Postings tagged with 'Work', listed in descending order by creation date. Last Postings shown.
I have now been playing on the pentesting platform hackthebox for more than a year. I have been in IT security / infosec for a very long time,
but I was very late to the offensive party. It still amazes me why that is. Some random thoughts!
I was not really aware of the exact terminology regarding blue and red teams etc. The Public Key Infrastructures I have built are maintained
by the 'networking' or 'server' or 'Active Directory' teams, so I had always considered 'security' to be one aspect of the work the architects
and network administrators have to do. Maybe I do not even count as 'infosec' - I am just the administrator of all things certificate-related.
I often sided rather with the people who had to maintain the 'security infrastructures' on a daily basis, rather than with consultants
(internal or external ones) who tell those administrators how to secure the infrastructure. People keeping infrastructure a the bottom layers of
the network afloat are hardly noticed - until something breaks. I had my share of WHO IS RESPONSIBLE THAT THIS WAS NOT WORKING FOR [a time
span very very small compared to the time the system was running well despite lots of changes].
In the book Advanced
Penetration Testing a seasoned expert states:
All that is needed for an attacker to gain entry to the most secure environments is for one person to have one lapse in judgment
one time. I keep driving this point home because it really is the point. As a penetration tester, I have the easy job. An attacker is always
at an advantage. I would hate to have the responsibility of keeping a network safe from attack; I'd never sleep.
I think as a security consultant - red or blue, consultant as opposed to sysadmin / 'devops' - it is hard to fully acknowledge all the
conflicting requirements and constraints you have to meet when you need to keep things running. I suspect I also helped implementing dumb and
insecure things at times, because they were the best trade-off at that time.
Often I found myself pondering on 'opposites', as red versus blue, consulting versus doing, projects versus operations. Should I lecture and
comment rather and implement and do? Is commenting and consulting just fence-sitting without skin in the game? I finally decided for more
involvement in keeping things running. Actually, I once became a consultant because I feel so terribly responsible for systems and infrastructures
also as an external consultant (usually without a long-term formal contract) who is touching that infrastructure once every few months. But
every time I was officially responsible for systems it was hardly bearable and moved me nearly over the edge into burnout - I better erect
that 'external consulting barrier' to keep me somewhat detached.
I also don' t want to say that offensive roles are 'easier' - far from this! I do not have real-live experience with pentesting, but I imagine
it as consulting on steroids: Travelling a lot, chaotic deadlines, all the non-glorious aspects of consulting in general, politics,... Exactly
the aspects that made me abandon the nomadic consulting life-style, by the way.
Following infosec experts on Twitter I notice that there is an old debate popping up from time to time: Should 'infosec' be an entry level role,
so should you e.g. go straight into security after college, or should you have an experience in other IT and software roles before - as a
programmer, system architect, or network administrator? Given my own path I should be in the latter camp, I guess. But on the other hand, again
given my own path, I can imagine that you can absolutely become a security expert with dedication and without having spent grueling years, say,
fixing clients' my-Outlook-does-not-work issues.
I changed my careers a few times, but I can as well present these transitions as a gradual, logical evolution. I had been a newcomer often,
and I people were asking me: How long have you been doing this? It was meant as a compliment, and I avoided to reply with the truth, like:
a few months only. When clients considered me a 'PKI guru' I often said that I firmly believe that a student with enough dedication can
become that exact type of guru in a year, too.
My blog was originally called Theory and Practice of Trying to Combine Just Anything. I had things like 'Physics and IT' in mind, or 'I had
also considered to study philosophy and want to be some sort of renaissance person'. Maybe this is how I have approached security, too: I wanted
/ want to combine all kinds of experiences. It has been my choice, my path, not necessarily the expression of some career advice that would apply
to anybody. Playing at hackthebox always shows me how much I do not know - about IT technologies and pentesting methods and tools. Only very
rarely, I can contribute something original, based on something I really know something about - like in the case of my
PKI / smartcard hack.
I feel very much that I am dilettante - in a positive sense of what the word actually means.
I have had a section called Philosophy on my very first website, and I have maintained a page called Principles or Our Approach ever since. It sounds as if those principles had been decreed at one point in time. As if aliens from outer space had dictated them.
However, I could simply say this: Since decades I play with technology, science, engineering, IT and everything in between. I worked in different industries. Each of them had good and bad aspects - regarding the actual subject matter and re the way of working. My main goal and hidden agenda was to every evolve but keep the good and interesting aspects of each of them. I could spin a story about how everything fits into a grand and big picture, and it is not even wrong.
But it's a good exercise to look at everything as disjointed pieces. At some point in your life that stories should speak for themselves. I am running my own business now for a long time; I don't have to explain and justify how everything fits together - as if it was part of a great plan.
In no particular order, and without aiming at completeness...
Like the Cobol mavericks at the turn the last millennium, I support legacy Windows Public Key Infrastructures. I have migrated them over and over and over. I don't pretend I know all the latest buzz words but it seems I can catch up quickly and connect the dots.
I am herding all the software tools related to sizing heat pump systems, related numerical simulations, and data analysis - the so-called Data Kraken. I could call myself a software developer - I use languages from VBA to C++, and I use pointers and recursion now and then. But I don't mind if somebody insists this on this being 'just scripting'.
I have been doing down-to-earth IT system administration for one small business - my second ever customer, loyal since more than two decades.
I get Ask-me-anything questions related to How Stuff Works and If That Stuff is Secure or If That Stuff Can Work at All. For some of that advice people even want to pay.
If you ask what real physics I actually use, I'd say Heat Conduction. Accidentally (?) it was one my specialties at the university, a long time ago.
I work mainly remote. It's more efficient, it's cheaper for clients, I don't have to travel, everybody is more focused. I don't do political projects (anymore).
I enjoy to find the pragmatic middle ground. I don't take as gospel: Software design patterns, methodologies, engineering standards, compliance guidelines, best practices, 'what everybody says', 'what everybody does just to be on the safe side'.
Taking stock of what I had done so far, I found that two things were part of all my endeavors: Teaching/training and software development. I have also been a student in parallel, most of the time. After I gave an academic lecture about PKI for a few years, I ditched formal teaching, and having completed another master's degree I also stopped collecting degrees and certificates.
Since a while I am catching up on computer science basics in self-study mode, and this year I have discovered the joys of pen-testing.
Recently I've changed my story at some social profiles again - to this:
Specializing in: Control systems, software development for measurement data analysis, IT security,
troubleshooting and reverse engineering systems with physical (hydraulic) and software (control) components.
I am running a small engineering consultancy together with my husband. We are both physicists, and we focus on designing,
programming, and troubleshooting control systems for heating / solar systems, especially heat pump systems with a combination
of uncommon heat sources and custom control. For more than 10 years I have implemented, reviewed, and
troubleshooted public key infrastructures, and I still do this for some long-term clients.
I am blogging about this and about related science and engineering topics at
In contrast to this blog, this site here is more of an extended profile /
About Me page. It is my hand-crafted whoami machine.
I think about my exploration of layers of software. tl;dr: I am gradually
moving down / back to the lower levels of software, the ones closer to hardware,
electronics, control, field bus systems etc.
I've started out learning about micro-controllers in electronics class as a physics student. Then I programmed sensors and actuators
for measuring the low-temperature electrical properties of superconductors as a
staff scientist at the university (in Turbo Pascal). Yet I jumped up to the top of the software
stack and switched to Microsoft scripting languages: VBA, VBScript, ASP when I
went 'from research to IT'. Even the first version of my numerical simulation
for our heat pump system was an Excel spreadsheet, then a VBA application using
It seems I needed to trade 'IT' again officially for 'renewable energies' to
be motivated to move down the stack again. When I was a non-traditional
'post-graduate' student in in energy engineering I was
always been the 'Excel programmer' in group projects. Buth then I went down rabbit holes:
Learning SQL Server and Transact-SQL for analyzing our measurement data.
Re-writing the simulation software, now based on Visual Basic .NET, for the
first time using a true object-oriented design. To get ready for this, I had
re-written this website from scratch in .NET before. My so-called Data Kraken
uses a combination of Powershell and SQL scripts today.
I finally learned to utilize all my processors in my simulation, and I fixed lots of
performance issues. I read Joel on Software cover to cover to re-live the period
I 'was in IT' and to catch up on fundamentals. He pointed me to Structure and
Interpretation of Computer Programs which I consider the single best ever
lecture / course I've ever 'attended'. It is both so deep and philosophical, and
at the same time so useful: My simulations became faster by a large factor.
And all the time, I did reverse engineering and debugging. I think I have
done this ever since, but always at the level I understood software at the
time. Of all the tasks I had as an IT Security / Public Key Infrastructure
consultant, troubleshooting weird issues with X.509 certificates was maybe the
best one: Digging deep into network traces, reading up on RFCs. Every time I was
theoretically only a user of software and services, I ended up debugging in
detail - like using Wireshark to track down a weird compatibility issue between
my e-mail client and a mail server, when just trying to sign my invocies via a
digital signature solution using SMTP.
finally learned C and C++, and I read about Assembly and the art of reverse
engineering and malware analysis - to really appreciate the final chapters of
SICP, about the self-referential wonders of compilers and interpreters.
Trying to visualize the stack and what happens to the registers, I picked up
a very old book - the one I used decades ago in my electronics class - and I
jumped into the chapter about micro-controllers. And then it hit me: Those
fundamentals, they have not changed much. Yes, different processors have
different instruction sets and you might have 8bit, 16bit, or 32bit. But the
explanation about the stack, and how to return from a function - this has always
been an eternal truth since that electronics book and SICP had been released.
All falls into place: Understanding C is really the pre-requisite for
understanding field bus communications, and that is what control units use.
Debugging skills are essential when dealing with abandoned engineering software
from the stone age.
So I finally found the most logical connection between physics and IT, the
place to be as a physicist in IT or in engineering or whatever.
Onword to Python!
I did not have ambitions 2017. It should have been a year of taking stock -
and it was, in a good way.
time-travelled and re-lived some history of software engineering, and
finally learned basics of computer science. This was philosophical delight,
but also useful and necessary: I was able to boost the performance of my
simulations (above a level of what was, maybe, embarrassingly slow).
- I tinkered a lot with
numerical simulations of our heat pump system. Main thing I learned: The
more modern the building, the more you'd need to simulate humans' behavior,
rather than physics or control logic.
- Reverse engineering and troubleshooting is what finally connects all the
fields of science and engineering I love: Troubleshooting, ferreting out
hidden causes and effects in hydraulics feel the same as
sniffing and debugging software and networking protocols.
- Theoretical physics reading: I returned to classical thermodynamics and
statistical mechanics; I find it fascinating and beautiful in its own
right, even if only at the pre-1960s level. I took stock of my
writing on heat transport - and I am happy I can actually really use
physics on a daily basis, in down-to-earth engineering projects.
- I was thinking about automation, standardization, and big social media
platforms. I struggled with this blog post about the
future of small business for a long time, but optimism won. I might
frame this even more positively today: There is a place for artisanal
service delivery despite or because of Everything Being Offered As A Service
by Omniscient Data Krakens.
- My blog turned 5 in spring, and I allowed myself to
return to a more philosophical blogging style (briefly). Otherwise, I
finally and subconsciously made the elkement.blog my main resources of
technical content - or at least content related to my professional domain,
and content edited for clarity and entertainment. Whereas on
elkement.subversiv.at I let my stream of consciousness flow. It seems that
the pattern that finally emerges is: elkement.blog = elkement's tech /
science magazine and platform for personal research news, with an ever
growing focus on fields I have training in and daily practical exposure to.
elkement.subversiv.at gravitates against the same focus, but I allow myself
to focus on my personal perspective only. So here you find 'what I am doing
with [insert: heat pumps, security,...]', over there you find the useful
content as such.
- Tomato harvest was great. I tried to grow late varieties - like Ox Heart
- directly outside, and it worked.
- Dinosaur Kale tastes good. And it is able to recover from a at attack of
a bug that targets kale (and radishes' seed capsules). Don't try to keep
seeds of radishes in the land of canola.
This website is an old-school non-interactive site. My blog technically
isn't, but looks like one now, for the lack of visible comments. However,
messages have reached over covert 1:1 channels, so I do now that there is a
small but sincerely interested group of readers. I thank you all for reading my
Many years ago, The Web – which has its own category on my website here –
was an experimental playground for me. You might have guessed so, just
checking out the URL of this post.
Technologies and protocols once used for displaying static websites have
been repurposed, and HTTP(s) became the so-called Universal Firewall Bypass
protocol. We synchronize files with Dropbox or offline-cache or mailboxes.
Applications like Teamviewer or the signals from our Things (as in Internet
Of Things) poke controlled holes into our firewalls so that they are
somewhat accessible from the outside.
I have written about all of that at length elsewhere – about the
insecurity of the Internet of Things and about
Data Krakens dominating small businesses. I have had mixed feelings
about the evolution of The Web. But there is one absolutely positive
outcome: That HTTP(s) (mis-)use connection magic enables me to work in a way
I would have never envisaged 25 years ago – at the time when my most
important ‘files’ were still contained in physical folders.
I am able to work nearly remote-only, not only in IT projects. About 10
years ago I was a consultant in information security. We worked from ‘home
office’, too, although company culture often dictated that there had to be
meetings in real life. Today, I still support some long-term IT security
clients, but mainly via remote and/or asynchronous channels. When we started
our experimental heat pump side-business several years ago, my standard joke
was: Someday we will work in heat pump projects the way we work in IT
projects. And the joke became true – it actually became the default way of
working, even for clients that are within geographical reach, like a 50-70km
This list on our website explains the steps / stages of such a project –
but it’s hard to convey the spirit of a remote project properly. It sounds
way too serious. On our German blog we feature
verbatim hilarious quotes of a client / ice storage heat pump system
self-builder – translation could never do it justice.
Working remotely seems to be about technology: We need to have the tools
we have today to communicate, exchange information, to monitor and manage
systems over the internet. But it is more about culture. In IT, such tools
have already been available for a long time, yet some corporations insisted
on ‘face showing rituals’. Notably, during the economic crisis of 2008/2009
many companies worked hard to keep travel costs low and resorted to working
remotely – and later never reverted to face showing mode.
Successful remote communication is based on the skill of asynchronous
communications, e.g. on processing more than the first three lines of an
e-mail, but replying thoughtfully in nested threads. My anecdotal evidence
tells me that our typical heat pump clients have that skill – tech-savvy
geeks whose day jobs are usually tech- / IT- / engineering-related .
You need to keep politics out. As soon as that infamous ‘non-verbal
clues’ become important, remote channels might be too narrow. However, I
wonder if politics can ever be tamed properly even with heavy face showing.
My pragmatic solution is to focus on simple ‘structures of command’ – work
with one single accountable client who is in charge for his/her project and
has skin in the game. Only if you need to intermediate between ‘team
members’ and listen to ‘different sides’ you get into troubles. I have my
share of experiences – like: Clandestine meetings in which project member X
told me they considered to revolut against project manager Y – depending on
my honest opinion of Y.
Many hands-on engineering tasks are gradually being supported by remote
IT tools. I am not a first adopter of such technology – like augmented
reality glasses for engineers in power plants. My icon is an angry dinosaur
for a reason. But even I say, half-jokingly, that someday people might 3D
print our heat exchanger tubes and PVC supporting constructions, instead of
working with our traditional design documents and plans.
So at the end of 2017, I embrace The Web again and my outlook is
positive. It’s like returning to the old days – when
The Cluetrain Manifesto told us that The Internet will kill TV-like ads and
foster communications between human beings – also in business. That may
sound irrational, given the ominous power of online tracking, all for the
sake of advertizing. But anyway: The positive spirit of
remote working pioneers, like Automattic (wordpress.com) is what defines
The Web for me!
I will try to explore my relationship with IT / software / computers / computer science / software engineering or whatever the best term is to describe it. I am in a mode of looking back with content, and making small changes, learning a bit more.
As often, thinking in 'opposites' comes most natural to me:
Self-study versus formal education. The IT and software industry is young and - I believe - had originally been populated by people without a formal training in computer science as this did not yet exist as an academic discipline. The community was open to outsiders with no formal training or unrelated experience. As a former colleague with a psychology background put it: In the old times, anybody who knew how to hold a computer mouse correctly, was suddenly considered an expert.
I absorbed the hacker ethics of demonstrating your skills rather than showing off papers, and I am grateful about the surprisingly easy start I had in the late 1990s. I just put up a sign in a sense, saying Will Do Computers, and people put trust in me.
I am not 'against' formal education though. Today I enjoy catching up on computer science basics by reading classics like Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs.
Breaking versus building things. I have been accountable for 'systems' for a long time, and I have built stuff that lasted for longer than I expected. Sometimes I feel like a COBOL programmer in the year of 2000.
But I believe what interested me most is always to find out how stuff works - which also involves breaking things. Debugging. Reverse Engineering. Troubleshooting. All this had always been useful when building things, especially when building on top of or interfacing with existing things - often semi-abandoned blackboxes. This reverse engineering mentality is what provided the connection between physics and IT for me in the first place.
It was neither the mathematical underpinnings of physics and computer science, or my alleged training in programming - I had one class Programming for physicists, using FORTRAN. It was the way an experimental physicist watches and debugs a system 'of nature', like: the growth of thin films in a vacuum chamber, from a plasma cloud generated by evaporating a ceramic target bombarded with laser pulses. Which parameter to change to find out what is the root cause or what triggers a system to change its state? How to minimize the steps to trace out the parameter space most efficiently?
Good-enough approach versus perfectionism. 80/20 or maybe 99/1. You never know or need to know anything. I remember the first time I troubleshooted a client's computer problem. I solved it. Despite knowing any details of what was going on. I am sort of embarrassed by my ignorance and proud at the same time when I look back.
In moment like this I felt the contrast between the hands-on / good-enough approach and the perfectionism I applied in my pervious (academic) life. I remember the endless cycles of refinement of academic papers. Prefixing a sentence with Tentatively, we assume,... just to be sure and not too pretentious though I was working in a narrow niche as a specialist.
But then - as a computer consultant - I simply focused on solving a client's problem in a pragmatic way. I had to think on my feet, and find the most efficient way to rule out potential root causes - using whatever approach worked best: Digging deep into a system, clever googling, or asking a colleague in the community (The latter is only an option if you are able to give back someday).
Top-down, bottom-up, or starting somewhere in the middle. I was not a typical computer nerd as a student. I had no computer in high school except a programmable calculator - where you could see one line of a BASIC program at a time. I remember I had fun with implementating of the Simplex algorithm on that device.
However, I was rather a user of systems, until I inherited (parts of) an experimental setup for measuring electrical properties of samples cooled down by liquid nitrogen and helium. I had to append the existing patchwork of software by learning Turbo Pascal on the job.
Later, I moved to the top level of the ladder of abstraction by using *shock, horror* Visual Basic for Applications, ASP, and VBScript. In am only moving down to lower levels now, finally learning C++, getting closer to assembler and thus touching the interface between hardware and software. Which is perhaps where a one should be, as a physicist.
Green-field or renovation (refactoring). I hardly ever had the chance to or wanted to develop something really from scratch. Constraints and tough limiting requirements come with an allure of their own. This applies to anything - from software to building and construction.
So I enjoy systems' archaeology, including things I have originally created myself, but not touched in a while. Again the love for debugging complements the desire to build something.
From a professionals' point of view, this is a great and useful urge to have: Usually not many people enjoy fiddling with the old stuff, painstakingly researching and migrating it. It's the opposite of having a chance to implement the last shiny tool you learned about in school or in your inhouse presentation (if you work for a software vendor).
In awe of the philosophy of fundamentals versus mundane implementation. I blogged about it recently: Joel Spolsky recommended, tongue-in-cheek, to mention that
Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs brought you to tears - when applying for a job as a software developer.
But indeed: I have hardly attended a class or read a textbook that was at the same time so profoundly and philosophically compelling but also so useful for any programming job I was involved in right now.
Perhaps half of older internet writing reflects my craving for theses philosophical depths versus the hard truth of pragmatism that is required in a real job. At the university I had been offered to work on a project for optimizing something about fluid dynamics related to the manufacturing of plastic window frames. The Horror, after I had read Gödel, Escher, Bach and wanted to decode the universe and solve the most critical problems of humanity via science and technology.
I smile at that now, with hindsight. I found, in a very unspectacular way, that you get passionate about what you are good at and what you know in depth, not the other way round. I was able to possibly reconnect with some of my loftier aspirations, like I could say I Work In Renewable Energy. However, truth is that I simply enjoy the engineering and debugging challenge, and every mundane piece of code refverberates fundamental truths as the ones described in Gödel, Escher, Bach or Structure and Interpretation.
This website shall finally reconnect with its roots – radices.
With the dawn of the new millennium a self-proclaimed Subversive Element has registered a bunch of domains. It was especially fond of radices.net and subversiv.at. Today, all these sites have been re-united and redirected to elkement.subversiv.at. But the site does not deliver on its promising name – I feel it became way too 'professional' recently. Historical content has been filed mostly under Physics (radices) and Art (subversiv). The category life displays some of the matter-antimatter collisions of these two worlds. Which also explains the category of the current article.
The Subversive Site was a Red Padded Cell, with Font Color = White, a so-called creative playground. The Element was aware that 'everybody' could read this but it did not care. The Merger of the sites was inevitable in the end, after a final detour of professionalization – when radices.net suddenly also hosted pages with IT Security links.
I have been a blogger, and I observed the evolution of other blogs: My anecdotal evidence shows that blogs live for about 1-2 years. If they are bound to survive they have to escape the matrix and to overturn their creators. A personal blog or website needs a 'Big' Idea. OK, not really big, but at least a-all-encompassing and abstract enough so that all the authors different threads and lines of thoughts can be silently tied together using this idea's magic glue.
My elkement.blog is relentlessly edited. It was a more philosophical site once, but I aim at following our punktwissen principles now. Articles should be concise, provide value, and perhaps also entertainment. There should be s logical connection between posts and my curated lists should help readers to find something 'useful'.
On the contrary, this site has more or less the same article over and over again – perhaps in disguise and interlaced with technical notes. It is all about my personal keeping the essence of Physics alive and useful for me. Since radices was originally a German-only science and philosophy site, the English version might not reflect this – but in the early articles on elkemental Force (at that time: Theory and Practice of Trying to Combine Just Anything) I recaptured these ideas.
So I do finally accept this – let elkement.subversiv.at have its way. This is elkement's personal site, and its primary topic is How To Learn About Physics And Why This Might Be Useful Or Even Edifying In Very Different Ways.
- Learning physics means to start somewhere in the middle. That's why a first Introductions to Physics lecture is always hard (if the lecturer has some modest mathematical aspirations). You need to look at the same phenomena from different angles, and only after a while – and some work – everything will fall into place. This process and journey of learning is rewarding in itself.
- The more related to mathematical foundations (of physics) a question is, the less googleable the answer is. You can find anecdotes, and examples, science sound-bites for entertainment. Of course you find awesome lecture notes to learn the fundamentals from Feynman Lectures to Landau-Lifshitz – but you need to 'learn' them. In contrary to the mantra of You Just Need to Know Where to Find Something (like: Google for error messages) I believe that really knowing about fundamentals without googling helps a lot with problem solving: You can walk through how a system should work, just using the resources in your head.
- Mathematics purges the brain, and this does not only help with
mathematical problem solving. So I believe that the hackneyed
problem-solving skills of science graduates are real (albeit it is difficult
to assess the self-selecting nature of STEM degrees for people with natural
'analytical' skills). But the caveat it: Years of corporate work, powerpoint
slides, office politics, distractions, pressure to deliver ad hoc can erode
these skills. I have long-term tested different methods to keep physics
knowledge alive and usable - and
learned now that science might even provide some evidence, in a sense.
- I have been in 'cyber security' for a while and I have written lots of gloomy articles about our new smart world of automation and where everything (including heating systems) is turned into cloud-based services. Thoughts on all of this is still work in progress, I am working on internal consistency and unambiguity. I came into the world of IT as an experimental physicist, I was applying my training of troubleshooting complex 'analog systems' to digital systems. Despite the myth of crystal-clear 0s and 1s it was often better to treat them as blackboxes. I lacked the typical computer nerd's / enthusiast's background and started late – playing with Microsoft systems and Office VBA and the like.
In spite of this Treat-as-a-Blackbox approach I like to understand as much as possible about a system. Yes, I know you cannot understand, yet build, a power plant, from knowing how to solve Maxwell's Equations (yet understand or solve issues in cyber security related to such power plants). Nevertheless, if I have the choice to understand something at all, I'd pick Maxwell's Equations.
Since years I am using an (angry) dinosaur as my web and blog logo. The dinosaur is from another era, and sometimes it cannot deal with 'modern' concepts of our 'smart', 'networked' world. But perhaps, it was part of this world for a while in order to overcompensate.
Now the dinosaur is getting more and more confident that its typical dinosaur activities might be more productive and positive than it thought before.
On science and technology
- I believe there is often a simpler, a more low-tech solution to a problem technology is thrown on.
- I sometimes call myself a geek but I don't understand this 'geek' movement of cheering science and technology - without any desire to learn any of the details.
- I prefer to work on seemingly mundane problems that somebody really wants me to solve right now.
- This explains why I discarded inquiries to participate in and profit from governmentally funded research projects.
- Yet, I often find a universe of intriguing puzzles when mulling upon a 'simple' problem.
- Learning about theoretical physics has a mind purging effect: It helps, no matter if I ever need the math directly.
On business and life
- If a business relationship does not work without a written contract, it does also not work well with one.
- Don't follow any advice by strategists and experts, especially if their primary role is to act as consultants and not as doers.
- If somebody has an opinion on something, I judge them on Skin in the Game, hands-on experience, and education - in that order. I keep this in mind when voicing my own opinions.
- I don't pay for leads - I endorse other for free, and I am endorsed for free. Not necessarily on a 1:1 basis.
On the internet
- The greatest internet-powered innovation in the workplace I have encountered is to work remotely.
- I am grateful that I started writing online before there were Likes and Comments. The point of writing online is to hold yourself accountable because others could read this on principle, not because you need feedback.
- The internet sharing paradox: The more information you share for free, the more requests for free information you get. Learning to say No is a key skill.
- No matter how eclectic you think your combination of specialties is - you will find people on the internet featuring the same combination. Just better. It's humbling and this is a good thing.
Since 2012 I have published PKI status updates here, trying to answer the question 'Do you still do PKI?' (or IT). I have re-edited them often, and my responses were erratic - I was in a Schrödinger-cat-like superposition state of different professional identities.
Now and then I still get these questions. Can I answer it finally? I am still in a superposition state - I don't expect the wave-function to break down any time soon. I enjoy this state! But my answer to IT-related requests is most often no.
So yes, I am still 'working with IT' and 'with IT security' professionally. Not necessarily 'in IT'.
I am supporting a few long-term clients with their Windows PKI deployments and related X.509 certificate issues (after having done that for more than 10 years exclusively). Those clients that aren't scared off by my other activities, and clients I had always worked with informally and cordially.
But I don't have any strong ties with specific PKI software vendors anymore, and I don't know about latest bugs and issues. So I don't present myself as a Windows PKI consultant to prospects, and I decline especially requests by IT security partner companies who are looking for a consultant to pitch or staff their projects. I am also not interested in replying to Request for Proposals for PKI or identity management and 'offering a solution', competing with other consultants and especially with other companies that have full time stuff doing business development (I hardly did this in my PKI-only time). I am not developing software anymore that might turn into an 'enterprise solution'.
Today I am working 'with IT' more than 'in IT' in the sense that I returned where I came from, as an applied physicist who was initially drawn into IT, armed only with experience in programming software for controlling experimental setups and analyzing my data: I call myself the 'theoretical department' of our small engineering consultancy - I am developing software for handling Big Monitoring Data. I am also tinkering with measurement technology, like connecting a Raspberry Pi to a heat pump's internal CAN bus.
Security is important of course: I have fun with awkward certificates on embedded devices, I sniff and reverse engineer protocols, and I could say I am working with the things in the Internet of Things. But I am not doing large-scale device PKIs or advising the IT departments of major engineering companies: My clients are geeky home owners, and we (the two of us) are planning and implementing our special heat pump system for them. An important part of such projects is monitoring and control.
So every time I feel that somebody is searching for 'a PKI consultant' I am the wrong person. But if somebody stumbles upon my CV or hears my story at full length - and absolutely wants to hire me just because of the combination of this - I might say yes.
But it is no good rationalizing too much: Finally it is a matter of gut feeling; I am spoilt or damaged by our engineering business. Our heat pump clients typically find our blog first - which has been mistaken for a private fun blog by friends. Prospects are either 'deflected' by the blog (and we never hear from them), or they contact us because of the blog's weird style. Having the same sense of humor is the single best pre-requisite for a great collaboration.
So whenever I get any other project request, not mediated by a weird website, I try to apply the same reasoning. Years ago I a colleague I had not met before greeted me in the formal kick-off meeting, in front of all others, with: You are the Subversive Element, aren't you? (Alluding to my Alter Ego on subversiv.at). That's about the spirit I am looking for.
Once upon a time this category was intended to comprise what I had learned about philosophy. I had even aspired to study philosophy. Then came the dawn of the web and of unconventional philosophers of web culture.
I had also followed common wisdom, and my first FrontPage-generated business website had a section called Philosophy.
What's left of that, or what has been my conclusion?
I believe - in a pang of cheeky self-assurance - that I ought to have my own philosophy. Experience, business and otherwise, should be good for something. My philosophy does not focus on the grand questions of life. I might have had an argument with my former self, the idealistic student of science who aspired to change the world as a physicist, a profession I pictured as a cross-over of hands-on MacGyver theorist-philosopher-mathematician, ad-hoc-inventing smart tools whole mulling upon deep insights on universe and everything.
The unexciting truth is that my personal philosophy is explained best by summing up the different roles I have ever seen myself to take on, no matter what my job title was. None of them was about making profound changes to the world or being any sort of thought leader.
1) The Reverse Engineer
I have been told that I dismantled (tech) stuff already at a time I have no conscious memory of. I wanted to know how things worked, and I found a way to get there. Some of these activities morphed into a career later, the obvious one having been IT Security - the stereotype field for lone maverick nerdswho reverse engineer stuff. Even as a white hat hacker and so-called security consultant you have to indulge in the relentless black hacker's mindset - or you become a security bureaucrat, ticking off checklists and following rules. (Which dies not mean you should not know the rules).
But I could as well have turned into a tax advisor or lawyer, given my pleasure in finding out how such systems work.
I disagree with Keep To Your Core Skills, and I have often used 'wasted my precious time' by 'not delegating'. I hope or believe - delusionally - that 'actually' everybody has this pleasure of finding things out ((c) Richard Feynman). I am wary of marketing (tech) stuff to allegedly dumb or stressed out end-users who don't want to understand anything about underlying technology. Perhaps I am talking to less than 10% of people, but after all this is about my personal credo.
2) The Mediator
One of my first ever fantasies as a child that came close to something like a career was being kind of a negotiator or diplomat. I am not kidding: I dreamt about settling peace treaties between Mickey Mouse and his sinister opponents in his cartoon world.
This has impacted any of my jobs, but it finally surfaced expicitly when a client booked me 'for another mediation', which was in fact the follow-up of a very technical meeting.
I had considered yet another training or degree, in coaching, psychology, or the like. However, I am glad that I never left technology for good (see 1). There is a paradox: People want such 'tech project psychology' services. However, they will not buy it if labelled as such yet happily use them if they come as a hidden by-product of technical consulting.
3) The Communicator
Maybe principles 1) and 2) can only co-exist if you bridge them with a lot of talking. During most of my career 'teaching', 'training', or 'lecturing' had been part of my official duties or a side-project done in moon-lighting fachion. I stopped teaching when I became a moonlightung student again. I have also realized that I am not cut out for
over well managed, structured, quality-assured educational systems. I suck at keeping to my own agenda, and I beg for being carried away by hard off-script questions.
I was not the best class-room teacher, but I think I was good at informal, jam-session-style train-the-experts sessions.
Projects I remember most fondly were those where clients were not only interested in The Tech Guy Who Will Fix Everything but also in my pontifiating on fundamentals, even if that was not required to get the job done. But as I said above (1) - I believe it's always worth it.
4) The Organizer and Automator
When I was a child, I was not called upon to tidy up my room: Not only was I self-motivation to clean it - Mr.Monk-style - but I rather re-organized my cabinets quite frequently. It was Feng Shui of Decluttering meeting obsession with structure, and it has not changed to this day.
I have extended these principles to the virtual world as soon as I had 'data'. Writing a tool, script, program to automate something is second nature. Some sort of software development has always been part of my jobs - just as teaching was, but I found out only recently that I like data analysis and programming much more.
Proficiency with interpreting and manipulating data, and with using or fixing software is part of our culture and should be trained and valued just as other basic technologies and skills. And of course I believe that we, each of us, really needs them! But perhaps it is just my bad luck or my high standards... Every time I just to use and application or service as a normal end-user I end up with low-level troubleshooting.
I am aware of the picture of the obsessed nerd that I have painted here. I don't underestimate subtleties and human nature though. But nowadays soft skills are so often praised to the skies and people with 'big ideas', rather than nitpicking detailed persons, so as Subversive Element the contrarian stance comes natural to me. Even the most empathic coach who tells burnt out IT guys not ot overdo perferctiomism will be very happy if a neuro-surgeon or airplane engineer are totally obsessed with flawless technology.
I renamed my blog elkement.wordpress.com last November:
Theory and Practice of Trying to Combine Just Anything
The original tagline was
Physics versus engineering
off-the-wall geek humor versus existential questions
IT versus the real thing
corporate world's strangeness versus small business entrepreneur's microcosmos, knowledge worker's connectedness
versus striving for independence.
until it became
I mean it
and finally turned into
Research Notes on Energy, Software, Life, the Universe, and Everything
This means that my blog elkement.wordpress.com has found its purpose, and I am able to distinguish blogging better from publishing to this website elkement.subversiv.at. My actual research and 'science writing' is featured on my blog. Over there I am using wordpress.com features I have no desire for developing them myself for - and this website will remain my 100% home-grown self-developed pseudo-blog with a very limited feature set and no interactivity. The blog has LaTex support and allows me to present galleries of technical figures and diagrams.
These recent blog articles showcase what elkemental Force has been and is covering now (the end of a journey that started already two years ago - when heat pumps and thermodynamics replaced quantum physics):
Rowboats, Laser Pulses, and Heat Energy (Boring Title: Dimensional Analysis)
How Does It Work? (The Heat Pump System, That Is)
Half a Year of Solar Power and Smart Metering
My personal website, on the other hand, should be just this: A more self-indulgent site that provides status updates, meta-information and About-Me-style summaries. Because of that I will keep not sharing articles here to any social network.
And so yes: The hands-on engineering, physics, math and data analysis will be done over there on the blog. But there really are personal meta-thoughts on physics - so I don't have to change categories here.
(Theoretical) Physics and Me
Over the Christmas holidays I have been nearly offline from social media. I used the internet as I believe it was intended for me: To learn about something in depth and not necessarily sharing my insights or my 'progress'. I indulged in theoretical physics lectures just for the joys of it. I can rationalize: Yes, a bit of mathy gymnastics also serves me well when I deal with more mundane physics as a professional - such as toying with the heat transport equation.
But the real reason is unrelated to work:
Theoretical physics and mathematical modelling of a small part of a complex world gives me the pleasure - and/or the illusion - of being able to understand and solve, well, something. Whenever I had been very stressed out in the past, close to burn-out, I got up even earlier - as 4:00 AM sometimes - to plow through
Feynman's Physics Lectures or my favorite
German volumes of theoretical physics by my late professor, W. Macke.
Not only did it help me to focus onto abstract details of a logical clear universe and to enter a more detached state of mind, but amazingly it also made me work more efficiently and focused later - on whatever technical challenge I had to solve. In those days, I was mainly concerned with Public Key Infrastructure, networking security, and applied cryptography.
With hindsight - and hopefully not too much hindsight bias - I feel that a rigorous training in a mathy subject boosts your results in any endeavor that needs an analytical approach. Perhaps only your physics training makes your realize that you need a more analytical approach at all, in addition to soft skills, practice, and familiarity with culture in certain industry sectors. I am thinking about project management, for example.
I believe that in any 'STEM' job, e.g. in IT, it is soothing to re-learn fundamentals often. One should know more than seems necessary about 'theory', before or in addition to knowing how to google, where to look up things, or whom of your tech buddies to call. Success in technical troubleshooting always gave me most contentment when I was doing it in my head mainly - like walking through a networking protocol the way it was designed, comparing that to messing reality, and uttering an educated guess about the root cause of an issue which was finally correct.
Whenever I had been blogging about a field of physics not related to my work - like quantum field theory - it was these mental connections I had in mind. I was trying to convey the joys of physics, but my main focus was different from most science writers' ones, so I think my writing was not engaging enough for the interested lay audience and sometimes oblique owing to too much references to math (whereas it was very basic for experts, of course).
My science writing is often a covert and feeble attempt to encourage others to tackle the real thing, that is the fundamentals and the math, and then to feel the same effects. I have seen that more books seem to have been released recently that try to bridge this gap between classical science writing (following the mantra of: Every formula will half readers) and text books.
I want to be part of that movement.
The most existing things, in no particular order:
Infrastructure updates - 'real'
Infrastructure updates - 'virtual'
- We migrated three bank accounts, and
I learned what I never wanted to know about different ways to setup debit orders.
favorite: an anonymous form on the vendor's website. Security = knowing your
- Our village has changed its zip code. I learned what I never
wanted to know about how organizations store addresses. Goodie: Opening
'support tickets' turned interactions with big platforms into something
Work and Life
We feel the fresh air of a new category: A new major tag that has infected most of our
online content: It is called Work, Life, and Balance.
So it has to be added here of all websites, of course! Do we need a manifesto?
We don't want only a solar collector for research and self-sufficiency - we want 100% self-sufficiency re tomatoes!
We don't only want to
hack play with our inverter's web interface - we want to have enough time to watch our
PV panels harvesting energy!
As the saying goes, an expert is somebody who has committed every blunder in
his or her discipline. It should be 'her' discipline as I have finally made it. I can
prove via two similar but independent (and surreal) events.
1) The Subversive Element's website had been hacked. Well,
not quite, as it was the same web server but the URL pointing to The Element's
so-called business identity.
Paranoia and panic was mitigated by the curiosity of the nerd. The Element
spent countless hours dabbling with Google Webmaster Tools. That is: Not only
clearing Google's cache from spammy URLs, but also with scrutinizing all data
available, for all websites including also the elkementary blog. And there we
looked into an abyss:
2) Google's love for the elkement's blog was
dwindling - by a factor of 100 within a few weeks.
But what an opportunity: Conspiracy theories running wild. In two blog
postings, presented to THE INTERNET at a global level:
Of course I want you to click these links. The anatomy of a hack
part is perhaps interesting. After all, I can still consider it correct, given
most recent findings.
This does not apply to the elemental theories on Google. Here is the final
explanation, in an incredibly brief posting, by elkement's standards:
tl;dr: All WordPress.com blogs had been gradually migrated to https only in
the past months. In Google Webmaster Tools you need to add the https URL as an
additional site. My traffic was tucked away in statistics for the https URL.
Facepalm, Tim Green from Bradford, Wikimedia.
I am running a small
engineering consultancy together with my husband. Following Star Trek
terminology, he is Chief Engineer, and I am Science Officer.
In overly correct legalese, my job titles according to our business licences
are 1) Consulting Engineer in Applied Physics and 2) IT Consultant.
We specialize in planning of
heat pump systems with
unconventional heat sources, that is a combination of an underground water
tank and an unglazed solar collector. 'IT' means: playing with control units and
As we run a
focused on this system and I also devote
a 'sub-division' of my English blog to
it, I use this site (radices.net) mainly for consolidating resources and links -
in the same way as I curate security / PKI related links. Perhaps these link
dumps will not be very useful for anybody but myself.
I once was a laser physicist and a materials scientists - my specialties
having been high-temperature superconductors, laser-materials processing with
Excimer lasers, and the microstructure of stainless steel. Then I turned to IT
security, IT infrastructure and IT management for more than 10 years.
In 2012 I
felt the urge to reconnect with my roots as a scientist and engineer, and we
started working on our own heat pump research project in stealth mode. It turned
to a second 'branch' of our two-person business. There are connections between
my different fields of expertise - IT security and heat pumps - like: the
security of the smart grid, 'hacking critical infrastructure', monitoring and
control systems. Even the data we gather with our pilot setup have turned into
'big data' that require analysis and management.
So I am actually more of an engineer than a physicist. But I am still very
interested in theoretical physics as sort of a mental exercise, and I indulge in
reading textbooks as hobby. In 2013 I had focussed on
(re-) learning quantum field theory.
Since 2014 I am mainly blogging on down-to-earth classical mechanics or
thermodynamics, and I enjoy doing cross-checks and back-of-the-envelope
calculations on my blog.
The Element has tried hard to subvert the Modern World of Work. As discussed
on this site often - but not necessarily in a way comprehensible to anybody -
results are debatable.
The Strategy of Subversion was too complex in the long run - hence The
Element now wishes to apply a Keep it Simple approach. It wants to ride
real waves: Anything longer than a tweet is not a read anyway.
Up-to-date and meticulously updated information on the current elementary
undercover disguise can be found
The Elementary Work Portfolio is truly diversified.
On Twitter its
Physicist, engineer, geek, dilettante science blogger, IT security
consultant, search term poet, Subversive El(k)ement.
The Element indulges in working (playing) with technology, in particular if
there is something to be hacked. As odd as this may seem - it especially likes
heat pumps and digital certificates.
On subversiv.at we are still dedicated to spot the weird and the bizarre in
daily working routines, mantras, and rituals.
I need to go one step further in discussing why a problem is not a problem
for me. This page is odd anyway, and the root problem is actually the structure
of this website which once has been turned into a bilingual website. So I am
discussing issues in English that had only been described before in German or
Years ago I had been intrigued by discussions among freelancers: about
(potential) clients who are not willing to pay for deliveries of samples,
concepts and whatnot.
I have discussed below why I declared this issue non-existent.
Now it is even better (or worse, depending on interpretation) - I can hardly
see a problem at all.
Yes, it can make sense to deliver a free sample work. But sometimes you don't
even notice that this was sample work (You do not even notice that this was
work). I cannot - and do not want to - distinguish between:
- a spontaneous outburst of my creativity - as close to 'art' as somebody
like me can get.
- strategic 'viral' marketing (though done in a very paradoxical way)
But probably these are just dry runs for a new way our economy should work at
Is this Open Source or Open Innovation?
The Elkement has recently put forward a theory: Its
life is cliché and some googling does prove that.
It has been proposed that there is a huge community of people (Netizens) who
would share the following characteristics / properties / hobbies:
- IT security
- Interested in the history of science
- Star Trek fan
- Douglas Adams fan
- Douglas Coupland fan
We are now going to challenge this, and we will ask Google. As
Scott Adams has pointed out correctly the internet is nothing else than the
consciousness of an omnipotent being, once splintered and now reassembling
- Searching for "physics" "IT security" "Star Trek"
yields 5 out of 10 hits on page one that can be associated with The Element.
Actually 2 more elemental links have been pushed down to page three since I
wrote the German version of this article two days ago.
- "physics" "IT security" "history
of science" yields 6 elemental page 1 hits.
Similar results can be achieved with nearly every combination of key words
So my advice is: If you are frustrated about being cliché:
- Write an article about those attribute
- And enjoy your page 1 Google hits.
I have returned to where I started from. This website closes on itself.
Unburdened of the nagging questions that have tortured The Element before.
So this is: Subversion Light. Subversion in Retrospect. Subversion Reloaded - a
remake, probably diluted due to pondering about what has been pondered about
what had been pondered about.
Work has always been the leitmotif of subversiv.at. Work and the connotations
attached to it by a corporate geek, such as true calling (or not), (knowledge)
work, dread and pleasure.
This website has been started in 2001: motivated by philosophical discussions
Discussion that accompanied a so-called management training. Confirmed by hip
and hot so-called business
On the dawn of the new millennium I have started a psychological self-test
and under-cover research. This was called 'Corporate World'.
So what happened to the Element? Did it live up to its expectations? Which
expectations? Imposed by whom?
There is a Ten Years After edition of the business book mentioned. I do not
know it and I have
written an update of my own.
In Austria you can be awarded your PhD with special honors by the president
of Austria, it is called Sub Auspiciis Praesidentis Rei Publicae. This year
(2012) about 1000 people have been given this award since about 1952. I am not
adding this explanation to impress you - this should rather set the stage for
the probably unexpected message I sent to the guests of my graduation ceremony.
On October 1996, we had been 4 awardees, me and husband being two of them.
I thanked the representatives of academia for their kind words, they gave us
the feeling that we had been rewarded for our perseverance and our talents.
Nevertheless I believed that an award like this imposes some accountability on
us - we had to prove that we are not intellectuals or nerds only, but that we
have some social skills too. Update: According to feedback I frequently got from
customers I think I have done fine on this.
But... then... BANG....(paraphrasing my long-winded German sentences) there comes
the eye-opener: There is something like real world and real jobs and nobody has
waited for us. It was 1995 and there was something like a micro-crisis on the
job-market, at least for physics PhDs. Update: I did not research that thoroughly
in recent times, but I think that has not changed so much.
I still like my speech, but there was too much self-pitying. I belabored the
point that as a high school I had expected a grown-up physicist's biggest ethical
dilemma would be to choose between working for the evil military or searching
the solution to the unified field theory as a lonesome wolf. Then I found out
that your biggest problem was to find a job. Actually, in hindsight the
situation was not that bad after all - rather the opposite. I did write only a
few job applications in order to get a decent job, shortly after my husband
ended up with the same employer - a national research center. And we had ditched
the scientific career deliberately and knowingly before. And I pitied to be just
a small and unimportant part of world's scientific machinery and I would just
work on something unimportant. Recently, I had read Thomas Kuhn's Structure of
Scientific Revolutions for the first time (shame on me) and it came as relief
that this was normal. As normal as it can get -
I did Normal Science.
(Oktober 8, 1996, University of Linz)
I added a small rant that I would phrase harsher today. I had been told -
repeatedly - that excellent people stay in academia (mediocre ones join
industry). Back then I felt that this was BS - though of course I phrased it
more politely. What I did not dare to say: I had also been told that there will
be so many academic job openings for physicists in the near future. Today I have
been confirmed by lots of credible accounts by other physics PhDs and by simply
statistics, that this is what students have been told since the 1970s. And since
the 1970s the number of physics graduates kept growing and exceeded the demand.
I had also ranted (a bit, in too timid fashion - but stay tuned for an
article that I had written two years, to be re-published soon) about the metrics
of scientific community - survival of the fittest AKA the person who managed to
out his/her names on most papers and to minimize real contributions at the same
time. I generally criticized the importance of "selling yourself". This is quite
bizarre actually. This is self-irony, but in a subconscious fashion - I meant
what I said. The truth is: I had an impressive record of publications - obtained
by honest work. And I always had the talents to market myself - that I was not
aware this this was self-marketing. When you tend to over-analyze things - as I
sometimes so - then it is best to simply stay with the facts: I did get any job
I ever wanted. I changed my expertise, my fields of work several times. My track
record in terms of metrics (grades, publications, performance data, revenue,
customer feedback) had been successful. It took me some time to find out, but I
enjoy being an entrepreneur - and I would rather work "mundane tasks" in a
self-employed way than being "part of the system that imposes its arcane rules
on me. So back then was probably just lacking a bit of self-esteem and
I was proud of the fact that my husband and I merged our PhD theses into a
single book. This is an option (though an uncommon one) as long as you denote
who has been responsible for which part. I had also enjoyed of being
supported by gifted technicians. And I really detested the attitude of not
giving enough credit to other persons who had delivered valuable contributions.
So I did not take the acknowledgement section in thesis too seriously, as I
thanked my friends "how to use the pipe wrench" - which was an allusion to using
that tool to open coke bottles every afternoon in the workshop. I could have
phrased this a bit crispier in my speech.
Thus in summary the speech was not to bad (it felt good to receive standing
ovations), the topics addressed were fine. Today I would:
- rant a little more, more sarcastically, more witty on stuff that deserve
being ranted about.
- remove all the self-pity and replace it by the
enormous chances that
challenges actually bore.
As for the second item, wallowing in self-pity was probably also due to the
fact that I did not get over the fact I did leave academia though it a deliberate choice and
I have always considered it right - absolutely, positively. At that time I
worked in a national research lab, but already felt separated from true science.
More realistically (as explained in the posting linked above) also my academic
existence was "more engineering-like" and more routine development grunt work
than pure science. But there are two catches:
- The menial engineering stuff plus the project management experience I
gained during my PhD work was what made me employable in the real world
while still keeping some relationship with the academic world over the
- It all - and I really mean IT ALL including the negative experiences -
prepared me for the final step I had taken recently: returning to research
and development (OK, it's more development), to physics and engineering -
and being able to afford a smooth an gentle migration to a new career path.
So after all - it was all worth it.
This is not about numerology or other esotericism - this is just a try to transform corporate planning thinking and deadline
madness into something useful.
The proverbial carrot in front of the nose of the donkey does work. In fact,
in works the better the more pointless but simple the goal is. I can speak from
I once promised to myself that I need to make the change until a date of
0x.0x.(20)0x with x=5.
Actually the decision has been taken as early as x=2.
And it worked.
Probably thanks to conditioning by various dangling prestigious
carrots - that
I had all managed to grasp finally in the past: School, university, corporate
At x=9 I started pondering about new plans again.
We are using the Babylonian system of numbers based on 60 and its
various factors such as 12. This means that there will be no 13.13.13
The Element is in change mode and mood again.
I am a true professional: I am the total antithesis of a dilettante and an amateur. (Ha!
Mike Daisey! Greetings from ElkeS)
An expert is a specialist and proud of not being a so-called generalist. Generalists is what the cowards call themselves:
Those wimps that found the exit from permanently living in emergency mode, from really knowing it all and having to know and to fix it all.
But I am not like that. I am the hero of troubleshooting.
But I am putting my hand on machines. I am wearing rubber gloves. By sheer thought power only
I am able to penetrate into the nervous systems of these modern NOMADs. This is like in CSI – you remember the close-ups of blood vessels or electrical wiring.
Then I track down and kill the enemy made from zero's and one's.
I am Trillian, I am Lara Croft, I am Ms. MacGuyver.
And I put pizza into the microwave oven like
Sandra Bullock in The Net. [Insert here: Something on the Improbability Drive, 42 or HAL].
I should not have any contact with human beings; I should not be human myself. I should live as an avatar only.
I should inherit my mind to the world – to be uploaded to the internet.
And as a compensation for all those heroic deeds I receive: Money, fame and glory without limits.
People that owe their lives to me. And flowers. And an e-mail with some managers on CC. Until the next tsunami approaches the shore.
How did I ever end up in this geek paradise?
And where is the exit, the shut down button?
Get me out of here. Please.
Years ago (see below) I thought that I had the same problem as reported by many
freelancers: So-called colleagues, customers or social networking acquaintances asking for:
something that will require time, efforts and my expertise - and that is usually paid (well).
The problem has vanished or did never really exist for me. As long as you do not believe you need
to make everybody happy you can simply say no to such not-willing-to-pay pseudo-clients. And
as long as you are selling some service that somebody (desperately) needs (who is willing to pay).
But it is hard to say no to the paying clients. Especially if they are appealing to your
vanity and to your reputation as the Number One / Guru / Diva.
Realistically it is not so much the fact that I can solve a problem in such a
way. But I am probably the only available person. Or the only person that is as crazy as considering
to work under such conditions - in terms of risk and schedule.
On reviewing your one history you are always biased and tend
to rewrite it silently. You might consider that bias positive, recapturing
Viktor Frankl's saying of flooding the entire life with meaning
I am keeping the old versions of my web pages and force myself to re-read,
comment and gradually change them. The CV
tends to become cluttered, therefore I am providing a current version (2011)
which is neither complete nor objective.
I always wanted to know how stuff really works and what makes
human beings behave the way they do. As a child I have dismantled a toy car in a
way that the grown-ups could not reproduce. I grew crystals of potash alum and
blue vitriol (until I destroyed a not so heat resistant glass) and crafted paper
polyhedrons (the largest in terms of no. of surfaces was a
rhombicosidodecahedron with pyramids on each surface). Later I fired pulsed
laser beams on little lumps of ceramic material, took photos of the emitted
cloud of evaporated material and let thin films grow from this material. I have
tried to understand why this clouds protruded into space in a very peculiar
shape and why the electrical resistance of these films became zero at low
temperatures (or not).
I was most interested in the reason why (things were as there
were). It seemed less important to me to build something useful based on these
insights. But I became more and more involved in the latter. Probably this was
based on my investigations of the human behavior. Or rather the behavior of
systems constituted by human beings. I learned what is required, important,
right or opportune. As a small particle in large systems I have made some
contributions. Today I am still under the impression of the ambivalent nature of
of being the 'techie who saves the world': Fame and glory versus burnout
and stoic self-descipline.
Reading the book of my life I am detecting the following
recurrent theme: Since nearly 25 years I have been explaining technical and
scientific stuff. By explanation I mean the transfer of low-level understanding
- of 'talking and thinking science' in the language of mathematics - into
examples, action, and stories. I am a true fan of Richard Feynman.
Do you know somebody who could help me with:
[insert here: something the networker does not have the
faintest clue about in will cost him/her 1000s of hours.]
Years ago the Subversive Element would have analyzed these questions and did what it had to do - as a brave
hero of networking. But know it knows:
For meeting one helpful person on the net, you have to pay: by serving
I had literally been asked: Do you like to work for free? Of course not really for free -
this was an opportunity: Put in many hours of work requiring a lot of experience and
a specific skill set. Then - if we are lucky - we will win the jackpot, get the project grant etc.
Risk and reward!
Being subversive - does anybody appreciate it?
Does appreciation result in financial compensation?
Are we not able to be subversive in so-called business world or do we just feel
that we are not allowed to?
Or could we be subversive all the time?
Would anybody notice it?