“In war the chief incalculable is the human will.” – B. H. Liddell Hart
“Positions are seldom lost because they have been destroyed, but almost invariably because the leader has decided in his own mind that the position cannot be held.” – A. A. Vandegrift

Warfighting is a US Marine Corps treatise on their philosophy of war, and it’s good. In the book, they define war as “a violent struggle between two hostile, independent, and irreconcilable wills, each trying to impose itself on the other.” This touches on a theme that has being unraveled through the course of my reading and writing – an external concept of reality is uncertain and up to interpretation, and is dictated by those with social dominance, who set the standards for cultural capital; the only “true” reality is the social interaction between members of the human race. People with competing external concepts of reality, also known as the “frame”, will often resort to violence unless one frame can subsume another one – even in subtle ways. The notion of competing frames is the basis for all of social interaction and is what we enjoy in comedy in television or the theater. I wish to do more reading in this area, especially with regards to grooming and cooperation vs. threat displays, and I will soon be stocking up on books on primatology. Anyway — we go to war to impose our will, or frame, on another party. So it is not only nation states that go to war, but everyday humans in love, business & sport: it is with that lens that I read Warfighting.

Friction

Friction is “the force that makes the apparently easy so difficult.” Although external, environmental and enemy threats may cause friction, friction may also “be self-induced, caused by such factors as lack of a clearly defined goal, lack of coordination, unclear or complicated plans, complex task organizations or command relationships, or complicated technologies.” Many of these are issues I’ve addressed previously on the blog. Lack of a clearly defined goal is an important factor in susceptibility to manipulation. Complicated plans showed be eschewed in favor of simple steps; the psychology of games is not too different from the psychology of real life (that post is an excellent reader for avoiding “complicated technologies”). It seems that the USMC has recognized the value of simplicity, because a major thesis of the book is that war is a fundamentally human process and therefore its processes should be built a framework of human nature. Keep it simple, make sure you have a mastery of the basics.

Reducing Internal Friction

And if a fair fight is the result of poor planning, then the first step we can take is by organizing ourselves – especially during peacetime; that way, when the shit hits the fan, we can be ready to roll. However, it is critically important that our peacetime initiatives simulate real-world conditions. The practice and buildup of skills is also known as procedural memory, but memory recall and skill performance is state-based: we recall skills that were built with similar enviornmental prompts. In my amateur view, this means environments that triggered similar neurochemical stimulus, since memory pathways are based on unique combinatorics of neurotransmitter pathing. If we learn important skills during simulated stressful situations, then we will be able to properly execute them in other stressful situations (triggering cortisol, GH and norepinephrine).

We must attempt to reduce our friction and “raise our enemy’s friction to a level that weakens his ability to fight”.

Uncertainty

The ambiguity and inherent uncertainty of war mandates us to take action based on incomplete information. Colin Powell espouses a philosophy of taking action when you have information that predicts a 40-70% likelihood of success. Of course, the authors of Warfighting are quick to point out that “it is precisely those actions that seem improbably that often have the greatest impact on the outcome of war”. Ahh… we have been revisited by our old friend The Black Swan.

Uncertainty and disorder go hand in hand; the USMC recommends we build a framework which we can use to navigate disorder, and also seek to generate disorder and use it as a weapon against our opponent.

Fear, The Mind Killer

“The greatest effect of fires is generally not the amount of physical destruction they cause, but the effect of that physical destruction on the enemy’s moral strength.” I’ve read a bunch of sports psychology books and they all say that given a basic baseline parity of skill, whoever wants to win more will win. I interpret this as having resoluteness of frame (mental strength, moral strength, our interpretation of reality; I get to mix moral strength with interpretation of reality because of the importance of values (and thus, morality) in determining reality and philosophy).

Science vs. Art

“Art includes the creative, situational application of scientific knowledge through judgment and experience, and so the art of war subsume the science of war….the conduct of war is fundamentally a dynamic process of human competition requiring both the knowledge of science and the creativity of art but driven ultimately by the power of human will.” It is only by having a rigorous foundational training in the sciences that we can learn how to creatively apply them – but at the end of the day, if our will to win isn’t high enough, we lose. I plan on taking a 10-day meditation course in order to strengthen my mind, and I do feel like I lack certain sufficient training in the physical sciences (physics, chemistry). Any recommendations of good books there?

*

“Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack. One defends when his strength is adequate; he attacks when it is abundant.” – Sun Tzu

I notice that I only win, win, win when I am on the attack – whether it be in sports (poker or basketball), getting something accomplished sociosexually, or business. For example, the recent awesome success of AwesomenessReminders has catapulted me into reactive territory, where I’m spending time dealing with the deluge of emails and interview requests rather than proactively accomplishing goals (the release of new, additional products; unleashing strategic ad campaigns; personal development via reading & articulating via the blog). But no more – today I set out a list of six goals to accomplish, and I will EMP the fuck out of whatever is in my way in order to get there.

*

Pause for Reflection

What are some of sources of friction that have brought me down in the past?

1. Facebook
2. Hacker News – debatable, my participation in this community may prove to be a wise investment of time; HN is becoming an important relay outlet for valuable information on the internet. Unfortunately, it has also encouraged me to spend a shitload of time reading stuff that I can’t readily integrate – articles from successful entrepreneurs on arcane processes that aren’t germane to my present goals – though I may be benefitting from positive social influence/contagion from people more successful than me.
3. Bad relationships (friends/enemies/girlfriends); inability to read body language and intent
4. Obsession with self-image – this ties into #1 and in many ways #3,5,6,7
5. Smoking
6. Drinking
7. Poor nutrition
8. Misinformation
9. Racketing (I’m taking Landmark Forum this weekend to help me deal with this)
10. Narrative Construction (see #9, #4)

I dropped out of freshman physics so please bear with me on the science metaphors – it seems like each source of friction is also in some ways a two-sided lever, like a see-saw; each brings benefits but also detriments.

*

War As An Act Of Policy

“War is an extension of both policy and politics with the addition of military force….the single most important thought to understand about [the USMC's] theory is that war must serve policy.” I interpret this as a dictate: The wars that you wage should serve your premeditated intentions.

Two Types, Two Ways

There are two ways to use military force to impose will on an enemy. One is through the elimination, permanent or temporary, of the enemy’s military power; this is known as the strategy of annihilation or, at least, incapacitation. This is power through dominance.

The second way is convincing the enemy that accepting our terms will be less painful than continuing to resist; also known as a “strategy of erosion”, this uses military force to erode the enemy leadership’s will. This involves using force to raise the cost of resistance higher than the enemy is willing to pay. This strategy is useful for “limited political goals that we believe the enemy leadership will ultimately be willing to accept.” I see this one in youthful romantic relationships all the time; notable examples include a woman coming into a relationship with the purported intentions of casual sex. The male has the upper hand, because it is his frame, dominance and ego that is being served. Then, he becomes addicted to the sex, and his frame is subsumed by the woman’s: a relationship, or even worse, marriage, ensues. Drug dealers use a similar strategy; how many times have you been offered a “free sample”? Free samples appear in all shapes and forms.

It is my understanding that Islam, under the Caliphate, used strategy #2: everyone either dies or consents to Islamic conversion/rule (tax).

Attrition vs Maneuver

Warfare by attrition is straightforward: wear your enemy out and rack up the body counts. See an enemy concentration? Perfect, bomb it. Warfare by maneuver, on the other hand, revolves around incapacitating the enemy systematically. See an enemy concentration? Avoid it, it’s a strength. Instead, concentrate on attacking an enemy weakness and “eliminate a key element which incapacitates the enemy systematically.”

On the social battlefield, do you know the foundation for someone’s confidence? Is it an external achievement that can be mocked, spiraling them into a whirlwind of mental spinning, taking working memory resources offline, unable to support skill execution? Do they have faulty pillars of self-esteem? An entire book should be written: an inventory of relevant tactics.

“We should try to ‘get inside’ the enemy’s thought processes and see the enemy as he sees himself so that we can set him up for defeat. It is essential that we understand the enemy on his own terms.”

“Similarly, we must try to see ourselves through our enemy’s eyes in order to identify our own vulnerabilities that he may attack and to anticipate what he will try to do so that we can counteract him.” My friend, who shall remain anonymous unless he decides to speak up in the comments, calls this “being bulletproof.”

“we can expect the enemy to disguise his dispositions in order to lure us against a surface [strength] that appears to be a gap [weakness].”

Speed, Focus, Surprise, Boldness

Social warfare could be distilled as a battle for the tempo. Other react when you proactively set the tempo. You can set the tempo through superior speed (forcing them always to play catch-up), surprise, focus, boldness, intelligent, ally support, resource domination. The tempo might well be renamed the “frame”. “Frequency” is a similar albeit somewhat different topic that I’m still unraveling.

“Speed is necessary in order to concentrate superior strength at the decisive time and place”; what matters is not absolute speed but relative speed. Superior speed forces reaction. This is huge!

Focus allows you to concentrate resources at critical points, economizing other positions and assuming increased risk.

Surprise, as I have written about before, stems from schema violation. The shock ensuing from surprise is a worthwhile boon, and maybe even the primary benefit of surprise: it induces panic and erodes the will. There USMC claims three ways to achieve surprise:

1. Deception involves getting the enemy to plan for us to do something other than what we are really going to do. So we give the enemy a clear picture of the situation, but we give them the wrong picture
2. Ambiguity requires us to act in an unpredictable way, forcing the enemy to plan for a plenitude of contingencies and therefore not properly for any one.
3. Stealth is achieved when we deny the enemy any information of impending action.

Boldness is a strong outpouring of resources in the right time and the right place; the advantages of a surprise are exacerbated by proper boldness. Virgil said “Fortune favors the bold”, but boldness should be initiated based on strong situational awareness.

Critical Vulnerability and Center of Gravity

Find out which factors are critical to enemy: where are his strengths that, if eliminated, will bend him most quickly to our well? These are the suitably-named “centers of gravity”. A similar concept is that of critical vulnerability– “A vulnerability that, if exploited, will do the most significant damage to the enemy’s ability to resist”. Looking for centers of gravity requires external focus on the enemy, rather than mechanical implementation of systematized procedures. Opportunities to exploit centers of gravity and critical vulnerabilities must be seized and acted upon with boldness.

*

I liked this quote: “Our doctrine does not consist of procedures to be applied in specific situations so much as it sets forth general guidance that requires judgment in application. Therefore, while authoritative, doctrine is not prescriptive.”

*

Leadership Gems

Leadership gems are something to be expected from a military book. Here are a few:

“Errors by junior leaders stemming from overboldness are a necessary part of learning. We should deal with such errors leniently…Abolishing ‘zero defects’ means that we do not stifle boldness or initiative through the threat of punishment” They still, of course, advocate constructive criticism as part of the learning process.

“Until a commander has reached and stated a decision, subordinates should consider it their duty to provide honest, professional opinions even though these may be in disagreement with the senior’s opinions. However, once the decision has been reached, juniors then must support it as if it were their own.” Money.

“Because … no two situations … are the same, our critiques should focus not so much on the actions we took as on why we took those actions and why they brought the results they did.” Man, if there was ever a quote i needed to hear, this is it. Although it seems like common sense, it’s remarkable the frequency with which I beat myself up over errors – without pausing for the rough equivalent of a “5 Whys” analysis. I want to start doing this!

Mission tactics are the tactics of assigning a subordinate mission without specifying out it must be accomplished. This creates “freedom for initiative that permits the high tempo of operations that we desire….mission tactics requires subordinates to act with “topsight” — a grasp of how their actions fit into the larger situation…..we cannot allow decentralized initiative without some means of providing unity, or focus to the various efforts…>we seek unity not principally trough imposed control, but through harmonious initiative and lateral coordination within the context [ed: frame!] provided by guidance from above.”

“A subordinate commander who is not given a clear purpose for the assigned mission should ask for one….It is often possible to capture intent in a simple “…in order to …” phrase….statement of intent should be brief and compelling–the more concise, the better…Subordinates must have a clear understanding of what their commander expects. Further, they should understand the intent of the commander at least two levels up.”

“[Maneuver warfare] requires a certain independence of mind, a willingness to act with initiative and boldness, an exploitive mindset that takes full advantage of every opportunity, and the moral courage to accept responsibility for this type of behavior. It is important that this last set of traits be guided by self-discipline and loyalty to the objectives of seniors.”

Communication

Our philosophy of command must also exploit the human ability to communicate implicitly. We believe that implicit communication- to communicate through mutual understanding, using a minimum of key, well-understood phrases or even anticipating each other’s thoughts- is a faster, more effective way to communicate than through the use of detailed, explicit instructions.We develop this ability through familiarity and trust, which are based on a shared philosophy and shared experience. This concept has several practical implications…we should establish long-term working relationships to develop the necessary familiarity and trust….key people…should talk directly to one another when possible….we should communicate orally when possible, because we communicate also in…inflections and tone of voice….we should communicate in person when possible because we communicate also through our gestures and bearing.”

Specifically, on trust and “forward command”: “Only by their physical presence [on the frontlines]– by demonstrating the willingness to share danger and privation-can commanders fully gain the trust and confidence of subordinates.”

Combined Arms

“Combined arms is the full integration of arms in such a way that to counteract one, the enemy must become more vulnerable to another. we pose the enemy not just with a problem, but with a dilemma- a no-win situation.” It makes me think of a fork in chess. How can I create more of these opportunities in everyday life?

Decision Making

At the lower levels, “decision making may be an intuitive process based on experience”. At higher levels, “decisionmaking may be a more analytical process based on comparing several options. We should base our decision on awareness rather than on mechanical habit…act on a keen appreciation for the essential factors that make each situation unique instead of from conditioned response.”

Conclusion

Maneuver Warfare “is a statement of mind bent on shattering the enemy morally and physically by paralyzing and confounding him, by avoiding his strength, by quickly and aggressively exploiting his vulenrabilities, and by striking him in the way that will hurt him most….[it's] a philosophy for ‘fighting smart.’”

Warfighting is available on Amazon.com for only $7.99.

Recommended Reading: On War by Clausewitz, The Human Zoo by Desmond Morris, this presentation by Colin Powell

How cool (and appropriate) if I renamed this to “Zachary Burt’s Strategy Blog”?

Anyway, the launch of my newest site, AwesomenessReminders, spawned this comment on Hacker News:

Zack,

I am a fan, but your recent rash of “sites” is worrisome. You launched: HipHopGoblin (<1 year, down), CustomerFind (1< year ago), NYC-Chicago-Bus (49 days ago), EndAnts (23 days ag), CompassionPit (5 days ago!) and now this, AwesomenessReminders.

When do you even have time to improve, even promote, projects if you’re tossing them on a weekly basis? It takes time to make anything monetizable, at least you need to create it first.

I think you’re just an small sample of a generation of people who are coming to see businesses as just “idea + landing page”. Sell, then build. A/B test today and build when the money piles up. etc. etc.

Slow down, for your own sake. Maybe even work on something you actually care about.
HipHopGoblin had a lot of potential, I used to listen to it; so you’re at least capable of discovering and executing good ideas. You just need patience, and maybe someone to ask you “how’s it coming?”. Perhaps .. ProgressReminder?

The reply I wrote was so long that I feel it’s better formatted as a blog post. So here goes:

I agree that HipHopGoblin had a lot of potential. Fortunately, so do a lot of other people. HHG has been acquired by another team and they’ve given me some equity. In return, I am staying on in an advisory role. This allows them to turn the dream into reality and me to do more of what I enjoy (networking with hiphop fans, rappers, and hip hop industry figures… Jay Electronia is following me on Twitter, why aren’t you?). Of course, it’s possible that staying on board in a more dedicated role and seeing it through to the end could have produced a more likely chance of success, I have to an extent de-risked myself yet still exposed myself to the upsides of an excellent outcome. The truth of the matter though is that I completely lost motivation to do programming on HHG, so I was hopeful when the opportunity to pass the torch came into my life and I am confident in the top-tier programming abilities and general caliber of the new team.

As far as CustomerFind, which was started as an indirect offshoot of HHG: I hack in new features when I get the inspiration, but CustomerFind continues to be a profitable, zero-effort source of passive income. Unfortunately, it’s also completely stagnant — zero growth. I believe that the site has extra potential; however, I’ve tried growing it in a few different directions but have each time been stifled because I’m not exactly clear how to market it (or how to grow and rebrand it). Some serious customer engagement would probably be advantageous, but I feel like each customer is using it for a different thing, and there’s not enough of a sample size in order to figure out how to pursue it. I could drive some traffic through an AdWords campaign, and I hired a designer to help me redo the landing page before doing it. Unfortunately, she wasn’t a critical thinker, and ultimately the onus was on me to design the site, but mental blocks and excuses prevented me from doing this (sample thoughts: “i don’t know how to design a fun ux”, “how do I lay out the landing page for an archetypal customer if I don’t even know ANYTHING about who they are?”). But I could just update the website to mention the new Facebook monitoring features I built, but I haven’t. So that’s what’s stopping me from CustomerFind, and I’m glad I have an opportunity to publicly ask for some help – some guidance. The very act of writing this out has actually triggered some inspiration about how I might go about doing it (highlight the main 3 benefits on the homepage, spend some $ trying out different ad combinations). It would require a commitment of a marketing budget, though, and finding a programmer to work on the code base: because I don’t actually feel like doing any programming work on it, myself. I wonder why that is – is it because I’m more eager to hack on early prototypes of fun ideas than continue them? Or is it because the code base is so development-unfriendly that working on it is just no fun? (For example, there’s no automated testing.) Soliciting feedback.

I did do some Customer Development meetings related to CustomerFind, and pivots suggested room for a potential enterprise-y Social Media dashboard product. Unfortunately, I am not thrilled with the prospect of competing in that market (hint: against Radian6, Alterian SM2), given how much funding those companies have as well as their development squads & adoption rates. I do have an idea for an easy SaaSy product in that niche that I may yet develop, but I’m going to keep the idea secret for now lest someone steal it. (It will probably be my next product once AwesomenessReminders is fully humming.)

Oh, and I do have one other idea about how CustomerFind could be huge. It will probably involve about $3000 in expenses to solve a few important customer development hypotheses (there is technology risk AND market risk, but if the technology works I will just use it for myself and not bother taking it to market unless I feel like world domination). Big “if” there, though.

EndAnts is getting scrapped. It’s something that I believe should exist, but I don’t know how it should be presented. At this point the UI sucks so bad that even I don’t enjoy using the product. Apparently, at least some people like it, given that they’re motivated enough to email me about it. How many people like it? I don’t know, I don’t have a good device for keeping track of Retention metrics (Google Analytics’s “New” vs. “Returning” feels too vague). Any suggestions for dealing with this?

CompassionPit is growing. It has proved to be a source of relief for many people. I’m slowly launching a PR campaign for it. One thing I’m working is making sure I use the principles of SUCCESs in the pitch, which is useful in getting people to remember your ideas. Incidentally, I’m thinking of forking it off and rebranding it as Webconfessional.com, geared towards Catholics. How selective is the Vatican with their RFQs? Are they ready to go digital? Religious groups need digital solutions.

And it’s looking like AwesomenessReminders will be another source of passive income, with over 19 signups already (zero paid traffic sent!).

So yeah – to address the original concerns, maybe in a sense, I should be swinging for the fences, trying to go big or go home. Maybe I should pick a market that I really personally care about and dedicate myself to it. To these concerns, I have nothing but rationalization. (The “try it and see” has worked profitably in the past; I’m also building up a skill set that will make me better prepared for when I sit down for “the long haul” (once I identify the right market); at least I am collecting persistent sources of income along the way (this blog is one of them, but it’s also technically a loss given the amount of money I spend on books: please donate to my Amazon.com book fund to encourage future posts! PayPal payments to zackster@gmail.com would be greatly appreciated).

I welcome your thoughts, and opportunities for collaboration.

P.S. Anticipating a potential criticism, I am being open, but not transparent. I have a few other products in the pipeline, but I am not ready to launch them yet so I am remaining mum for strategic purposes.

Hi loyal blog readers,

I haven’t posted for about 3 weeks now. Here’s what I’ve been busy with:

EndAnts

I launched http://www.EndAnts.com – a site to help you end Automatic Negative Thoughts (ANTs). As I have previously mentioned here on ZacharyBurt.com, negative thinking is bad for our emotional health. The site uses a technique from Cognitive Behavioral Therapy called distortion thought records and also includes social game-like components (“karma points”, a “leaderboard”). At first I thought I could market it to Cognitive Behavioral Therapists, but after a few hilarious failed customer development meetings (one guy tried to recruit me as a business partner to start a completely different idea with him), and a few dozen unanswered emails, it seemed like I was barking up the wrong tree, peddling vitamins instead of painkillers.

I did get a few other people using the site, and at least a few of them expressed to me that they were getting some value out of it. But ultimately, I found that EndAnts in its current incarnation is not a site that I personally enjoy using – so I’m going to retool it until it becomes software that I personally want to use.

CompassionPit

Ever have a personal problem that’s weighing you down, but you can’t really tell a friend – because they’ll use it against you in the future, or because you’re embarrassed, or because it lowers your social status? Well, I’ve felt that pain before, and that’s why I created http://www.CompassionPit.com, an anonymous one-on-one chat site where the tag line is “Chat with an anonymous stranger who won’t judge you.” I plan on sending out annunciation emails, but apparently Nylon Magazine already found it and named it “site of the day”.

Reading

In July I set out a goal to read 30 books. I don’t think I accomplished that, but I definitely cracked at least 20. In retrospect, not knowing the exactly number of books I did read is probably related to why I failed: I wasn’t keeping exact track. Another disappointment from ZB town is that I did not blog about the vast majority of the books I read. I don’t know why; I probably rationalized it as something like, “they only generated one or two new interesting insights and I don’t feel that the ideas are polished enough ideas as to be construed blog-worthy”. I definitely regret this, because most of the ideas I express in this blog aren’t particularly polished anyway. Hopefully one day a publisher will pay me to go through my previous entries and refine/reframe them into something book-worthy…

Anyway, I have finally finished Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes. It kicked lots of ass and has borne some awesome paradigm shifts that readers of this blog are going to find particularly interesting.

Thanks for your continued readership and participation.

Zachary Burt