[i_like_apis]

I’m reminded of one of my favorite sayings:

You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.

You may want to ignore that this this comes from Donald Rumsfeld (he has some great ones though: “unknown unknowns …”, etc.)

I think about this a lot when working on teams. Everyone is not perfectly agreeable or has the same understanding or collective goals. Some may be suboptimal or prone to doing things you don’t prefer. But having a team is better than no team, so find the best way to accomplish goals with the one you have.

It applies to systems well too.

[roughly]

Rumsfeld's got some great quotes, most of which were delivered in the context of explaining how the Iraq war turned into such a clusterfuck, and boy could that whole situation have used the kind of leadership Donald Rumsfeld's quotes would lead you to believe the man could've provided.

[rovolo]

JFYI, the "Unknown Unknowns" quote is from before the invasion (2002-02-12). It was deflection on whether there was evidence of Iraq building WMDs or of cooperating with e.g Al Qaeda.

> Q: Could I follow up, Mr. Secretary, on what you just said, please? In regard to Iraq weapons of mass destruction and terrorists, is there any evidence to indicate that Iraq has attempted to or is willing to supply terrorists with weapons of mass destruction? Because there are reports that there is no evidence of a direct link between Baghdad and some of these terrorist organizations.

> Rumsfeld: Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

> And so people who have the omniscience that they can say with high certainty that something has not happened or is not being tried, have capabilities that are ...

https://archive.ph/20180320091111/http://archive.defense.gov...

[marcosdumay]

If I remember it correctly (it was a long time ago), he never fully supported the war. It didn't take a genius to notice that the goals set by the presidency were (literally) impossible and not the kind of thing you do achieve a war.

But whatever position he had, Iraq turning into a clusterfuck wasn't a sign of bad leadership by his part. It was a sign of bad ethics, but not leadership. His options were all of getting out of his position, disobeying the people above him, or leading the US into a clusterfuck.

[dragonwriter]

> Rumsfeld's got some great quotes, most of which were delivered in the context of explaining how the Iraq war turned into such a clusterfuck

If by “explaining how” you mean “deflecting (often preemptively) responsibility for”, yes.

[xapata]

> could've

If someone is 83.7% likely to provide good leadership, how would you evaluate the choice to hire that person as a leader in the hindsight that the person failed to provide good leadership -- was it a bad choice, or was it a good choice that was unlucky?

(Likelihood was selected arbitrarily.)

[moffkalast]

Could've at least given them some motivational quotes.

[hluska]

I like to remind myself that very few people reach positions of great power after mediocre lives. Rather there’s a thread of talent that runs through government.

Once they’re in, the predilections that led to power often rear their dark long tails. But they’re all (even the ones I disagree with) talented.

[oDot]

Every time I hear the name Rumsfeld, I am reminded of the time when, for over 10 minutes, he refused to deny being a lizard:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH_34tqxAjA

[i_like_apis]

Haha. Thanks for sharing that. Rumsfeld definitely has a sense of humor.

He’s also one of the best candidates for that type of conspiracy theory. His career history is flabbergasting.

Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld#Corporate_conn...

In addition to all the Bohemian Club, RAND corp, defense and government posts, in the 70s the guy was a CEO in the pharmaceuticals and electronics industries, was a director in aerospace, media and tech.

Definitely the type of resume that lets the imagination run wild with, “… wait, was he a lizard person …?”

[fuzztester]

"No battle plan survives contact with the enemy."

https://www.google.com/search?q=no+battle+plan+survives

[fuzztester]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_von_Moltke_the_Elder

Moltke's thesis was that military strategy had to be understood as a system of options, since it was possible to plan only the beginning of a military operation. As a result, he considered the main task of military leaders to consist in the extensive preparation of all possible outcomes.[3] His thesis can be summed up by two statements, one famous and one less so, translated into English as "No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy's main strength" (or "no plan survives contact with the enemy") and "Strategy is a system of expedients".[18][8] Right before the Austro-Prussian War, Moltke was promoted to General of the Infantry.[8]

[sbuk]

Mike Tyson said it more simply: "Everybody has a plan until you get hit in the face."

[tedunangst]

Mattis "the enemy gets a vote" is another good reminder of reality, although people get very angry about it. Useful in terms of security, privacy, DRM, etc.

[roughly]

I work in an area with particularly clever and motivated users, and this quote pops to mind now and again when I learn about some of the hacks they’re using to get around some of the more optimistically designed systems they’ve been provided.

[walterbell]

Product management outside the box.

[Buttons840]

I like a similar quote from Steven Pressfield:

“The athlete knows the day will never come when he wakes up pain-free. He has to play hurt.”

This applies to ourselves more than our systems though.

[brookst]

I think it’s as applicable to systems. They are all imperfect, they all have flaws and broken parts that need fixing. And we have to use them.

[sainez]

Great point about working on teams. For the vast majority of tasks, people are only marginally better or worse than each other. A few people with decent communication will outpace a "star" any day of the week.

I try to remind myself of this fact when I'm frustrated with other people. A bit of humility and gratitude go a long way.

[prmph]

Hmmmm, I really don't think this is true all (or even most of) the time. It probably depends on the task at hand, but if leading small teams of all kinds has taught me anything, it's that I'd prefer a tiny team (or even one person) who is at least above average competence, and is reflective of the work they are doing, than several people of average or below-average competence.

It's eye opening how many people are outright lazy with thought, don't care about the joy of doing something well (apart from whatever extrinsic rewards are attached to the work). Many team members can actually produce negative value.

It seems that people who are really capable of (or care about) conscientious, original thought in problem solving and driving projects forward are few. Count yourself lucky if you get to manage one of these people, they can produce incredible value when well directed.

[eru]

> Great point about working on teams. For the vast majority of tasks, people are only marginally better or worse than each other. A few people with decent communication will outpace a "star" any day of the week.

Depends on what you are working on. Btw, good communication can also make someone a 'star' and elevate the whole team.

> I try to remind myself of this fact when I'm frustrated with other people. A bit of humility and gratitude go a long way.

That's good advice for most situations.

[bmurphy1976]

I think about this whenever a product lead talks about planning something, dumping it on the dev team, and saying it's the dev team's responsibility to figure out how to implement it. No wonder the part of the company that does this has a very contentious relationship with their product team and is overly oriented around metrics, having to constantly fight for resources and prove they don't have the bandwidth to take on projects.

Meanwhile our side of the org has a much more collaborative relationship with our product team. We have our issues for sure, but our relationships are sound. The feedback loop is tight and product pushes back on things as much as the dev team does. Product works with the dev team to figure out what we can do and stays with us to the end. There's much less tossing things over the fence and everybody seems happier.

[yardie]

I’m not sure who came up with it first but the nautical expression is, “you sail with the crew you have”

[i_like_apis]

Yeah I should have left the Rumsfeld part out because the conversation naturally got distracted. It isn’t accurate to attribute it to him. His was perhaps the most prominent recent version , but he was definitely paraphrasing an existing adage.

[makeitdouble]

I'm thinking about this quote for a while but have a hard time squeezing the meaning, or really the actionable part out of it.

The unknown unknowns quote brings the concept that however confident you are in a plan you absolutely need margin. The other quote thought...what do you do differently when understanding that your team is not perfect ?

On one side, outside of VC backed startups I don't see companies trying to reinvent linux whith a team of 4 new graduates. On the other side companies with really big goals will hire a bunch until they feel comfortable with their talent before "going to war". You'll see recruiting posts seeking specialists in a field before a company bets the farm on that specific field (imagine Facebook renaming itself to Meta before owning Oculus...nobody does that[0])

Edit: sorry, I forgot some guy actually just did that 2 weeks ago with a major social platform. And I kinda wanted to forget about it I think.

[coldtea]

This however is a retelling of centuries old proverbs and quotes (all the way to Roosevel's "do what you can, with what you have, where you are"), and "unknown unknowns" was a concept already familiar in epistemology, but also fields like systems theory, risk management, etc.

[bachmeier]

That's the right attitude for an employee. If management says something like that, look for a new job. It's not sustainable to compete with fewer resources than your opposition. There's a reason college sports is going through a passionate realignment right now.

[nostrademons]

The way to win with fewer resources than your competition is to convince them it's not a competition. Or even better, to not let them know you exist.

[batch12]

Sounds like he may have been a Shania Twain fan - "Dance with the One That Brought You" is the similar phrase I've heard

[dizhn]

Let's go back to the 70s.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_the_One_You%27re_With

[KnobbleMcKnees]

That was Donald Rumsfeld!? I always assumed this came from some techie or agile guru given how much it's used as a concept in project planning.

[killjoywashere]

As a military officer who was watching CNN live from inside an aircraft carrier (moored) when he said that, being in charge of anti-terrorism on the ship at the time, it was absolutely foundational to my approach to so many things after that. Here's the actual footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REWeBzGuzCc

Rumsfeld was complicated, but there's no doubt he was very effective at leading the Department. I think most people fail to realize how sophisticated the Office of the Secretary of Defense is. Their resources reel the mind, most of all the human capital, many with PhDs, many very savvy political operators with stunning operational experiences. As a small example, as I recall, Google's hallowed SRE system was developed by an engineer who had come up through the ranks of Navy nuclear power. That's but one small component reporting into OSD.

Not a Rumsfeld apologist, by any means. Errol Morris did a good job showing the man for who he is, and it's not pretty (1). But reading HN comments opining about the leadership qualities of a Navy fighter pilot who was both the youngest and oldest SECDEF makes me realize how the Internet lets people indulge in a Dunning-Kruger situation the likes of which humanity has never seen.

https://www.amazon.com/Known-Donald-Rumsfeld/dp/B00JGMJ914

[twelvechairs]

It's from a post WWII psychological theory the 'Johari Window'. Rumsfeld brought the phrase into wider consciousness.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johari_window

[a_seattle_ian]

That it came from Donald Rumsfeld in the context of what we know now and what he surely knew then is why it's such a good quote. The words basically say nothing but are also true about everything. So it can implicit be a warning that there is probably some bullshit going on or someone has a sense of humor and is also warning people while also avoiding the subject - of course just my opinion. How people actually use it will depend what the audience agrees it to mean.

[midasuni]

And unknown unknowns is a great way to communicate with stakeholders too