular small group of scientists have displayed that dataset.
There is no debate here, just scientists and non-scientists. And since the subject is science, the non-scientists don't get a vote.
I've been thinking, in an age of Trump where you don't know the direction of the country, the person you need most is a steady conservative hand like Mark Kirk in the Senate to be advising the president, especially on national security topics ... which is my particular expertise after 23 years in the Navy.