-Here's Guy Kawasaki falling prey to a textbook case of the selection bias and using a non-representative sample.

-Here's one of the writers at Wikinomics bragging about Starbucks' successful social media strategy a few days after they reported earnings were down by 97% PERCENT and its shares lost two thirds of their value almost instantly.

-Here's Hugh MacLeod (who this aside is wonderful) self-referencing the "blue monster" for the 400th time, apparently unaware that Microsoft isn't just culturally irrelevant but actively not "changing the world."

-Here's Steve Rubel misunderstanding incentives that some crappy new Mahalo program creates. (Hint: Rewards for searching translate into more worthless searches by people trying to get prizes)

-Here's Michael Arrington (who is the worst) not noticing an incredibly obvious flaw in a textbook rental startup, letting an outlier skew the results by adding TMZ's revenue to an acquisition it wasn't a part of, and finally, projecting a yearly revenue estimate based off 3 weeks of data from an unofficial source in the middle of a financial crisis less than a month after the product launched.

To be fair, it's not really blogs fault so much as it's a product of low-level thinking. Scientists and psychologists do their research in these fields for a reason - to help us think clearer and more accurately. Breathlessly chasing the first lead you find without constantly checking it against the world around you is a dangerous way and unproductive way to think.

If we can deduce anything from the blogs above, it also makes you 1) Sound like an idiot 2) Act like an asshole 3) Always get it wrong

It's not pleasant to root out rationalization and subjectivity. You rob yourself of the right to indignation, an intoxicating position. Every time I dig around, I watch as the boxes I've trapped people in just disappear along with my superiority. The reality is that the smear of low level mediocrity never shines brighter than on a person unknowingly reacting to something inside them. In fact, the truly impressive part of Gladwell's New Yorker piece on artists is not his thesis but the fact that it has nothing to do with him. He transcends his own place in the discussion.

So the bold move when you encounter hypocrites may be ignoring the desire to dismiss them. The real question: would you really want to listen to someone whose moral philosophy was just as easily done as it was said?

Those are just the ones I can remember. For most, I used two or three different books. I do know that I have to buy more bookshelves because I've resorted to piling them on the floor and in the trunk of my car. If anyone can think of people like these, iconic figures that might have a side to them that has gone unnoticed, it'd be amazing if you could email me your ideas.

-Or here's some advice on making money from writing by someone who isn't actually a writer or happen to know anyone who is one.

-This is a chubby weirdo who thinks you have to confront your boss to get vacation.

-Lastly, we have a 'brand manager' who can casually reference the 2 truths, 1 lie icebreaker along with some logical fallacies, unnecessary acronyms and plenty of Arbitrary Capitalization of ordinary Phrases For Emphasis.

If you're a piddly fucking loser who spends their time reading employee handbooks and going to mixers then that's a way to think about life. If at any time during your day or education the concepts of Good Boss, Bad Boss, social media, Gen Y, Gen X, Seven Highly Effective Habits, 'Bulletproofing', Blogging, liveblogging are in anyway significant, you've saddled yourself with the wrong set of priorities. God forbid, if you actually use those words in seriousness, I don't it's possible to truly quantify how far you've removed yourself from the sphere in which people get things done.

The funny thing is that the people who spend time obsessing over these workplace laws are always the absolute worst at following the rules that matter: meeting deadlines, delivering expectations, communicating what they want, being informed, common courtesy. You know, the stuff that makes society work.

So here's what you do when you read things like that: keep your head down and keep thinking. The problems that they pretend to have figured out are far more complex than the 23 year old working at a non-profit in Minnesota will ever be able to articulate via bulletpoints. In almost all cases, the people who put together tip sheets and career advice give it away for one reason - they couldn't manage to make use of it themselves. Let them have the low-hanging fruit they pass off as profound observation and dedicate yourself to chipping away at the actual reality in front of you. You know, turning words into works.

The final irony: the world is indeed a profoundly different place than it was a generation ago, the Brazen Careerist writers though, they are the same small-minded, pontificating idiots that've plagued every recorded age. You don't have to let your ego pull you down that hole. You can pass up attention, the temptation to boil big things down to headlines and giving yourself comically pompous titles and experiences you've yet to earn. It just takes discipline and some goddamn perspective.

Note: I keep reading that Penelope Trunk and Brazen Careerist need venture funding, so if you have a few dollars laying around, maybe they'll make give you an honorary chair in the field of Coachology.

This is the newest addition to my apartment. I put it in the window so the neighbors would see.