english hacking.com

Fastcompany reports:

At the time, Dorsey was employed by Odeo, a podcasting company where Evan Williams was an investor and founder. For those who don’t know, Williams was the inventor of not only the term “blogger” but also was the founder of the weblog authoring web applications of the same name. It would eventually sell to Google and the proceeds of that deal would lay the foundation for Twitter. Unlike the success Williams found at Blogger, Odeo was on a path toward uncertainty. The team sought the next big thing and during what is now considered a revolutionary series of deep company soul searching, Jack presented his concept for “my.stat.us.” The idea was to text message what you were doing and have a group of friends follow along. What was once a system for tracking ambulances and taxis would now set the stage for creating a dispatch service that connected people through their phones and text messaging.
Odeo embraced Jack’s idea and dedicated staff and resources to developing version 0.1. My.stat.us eventually was code-named twttr, inspired by the Yahoo-owned social photo network Flickr as well as the fact that American shortcodes are five characters long. Eventually named Twitter, the micro-blog as it was originally referred to, would combine mobile and web services, and limit communications between its users to 140 characters with each message. Jack found that the constraint of 140 characters was actually easier to approach and thus reducing the barriers to entry. Messages evolved into “tweets” and suddenly, everyone with a phone or computer represented a potentially new connection. (Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey and the ideas that sparked a revolution)

Jack Dorsey is an interesting guy, I can say that for sure…

스티브 잡스를 표현할 때(다른 경우에도 사용되겠지만) 가장 많이 사용되는 말이 바로 RDA, 즉 “reality distortion field” 또는 현실왜곡장일 것이다. 1981년 맥 컴퓨터를 만드는 프로젝트와 관련하여 Budd Tribble이 맨 처음 사용했다고 하고, 그는 또 이 말을 스타 트랙에서 빌어 왔다고 말한다. (Wikipedia on RDF)

Bud usually didn’t come into work until after lunch, so I met with him for the first time the following Monday afternoon. We started talking about all the work that had to be done, which was pretty overwhelming. He showed me the official schedule for developing the software that had us shipping in about ten months, in early January 1982.
“Bud, that’s crazy!”, I told him. “We’ve hardly even started yet. There’s no way we can get it done by then.”
“I know,” he responded, in a low voice, almost a whisper.
“You know? If you know the schedule is off-base, why don’t you correct it?”
“Well, it’s Steve. Steve insists that we’re shipping in early 1982, and won’t accept answers to the contrary. The best way to describe the situation is a term from Star Trek. Steve has a reality distortion field.”
“A what?”
“A reality distortion field. In his presence, reality is malleable. He can convince anyone of practically anything. It wears off when he’s not around, but it makes it hard to have realistic schedules. And there’s a couple of other things you should know about working with Steve.”
“What else?”
“Well, just because he tells you that something is awful or great, it doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll feel that way tomorrow. You have to low-pass filter his input. And then, he’s really funny about ideas. If you tell him a new idea, he’ll usually tell you that he thinks it’s stupid. But then, if he actually likes it, exactly one week later, he’ll come back to you and propose your idea to you, as if he thought of it.” (Folklore on reality distortion field)

스티브 잡스를 가장 잘 표현하는 말이라는 점에 나도 절대 동감이다.

경제학 — 어쩌면 모든 학문 — 에서 가장 많이 쓰이는 말이 바로 이 말일 것이다. 이 말은 “다른 모든 조건이 동일하다면(all other things being equal or held constant)“라는 뜻이다. 물론, 현실에 그런 일은 없다. 그렇지만, 현실이 시험에 나오는 일도 없다. 또, 논쟁의 대상이 현실이 되는 경우도 거의 없다. 다만, 그렇게 보일 뿐이다. 프란시스 베이컨은 이렇게 말했다(고 알려져 있다. 그냥 도시의 전설이라는 이야기도 있다).

In the year of our Lord 1432, there arose a grievous quarrel among the brethren over the number of teeth in the mouth of a horse. For thirteen days the disputation raged without ceasing. All the ancient books and chronicles were fetched out, and wonderful and ponderous erudition such as was never before heard of in this region was made manifest. At the beginning of the fourteenth day, a youthful friar of goodly bearing asked his learned superiors for permission to add a word, and straightway, to the wonderment of the disputants, whose deep wisdom he sore vexed, he beseeched them to unbend in a manner coarse and unheard-of and to look in the open mouth of a horse and find answer to their questionings. At this, their dignity being grievously hurt, they waxed exceeding wroth; and, joining in a mighty uproar, they flew upon him and smote him, hip and thigh, and cast him out forthwith. For, said they, surely Satan hath tempted this bold neophyte to declare unholy and unheard-of ways of finding truth, contrary to all the teachings of the fathers. After many days more of grievous strife, the dove of peace sat on the assembly, and they as one man declaring the problem to be an everlasting mystery because of a grievous dearth of historical and theological evidence thereof, so ordered the same writ down.
—Francis Bacon, 1592. (Horse’s Teeth)

그건 그렇다 치고, 이 말, ceteris paribus가 경제학에서 갖는 의미에 대하여 알프레드 마샬은 이렇게 말했다.

The element of time is a chief cause of those difficulties in economic investigations which make it necessary for man with his limited powers to go step by step; breaking up a complex question, studying one bit at a time, and at last combining his partial solutions into a more or less complete solution of the whole riddle. In breaking it up, he segregates those disturbing causes, whose wanderings happen to be inconvenient, for the time in a pound called Ceteris Paribus. The study of some group of tendencies is isolated by the assumption other things being equal: the existence of other tendencies is not denied, but their disturbing effect is neglected for a time. The more the issue is thus narrowed, the more exactly can it be handled: but also the less closely does it correspond to real life. Each exact and firm handling of a narrow issue, however, helps towards treating broader issues, in which that narrow issue is contained, more exactly than would otherwise have been possible. With each step more things can be let out of the pound; exact discussions can be made less abstract, realistic discussions can be made less inexact than was possible at an earlier stage. (Principles of Economics, Bk.V,Ch.V in paragraph V.V.10). (Wikipedia on ceteris paribus)

한글로는 물론, “다른 모든 조건이 동일하다면“이라고 번역하겠지만, 그냥 발음 대로(!) “세테리스 파리부스“라고 쓰는 경우가 더 많은 것 같다.

“trickle down effect“는 보통 “낙수효과“라고 번역한다(물이 아래로 떨어져 흐르는 것과 같다는 정도 의미를 담아서). “trickle-down theory” 또는 “trickle-down economics“는 달리 어찌해야 할 지 몰라서 그냥 “트리클다운 이론” 내지는 “트리클다운 경제학“이라고 한다. “통화침투이론“이라고 좀 있어 보이게 표현하기도 한다. (옆의 그림은 The Failure of Trickle-Down Economics 에서)

According to this theory, when government policies favor the wealthy — for example, via tax cuts for upper-income classes — the increase in wealth flows down to those with lower incomes. That’s because the rich are more likely to spend the additional income, creating more economic activity, which in turn generates jobs and eventually, better paychecks for the less well-off. (Trickle-Down Economics Fails to Deliver as Promised )

이 말은 대공황 당시 코미디언 윌 로저스가 한 다음과 같은 말에서 유래하였다고 한다. ““Money was all appropriated for the top in hopes that it would trickle down to the needy.” (Wikipedia Trickle-down Economics )

관련된 (마찬가지로 번역이 까다로운) 말에는 레이거노믹스(Reaganomics) 및 공급중시 경제학(Supply-side Economics) 등과 같은 말이 있다.

이 주장에 대하여 Jared Bernstein은 이렇게 반박한다.

What is trickle-down? It’s the set of economic policies based on the notion that if you provide economic incentives to the wealthy by cutting their taxes (or, as the supply-siders put it, “letting us keep our money”) while deregulating industry, you’ll unleash a tsunami of economic activities that will enrich even the least advantaged among us.
The theory doesn’t make sense even on its face. Why would people work harder only if you cut their taxes? After all, their after-tax income goes up, so they might decide they can work less and still be as well off. Or, if you raise their taxes, they might decide to work harder to make up the after-tax losses.
No matter…this stuff is not based on logic. It’s largely a rationale for upward redistribution that’s been kept alive by the vested interests who benefit from it. Reagan put this stuff on the map, but GW Bush brought it back with a vengeance, and McCain goes even further. He extends the supply-side Bush tax cuts, and lards on about $75 billion more in corporate tax cuts on top of that. (Trickle Down … R.I.P )

What do you want to do next?

• Modify or even delete this article? The article list is the place to start.
• Change this site’s name, or modify the style of the URLs? It’s all up to your preferences.
• Get yourself acquainted with Textile, the humane web text generator which comes with Textpattern? The basics are simple. If you want to learn more about Textile, you can dig into an extensive manual later.
• Be guided through your Textpattern first steps by completing some basic tasks?
• Study the Textpattern Semantic Model?
• Add another user, or extend the capabilities with third party plugins you discovered from the central plugin directory at Textpattern Resources?
• Dive in and learn by trial and error? Then please note:
  • When you write an article you assign it to a section of your site.
  • Sections use a page template and a style as an output scaffold.
  • Page templates use XHTML and Textpattern tags (like this: <txp:article />) to build the markup.
  • Some Textpattern tags use forms, which are building blocks for reusable snippets of code and markup you may build and use at your discretion.

There are a host of Frequently Asked Questions to help you get started.

Textpattern tags, their attributes and values are as well explained as sampled at the Textbook Wiki, where you will also find valuable tips and tutorials.

If all else fails, there’s a whole crowd of friendly, helpful people over at the Textpattern support forum. Come and pay a visit!