Book I have been reading for 4 years

It isn't often that I don't finish a book for years, well I just finished one last night that took that long.  This book was "Mel Gibson's Passion and Philosphy."  It took me a long time to get through it which is indicative of my review of the book.  Unfortunately I have read a lot of the 'pop culture and philosphy' series of books and after a while it is just the same thing over and over.  This book was actually a little different in that some of the essays were unique but I don't think that saved the book.  I feel the series on a whole has gone downhill and this book was a clear example.  It just wasn't engaging.  I remember having an intense reaction to the movie (I am an evangelical Christian for reference, or at least I think that is the sect that most defines most of my beliefs though there are major differences between me and the dogma).  Anyway.  I can't recommend this book.  If you want to read about philosphy and christianity there are better books and if you want to read one of this specific series there are way better ones as well.

Quick Post: Classic Daily Show

So for some reason this segment of the Daily show has been in my head recently.  So I am posting it.  :-)

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
South Park Death Threats
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Video round-up

Thought I would highlight a couple of videos I watched tonight because they were interesting.  So here we go:

1) Question: Do you think reason.com could defend government intervention in the fishing industry and spin it towards a free market solution?



It was interesting to here this argument which I had never really heard made.  I think there is a moral hazard in the other way though for instance, overstating fishing reserves or promoting the growth of one species over another so they can get more of the quota.  I just never thought I would hear that argument before.

2) Question: Can John Stewart attack someone from the American Enterprise Institute?

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Arthur Brooks Unedited Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Answer is yes again.  I don't know what I think about this answer.  I think John Stewart instead of actually attacking the book attacked the methods the soft sciences use to understand the world.  I feel like this attack was slightly unjustified.  Also he didn't really let the guest talk enough.  The guest was trying to say that there was a dissonance between the views the voters had and their actions and John Stewart wanted to take his argument to an extreme.  This was extremely unhelpful to the discourse in my opinion.  He would have better served his audience to not have gone that way.  However he did have good points that this isn't some vast conspiracy and that sometimes the markets are messed up and need a little help from the government.  The problem is  the government is usually the source of those problems but I digress.

3)  The last set of videos are the most recent videos on 'Uncommon Knowledge'.  I won't post the link since  you can get to it from the sidebar and I can't really recommend the videos.  The discussing was all about foreign policy, Israel, and Iran and I feel the discussion wasn't intelligent nor thought provoking and in general boring and unhelpful.

Quick Post: Changes in the Republican Party

I found this article on Newsweek.  It has some interesting thoughts.  Basically the idea is the the heart of the republican party is moving ideologically.  This distinction is seen in the southern republican ideology moving into a western republican ideology.  I will say I completely disagree that Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are western republicans.  They belong to the trendy moron republican crowd.

What is most exciting though is that western republicanism is very libertarian in roots and ideology.  I guess my hope that the republican party would split between the trendy moron crowd and the libertarians is instead a movement to a more libertarian viewpoint.  I don't know how truthful this article is but it is thought provoking.

Pay me to wait

I usually don't talk much about investing in a particular way.  However I am posting about a blog posting which I found interesting.  For refernce I haven't verified the analysis.  It seems like there is more than meets the eye from the chart but the chart is pretty compelling if it is even partially true.

I have been investing a lot of dividend paying stocks recently.  Even though I keep losing money in a lot of bets the dividends just keep on coming.  I will likely continue to invest mostly in this way.  Partially because it is simplier from a longer term perspective.  As long as the company can afford its dividend you are being paid to wait, which is helpful.  I have said that there is a tough problem with companies that don't give dividends yet have huge margins, they tend to invest poorly.  Anyway.  I liked the graph so I posted this.

Deduction that is sinking America

As most reader know I am not friend of the mortgage interest deduction in America.  If changes the costs of housing and skews them against apartments.  It also causes people to unreasonably assume you will get a huge deduction for the interest and get themselves into trouble.  Well I was glad to come across a posting discussing the mortgage deduction.  This was set off by an op-ed in the Boston Globe.

This is a very important discussion that needs to be had in America.  The mortgage deduction really needs to be rethought.  While I would like to completely remove all market skewing taxes I do not really think we will be able to do that.  So I think removing it above a certain areas with a phase out.  This seems to be a really good option, as long as we don't index to inflation, this will eventually work itself out which would be great.

Moving up the Ladder

There was an interesting article on NPR (yes I sometimes read that too) about mobility in India.  What was interesting to me is that this article says the best way for a person to move up, especially someone who isn't in primary education, is to move from poor to a manufacturing job.  The point of the article is that there is no manufacturing jobs in India.

So this made me think of two things.  First, which countries are the ones that have both services and manufacturing sectors that are robust or growing robustly.  While investing in India can make money it seems like the political stability and future growth prospects are shadowed by this problem.  China doesn't have enough manufacturing jobs and is starting to move to a more service oriented (and high-tech) economy.  This doesn't help the poor, and this could be really bad.  I think this is a good place to look to when considering investments, countries where both areas are growing.

Second, I have often wondered if the world is hamstrung because they see America (a developed economy) and so the citizens want to jump quickly to more advanced economies from simplier less developed economies.  In the 1900's the American economy couldn't just jump to 2000.  This was an advantage, as trailblazing does, to slowly grow into larger shoes.  I fear that this aspiration of emerging economies is driving unnatural growth in a way that significantly divides the populace.  In all countries there is a small number of people who can benefit from such a fast change and most emerging economies have an even worse story to tell with regards to that.  I worry what this could do to those countries.

Awesome Idea

So this is awesome, Planet Money has bought a piece of an MBS for $1000 (originally it sold for $75000) and they are tracking the progress of the MBS.  This is so neat.  For $1000 they have quite a story for their blog.  The tracking widget is here.

Man I wish I had thought of it, it would have been a great hook for a blog and since I am not great at picking stocks I may have made more money than I am currently making in the market.

Also they have a map of where the mortgages are located.  So neat.  Such a great idea, wish I had thought of it.

Additionally what is interesting is that the New Jersey Carpenter's Vacation Fund is suing the company that made the MBS (Royal Bank of Scotland).  It keeps getting more interesting.

Maps that changed the world

Thought this may be interesting to those who read my blog.  It is a listing of maps that changed the world from the head of maps collections at the British Library.  Note that Google maps is on there.

Ideas worth watching

So Sunday I was waiting for the Lost finale I decided I was going to watch a bunch of TED videos.  (

You may remember TED from a previous post.)  Well I thought I would review a couple of them for you so you can watch them is you want.

•  Mosquito zap.  This was recently discussed in the IEEE Spectrum.  Basically this guy works at a place which just thinks of cool stuff and they made a laser mosquito zapper.  Pretty cool.
• Coral Reefs.  Maybe skip this one.  The guy basically talks about the problems of coral reefs dying.  If you are up on the problems this won't give you any new information.
• Schools and Creativity.  Funny, worth a watch.  This is about how schools kill creativity and how we need to encourage this.
• Eating to Starve Cancer.  Totally worth watching.  Basically this is about how blood vessels grow around cancer (and fat cells which was really interesting).  The thesis is that by starving the area of blood vessel growth you can prevent the growth of cancer (and keep you skinny).  This is really worth watching, really interesting.  Made me eat my tomatoes this week.  :-)
• Dangers of Science Denial.  This is interesting.  I think there is a balance between blindly believing science and blindly rejecting science.  However I feel like this guy may be too blindly non-questioning.  Interesting video.
• Spaghetti Sauce.  I know I have posted this before I am pretty sure.  This is presenting Malcolm Gladwell.  This is an interesting one to watch just because it is thought provoking.
• Danger of Choice.  I think everyone knows that too much choice is paralyzing.  Interesting discussion if nothing else.
• Family Tree of you and Me.  This is a video about the efforts to map the family tree of humanity.  What is most interesting to me is that there have only been about 2000 generations since the 'adam' and 'eve' moments in human history.  Amazing to think how much diversity there is in such a small time.

Those were a selection of the ones I watched.  Have fun, watch the laser one it is neat, watch the spaghetti sauce one it is thought-provoking, and watch the eating to starve cancer one because it is important.

FOUND!

So tonight is the end of Lost.  I am actually pretty jazzed.  For one there is about 10 hours of stuff to watch tonight.  For two this means the season is over.  I watch way too much TV in general.  I recently had a conversation with another friend about how life changes when you get a real (non-graduate studentish) job.  When you get home from working (usually more than 8 hours) it is really easy to just veg in front of the TV.  So anyway I have a weekly schedule that is all done this week, and I couldn't be happier.  With the exception of Mythbusters on the weekends I don't really have channel which carries anything I want to watch.  SO I am looking forward  to finally finishing some books I have been reading, finishing up a couple of programs I am writing, getting some more exercise as the weather turns nicer, in general I am hoping for a more forceful introduction to this again.  The lack of interesting TV shows will do this for me.

I also would like to note that tonight's food (which I will prepare for the lost finale) will be prepared with my new Vidalia Chop wizard.  So much nicer than doing this by hand.  :-)

I will have my thoughts on the lost finale tonight...

Mixing up Empathy with Political Philosphy

Recently Rand Paul won the primary in Kentucky.  (I am sure most of you know this by now.)  I don't actually know a lot about him so I am not going to support him or defend his person.  However I would like to discuss an article I read on the huffington post.  (I am sure everyone knows how much I hate the blogs and articles written specifically for the huffington post.  They are always one sided and spread fud.)

Here is my problem with the article, it is essentially saying that a political ideology that doesn't allow for massive spending for 'empathy' is a bad thing.  This is intellectual suicide.  Political morality is a option not a constant.  Some political philosphies do not state an inherent morality of the government.  (I know I am equating morality with empathy but since ideologies can't think we have to talk about morality.)  So why are people attacking Rand Paul?  Well he is stating things in a way that opens himself up to attacks.  However his ideology is sound.  He doesn't think there is an importance in the government spending money on various programs (I diverge with him in a lot here).  As a person he should show more of his empathy (I am sure he isn't heartless) but on the flip side the media should leave him alone.  Not everyone thinks spending money on 'moral' things is the best idea for the government despite what talkgin heads would leave you to believe.

For instance, Rand Paul said that Obama should lay off BP.  Well he is wrong here, BP screwed up, however he is right that Obama and congress in a populist rage are looking to tar and feather BP.  Here is what Rand Paul is trying to say:

"Without risk there can be no oil.  There is a certain amount of risk in everything and if you want to have the benefits of modern society you have to realize there are consequences.  The government should not be holier than thou when it comes to industry because the warped incentives of government intervention cause in industry to not appropriately account for the risk in business.  For instance the government limits profits of oil companies which cause problems with funding risk.  As such the government should step back and look at its role in prevention oil leaks and enabling oil companies."

Or something like that.  That being said I think Rand Paul sounds like a non-pragmatic Sarah Palin wanna be.  I think he is a bad example of a libertarian.  But I guess time will tell if he can convey his message in a productive manner.  I am betting the media doesn't want to hear the message anyway.

Expand your mind

So have a new favorite way to waste time: Lumosity.

The website claims to help your mind by helping you exercise your mind.  While I doubt this claim it is a fun way to waste a while online.  If nothing else it is a good way to quantify your abilities.  I doubt there is a high real world correlation though.  I am also a little surprised to see the website wants like $6 a month for a membership.  It seems like a lot, heck XBOX Live isn't even that much and you can play a lot more games there.

Long times away and long travels

I have been traveling and sick recently (those are unrelated I am pretty sure).  I have to say 4 hours on a plane is getting pretty painful.  I did find someone to talk to on the way back.  He was studying C++ on the plane and I asked him why he was learning that (C++ is way more painful than Java for object oriented programming and C is way better for learning the internals of a computer).  So I got to talk to him for quite a while.  He is looking for a job as a quant after spending the last 5 years teaching as an assistant professor in math.  It was an interesting conversation, made me remember how good of a job I actually have most days.

I had a couple of interesting experiences while doing my usual green commute back home.  On the light rail (which is brand-new BTW) I watch 3 girls get on who had the biggest potty mouths and the poorest grasp of the english language I have seen in a long time.  We are talking bad language.  I can remember being that age and having  the same pointless conversations about who did what to whom and whose cousin could help in a fight (for reference none of my cousins could help).  But this made me feel really old.  All I could think was how uneducated they sounded and how much they will be disadvantaged in life.  Additionally, they had poor attitudes.  One girl was picking the decals off the window for the train.  The older lady behind them asked them not to do that because her tax dollars paid for that and someone would have to replace it.  Then I heard a conversation I could not believe where these young girls just dismissed and insulted this lady.  Incredible, their parents should get out the spanking paddle for this conversation.  The girl continued to do it insisting that the lady couldn't tell her what to do.  Then the lady mentioned something about her tax dollars paying for their education and the girls were like 'no, my mom pays'.  It was obvious the girls did not go to any private school because no private school would ever let their children act like that.  It was pretty amazing how disjoint from reality their perceptions of the world are.  Even if they went to a private school the state still sends tax payer dollars their way for a wealth of programs (that aren't helping these girls obviously).  It was just amazing, I really want to do something.  I know older people always complain about the younger generation but this was quite incredible.  These girls, if they continue on their course, will never amount to anything, no one with the attitude and language that they showed could ever go anywhere.  It just made me feel very old and sad for them.

Then when I was walking around downtown there was this kid on a skateboard who almost ran into me while he was trying to run a red walk signal (for reference he was completely wrong to even try).  To which I was of course at fault and he called me a 'fucking idiot'.  A completely ridiculous statement.  I wasn't the asshole who fell off my skateboard nor the idiot who thought I had the right of way when I didn't.

It was just a couple of incidents that made me feel old because I was complaining about the younger people, sad because I had acted similar though to a significantly smaller extent in my youth, and angry that these kids are acting this way.  The future is going to be full of a few smart people and a lot of dumb people and unfortunately the difference will be larger than it is today and these kids I saw will be on the wrong side of that with a high probability.  Just sad, parents should raise their kids better.

The Heart of a (Classical) Liberal

(It is upsetting to me that the adjective liberal has been hijacked in this day and age.)

With this post I am kicking off (what I hope will be slightly less than) a weekly post series on (Classical) Liberalism in the modern world.  My goal with this series is to look at all of the issues facing us in this current world, no matter how small, and analyze the correct and current responses in light of classical liberalism (libertarianism) and what is pragmatically politically acceptable.  I am also planning multiple posts on what the various aspects of libertarianism are and how important these differences are in general and especially when the current current politic climate is decidedly anti-libertarian.

This series will approach the hard issues and ask what it is that we actually need  to worry about and what do we not.  (For instance, does it matter that Post Office is run by the government when we have a 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit this year?  Probably not though people still fight about that these days.)  In my view the current political climate of the younger generation (18 - 35 y.o.) is decidedly pro-libertarian in their ideals but there is no strong movement to collect those voters nor is there a common vision on the important things.  I hope to flesh this out.

At the end of the day, in my opinion (which is supported by research, see this video series), American is not blue or red.  The reality of the situation is that we are all purple.  Not only are constituencies purple in general but people are purple.  Everyone cares about the same things.  Everyone cares about the fact that some people don't have health care however we all disagree on how best to tackle the problem.  This is where the media steps in and 'on the surface' polarizes the populace into two diametrically opposed camps.  The reality of the situation is that a rational and helpful solution is likely very amiable to all people but the media and the politicians don't sell that.  Everyone cares about people making a living wage but we disagree on whether the minimum wage places people out of jobs they are qualified for (just like unions do), or whether certain 'rights' are afforded by the constitution or by modern society.  If a real conversation was had about the issues it is likely that everyone would realize that politicians are full of hot air in general and real solutions are usually acceptable to both sides.

This series will have a definite rational and logical slant.  That is what I am and that is how I view politics and economics.  I don't think some magical fairy will come down and make the deficit disappear.  So if you are decidedly pro-fairy solutions you will likely not like the series.  Sorry.

Quotes for thought

So, I have been reading John Adams by David McCullough.  I came across an interesting quote which I thought was really interesting.  I don't remember the original reference but the quote is:

"In all things consider the end."

Think of this for a minute.  In all things consider how it will end.  In the context of government this seems to have an obvious application, however, think of this in general.  Always consider how it will end.  I just feel like the quote is very challenging to think about in our quick answer, think on your feet world, do we consider this enough?

A second quote which is more transparent:

"All men would be tyrants if they could."

I think we all know what that means.  However think of it.  If this is your idea and philosphy you would definitely make a government where no man could have too much power.

I am definitely enjoying the book.  I see some of the same character traits in John Adams as I see in myself sometimes.  The most compelling likeness is in his approach to studies and to life.  In studies he self-studied a LOT.  I have a hankering to always be learning.  Additionally, and I think this is very interesting, John Adams was asked by someone what would be the best way to prepare for a trip to Europe.  And he replied that the best way was to be more learned and respected, then he would be ready.  The writer was obviously looking for which languages were more important etc.

Anyway, those quotes are interesting thoughts.

Always have a backup plans

So today I woke up and I was like, 'I am going for a bike ride.'  I planned out a path that would take me about 23 miles and would end up at a bus stop where I could get a ride back home.  Let me tell you I was flying, it was a great ride.  I was at about mile 12 when my back tire blew out.  Not only that but I didn't have a spare.  So I had to walk the remaining 11 miles to the bus stop to get a ride home.  So a 1.5 hour trip turned into a 5 hour trip.  It was not fun.  Now I have to get my bike fixed and I can't ride it into work tomorrow.  :-(

This also reminds me.  On my list of things that need to exist in heaven are:

1. Cold shower after a long run or bike ride
2. Naps on Sunday or Saturday afternoons when the wind blows through the house and it is sunny outside.

Those are two of my favorite things.  I got to take a nap today and it was great.

Dividends on Education

So I have a funny story about this one, I was surfing reason.com about a week ago and the banner was for this Frontline documentary on for profit colleges.  Well the ad right under it was an ad for University of Phoenix online.  Strangely ironic, that I was also reading an article about education policy.  Perhaps the programmers should make the website not place ads for both sides of the argument at the same time.  :-)

So, I have very complicated thoughts on education.  I spent a considerable amount of time in college/graduate school.  I have a lot to say about the problems and sometimes I even have solutions to some of the problems.  This post, however, is not about traditional colleges.

I have long said that not everyone should go to college.  Our colleges are stuffed with people who are only there to get a job when they graduate, they have very slight interest in their chosen field, and/or are there to party and live without parental supervision.  This is bad and hurts our education system.  I have also in the same breath said that we need community colleges and technical schools to step up and educate those who are not bound or should not be bound for college.  So where do the for-profits sit in that equation?

America has a lot of problems.  (All countries do.)  However there is one common thread, if people were more educated they would be less likely to 1) do stupid or irrational things, 2) vote for stupid or irrational things, and 3) be a detriment to society.  If this gap can be filled with for profit institutions then I say go for it.  However, I personally would not invest in a for profit school.  I feel like the problem is education policy at the regional and state level and more intelligent administration could fill in the gaps more effectively and render the profit margins of for profit schools lower.  (However good luck getting any government at any level to do anything remotely rational.)  Education is one of those ivory tower things that benefit all of society.  I feel like they should be non-profit and private (maybe owned by alumni).  So I guess for profits are here to stay.  As a society we need smarter people who are more able to fill the roles needed and less likely to need jobs we can't do (like a lot of manufacturing these days).

So what are the problems?  Cost.  They cost more.  There are more loans needed by the students.  This is a huge issue.  I was surprised that the 10% default number (default right after they leave school) for these schools was shown as a good thing (as opposed to a higher number).  (I have no idea what it is for private or state school but the video said for profits are 10% of the loans but 50% of the defaults so you can do the math.)  Basically people get a lot of loans and then get out or don't finish and can't pay their bills.  This seems like a place where the government could step in and say, hey, thats fine that you make money on education but you have to find private funding for loans.  (I feel that a lot of government financing of education should be allocated with a thought to whether or not the investment is worth it on an individual basis and private investors should do that.)

Unfortunately not everyone can handle the work load of an online university either.  This shows a major failing of the primary educational system in America.  This is a topic for another post though.

The biggest problem I feel is accreditation and quality of knowledge when people exit.  I also feel this is a major problem with foreign schools as well.  (I have had to work with a lot of people who may be the cream of the crop in another country, where they were educated, however in America they just can't cut the mustard.)  This suggests a failing of the schooling and not the person as it is a systemic problem.  (This is a general statement, individual results may vary.)  For profits, especially the online ones, lack this credibility as well.  Is this justified?  In some cases yes, I believe so and in others no I do not.  I do not feel that a for profit education is the same as a poor education.  However a lot of people do.  I feel like the variance is high in the quality of graduate and mean may be a little lower due to the sample of students who enter.  The rate of cheating is just as bad in regular colleges (man do I have stories I could tell you).  Grade inflation is just as bad in both places.  So why finger one type of school and say they are worse?

Also on the other side of the coin I do not think the established universities are out to get for profits or online schools.  While their structure does have specific failings of their own (I will discuss another time) they are not enemies.  In fact they could complement each other very well if they could work together.

Anyway, education is important and in America there are problems.  This video suggests an interesting approach to the problem and presented the problems associated with it.  I have given my stance (they can exist but I do not support them), watch the video, make up your mind.

Knowing More: Autism and Vaccines

I recently discussed the frontline video about vaccines.  If you didn't have a chance to watch it (it is an hour long) the reason has produced a video which essentially the same content but in 6 minutes.  I feel the content of the video is much better representative of a logical and rational response to the issues (as compared with frontline which I basically just complained about the lack of reason from the people in the video).

Since I basically just dismissed the editing and raiontality of the people on the video last time this time I thought I would discuss more of the substance of the debate.  Basically I am of the opinion that something is wrong with kids.  The rates of autism have been rising in recent years (including in Europe) and there is little to no scientific link to the vaccines.  So what does this mean?  We should spend our little resources on finding the real issue behind what is wrong.  Basically I am very frustrated with people who know nothign about the subject saying that people who do science are wrong.  Scientists are not always right but they are in a better position to be correct than someone just guessing.  I feel like we should focus the 'vaccines cause autism' movement into the 'we need to know what is causing autism' movement.  Unfortunately this will not happen because there is nothing to be mad at in the later movement and people need something to be mad at or to blame.

Pasta de Jour

So today I went downtown again to get past.  Today went a lot better than my difficulties with the Teamsters union last week.  On this week's food list is:

• Whole Wheat Herb Pasta with Lentils, Spinach, and Leeks.
• Whole Wheat Garlic PAsta with a Broccoli Rabe Sauce.

I am looking forward to this week.  I put the bread I bought into the fridge so it won't go bad as fast.  The one dollar bread is nice because I get to try all kinda of new breads.  The only problem is that they are loaded with carbs so Iam not eating that well.  I also got myself up early this week (actually I was already up) to be downtown by about 8:30 am.  So I was able to move in the market and actually buy stuff without having non-shopping tourists all over.  It was nice however the stores don't all open until about 10:00 so I couldn't get to every store.

I also noted last week that they were charging a 20% mark-up over the website.  Well today I realized they actually give you more than you ask for.  So a 1/2 lb bag of anything is 5$.  Well I noticed both of my bags come in heavy at about 2/3 lb.  What the sellers were doing was lifting the bag to make the weight exactly 1/2 lb for the price printer and then leaving the extra in the bag for you.  It is really nice of them to do.  Makes me feel a little better about spending $5 on a bag of pasta (which isn't much more than a box from a store I might add and I get really cool pasta from this place).

My results from last week were that the lemony one was way too lemony and the one with mozzarella in it was too gooey with the addition of the cheese to stomach for the week.  I am hoping to have better luck this week with my cooking.

A representative I can get behind

So today I open my mailbox and I got a letter (a general letter not a personal one) explaining the actions of my representative to the state legislature.  Now in general I hold high contempt for them.  The state is largely staffed by democrats and I do not agree with a lot of their policies and fiscal decisions.  Well this representative is high on the ways and means committee and discussed some of the action he made.  Additionally he explained why he voted against the budget.  This was really cool in my opinion.

Basically (as is true with all state and federal budgets) there is no real discussion on how to reign in spending.  While the budget gap out here was closed this year there is likely a large hole next year as well.  What was amazing is some of the (handpicked) amendments to the budget that didn't make it through.  One was to merge 3 very similar agencies to reduce overhead (which failed).

Basically I wanted to say I was pleasantly surprised that he even sent out a letter explaining his positions, most politicians shit in your face then ask for more money.  At least this politician is trying to explain his actions.  I wonder how common this is (I have never seen anything like this before).

Hanging by a thread

I found a very interesting article with a list of 90 democratic seats in trouble come the election in November.  I am always a sucker for articles like this because it is so hard to find any kind of national article on all of the seats in 'trouble'.  Unfortunately this is only about democrat seats in trouble at least the author took the time to say a couple of things why they thought the way they did.  I think the article likely over states the danger to some of the seats and definitely tries to play up that everyone is upset with the current administration.  I think these are unhelpful to the article but it is the world we live in...

...and I feel fine.

So today's post is a review of a set of videos on Uncommon Knowledge.  As I have said before this is a video series produced by the Hoover Institute for The National Review.  There is a decidedly conservative (or Republican in a political sense) slant to the guests and questions.  The video series today is about the book "America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It," by Mark Steyn.  The interview discusses the book.  The links for the videos are:  (The total length is somewhere between 30 and 40 minutes.)

• Part 1
• Part 2
• Part 3
• Part 4
• Part 5

I personally found the first 2 more interesting, the 3rd is very slanted by an improper characterization of the health care reform (though I think some interesting points are raised), the 4th and 5th seem very xenophobic against Muslims by making broad generalities and stereotypes.  What I found interesting were usually the things I disagreed with so take that as you will.  It is always important to understand the other side of the argument.

For one I feel like his characterization of health care reform is angrily wrong.  I do not feel like the health care reform and allowing kids to stay on their parents insurance is pushing up the age of accountability or making people kids longer.  However I do feel like he has a point in that the age of accountability seems to edge higher and the more 'adult' pursuits (think politics, money matters, responsibility, etc.) take a back seat to toys.  I haven't decided what I think of this thesis, though it is an interesting idea.  I wonder how much of this is influenced in the reverse way by the consumer culture.  For instance, how much of the 'oh I need the best treatment with the highest resolution camera' is driven by our consumer culture which rewards trendy, sometimes useless, metrics.

As avid readers know I recently watched the "Global Population Growth" (link to my academy page) and I was interested to see some of the same ideas re-represented in these videos.  The course discussed how when populations are more educated, richer, and have better access to birth control the birth rate drops.  However Steyn's thesis is that this will not happen and the adjustments in the cultures in Europe will happen because this rate will not drop.  This seems to be at the opposite of the current research into the topic.  I will take the advice of someone who knows the field better honestly.  However this doesn't invalidate watching the videos because people are very afraid of this happening.  Where there is fear and misunderstanding there is usually poorly written laws.

I was kinda frustrated to hear the very overt discussion which bashed the current administration in what I felt were back-handed slaps against the current policies.  I feel like the discussion could have been a little more high-brow but never was.

It was an interesting set of videos and I suggest you give them a glance, it is an interesting viewpoint which is worth understanding even if you do not agree with it because it will shape policy decisions in the next 20 years.

Biking in Hail and Fun Links

Yes you read that correctly, I had to bike in hail on t he way home.  Not only that but it was pelting rain and I don't have fenders so all of the water hits me in the face.  It was nutz.  I do not suggest riding in the hail though.  It was very unexpected.  Additionally it is thundering out there.  I haven't seen that very often.

Anyway I wanted to add a couple of interesting links I have found or been passed recently.

• Here is another set of pictures from the volcano, I really like the ones with lightning.
• Finally I was passed an interesting video from 1906 which is on youtube.  So interesting to see what things were like back then.  I have to admit it is kinda boring but look at the people riding their bikes and looking at the, I assume, trolly car.  Really interesting.

I'm going to show the world I'm smart

So here is a gripe I have with people (I know another one).  So this is something I see all the time on TV when I am watching I hear something to tune of 'This is going to prove to people I am smart/great/awesome/etc.'  Well here is the problem, the thing that will 'show them' is never actually related at all.

So here is the complaint tonight, the Amazing Race has Miss Teen South Carolina, you know 'the Iraq' girl.  So anyway tonight she was like 'I want to make it to the top 3 to prove I am smart.'  So first of all being in the top 3 doesn't make you smart.  If there is anything reality TV has taught us is that smarts have nothing to do with winning.  In fact the only things correlated with it are cunning and luck (and in the case of Survivor, people skills).  Additionally what is more funny is that about 4 weeks ago she got lost because she couldn't read a map.  I mean, if you look at someone and say, 'hey you made it to the end of that TV show, you must be smart' then you should just smack yourself in the head.

I think this all derives from everyone's inability or lack of desire to reflect on oneself.  If you look at this situation in the above paragraph from the outside you will say of course there is no correlation, however if you look at it from the inside (if it was you) what would you say?  Of course making it to the end would reinforce your idea that everyone under estimates you and how this is just proof you are beyond awesome.  I mean really think about it.  Would you think that way.

So here is the major problem, how do you recognize situations where you are reinvorcing some idea in yourself that is improper.  I think the biggest problem is recognizing when situations and actions are correlated and when they are not.  For instance if you want validation that you are a good basketball player would the fact that you just solved a mathematical proof validify your basketball skillz?  Of course not, however what if it is baseball and you just scored a homerun?  Is that similar enough to verify your opinion?  Is it valid?  I think there is also a problem in the opposite direction, can something reinvorce a bad decision about yourself.  For instance if you think you are terrible at programming and you get a pile of bugs against your code does that mean you actually are bad?

This seems to be a skill that many people lack.  What is more interesting is the more theoretical question of whether one can evaluate themselves and whether or not any evaluations are correct.  Also can someone else evaluate you (I mean we do it all the time, tests, evaluations, etc.)?  These are interesting questions however back to the original premise, no getting into the top 3 doesn't make you smart, it makes you in the top 3.  Period.

Lemons Everywhere

Pasta of the day: Lemon Explosion.

Let me tell you, it is lemony.  I used an entire lemon (zest and juice) to make this pasta.  It is really good but the Ricotta cheese is a little course when you add in the zest it isn't the best.  However it is definitely a neat dinner.  Now my hands smell like lemons.

Also zesting a lemon is not the easiest thing to do.  I used a potato peeler and then chopped the zest again but the chopping didn't produce very small zest, this may be the problem with the roughness of the dish.  I think there needs to be a kitchen device that you like put the thing in there and the press slice, peel, zest, smush, whatever and it will just do it no matter what it is or its size.  I think I will invent this, it will be awesome.

Note to Self: Cooking prep to not do

• Dice Garlic
• Dice Tomatoes
• Dice Olives

Modern technology is wonderful, dicing those things are a pain, difficult, and not worth it.  In the future I am going to let the food companies do that for me.  However that being said there is a lot of pride in chopping your own vegetables.  Maybe there is a market for a home product which will dice those things.  I think I need one.

For reference I am making: this.

Pasta Party

So I think I have a new Saturday routine.  I have found this stand in the Pike Place Market called Pappardelle.  The pasta place also gives you a recipe with the pasta which is fun as well.  While I think the vegetables are a little overpriced in the market it is still fun.  There is a farmer's market in Redmond where I live however it is generally under-attended by people I would like to buy from and isn't open as long as Pike Place Market.

I also have discovered a bakery in Pike Place which sells day old bread for a dollar which is way cheaper than I normally get from the store near my house.  So recently I have been making the trip downtown to get pasta and bread (and maybe vegetables) on Saturdays.  It is nice because I get out of the house and get to experience Seattle (which isn't really that interesting but still).

The pastas they have are really neat.  They all kinds of weird stuff like Spinach Garlic.  It seems this place only sells at farmer's markets and the websites suggest a sort of central making place however for 1/2 a pound for $5 I think it is worth it to get some new kind of pasta I have never tried.  My biggest problem recently with my cooking has be the boring food which is always the same and this will hopefully spice it up some more.  Also they have vegan pastas (which I buy) and vegan recipes which is nice as well.  I am slightly worried about the more starchy diet I have started however since I normally eat 1/3 to 1/4 as much as I used to I think it averages out.

It also seems like you can order the pasta online at a 20% discount to the market which is kinda frustrating.  If you have a farmer's market near you which sells this pasta let me know what you think of it.

Twits Tweeting

So, I am not a fan of tweeting.  I don't really give a shit if you found a deal on a pair of shoes or just took a major crap.  So anyway I remember a year or so ago at the state of the union address there was a big splash made of the congressmen who were tweeting during the address.  I find this insulting.  You are there to do the entirely difficult job of writing laws for a diverse and complicated country.  While I agree that the state of the union has become a pep rally for the majority party, tweeting during the address, come on.

Anyway, I haven't thought much about it until I came across this article on newsweek.com.  As you know I am a big fan of factcheck.org.  I wish more people visited there.  I think it will help a lot, however it involves reading so that is out for 90% of the populace.  However maybe there is an app for that... that tweets... while you are reading... on the toilet...

Anyway, apparently congressmen are still tweeting.  The article goes into several 'factual difficulties' our 'intelligence impaired' congress have had, recently, on both sides.  What is difficult for me to understand is this: legislating is difficult, do you really think 140 characters is enough when the health care bill was like a million words long?  So you can't craft a bill that people can actually read but you feel like tweeting 140 characters is enough to explain the problems with health care reform or the motives of the opposition?  Come on people.  I would actually prefer if you all spent your time writing simpler laws rather than tweeting, leave that to the unemployed.  If you continue to tweet hopefully you will join them in 6 more months.

Take two shots and call me in the morning

To start out with I would like to say that a lot of time is wasted in documentaries by people walking in hallways, talking on phones, or typing on computers.  I mean these aren't hard things, why do I need to watch someone do it.  The more hilarious part is that the people are trying not to laugh while doing it.

(I would like to say at the start that I am discussing the content of the video only and not information that was not contained in the video.  I personally would choose to vaccinate my children as I have seen no scientific evidence to the contrary.  However this does not have any effect on my discussion of the validity of the arguments presented.)

Anyway, so Frontline had a new video this week about vaccines.

As always I love Frontline, I don't always agree with the way they present material nor the material they leave out but in the end I feel like Frontline is in general a productive thing to watch.  This video is worth watching even though I am going to tear apart a couple of things here.  (The Wikipedia article on vaccines is here.)  The video is about people who don't want to vaccinate their kids and the reasons for it.  (Wikipedia article is here.)

I have to say, and this is a common complaint about all people throughout all time, is that people do not understand logic, statistics, and rational argument.  I don't want to specifically say person X is an idiot, I mean these are not simple topics to master however the lack of skill in these areas are causing significant problems in society.  For instance take the mom in the Frontline video from Oregon who is trying to rationalize not vaccinating her kids.  I will say that she has a valid question, 'When is the disease gone so that we can stop vaccinating against it,' however this is her justification for not vaccinating her kids: 'There hasn't been a case in X years in the United States.'  However during this time thousands of people die outside the United States.  This is an example of an illogical conclusion, this is like me saying no one ever gets hit by cars because I have never been hit by a car.  Additionally this more complicated due to the herd immunity populations in the United States has had in recent years though pockets of problems are popping up.

I also want to directly attack a common problem with cause and effect.  It is common today (and in the video this is pointed to early) that science and the benefits thereof are subdued or wrong if the discovering party makes money off the discovery.  In the video the Doctor who discovered the 'R' in the MMR vaccine was directly questioned about this.  I don't think he did any favors to himself by dodging the question however the question is stupid to begin with.  The vaccine is provided to children because the NIH, CDC, FDA, etc. say it is safe and prevents disease.  Does the profit motive matter here?  Does the fact that he made money from it mean the vaccine doesn't work?  No.  Now some people may dislike the idea of paying someone a profit on something that is 'required' for life but in reality you do this all the time, food, shelter, etc.  Don't think your landlord is a charity organization.  Luckily this was quickly glossed over as I feel like it was a general distraction.

Next we are looking at a statistical problem in the video.  The video spends a lot of time discussing the link between autism and vaccines (specifically Thimerosal and Mercury as possible culprits).  Now here is the problem, and it is stated later in the video about minute 35:00.  It is stated that parents noticed their children regress at this specific time, when the vaccine was given.  The guy was like, science can't tell us why this happened though non-scientific evidence from the parents said it happened because of the shot.  Well this is what the scientific method is for, to prove both positive or negative outcomes.  The research showed there was no or significant evidence against a link between the vaccines and autism.  I think the video states it pretty clearly that there is an average age when autism is diagnosed and that happens to be during the time that a lot of vaccines are given.  Correlation does not equal causation, it is that simple, you have to prove causation (and correlation).

I feel like a lot of problems and poor communications could be cleared by a more effective understanding of these principals of rationality, logic, and statistics.  It seems pretty difficult to have a functioning society without these and so many people lack them.  I feel especially blessed that I have a solid understanding of those but it also took many years to develop a good grasp of any of them.

So now I will discuss briefly (after tearing into the anti-vaccine camp) the positive points they made.  Yes, it is important that these concerns are studied.  Yes, it is important that we spend resources to identify problems.  Yes, (my opinion is) you should have choice in determining what happens to your children, however, I do not feel you should assume you can know everything just because 'you read something'.  I would say challenge your doctor by asking important questions however remember to practice intellectualism and defer to the person with the most expertise in the area.  It is sad when children have bad things happen to them but we need to as parents, and as a society look at the problem through a scientific lens and find out what the real cause of the problem is, half-guesses and assumed omnipotence are counter-productive.

(I strongly suggest watching the video and surfing through the Wikipedia articles as the discussion is very interesting.  I would also add the discussion on the Frontline website is interesting.  It is obvious that not all information could be presented in 55 minutes and some people bring up valid points and additional information.  I think both sides should remember that we are all looking for the answer we just may have different paths to get there.)

Unbelievable

Here is a video on Anderson Cooper 360 which is incredible.  These people just walk by as a man is dying.  What is amazing to me is that the women didn't call for help.  What is also surprising is that it took the authorities 1 hour to arrive at the scene of the crime (if in fact she was the one who called).  This is incredible.  I actually watched a cop car hit a kid this last week.

Why didn't these people help him?  He was homeless, could that be it?  I have to admit I would think twice before approaching someone on the sidewalk after dark.  It could be a trap.  Criminals are getting more innovative all the time, playing on the good Samaritans is common.  So I can kinda understand walking by.  However I think I would still call someone.  However I can't believe the groups of people walked by.  Pretty incredible.

I have to say that I think the guy in the video is mostly full of crap.  I don't think the 'whatever he called it' is the reason people walked by.  I think it has more to do with what I said.  Also I feel like even if you are just helping the police the amount of time you spend and such is overwhelming.  I don't know if that would prevent me from helping someone who was bleeding, however I may think twice about calling in a bum sleeping on the sidewalk because it just isn't worth the effort to move the bum.

I have to say this is crazy, the people who took pictures should doubly be ashamed of himself.  Just ridiculous.

Update on GS v. SEC and public opinion

So I posted recently about what the content of the case was against Goldman-Sachs.  I wanted to weight in on the case (I know, surprising).  (For reference here is another article which stands closer to my opinion.)

So here is my thing, these were not average investors.  These people involved in the deal had the sole job of vetting and buying/selling securities of this nature.  They should have known that there was danger.  See here is the issue that most people don't understand: The buyers (all people in these transactions have a seller and a buyer) didn't care.  They were betting that the housing market would go up forever and they just wanted a steady income stream from Paulson for free (since the market would go up).  The bigger issue is that they didn't charge enough for the risk.  If the buyer had charged enough then Paulson would likely have not entered into the transaction either.  I mean Paulson was betting heavily against the grain, almost no one was betting that way at the time, that is why the Synthetic CDO was so cheap and thus why Paulson took it (in an economic sense).  If there were a lot of people betting against the housing market then there would have been more demand and less supply which would have raised prices (i.e. Paulson would have paid more every month to the buyer).  There was little risk to them but a large reward and they were betting it would pay off.

Now look at this the other way.  If the world was different and the market didn't crash then Paulson would have been out a lot of money (well not a lot but out money) and we wouldn't be talking about this.  The issue is that due diligence was not done by the buying party.  As a society we don't like people who bet against stuff.  For instance, take an opposing bet on a craps table and see what happens, you will get a lot of stares.  Why?  Because as a society we want to go long.  Bet for something rather than against so when someone makes money against something we as a society get mad.  I feel like there is a lot of that here.  I mean look at how often congress wants to ban short-sellers.  This is a huge problem, without the ability to bet against a security all the securities will be over valued and the market will be more bubbly and more people would lose money.  We need people to bet against securities and ideas when it makes sense.

Is Goldman-Sachs at fault of anything?  No.  They brought together a buyer and a seller.  They didn't want to hold the buyer's side.  Does it matter than some people bet for and some against in the same company?  No.  Each area is responsible for their own money making and you can bet if the short sellers lost a lot of money they would all be gone just like those who made the securities lost their jobs when the short-sellers were right.  I mean the biggest problem is that people were buying stuff just because it was from Goldman-Sachs, the reputation meant that no one thought about what they are buying.  This is like you going into a store and t he clerk saying you should buy X and then you just buy it because if they sell it it must be good.  Now reputation is a good thing and allow people to make decisions with less information.  However I hope that in the future people will look at that less.

One outcome is that people will be more likely to do their due diligence when buying non-traditional securities.  This can only help us.  The market works best when all people work in their interest and if you don't know what you are buying then you can't do that.

I will say that one hopeful outcome of this is that complex instruments will eventually have smaller disclosure documents and simpler reporting.  I mean who is going to read thousands of pages?  I feel like a standardization of securities in this market would do a lot to help reduce the paper and help the individual buyers and sellers make a better choice.  (If you have money and want to invest in a start-up I have a fabulous idea for a company who can address the importance of derivatives and the transparency needed to create a market.  There is a market and non-government solution to these problems and I know what it is.)

Island of Solitude

I love surfing the travel sites, knowing that I will never see many of these places unless I win the lotto.  (Come on 1-2-3-4-5-6-(7) make me rich.)  So I came across a really neat page which is the remotest islands you can get to and what is there.  So awesome.  Wish I didn't have to work so I could just explore this world while I am still young and could enjoy it.

Here is the slide show.

A Hilarious Clip about Religion

So in case you didn't hear (who hasn't), the south park guys have been threatened with death threats from an American Muslim group in America.  Well the Daily Show had a fabulous video (and song) to all people who get mad about politics and religion and the differences people have in that arena.  Hilarious.  Make sure you get to the end, the song is hilarious.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
South Park Death Threats
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

That Park is going, going, gone

I just have to say I love maps, and that the New York Times and Newsweek always have really good ways of putting together information.  Well here is something I ran across sometime back and I thought you would all enjoy this.  Here is a map of places that are likely to radically change due to climate change.  This is like a who's who of things to see.  Make sure you drive your 6 mpg hummer to these places.  If not you may not make it.  :-)

Its a really neat page, totally check it out.

Jesus Saves

While I was researching other blog posts I came across an interesting post on seekingalpha.com about saving in China.  I thought I would provide it for reference since a lot of people seem to think economics is black magic (which a lot of it is).  I mean economics is the science of saying why your prediction yesterday was wrong.  However this does a good job of explaining why savings and interest rates are correlated in the US and then goes to provide anecdotal evidence of why the reverse is true in China.  Mostly (IMHO) this is due to the larger safety net in the US and the longer history of 'things working out' in general.  China on the other hand is newly free market and so many people still save like crazy to pay for things that the state doesn't provide.

Alphabet Soup of Goldman-Sachs

So, for those who live under a rock, last week the SEC (those guys who fell down on finding Madoff, ya them) have brought charges against Goldman-Sachs.  Now I know it is common to bash Goldman-Sachs for making money these last couple years especially while everyone else is losing tons of money, however it is important to know that not everyone there is evil.  However it does look like questionable things were happening inside the company.

So what are the charges about?  Well I have collected a couple of interesting links for your review:

• Article from the Huffington post.  I would strongly suggest starting here.  This article is fairly accessible and does a good job of reviewing the case against Goldman-Sachs and what they did.  I think in general this article is slightly more 'they are evil and meant to be evil in their actions' than this is 'just unfortunate as a product of doing business' article.  I, in general, do not like a lot of the HuffingtonPost.com articles but I thought this did a good job of explaining the problem.
• From CBS about the breakdown between GS and the SEC.  What I find most interesting is that the commission was split 3-2 on party lines.  Come on people this isn't a partisan issue.  Your job is to protect investors, I really feel like this party lines thing has gone too far when it influences whether or not the SEC brings actions against companies.
• Europe's Response.  You know when blood is in the water more sharks circle.  Governments always want escape goats especially when they were complacent in the problem to begin with.  With so many problems in Europe (think Greece here), it seems like everyone attacks at the same time.
• Overview from a blog at seekingalpha.com.  (If you have never been to this site and invest you are doing yourself no favors.)  This site is mostly people blogging about investing and markets so as you can imagine there has been a lot of postings about this.

It will be interesting to see how this all settles out.  This is a major problem for the markets, trust.  If you can't trust the counterparties then markets breakdown (though you can buy insurance against that).  Your broker should have your interests at heart.  It looks like Goldman-Sachs may not, not that this surprises anyone.

I have not decided if on any level either of the options (GS is guilty or not) is a preferable option.  I think it is terrible that some companies are so big that the government can't police them because they don't have the resources to force compliance (it is well known the SEC 'talks' with large companies to find solutions when they cause problems and not sue them since the SEC doesn't have the resources to win).  No one should be above the law but in the US we seem to be ok with the government not policing the largest companies.  This is a good step in the correct direction.

Update:  Had to add a daily show link for this.  :-)

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
These F@#king Guys - Goldman Sachs
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Musings on Conferences

So I have a couple of thoughts on conferences I would like to air out.  I think there is a lot of problems in the current structure as I have seen in my research career.  Some organizations put on better conferences than others, this is not in doubt.  But the general quality of a quality conference is slightly unnerving to me.

1. The publishable delta is larger than you know.  There is a lot of thinking that the smallest publishable delta should be published (and sought after).  I have problems with this model as it encourages people to do trivial uninterested research in general.  Additionally the smallest publishable delta is larger than most people think.  It is obvious that some institutions are publication machines without any thought on the quality of the research.
2. Most people give terrible presentations.  This one probably wouldn't surprise most people as a lot of people in general give poor presentations.  Most colleges have a public speaking class that is required, I know I did.  The course was a joke honestly.  This is however a very important skill and it is one that I actually did take away from graduate school partly from my advisor whom I left.  It is important to be able to explain your research to anyone and it is important to describe it clearly.  Most people I have seen recently fail at both of those.
3. Most people can't write coherent papers.  I am amazed at the poor quality of writing that is accepted in a lot of journals.  I have been an editor a couple of times now and there are occasionally good co-editors, however in general I feel like the reviewers just rubber stamp most work.  Additionally I feel like reviewers should not know who wrote the paper because it biases them.  I mostly feel like my time is wasted when I review papers because my work is larger ignored or unnoticed.  There are good papers and better journals but most are just full of crap (including the 'premiere' journals).
4. All because you can make a graph of your work doesn't make it interesting, research, or publishable.  I can't tell you how many presentations I have been to where the presentation was just talking about an experiment and not results.  Or some stuff which results with one graph.  Amazing.  There is no peer review of the academic merit there.  Not everything should be published.  While I agree that no result is a result you have to have some reason for someone to care beyond 'I need to publish for my career'.
5. Fifteen minutes is not long enough for anything.  The common thread I have seen in a lot of conferences is to allow for 15 minute presentations.  You know that isn't enough time.  I really feel like 30 minutes is what is needed (however 15 minutes is more than enough to bore the hell out of me).  No one ever gets done in 15 minutes and no real information can be transferred to the audience in that time.
6. This follows from the previous one but posters and WAY better than presentations.  I know everyone thinks that presentations are better and more respectable than posters but I love posters both as a presenter and as an observer.  I like talking about the material, being able to move forwards and backwards through the material, not having a time limit, the amount of questions you can address, etc.  I just feel like it is a more effective way to get information across.  However I will say, there are a lot of REALLY bad posters.  If your poster has over 200 words on it you are probably doing something wrong.  I once saw a poster with, I kid you not, 5000 words on it.  Could not believe it, needless to say I didn't read it.

This all comes on the heels of an interesting discussion on slashdot.org about Chinese papers and employees.  I don't actually have any direct experience with the material talked about in the discussion but my experiences with outsourcing are less than glowing.  What is happening to research?  Perhaps I was spoiled because I went to a big name university where I met and interacted with really, really, smart people.  I know people who did interesting and compelling research (though not all).  Perhaps the majority of research is this search for the smallest publishable delta and they fall short.  Seems like a bad thing if it is.

Porn is Art

Gotta love this article.  How is nude people art?  I am not really that down with modern art especially like this.  I have been to many art museums and taken a lot of art classes but I still don't get it.  Anyway this article struck me as the old 'but stripping is an art form' debate.  :-)

Gotta love awesome pictures

Quick Post, look at these pictures.  Wow.  Pictures.

Nominate me for the Supreme Court

So I am reading this article which states that Patrick Leahy is planning to ask:

"Do you share our concern about the fact that the court always seems to side with the big corporate interests against the average American?"

Here is why I should be nominated because I would answer the following:

"I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.  The court's sole purpose stated in the constitution is to decide the constitutionality of laws passed by congress, and interpret the laws passed in the U.S. code.  If it seems that the court always sides with corporate interests then perhaps you should ask yourself why congress keeps making laws that favor corporate interests.  Do you share my concern that congress seems to side with big corporate interests against the average American?"

Now this would never get me nominated and this would be labeled as a decidedly conservative response, which it isn't.  This is a constructionalist response.  I would love to see someone get up there and say that.  I totallly would.  Unfortunately I will never get my chance...

Interesting Conversations

So I had an interesting interaction on a plane.  So I am sitting in an exit row and enjoying myself reading my book (The Princeton Companion to Mathematics).  I come back from the bathroom and the lady behind me across the aisle ask me a question.  It is obvious she had been wondering for a while and wanted to ask: "Is that a textbook?"  So I was like, 'no', I mean it isn't a textbook.  How do you though say what it is.  So I said it was a tour-de-force of the modern mathematical research at the end of the 20th century, which I think is mostly an accurate way to look at it.

So but here is the thing.  The number of people who actually read this book is slim and there is an exceedingly small portion of the population which could even understand the 'review' chapter.  So I felt extreme pride in telling them what I was reading.  I mean it is quite something that I can read it and understand the majority of the concepts (thought I don't honestly get the insanely complicated ones, I am still having trouble with buildings (there isn't even a wikipedia article on it)).  So is it right to feel proud of myself?  I mean I am trying to improve myself by doing more than just reading people magazine.  Or is it wrong to feel that way?  You know in my opinion it is ok because this is complicated and advanced and I can understand it and I should feel good.  I am sure most people will disagree that it is valid to feel proud that you can do something well or at all but I completely disagree.  Now it isn't like I was standing up on the plane and being like, 'I'm better than you because I can read this' (that would have been inappropriate).  However it is important to know your strengths and nuture them, additionally (and I will write more on this later) humility is not the lack of pride in yourself it is the proper amount of pride and the self awareness to know where that line is between your abilities and where your abilities are not.  Anyway.  All of that went through my mind so I thought I would write about it.

I would add that no one else can judge whether you have the proper amount of pride in your abilities.  They might think they can but they cannot mostly because people always remember the one time you were wrong instead of the other times where you were not.

I'm going to need you to come in on Saturday

So you may have noticed a lack of postings recently.  Well, last Friday about 3 minutes before I was to grab my bike and go home I get a call from a high up person.  So to make a long story short I was on a plane last Sunday to visit a customer and I just got back a day or so ago.  This required me to work all weekend to set-up my laptop so that I could get access the materials I needed to do all of the things I required while I was away.  So I lost Saturday.

We flew the red-eye on Sunday and then I worked straight until about 9 pm the next night.  Followed by a long Tuesday and then a half-day on Wednesday which I followed up with a long flight that was delayed by an hour.  That was my last week.   Couple of lessons in general for those who are likely to interact with customers.

1. If your customer's company is non-American then expect to spend lots of times with misunderstandings.  I wasted most of Monday because we couldn't communicate with the customer effectively.
2. Make sure your support staff at your home office are available and will help you.  We had a lot of problems because we could not get in contact with the people at home.
3. Expect your customer wants to own every aspect of your product regardless of whether or not they should.  My area is completely automated and self-configuring and the entire trip was about the customer wanting to tweak things in the system.
4. Make sure you bring a program manager or someone with you.  Program managers are people and relationship managers.  This is important because as a technical person I didn't have the time nor the energy to take care of that aspect and I really appreciate my coworker who went with me as he did a great job of keeping the entire process on track, documented, and productive.

Anyway I have more posted about the trip I am sure though they are for another time.

One carry-on please

So I am flying a lot in the next two weeks.  It is really easy to criticize airplane travel.  Airlines never seem to care, people are rude, I will probably be stuck in a middle seat which will suck major ass.  (My company didn't book the flights nor tell me until late on Friday.)  One of my biggest pet peeves is people's carry-ons.  No one ever carries on the appropriate amount onto flights.  I can remember flying back from Las Vegas and watching a couple put 5 bags in the overhead.  They were not like purses we are talking carry-ons, and they didn't even fit.

So I can actually understand Charles Schumer.  He wants to prevent airlines from charging for carry-ons.  I don't want to pay either (though I want people to follow the rules which they never do).  Recently I heard that representatives would like congress to enforce the carry-on policies of the airlines.

Well here is my take.  I don't fly airlines that charge baggage fees unless I have to and usually someone else is paying in that case (and reimbursing me for the charges).  However I would fly an airline that charged for carry-on luggage if the ticket was significantly cheaper than other airlines.  Here is the thing, if airlines would like to distinguish themselves by only having you pay for what you need then I say go for it.  If Spirit Airlines wants to charge 45$ for a carry-on but lower the ticket price by $40 then that is fine.  I am sure there are people who don't fly with carry-ons that would like a cheaper ticket.  Only pay for what you use, I like that.  I think the biggest problem is that most people think everything should be free.  Is this possible, no.  You don't have to fly one airline you can fly any of them so choose the ones you support instead of the ones you don't.  Southwest is doing well because of exactly this.  I don't think I should have to subsidize other people's perks while flying.  Paying for carry-ons actually make sense in this respect (however the airline should reduce the cost of the base ticket which they never do but that is the post for another day).  Also I feel like ticket prices quoted should always reflect all fees and surcharges.  I mean it isn't like I can buy the ticket without paying those fees.

Also, congressmen stop flapping your pie holes about fairness.  Government has no place in this discussion besides to make sure all of the fees are disclosed at purchase time and easily readable.  Even then the reasons are dicey because people could just not fly airlines with hidden fees.  However I will allow the government to step in and make sure the fees are disclosed.