Todays the day I was planning to spend time at the area Democratic club, listening to a presentation for prospective candidates and workers. I actually got to the clubhouse, and even went in, but I didn't hang around. I have reasons (it's a pretty day, why spend it inside; I have mowing to do; I wanted to bake something as a welcome gift for new neighbors; I didn't like that there was no free parking; apparently they really did mean to RSVP, because they had name tags; I wasn't sure how they'd like the answer if they asked if I was a registered Democrat), but the key truth is, I wimped out.
I've been reading people's columns and articles about the Virginia Tech calamity. Even ignoring the blogs with hyperbole as their major ingredient, there's a lot. Two interesting ones -- Science Blogs is pretty literate, and Cynical-C has a running summary of Whom to Blame. For me, I know that I have come to the conclusion that there is no single answer, or even multiple answers. I don't see my society changing its attitude toward the acceptibility of violence soon, and probably not at all; I think that attitude is part of it. I do believe that any answer has gun control as part of it, but I find myself thinking that perhaps the people who advocate being personally armed have something there. I suspect that certain elements can be present in two places and lead to violence in one but not the other, and that a solution that works in one won't work in another. I think we can't defend against catastrophes, or crazy people. We can just prepare, and hope we have all the bases covered.
Its so damn hard to think about it. And its so damn easy to trivialize our response.
I baked the muffins, and now we're going to drop them off. And, to my amazement, I got up this morning and DTB'd.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
H&S
As distinct from, say, H&K, which any weapons-oriented person recognizes immediately.
H&S is Heart and Soul. For some reason, sitting here at the breakfast table, I thought of the charming sequence in Superman Returns where the hulking, muscular, tattooed thug walks over to the piano where Lois Lane's son is tentatively picking out that tune, turns to smile at her, and then sits and quietly plays the counterpoint as the boy continues his part. Its a startling, counterintuitive sequence.
And what happens shortly afterward with the piano's not bad, either.
H&S is Heart and Soul. For some reason, sitting here at the breakfast table, I thought of the charming sequence in Superman Returns where the hulking, muscular, tattooed thug walks over to the piano where Lois Lane's son is tentatively picking out that tune, turns to smile at her, and then sits and quietly plays the counterpoint as the boy continues his part. Its a startling, counterintuitive sequence.
And what happens shortly afterward with the piano's not bad, either.
Friday, April 20, 2007
More on Guns
I just read two editorials linked from the CNN web site.
One said that we ought to drop the gun culture entirely. The other said that we ought to embrace it fully.
The first held that being part of a gun culture encourages violence, encourages the use of weapons to resolve problems.
The other held that so long as there ARE weapons, only a fool would believe that limiting or banning weapons was a good idea.
I agree with the first. And I understand the logic of the second. Don't agree with it, but I understand it.
What I need is a way to control or eliminate the use of weapons by maniacs and the criminal, while allowing it for anyone else -- kind of like a Breathalyzer for guns.
One said that we ought to drop the gun culture entirely. The other said that we ought to embrace it fully.
The first held that being part of a gun culture encourages violence, encourages the use of weapons to resolve problems.
The other held that so long as there ARE weapons, only a fool would believe that limiting or banning weapons was a good idea.
I agree with the first. And I understand the logic of the second. Don't agree with it, but I understand it.
What I need is a way to control or eliminate the use of weapons by maniacs and the criminal, while allowing it for anyone else -- kind of like a Breathalyzer for guns.
Response
I got this back from one of our state's senators. Though it is apparently a form letter, I thought it was well done.
Thank you for contacting my office regarding the ongoing situation in
I believe that had we known Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, the Congress would not have authorized the invasion of
As a member of Congress, I have expressed my belief that a shift in policy is overdue and expressed openness to considering any and all suggestions for a change in course. I have urged the Administration to work with the Iraqi government and
On February 27, 2007, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced that the U.S. would participate in an international conference organized by the Iraqi government to address regional peace and security and that the governments of Iran and Syria would also take part. I believe participation in these meetings by the
On January 10, 2007, President Bush outlined a new strategy for
On the issue of troop withdrawal, it is my opinion that the Iraqi government should be put on notice that
Although I question the impact of a surge in
Thank you again for contacting me. The concerns of my constituents are of great importance to me, and I rely on you and other Pennsylvanians to inform me of your views. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office or visit my website at http://specter.senate.gov.
Life's a lot easier in the bleachers.....Overheard
"I once worked for a guy who, when he wanted to do something that he knew he should get agreement on, would present the proposal, and then say "All in favor, say AYE; All opposed, say I QUIT".
Friday Ayem
Okay, thats two days in a a row of getting up at 5:30 and DTBing --I think thats enough! Though I have learned some things that I had forgotten, here in the pre-dawn hours --
-- it is incredibly easy to lose weight, make big money in real estate, and meet hot chicks who desire to flash their boobs while grinning wildly and sticking their tongue out; these people are just waiting -- yearning -- for you to call.
-- should any of the foregoing make you yearn for a more ethereal existence, there are plenty of well-dressed, smiling men with (usually) great hair who are willing to help you achieve spiritual stability for only a small donation.
-- the X Files is as strange now as ever
===========
Last night, we drove the Accord. Very nice. My wife said that if you need a powerful car which can seat five and gets excellent mileage, that's the ticket. I agree. It was a hybrid V6, and would go so fast that it scared me. Plush interior, nicely laid out. Only the drivers side was fully adjustable, which surprised me a bit. Both the Toyota and the Honda adjust the steeting column by means of a pull-down lever which can bang your legs as you get in.
If the Honda were about $4K less, we'd dither some more (not to say that we won't, anyway), but right now we're thinking: Prius.
-- it is incredibly easy to lose weight, make big money in real estate, and meet hot chicks who desire to flash their boobs while grinning wildly and sticking their tongue out; these people are just waiting -- yearning -- for you to call.
-- should any of the foregoing make you yearn for a more ethereal existence, there are plenty of well-dressed, smiling men with (usually) great hair who are willing to help you achieve spiritual stability for only a small donation.
-- the X Files is as strange now as ever
===========
Last night, we drove the Accord. Very nice. My wife said that if you need a powerful car which can seat five and gets excellent mileage, that's the ticket. I agree. It was a hybrid V6, and would go so fast that it scared me. Plush interior, nicely laid out. Only the drivers side was fully adjustable, which surprised me a bit. Both the Toyota and the Honda adjust the steeting column by means of a pull-down lever which can bang your legs as you get in.
If the Honda were about $4K less, we'd dither some more (not to say that we won't, anyway), but right now we're thinking: Prius.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Timber!
This is another 'now what' photo. What do you fix first?My guess: brace the vertical stack on the right, then start picking off the ones that have fallen, right one first.
Absolutely -- Well, Nothing. No, Really.
The Absolutely Nothing web site has some elegantly composed and executed photography.
And This is Why....
Argh.
I just left two comments on a person's site.
The first, I forgot to give it my name. It was a funny comment, and I didn't say who I was.
The second was a dumb comment, because I didn't notice that at the end, the person had effectively said exactly what I said. That one, I signed.
And I wonder why people don't flock to this blog? Don't say Damn, this guy is good, let me see what else he's written?
I just left two comments on a person's site.
The first, I forgot to give it my name. It was a funny comment, and I didn't say who I was.
The second was a dumb comment, because I didn't notice that at the end, the person had effectively said exactly what I said. That one, I signed.
And I wonder why people don't flock to this blog? Don't say Damn, this guy is good, let me see what else he's written?
Picanick
Which is how my father used to say 'picnic'. Pick-a-nick. No, his name wasn't Nick.
When I was a kid, picnics were not particularly gay affairs. They were usually held on crowded beaches, wearing sandy or damp bathing suits, or in thinly-grassed parks with tree-roots poking me as I try to find a comfortable position -- and if I should doze off, then I could count on awakening with a headache from the sun glaring down on me. The sandwiches would be dry and listless from being crammed into the basket; the cake (if there at all) crumbling from the same rough handling. You tramp from the parking lot, eke out some space, frolic, and later tramp back to the parking lot and tumble back into the car, gasping from the canned heat. "Roll down the windows! Roll down the windows!"
And this was a good picnic. On the bad ones, it rained.
What brings this to mind is the 'Picnic Basket' web site I came across this morning. It's got a marvelous collection of various types of picnic baskets, each one redolent with possibility. I look at these baskets, and I envision the perfect picnic -- warm, sultry breezes, thick ground cloths set on lush grasslands, good food emerging from a bottomless hamper of delights, followed by a peaceful slumber on a shaded, soft surface, and, when I awake, a tasty snack -- perhaps a piece of chocolate cake, or some deep dish apple pie. With vanilla ice cream! Oh, and some quiet background music -- some chamber music, or Mozart, perhaps...
A little Grey Poupon, my dear?
When I was a kid, picnics were not particularly gay affairs. They were usually held on crowded beaches, wearing sandy or damp bathing suits, or in thinly-grassed parks with tree-roots poking me as I try to find a comfortable position -- and if I should doze off, then I could count on awakening with a headache from the sun glaring down on me. The sandwiches would be dry and listless from being crammed into the basket; the cake (if there at all) crumbling from the same rough handling. You tramp from the parking lot, eke out some space, frolic, and later tramp back to the parking lot and tumble back into the car, gasping from the canned heat. "Roll down the windows! Roll down the windows!"
And this was a good picnic. On the bad ones, it rained.
What brings this to mind is the 'Picnic Basket' web site I came across this morning. It's got a marvelous collection of various types of picnic baskets, each one redolent with possibility. I look at these baskets, and I envision the perfect picnic -- warm, sultry breezes, thick ground cloths set on lush grasslands, good food emerging from a bottomless hamper of delights, followed by a peaceful slumber on a shaded, soft surface, and, when I awake, a tasty snack -- perhaps a piece of chocolate cake, or some deep dish apple pie. With vanilla ice cream! Oh, and some quiet background music -- some chamber music, or Mozart, perhaps...
A little Grey Poupon, my dear?
Ads
I am not much of a sports fan (did you know that comes from sports fanatic? Yup.) but I do understand some of the delight in the game when you see someone doing what they do with effortless elegance. Hearing that solid thwack, seeing the arc into the basket from thirty feet away, or the perfect spiral across the autumn sky, I suspect that many people just shake their head in bemused admiration.
They also think "Why, heck, I could do that...and for a lot less money than that guy's getting, too". But they know in their hearts that it takes a goodly amount of talent to throw a blistering fastball, or catch a long fly ball deep in the shadows, or tap the ball in while three hundred people watch, and though they still think that they might be able to do it, they sometimes just admire the ability that makes that possible.
This Slate article, about a series of elegantly simple UPS ads, celebrates that same sense of achievement -- both the ads themselves, and the creative effort that brought them to life.
I liked it.
They also think "Why, heck, I could do that...and for a lot less money than that guy's getting, too". But they know in their hearts that it takes a goodly amount of talent to throw a blistering fastball, or catch a long fly ball deep in the shadows, or tap the ball in while three hundred people watch, and though they still think that they might be able to do it, they sometimes just admire the ability that makes that possible.
This Slate article, about a series of elegantly simple UPS ads, celebrates that same sense of achievement -- both the ads themselves, and the creative effort that brought them to life.
I liked it.
Early Action
After being reminded by my oral surgeons reaction that I really do take a lot of drugs (and not the fun kind, either), I thought that perhaps I ought to do something about it.
The way I did the math is, the type of drugs I take aren't likely to substantially change, but the quantity seems to be related to my size. To lessen the amount of them, there should be less of me. Well, of course, my track record on that is just as good as most people's, but I do recall the one time that I actually was successful in such an effort -- it was just after we'd bought an exercise bike, and started using it religiously. We were doing it for strength, but after about a month, we both noticed that there was a size effect, too. It wasn't overwhelming, but it was definitely there.
So, I thought "I should do that again". I went through the probably - predictable cycle of 'I should do that thirty minutes every day' to 'I should do that twenty minutes every day' to 'I should do that ten or fifteen minutes, most days'. I couldn't talk myself into planning to do it less than that, so this morning, I actually Did The Bike. Lowest possible intensity, slow pace, 16 minutes. But I did it.
I am trying hard not to think of how soon tomorrow morning comes.
The way I did the math is, the type of drugs I take aren't likely to substantially change, but the quantity seems to be related to my size. To lessen the amount of them, there should be less of me. Well, of course, my track record on that is just as good as most people's, but I do recall the one time that I actually was successful in such an effort -- it was just after we'd bought an exercise bike, and started using it religiously. We were doing it for strength, but after about a month, we both noticed that there was a size effect, too. It wasn't overwhelming, but it was definitely there.
So, I thought "I should do that again". I went through the probably - predictable cycle of 'I should do that thirty minutes every day' to 'I should do that twenty minutes every day' to 'I should do that ten or fifteen minutes, most days'. I couldn't talk myself into planning to do it less than that, so this morning, I actually Did The Bike. Lowest possible intensity, slow pace, 16 minutes. But I did it.
I am trying hard not to think of how soon tomorrow morning comes.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Symantec Semantics
Last night, I spent an hour and a half installing the Norton Premium System Works onto my home laptop. And I can say, authoritatively, that Premium does not mean tasty, or automatic, or damn fine. It does have features that the others do not...but they are challenging, and they make assumptions that I'd just as soon they not have made.
For example, part of the package is what they call GoBack, which is a 'restore my files' deal. Well, that sounded good to me, and was in fact part of why I bought the upgraded package. What I DIDN'T expect was that as part of installation, it would decide that this meant it needed to take a (presumably compressed) picture of my entire hard drive...including about twenty meg of files that never change, and are easily reinstallable. There went twenty minutes of my evening. Another function was their Backup package, which I thought meant that they were offering an off-site backup service. Ah, no. It meant they would backup files for you...once you downloaded and installed Microshaft's .NET service. Well, okay, its not that big a deal -- but I didn't expect it. Right now, the back up is running, but its just a test. I need to figure out how to tell what files it ought to be backing up, and then how to get them off this laptop and to a secure location. Pretty soon, I can see, I'll need a whole backup architecture.
Software should make life simpler, and I suppose it usually does. But not this stuff.
For example, part of the package is what they call GoBack, which is a 'restore my files' deal. Well, that sounded good to me, and was in fact part of why I bought the upgraded package. What I DIDN'T expect was that as part of installation, it would decide that this meant it needed to take a (presumably compressed) picture of my entire hard drive...including about twenty meg of files that never change, and are easily reinstallable. There went twenty minutes of my evening. Another function was their Backup package, which I thought meant that they were offering an off-site backup service. Ah, no. It meant they would backup files for you...once you downloaded and installed Microshaft's .NET service. Well, okay, its not that big a deal -- but I didn't expect it. Right now, the back up is running, but its just a test. I need to figure out how to tell what files it ought to be backing up, and then how to get them off this laptop and to a secure location. Pretty soon, I can see, I'll need a whole backup architecture.
Software should make life simpler, and I suppose it usually does. But not this stuff.
Surgery
Just went to see the oral surgeon to -- again -- set up things for the first phase of the implants. Its amazing to me how many times we've done this, and something's gotten in the way. I now expect that something will come up -- and, indeed, something has. The good news is, neither one is a showstopper. I flinch when he refers to the first phase as 'this minor surgery'. I know that whats planned is major, but I don't like being reminded of it.
=======
I need to figure out how to get my blood sugar meds down.... I'm sure I can find lots of helpful advice, most of which will tick me off, since I suspect it'll start with Get More Exercise. A LOT more exercise.
=======
I need to figure out how to get my blood sugar meds down.... I'm sure I can find lots of helpful advice, most of which will tick me off, since I suspect it'll start with Get More Exercise. A LOT more exercise.
Question
From a gun owners perspective:
Is a moderate accomodation with non-gun owners possible?
Or is the feeling pretty much what the NRA says -- any accomodation makes it easier to take your guns away?
Is a moderate accomodation with non-gun owners possible?
Or is the feeling pretty much what the NRA says -- any accomodation makes it easier to take your guns away?
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Firefracks
Has anyone else had problems doing comment responses with Firefox lately? I've lost three comments in two days, and I'm starting to question the integrity of this release 2.0.0.3.... the damn thing just locks up, and next thing I know, I'm looking at that 'Please tell Microsoft about this problem' box, like thats going to do any good....
Food and Reality
The West Virginia Surf Report site has an excellent display of pictures comparing advertising photos to unretouched photos of the actually delivered food. My favorite's the Big Mac.....
Gosh, truth in advertising doesn't seem to be keeping up....
Gosh, truth in advertising doesn't seem to be keeping up....
Guns, revisited
I wrote a little about my reaction to the most recent shooting. At the risk of being even more boring than normal, I'd like to put down what I think, once again.
Finally:
I believe that people cause violence; guns just facilitate it.
+++++++++++++
Interesting article: www.theage.com.au/
I understand the gun culture -- people who like or need to hunt; people who want personal weapon(s) for self-protection; people who like to collect firearms. My understanding is intellectual, not visceral. To draw an analogy, I understand the appeal of fashion, but I am not motivated by it. I understand the appeal of guns, but I am not motivated by it.
I believe most gun owners don’t understand the deep disgust that NRA zealots can induce in non-gun owners. To this day, the memory of Charlton Heston waving a flintlock at an NRA convention, saying that “We’re got the guns!”, causes me to shudder.
I believe there is no reason at all – none whatsoever – for private ownership of rapid-fire weapons, high-capacity weapons, speed loaders, or bulletproof vests and body armor.
I believe that gun owners are as afraid as I am, generally, of getting shot, or having their family slaughtered. I suspect that most of them are like me, hoping to be protected by the police; some (my guess is about thirty percent) are armed, themselves, because they don’t think the police can be counted on to do it.
I believe that criminals can always get guns; all society can do is make it hard for them to do so.
I believe that there are times when a victim could have saved themselves, had they been armed.
I believe that requiring gun owners to register, and guns to be secured, will not end random acts of violence. Reduce it, probably; end it, no.
I believe that most gun owners believe that gun registration would not significantly reduce gun violence. I also believe that some percentage of gun owners believe that gun registration a) would expose them to having their weapons summarily confiscated, b) would expose them to being the first-attacked in any wave of insurgency, and/or c) is a violation of the second amendment.
Finally:
I believe that people cause violence; guns just facilitate it.
+++++++++++++
Interesting article: www.theage.com.au/
Monday, April 16, 2007
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Chilly Sunday
I'm sitting in the living room, a lap rug over my legs to ward off the chill -- it's a rainy, damp Sunday; feels almost like winter. We just had a balanced dinner of greasy pepperoni pizza, flavored water, and cinnamon bread that my wife had made this morning, but which, due to some early morning grumpiness on my part, we didn't have. My wife thinks I'm a little off because of the impending car purchase; she may be right, though I ascribe it more to a reluctance to go into the office tomorrow and get beaten up some more due to the audit. I have some reasoned, rational answers, but I'll have to be careful about rolling them out; better, I think, to nod penitently and let them storm and rage for a while. I don't want to, but I think it's likely the best approach.
I started reading Stephanopoulos' book this morning. Since its not a novel, it doesn't have the concentrated forcefulness, nor the clear sense of purpose that Executive Orders had (which can be summarized as Good Guys Almost Always Win, Decency Almost Always Trumps Guile and Deceit, and Massively Computerized Weaponry Will Carry the Day, Betcher Ass), but what the heck: its reality, or at least his version of it. As I was sitting here in this same chair today, listening to the rain, and reading that book, Emmanuel Ax playing softly in the background, I could see myself doing this in retirement. Wouldn't want to do it all the time, but its not a bad way to pass the day. That, and baking.
We're still leaning in the direction of the Prius. The two things that are showstoppers are first, the interior length of the car with the back row of seats down; we have to be able to carry a pole (my daughter's color guard flag) thats about eight feet long, and second, the view out the rear window, which I remember as being fairly grim, since it's bisected by some kind of bar, which might be the top of the hatchback -- not sure. And we're a tad queasy about the acceleration. I did a little test this evening, coming back from picking up the pizza -- stopped on the empty road, then floored it. The van took just about eleven seconds to get up to sixty, of which perhaps half a second was skidding on the wet pavement. That makes it comparable to the Prius, which I believe says its about ten seconds for the same distance. I remember when I was first driving the van, which has a smaller engine than its predecessor, I was a little concerned, but I got used to it pretty quickly. I'm assuming the same thing will happen here, if we pursue it. There are some other, minor things -- the seat's not height-adjustable, the steering wheel doesn't telescope -- and one thing of mild concern: performance is worse in frigid weather, to the point where you can actually flatten the drive battery if you push it hard enough. Hmm....
We also have to figure out what to do with the Buick. I'd like to sell it locally, but that implies having someone around to show it, do we require cash or a check, that kind of thing. I'm not up for that. Also, there's the key question of how much: its a 91, in pretty good but not outstanding shape. We think its worth about 1600 or so, which means ask for 2000, accept 1500. Unless its a dealership, which I think would knock it down to around 1000. Not too thrilled about that.
I started reading Stephanopoulos' book this morning. Since its not a novel, it doesn't have the concentrated forcefulness, nor the clear sense of purpose that Executive Orders had (which can be summarized as Good Guys Almost Always Win, Decency Almost Always Trumps Guile and Deceit, and Massively Computerized Weaponry Will Carry the Day, Betcher Ass), but what the heck: its reality, or at least his version of it. As I was sitting here in this same chair today, listening to the rain, and reading that book, Emmanuel Ax playing softly in the background, I could see myself doing this in retirement. Wouldn't want to do it all the time, but its not a bad way to pass the day. That, and baking.
We're still leaning in the direction of the Prius. The two things that are showstoppers are first, the interior length of the car with the back row of seats down; we have to be able to carry a pole (my daughter's color guard flag) thats about eight feet long, and second, the view out the rear window, which I remember as being fairly grim, since it's bisected by some kind of bar, which might be the top of the hatchback -- not sure. And we're a tad queasy about the acceleration. I did a little test this evening, coming back from picking up the pizza -- stopped on the empty road, then floored it. The van took just about eleven seconds to get up to sixty, of which perhaps half a second was skidding on the wet pavement. That makes it comparable to the Prius, which I believe says its about ten seconds for the same distance. I remember when I was first driving the van, which has a smaller engine than its predecessor, I was a little concerned, but I got used to it pretty quickly. I'm assuming the same thing will happen here, if we pursue it. There are some other, minor things -- the seat's not height-adjustable, the steering wheel doesn't telescope -- and one thing of mild concern: performance is worse in frigid weather, to the point where you can actually flatten the drive battery if you push it hard enough. Hmm....
We also have to figure out what to do with the Buick. I'd like to sell it locally, but that implies having someone around to show it, do we require cash or a check, that kind of thing. I'm not up for that. Also, there's the key question of how much: its a 91, in pretty good but not outstanding shape. We think its worth about 1600 or so, which means ask for 2000, accept 1500. Unless its a dealership, which I think would knock it down to around 1000. Not too thrilled about that.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Superman Redux
Tonight we rented and watched Superman Returns. And despite not watching it on a wide screen LCD display with Bose surround sound, it was pretty good -- in many ways, superior to the Christopher Reeves ones . The acting, for the most part, was better than expected, particularly Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor -- I like a bright, non-caricatured evil person -- and from others, including Lois Lanes long-term boyfriend, who, I think, in earlier movies would have been played as a lightweight, but in this movie was a character with intelligence and forcefulness. Lois herself -- well, Margot Kidder hasn't got much to worry about. The special effects were excellent, and though the plot was a little bit thin at times, it really wasn't bad at all.
I'm glad we rented it.
I'm glad we rented it.
First Look
We looked at the Prius, Camry, Civic, and Accord. Our eventual ranking was Prius/Accord, and Civic/Camry. The Prius and the Accord are different cars for different markets, but they're both acceptable, and at times delightful. The Civic and Camry are also for different markets, but we were not delighted by them.
The Prius is a decent city car. The mileage on the sticker said high forties/low fifties, but the internal meter said about 33 MPH driving on small country roads. That's acceptable. The acceleration was good but not outstanding (it felt like if you were merging onto a busy road, you'd want to take a moment to check it out), and the handling was good (small steering wheel was okay for my wife, felt a bit like a toy to me). The rear-view camera (only active when in reverse, unfortunately), was slick. The gas engine runs more than I expected -- about thirty seconds after the engine start, it comes on 'to heat the catalytic converter', then shuts off except for acceleration. The interior was laid out well -- lots of visibility forward and side. I couldn't see the nose of the car, which was a little off-putting, and the view out the back (hatchback) window was minimal, which was also a bit of a problem.The car was different in terms of how it started (keep the transponder key in your pocket, if you want; press the START button to start it), and how information was delivered to you (the graphics are nice but about half of them are useless, I think). And the hatchback area opens up all the way -- the two rear seats can fold flat. I wouldn't want to take a long trip in it, but overall, not bad. Seats four, comfortably.
The Accord is more luxurious, and surprised us by that. It felt like I'd expect a Benz to feel. The mileage sticker for it said 25/31, which we're guessing would actually play out to about 20/25 -- not as much as we'd like. Granted, you're using less gas overall, but still: a problem. The interior was quite comfortable, and it could probably handle five. We didn't drive it, though.
The Civic and Camry both disappointed us. The Civic felt cramped -- funny, because the Prius is a smaller car, but somehow the Camry didn't feel bigger. This will sound odd, but the Civic didn't feel 'welcoming'. My wife said that it felt like a college kid's first car. As for the Camry, for the price (about equivilent to the Accord), we expected it to be more plush, more elegant. It was nice, but bland.
We've got to think about it, and of course drive the Accord, and then do the math: do we want a city car (less expensive, better mileage) or a touring car (more comfortable, more room). And: if one of them is the car our daughter learns to drive in, which? The Accord has more steel around you, but both have front and side air bags. Minor preference for the Accord, but not overwhelming.
So right now its the Prius or the Accord. More likely the former than the latter, but not definite by any means.
The Prius is a decent city car. The mileage on the sticker said high forties/low fifties, but the internal meter said about 33 MPH driving on small country roads. That's acceptable. The acceleration was good but not outstanding (it felt like if you were merging onto a busy road, you'd want to take a moment to check it out), and the handling was good (small steering wheel was okay for my wife, felt a bit like a toy to me). The rear-view camera (only active when in reverse, unfortunately), was slick. The gas engine runs more than I expected -- about thirty seconds after the engine start, it comes on 'to heat the catalytic converter', then shuts off except for acceleration. The interior was laid out well -- lots of visibility forward and side. I couldn't see the nose of the car, which was a little off-putting, and the view out the back (hatchback) window was minimal, which was also a bit of a problem.The car was different in terms of how it started (keep the transponder key in your pocket, if you want; press the START button to start it), and how information was delivered to you (the graphics are nice but about half of them are useless, I think). And the hatchback area opens up all the way -- the two rear seats can fold flat. I wouldn't want to take a long trip in it, but overall, not bad. Seats four, comfortably.
The Accord is more luxurious, and surprised us by that. It felt like I'd expect a Benz to feel. The mileage sticker for it said 25/31, which we're guessing would actually play out to about 20/25 -- not as much as we'd like. Granted, you're using less gas overall, but still: a problem. The interior was quite comfortable, and it could probably handle five. We didn't drive it, though.
The Civic and Camry both disappointed us. The Civic felt cramped -- funny, because the Prius is a smaller car, but somehow the Camry didn't feel bigger. This will sound odd, but the Civic didn't feel 'welcoming'. My wife said that it felt like a college kid's first car. As for the Camry, for the price (about equivilent to the Accord), we expected it to be more plush, more elegant. It was nice, but bland.
We've got to think about it, and of course drive the Accord, and then do the math: do we want a city car (less expensive, better mileage) or a touring car (more comfortable, more room). And: if one of them is the car our daughter learns to drive in, which? The Accord has more steel around you, but both have front and side air bags. Minor preference for the Accord, but not overwhelming.
So right now its the Prius or the Accord. More likely the former than the latter, but not definite by any means.
Saturday
...and outside, the first mower of the season is active. *sigh*
This is a funny commercial, but almost as funny are the comments. Try guessing which comments are made by women....
And this is a quote from Tom Clancy's Executive Orders. One of the bad guys, a sleeper Iranian agent, is on his way to assassinate the US President --
"It would have been better for everyone if he'd known beforehand about all the things that were happening....The disease attack, that was something else. The manner of its spread was a matter of God's Will. It was distasteful, but that was life. He remembered the burning of the theater in Tehran. People had died there, too, ordinary people whose mistake had been to watch a movie instead of attending to their devotions. The world was hard, and the only thing that made its burden easier to bear was faith in something larger than oneself...The world didn't change its shape by accident. Great events had to be cruel ones, for the most part. The Faith had spread with the help of the sword, despite the Prophet's own admonition that the sword could not make one faithful...a dichotomy he did not fully understand."
I think thats a pretty good description of how I see zealots. They're saying that they're guided by their faith, and when they don't find their faith leading them in the direction they want to go, or leading away from it...they do what they wanted to do, anyway. In that, they're not all that different than many others...except that they're willing to kill.
Today we go look at cars again. Last night, my wife was supposed to stop by and pick up literature for the hybrid Camry and hybrid Prius, but she met a friendly salesman, and ended up spending half an hour looking at both. An interesting point is that the local dealer for Honda (hybrid Civic, possible hybrid Accord) and Toyota (hybrid Prius, Camry) is the same. She asked the Toyota salesman why one was preferable to the other, and he said that they differed in their hybrid implementation -- the Honda's primary engine was the gasoline one, using the electric engine to give greater acceleration, or for use in low-power situations, while the Prius uses the electric engine as the primary, adding the gasoline engine for extra power as needed. What that seems to translate to is that the Prius is good for short-haul stop and go, running predominantly on electric power; the Honda is good for long-ride driving, cruising on gas, with the electric engine for added punch as needed. The net out is that the mileage for the Toyota is better. Not overwhelmingly better, but better. That's important to us to know, because we want to go into this with our eyes open. We do not expect that the savings in gas, either way, will pay for the differential (about five thousand) in the cost of the car, and we do expect to have expenses that we would not have with a traditional car. We want to note that up front, so that we know what we're doing, what we're getting into, and why. We're not doing it to save money, but we don't want to toss it away, either. Heck, if we wanted to toss away money, we'd -- oh, I don't know, pay for extravagant dental procedures, something like that.
One other tidbit: she said that when she started the Prius, it was completely silent. The gas engine was just ticking over? I asked. Nope, she replied. Not even running. Totally electric.
Ooohhh......
This is a funny commercial, but almost as funny are the comments. Try guessing which comments are made by women....
And this is a quote from Tom Clancy's Executive Orders. One of the bad guys, a sleeper Iranian agent, is on his way to assassinate the US President --
"It would have been better for everyone if he'd known beforehand about all the things that were happening....The disease attack, that was something else. The manner of its spread was a matter of God's Will. It was distasteful, but that was life. He remembered the burning of the theater in Tehran. People had died there, too, ordinary people whose mistake had been to watch a movie instead of attending to their devotions. The world was hard, and the only thing that made its burden easier to bear was faith in something larger than oneself...The world didn't change its shape by accident. Great events had to be cruel ones, for the most part. The Faith had spread with the help of the sword, despite the Prophet's own admonition that the sword could not make one faithful...a dichotomy he did not fully understand."
I think thats a pretty good description of how I see zealots. They're saying that they're guided by their faith, and when they don't find their faith leading them in the direction they want to go, or leading away from it...they do what they wanted to do, anyway. In that, they're not all that different than many others...except that they're willing to kill.
Today we go look at cars again. Last night, my wife was supposed to stop by and pick up literature for the hybrid Camry and hybrid Prius, but she met a friendly salesman, and ended up spending half an hour looking at both. An interesting point is that the local dealer for Honda (hybrid Civic, possible hybrid Accord) and Toyota (hybrid Prius, Camry) is the same. She asked the Toyota salesman why one was preferable to the other, and he said that they differed in their hybrid implementation -- the Honda's primary engine was the gasoline one, using the electric engine to give greater acceleration, or for use in low-power situations, while the Prius uses the electric engine as the primary, adding the gasoline engine for extra power as needed. What that seems to translate to is that the Prius is good for short-haul stop and go, running predominantly on electric power; the Honda is good for long-ride driving, cruising on gas, with the electric engine for added punch as needed. The net out is that the mileage for the Toyota is better. Not overwhelmingly better, but better. That's important to us to know, because we want to go into this with our eyes open. We do not expect that the savings in gas, either way, will pay for the differential (about five thousand) in the cost of the car, and we do expect to have expenses that we would not have with a traditional car. We want to note that up front, so that we know what we're doing, what we're getting into, and why. We're not doing it to save money, but we don't want to toss it away, either. Heck, if we wanted to toss away money, we'd -- oh, I don't know, pay for extravagant dental procedures, something like that.
One other tidbit: she said that when she started the Prius, it was completely silent. The gas engine was just ticking over? I asked. Nope, she replied. Not even running. Totally electric.
Ooohhh......
Friday, April 13, 2007
LEANing
I was just doing some reading here about the technique known as LEAN, which is the methodology that my organization is lurching towards. The site I referenced describes one manifestation of LEAN this way:
“A philosophical approach to business that is based on satisfying the customer (whether internal or external) by producing quality products that are just what they need, when they need them, in the quantity required, using the minimum of materials, equipment, space, labor and time.”
I've seen a number of actions, initiatives, and programs over time, from ISO9000 to Quality to variants thereof, and this smells like another one, complete with secret words (one here is muda, which is allegedly a Japanese word meaning waste -- very bad), certifications, and protestations about why THIS manifestation is ever so much better than the LAST manifestation. Everybody's doin' it, doin' it, doin' it -- why aren't you?
As you can tell, I find it hard to believe that THIS is going to be the one, the golden bullet that's going to solve our problems. I think it'll be useful, but I don't think it'll solve everything. And yet, I want to believe that solutions are possible. I know that some programs do work... for a while, and in specific cases, and locations. Not without thought -- no One Size Fits All -- but some do work. Why?
My thought: The Westinghouse Effect.
The program's content matters, the tools and methods, they matter, even the sensation of 'being in the secret club', that matters. But the Effect? Ah, I'll bet thats the ticket.
What do you think?
“A philosophical approach to business that is based on satisfying the customer (whether internal or external) by producing quality products that are just what they need, when they need them, in the quantity required, using the minimum of materials, equipment, space, labor and time.”
I've seen a number of actions, initiatives, and programs over time, from ISO9000 to Quality to variants thereof, and this smells like another one, complete with secret words (one here is muda, which is allegedly a Japanese word meaning waste -- very bad), certifications, and protestations about why THIS manifestation is ever so much better than the LAST manifestation. Everybody's doin' it, doin' it, doin' it -- why aren't you?
As you can tell, I find it hard to believe that THIS is going to be the one, the golden bullet that's going to solve our problems. I think it'll be useful, but I don't think it'll solve everything. And yet, I want to believe that solutions are possible. I know that some programs do work... for a while, and in specific cases, and locations. Not without thought -- no One Size Fits All -- but some do work. Why?
My thought: The Westinghouse Effect.
The program's content matters, the tools and methods, they matter, even the sensation of 'being in the secret club', that matters. But the Effect? Ah, I'll bet thats the ticket.
What do you think?
Palmed
When the cop was fingerprinting me this morning, he asked if I used some kind of hand cream. I told him no, and he said that my skin was amazingly pliable.
My wife, when informed of this, asked if the cop was, perchance, a cute young police trainee.
My wife, when informed of this, asked if the cop was, perchance, a cute young police trainee.
Fried-Day
It's Friday, and I'm feeling a bit fried. Part of that is a slight cold that I've managed to pick up; most of it is the events at work that I've described earlier. About which, I'll just say this: I made reasonable mistakes, doing a function with no assistance, oversight, or review that might have caught them. I'm sorry they happened. If they want to fire me over it (doubtful, but possible), so be it. I don't want that to occur, but as the plan is to work until December and then quit, it wouldn't be an overwhelming loss. So, we'll see.
Making plans for the summer, already. My daughter wants to go to multiple local events held by the township rec board, which is cool. She also wants to go to a Girl Scout camp, also cool, but the camp is three and a half hours from here. Not cool. It doesn't help that the camp is oriented toward seriously outdoors-type kids, which she isn't, but the primary eliminator is the distance. We'll go to the ends of the earth for you, kiddo, but not three and a half hours away. Sorry.
Today I go to get fingerprinted at the local cop shop (a job requirement, though, given events, that might turn out to have not been necessary (g) ); I go to the school to talk with a guidance counselor about the nature of their mentoring program; and I do some other errands. I'll be working from home, the remainder of the day.
Making plans for the summer, already. My daughter wants to go to multiple local events held by the township rec board, which is cool. She also wants to go to a Girl Scout camp, also cool, but the camp is three and a half hours from here. Not cool. It doesn't help that the camp is oriented toward seriously outdoors-type kids, which she isn't, but the primary eliminator is the distance. We'll go to the ends of the earth for you, kiddo, but not three and a half hours away. Sorry.
Today I go to get fingerprinted at the local cop shop (a job requirement, though, given events, that might turn out to have not been necessary (g) ); I go to the school to talk with a guidance counselor about the nature of their mentoring program; and I do some other errands. I'll be working from home, the remainder of the day.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Learning
Today, I learned some things.
I learned that a guy that I used to work with at another company, who was a very gung-ho, true-believer type, was recently named as a vice-president for that company. He's responsible for a whole mess of applications and customers. From this, I learned two things: the company still likes gung-ho true believers, and I can simultaneously mock his style and envy his results. I'm not sure what the psychological evaluation of that dichotomy is, but I don't think its very complimentary to me.
I learned that my current company isn't telling the same story to everyone who's involved with this new service delivery scheme; the basis of which seems to be that its better to deliver exactly what the customer wants, right now, immediately, via the methodology of having everyone available all the time, than to deliver what the customer wants, over time, in a phased, process-driven approach. Less delays, sooner satisfaction. The problem is that the people who are actually going to participate in this seem to be hearing that its not so much an experiment in improving service delivery though elimination of roadblocks and procedural delays as a death march -- no slack time, always someone to call back, something to follow up on. Whats particularly ironic is that it uses as a bible a book about a similarly named process at another company which does nothing of the sort -- they push the idea of incremental improvement, all the time. (Who gets to decide whats an improvement, its not clear, but apparently however they do it, it works. At least for them.) We're not doing that, but we expect similar, if not better, results.
And I learned that I am not attitudinally suited for the job I do. This is not a new observation, but it hit me again. How many times I need to be hit, I don't know.
I talked to my wife about it. She said that I got beaten up today, and I feel unsettled as a result, because I don't usually get beaten up, and, because some degree, maybe even much of it, was warranted, I feel shaky about my capabilities. I shouldn't, but I do.
Married someone smart. But I knew that.
Still and all...I think I need to be giving some thought to post-work life. Because it's coming, and -- on days like this -- it seems that'll be sooner than I think.
I learned that a guy that I used to work with at another company, who was a very gung-ho, true-believer type, was recently named as a vice-president for that company. He's responsible for a whole mess of applications and customers. From this, I learned two things: the company still likes gung-ho true believers, and I can simultaneously mock his style and envy his results. I'm not sure what the psychological evaluation of that dichotomy is, but I don't think its very complimentary to me.
I learned that my current company isn't telling the same story to everyone who's involved with this new service delivery scheme; the basis of which seems to be that its better to deliver exactly what the customer wants, right now, immediately, via the methodology of having everyone available all the time, than to deliver what the customer wants, over time, in a phased, process-driven approach. Less delays, sooner satisfaction. The problem is that the people who are actually going to participate in this seem to be hearing that its not so much an experiment in improving service delivery though elimination of roadblocks and procedural delays as a death march -- no slack time, always someone to call back, something to follow up on. Whats particularly ironic is that it uses as a bible a book about a similarly named process at another company which does nothing of the sort -- they push the idea of incremental improvement, all the time. (Who gets to decide whats an improvement, its not clear, but apparently however they do it, it works. At least for them.) We're not doing that, but we expect similar, if not better, results.
And I learned that I am not attitudinally suited for the job I do. This is not a new observation, but it hit me again. How many times I need to be hit, I don't know.
I talked to my wife about it. She said that I got beaten up today, and I feel unsettled as a result, because I don't usually get beaten up, and, because some degree, maybe even much of it, was warranted, I feel shaky about my capabilities. I shouldn't, but I do.
Married someone smart. But I knew that.
Still and all...I think I need to be giving some thought to post-work life. Because it's coming, and -- on days like this -- it seems that'll be sooner than I think.
Forecasts, Queries
My forecast about the likely events today was accurate. At the moment, I'm mulling whether I want to stay in this environment. Its mostly what I mentioned earlier, and a massive feeling of guilt (with a healthy dollop of denial) but also listening to discussions about the service delivery scheme that we're going to be implementing. Its scarier than I thought. I still think its a good thing, but....
============
Wish I could figure out why Firefox on my home PC will remember my passsword for Blogger and log me right in, whereas Firefox on my work PC will remember the password but make me push the button to log in. Not a big deal, but strange. Whats different?
============
Wish I could figure out why Firefox on my home PC will remember my passsword for Blogger and log me right in, whereas Firefox on my work PC will remember the password but make me push the button to log in. Not a big deal, but strange. Whats different?
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
In the Afternoon
Well, I feel better. I got to yell at someone about our security environment, and how we manage it. Well, okay, it wasn't actually yelling so much as speaking firmly and emphatically and at length, and there was more than a little 'It isn't (all) my FAULT, darn it!' mixed in there, but I did get to do it. I boogied out of work as quickly as I could, lest they call back with some more angst-inducing 'grams. I'm sure it'll be there, waiting for me, tomorrow, and I'm sure I'll feel guilty and get pissed off and all, but as for right now: I feel better.
==============
I was listening to an NPR article yesterday about why Daimler Benz and Chrysler are about to go their separate ways (too bad: I'm not, and likely never will be, a Benz buyer, but I did like the ads where they tried to make Herr Doktor Z seem like the quizzical prototype for the doctor in Back to the Future, instead of the hard driving, hard-nosed technocrat that he probably is). One of the points that they made was quite good, in that they said that the systems of one company couldn't be integrated into those of the other because Benz didn't 'want to dilute the DNA of the parent company'. I liked that image a lot. I've heard it before, in roughly the same circumstances, though about twenty years ago, but its potent. You can talk all you want about synergies and 'we're a car company, they're a car company, we should mesh just fine', but if you don't take the culture into account, which means not just the nuts and bolts (do you really want to pop the hood on your new Benz and find the same engine as in your Chrysler 300?) but the way that they work, the way that they 'see themselves' (a car guy in Detroit is not necessarily the same as a car guy in Stuttgart), then you're in danger city. Its not a guaranteed show-stopper, but a warning flag? Oh yeah. Too bad this kind of 'well of COURSE this marriage was doomed' analysis wasn't done before the wedding, of course.
==============
I was listening to an NPR article yesterday about why Daimler Benz and Chrysler are about to go their separate ways (too bad: I'm not, and likely never will be, a Benz buyer, but I did like the ads where they tried to make Herr Doktor Z seem like the quizzical prototype for the doctor in Back to the Future, instead of the hard driving, hard-nosed technocrat that he probably is). One of the points that they made was quite good, in that they said that the systems of one company couldn't be integrated into those of the other because Benz didn't 'want to dilute the DNA of the parent company'. I liked that image a lot. I've heard it before, in roughly the same circumstances, though about twenty years ago, but its potent. You can talk all you want about synergies and 'we're a car company, they're a car company, we should mesh just fine', but if you don't take the culture into account, which means not just the nuts and bolts (do you really want to pop the hood on your new Benz and find the same engine as in your Chrysler 300?) but the way that they work, the way that they 'see themselves' (a car guy in Detroit is not necessarily the same as a car guy in Stuttgart), then you're in danger city. Its not a guaranteed show-stopper, but a warning flag? Oh yeah. Too bad this kind of 'well of COURSE this marriage was doomed' analysis wasn't done before the wedding, of course.
Angst Update
I realized (again) this morning that I do the best I can at what I do, and that the only way to do better would be to be a true believer in security, which I'm not. It would help, too, to have an organization that doesn't change its mind about whats required about every twelve months or so, which I do, but the primary driver is that to do it better, you've got to be a true believer. I'm not. Never have been.
I do think our problems are partially my fault, but I don't think they mostly are. That might be my ego scarring over, but I just can't afford to take this stuff personally. Though, as is obvious, I do.
Even though I could retire right this minute, I don't want to do that. I want to work in a technical environment, and this place has got the potential for that. Course, they've had it for six years now. I do not like being at the whim of an organization that (gross expletive coming) doesn't give a flying fuck about me or my wishes (boy, I haven't used that phrase in years, perhaps decades), but I am very reluctant to say Well, then, find something else -- don't have enough confidence in myself, never have. So I sit, and mutter, and I do the best that I can, as often as I can. Its usually good enough, and when it isn't -- it isn't.
If they want a real security person, let them hire and train one. Note to any prospective manager: there were TWO verbs in that final clause. As for me: I care, but not overwhelmingly. Its just not worth it to me.
I do think our problems are partially my fault, but I don't think they mostly are. That might be my ego scarring over, but I just can't afford to take this stuff personally. Though, as is obvious, I do.
Even though I could retire right this minute, I don't want to do that. I want to work in a technical environment, and this place has got the potential for that. Course, they've had it for six years now. I do not like being at the whim of an organization that (gross expletive coming) doesn't give a flying fuck about me or my wishes (boy, I haven't used that phrase in years, perhaps decades), but I am very reluctant to say Well, then, find something else -- don't have enough confidence in myself, never have. So I sit, and mutter, and I do the best that I can, as often as I can. Its usually good enough, and when it isn't -- it isn't.
If they want a real security person, let them hire and train one. Note to any prospective manager: there were TWO verbs in that final clause. As for me: I care, but not overwhelmingly. Its just not worth it to me.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Day
This was a pretty good day right up until the very end, when I screwed up by letting a local manager know that I was there. This was a screw up because at the end of the day he had the time to talk to me about the ongoing audit, and a problem we have, which I didn't even want to acknowledge, let alone think about.
I am not a person who takes kindly to audits, auditors, or organizational stupidity, and this wrapped them all up at once. I know, most people don't take kindly to that unholy trio, but I take it personally. I take it very personally. It takes me a while to cool down -- I'm not there yet, and I just had some decent though not outstanding pepperoni pizza, which for me is comfort food. Its going to take a while.
I despise this part of my job.
I am not a person who takes kindly to audits, auditors, or organizational stupidity, and this wrapped them all up at once. I know, most people don't take kindly to that unholy trio, but I take it personally. I take it very personally. It takes me a while to cool down -- I'm not there yet, and I just had some decent though not outstanding pepperoni pizza, which for me is comfort food. Its going to take a while.
I despise this part of my job.
Monday, April 09, 2007
...You Blowhole!
I'd like to point out the temporary link to the Stanford Alumni society website, over to the left. I didn't go to Stanford; I consider my self lucky to have been able just to drive through Palo Alto on my honeymoon. But I strongly admire bright, motivated people, and Stanford's got a bunch. Their site is worth visiting.
(If you're wondering, that title is a relevant quote from The American President.)
(If you're wondering, that title is a relevant quote from The American President.)
Euphemisms
On the way home this evening, I heard a little bit about the 'radical cleric' al-Sadr. I got to thinking about how often you hear that phrase. So I did a Google on it, and an alternative;
Search 1:
Results 1 - 100 of about 16,000 for "moderate cleric". (0.28 seconds)
Search 2:
Results 1 - 100 of about 343,000 for "radical cleric". (0.24 seconds)
Fewer, and they took longer to find. Hmm..... Knowing very little about how searches work, I'll draw the simplest conclusion, which is that 'moderate cleric' doesn't appear nearly as often as 'radical cleric'. You might almost think that perhaps 'cleric' ought to imply 'radical', with those results.
I believe that most Muslims are decent people -- not great, not terrible, trying with varying degrees of effort and success to keep with the tenets of their faith. This must be pretty wretched for them.. It means that most people's image -- yes, including mine -- of Muslim clerics is wild-eyed murderous fanatics. I know its not true; I know its not fair. But I hear it so often, its hard to remember that in the global scheme of things, they are the minority. It's just that they're the armed and dangerous minority. The ones who want to kill me, and everyone like me. And they command bands of armed fanatics who are willing to subsume their own intelligence for the murderous will of their masters. Who are willing to die for it.
Scary.
=============================
Update: This is an interesting CNN article. It contains this phrase, which grabbed me:
"The war in Iraq, in particular, has such a negative effect on the way Americans perceive Islam," she said. "The chaos there has led many Americans to have this association between Islam and violence."
Oh, yeah.
Search 1:
Results 1 - 100 of about 16,000 for "moderate cleric". (0.28 seconds)
Search 2:
Results 1 - 100 of about 343,000 for "radical cleric". (0.24 seconds)
Fewer, and they took longer to find. Hmm..... Knowing very little about how searches work, I'll draw the simplest conclusion, which is that 'moderate cleric' doesn't appear nearly as often as 'radical cleric'. You might almost think that perhaps 'cleric' ought to imply 'radical', with those results.
I believe that most Muslims are decent people -- not great, not terrible, trying with varying degrees of effort and success to keep with the tenets of their faith. This must be pretty wretched for them.. It means that most people's image -- yes, including mine -- of Muslim clerics is wild-eyed murderous fanatics. I know its not true; I know its not fair. But I hear it so often, its hard to remember that in the global scheme of things, they are the minority. It's just that they're the armed and dangerous minority. The ones who want to kill me, and everyone like me. And they command bands of armed fanatics who are willing to subsume their own intelligence for the murderous will of their masters. Who are willing to die for it.
Scary.
=============================
Update: This is an interesting CNN article. It contains this phrase, which grabbed me:
"The war in Iraq, in particular, has such a negative effect on the way Americans perceive Islam," she said. "The chaos there has led many Americans to have this association between Islam and violence."
Oh, yeah.
Bright Idea
Today my company rolled out a new idea in how we deliver services. Its actually an old idea, but, well, to us its new, because its been a while since we did this.
Basically, we're taking the current organization, which is composed of multiple groups that each put together a software product, and then funnel it out to subteams that deliver it to the customer, and rearranging it to be fewer groups that support more customers each. The total number of people in the new groups will be less -- by about half, if the people who are into this have their way. The others will be -- well, sidelined, at least till we see how this plays out. (Will they be a target for firing? We're assured not.) I'm not exactly sure what the goal of all of this is. Cost cutting, I think.
There are those who don't think this will work. There are more of these in the worker bee level than in the queen bee level, though perhaps the QBs feel the same way, but, due to the need to be Supportive Team Players, they're stifling their dissent. Either way, a fair number of people don't think it will work. The general take is that you can't get the same product, faster, at the same quality level, with fewer people. You might have some fat in the organization, but this assumes you have on the order of forty or fifty percent. Thats hard to believe. The thought is, we're going to kill some people trying it, and we might kill some customers, too.
But I've got to say, I think its a nifty idea. I don't think it'll work, either, but its a way of blasting through the bloat and bureaucracy that imperils the life of this company. I think that even if it just works half way, it'll be a Good Thing. We're a big, lumbering company (that according to the Sunday New York Times pays its CEO waaaaaaaaaaaay too much); we need to be smaller, faster, more focused. This might do it.
As it happens, I don't think I'll get a chance to play, but if I do, I'll do my dammedest. Because its a terrific gamble, and I'd like to see it succeed.
Basically, we're taking the current organization, which is composed of multiple groups that each put together a software product, and then funnel it out to subteams that deliver it to the customer, and rearranging it to be fewer groups that support more customers each. The total number of people in the new groups will be less -- by about half, if the people who are into this have their way. The others will be -- well, sidelined, at least till we see how this plays out. (Will they be a target for firing? We're assured not.) I'm not exactly sure what the goal of all of this is. Cost cutting, I think.
There are those who don't think this will work. There are more of these in the worker bee level than in the queen bee level, though perhaps the QBs feel the same way, but, due to the need to be Supportive Team Players, they're stifling their dissent. Either way, a fair number of people don't think it will work. The general take is that you can't get the same product, faster, at the same quality level, with fewer people. You might have some fat in the organization, but this assumes you have on the order of forty or fifty percent. Thats hard to believe. The thought is, we're going to kill some people trying it, and we might kill some customers, too.
But I've got to say, I think its a nifty idea. I don't think it'll work, either, but its a way of blasting through the bloat and bureaucracy that imperils the life of this company. I think that even if it just works half way, it'll be a Good Thing. We're a big, lumbering company (that according to the Sunday New York Times pays its CEO waaaaaaaaaaaay too much); we need to be smaller, faster, more focused. This might do it.
As it happens, I don't think I'll get a chance to play, but if I do, I'll do my dammedest. Because its a terrific gamble, and I'd like to see it succeed.
Politics
I sent a note to both of our state's federal senators, urging them not to back down on the war funding bill with the provision for withdrawal in it, so if you see Arlen Spector and/or Bob Casey come out for it, you can thank me.
Huh.
Huh.
Stray Thought
I was thinking on the way in about theocracies, and how they operate. These weren't particularly deep thoughts, but I wondered: Iran is a theocracy, and Iraq is as well; so, I think, are Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Pakistan. Abu Dhabi, I'm not sure about, or Libya. But all of those are Islamic theocracies. I assume you can call Israel a Jewish theocracy, though my impression is that they aren't as intense about imposing their religion as a way of life on the populace as a whole. I suspect its very helpful to be Jewish, but not as helpful as it would be in one of the countries I mentioned.
Anyway, I wondered: are there any Christian theocracies? Certainly, there are theocratic schools -- Oral Roberts University comes quickly to mind -- and there are people who'd like to make this country a theocracy (maybe not in name, but in practice, oh, yeah) but are there nations where the name of the game is the Christian religion, and if you live there, you're expected to adhere?
And if not, does that imply anything good, bad, or indifferent?
Anyway, I wondered: are there any Christian theocracies? Certainly, there are theocratic schools -- Oral Roberts University comes quickly to mind -- and there are people who'd like to make this country a theocracy (maybe not in name, but in practice, oh, yeah) but are there nations where the name of the game is the Christian religion, and if you live there, you're expected to adhere?
And if not, does that imply anything good, bad, or indifferent?
Sunday, April 08, 2007
Mawnin
I'm sitting at the dining room table, much of the effluvia of Sunday Brunch all around me, the gentle sound of Ellis Marsalis doing Love for Sale drifting in from the living room. This morning we had the excellent local brand of bacon that we found a couple of weeks ago (in keeping with a family tradition, we have not spoken loudly about this in the store, as they seem to pick up on these utterances and stop stocking them), as well as waffles, coffee, and home-made apple fritters. The fritters were easy enough to make, though the apples were a bit hard to slice -- my fault, as I picked a gihugic apple to start with. I thought the food processor could be used to make thin slices, but didn't realize that for our food processor, thin means thin -- wafer thin, wispy thin. So I grabbed a bowl of water, and sliced it by hand, dunking the before and afters into the water to prevent oxidation from turning them brown while my wife mixed up the batter and I pressed on with the rest of the brunch. A bit more effort than anticipated, but it was worth it -- quite good, particularly with syrup and cinnamon sugar.
As always, some interesting and thought-provoking material in the Sunday papers. There was an article in the Washington Post about people who are using novel methods to help their young children deal with the stress of their father (usually) being away to war -- life size posters of the person (Flat Daddy) , or small stuffed dolls with the person's image on the face part (Daddy Doll). I'm always impressed by that kind of creativity. Almost always, I think 'Gee, I wish I could help with that', and almost always, I don't. Usually, there's a reason -- the posters, for example, cost fifty dollars each. I could afford one or two of them, but I convince myself that only contributing to one or two would hardly help. I am envious when others find a way to get their company to help in a big way. I'm thinking of an article I read where a man, whose son was grievously injured in Iraq, wrote an email about it that was circulated among coworkers in IBM, and the email eventually made its way to the chairman of the board, who arranged for the company to donate something like ten thousand copies of their translation software for use in Iraq, in recognition of the son's sacrifice. Geez, I think, how come I can't arrange something like that?
We also found out, courtesy of the Post's Outlook section, that Monica Goodling, the assistant to the Attorney General who resigned, no reason given, and who refused to testify because she feared self-incrimination, is a graduate of Messiah College, a local college. That surprised us, for a couple of reasons. First, Messiah is a small school, and the idea that someone graduated from there and ended up in a fairly prominent position is startling; usually, Messiah graduates end up as first assistant manager in charge of home loans at an area bank, though only after doing two or three years working in down-trodden areas helping build health clinics or as actual religious missionaries. For one of their own to make that leap is pretty impressive. Which leads me to the other reason -- that someone with the depth of religious conviction that she probably had -- as you might guess from the name, Messiah is a religiously oriented school, but its not oppressive about it; you don't find religious screeds everywhere, and, of course, they don't have Truth Squads keeping the faithful faithful, unlike certain other - ahem - religions -- to get into that kind of trouble is startling. Hearing that she came from Messiah made me assume she had firm, fairly inflexible religious values, which might well have spoken to why she was chosen over other candidates for a position in a faith-based presidency. I gather that she wasn't all that pure of heart, though, since she apparently pushed out qualified but non-Christian people in favor of others who were Christian though possibly not as qualified -- but still, I feel sorry for her -- much more so than for her boss, or her boss's boss.
I was pretty surprised to hear that the Supreme Court had ordered the EPA to review the effect of greenhouse gases, as I was fairly sure they couldn't do that. I would have bet that the Supremes would say that they didn't have the authority to review the actions of the EPA, especially in a Bush administration. Turns out that they didn' order any such thing, but they did come close-- they said that the EPA has the authority to do such reviews, which opens the door for the EPA to be sued if they don't do it. Whats also interesting is the breakdown of the vote -- as I recall, it was 5/4 -- because the Chief Justice said that Massachusetts, which brought the action, didn't have standing to do so, couldn't show that any injury was brought to it because the EPA either acted or failed to act, and had no clear course of recompense if they could show injury; the justice who wrote for the majority said that not only did they have standing, but as a State they had a special standing; they most certainly could show injury, and they did have a clear course of recompense. Makes me wonder if they listened to the same case.
We went looking for a replacement for our 1991 Buick Regal, which is beginning, a bit, to show its age. My wife said that her first choice would be a hybrid, so thats what we looked at, primarily, checking out the Honda Civic hybrid, the Toyota Prius hybrid, and then also the Hyundai and Kia lines. We also looked at Saabs, just for grins. We did not even slow down going past the Hummer lot, though my wife did say that her goal was to change her gas mileage, and a Hummer would certainly do that. I must say, I was impressed by both the Civic and the Prius -- they're gotten bigger (as have we), the prices are acceptable (there's about a five thousand dollar bump from a non-hybrid to a hybrid), and the mileage is amazing -- about 40/50 for the Civic, and about 50/60 for the Prius. We need to write down what our priorities are, and examine some basic assumptions, but I do believe we'll be getting one of those in the not too distant future.
As always, some interesting and thought-provoking material in the Sunday papers. There was an article in the Washington Post about people who are using novel methods to help their young children deal with the stress of their father (usually) being away to war -- life size posters of the person (Flat Daddy) , or small stuffed dolls with the person's image on the face part (Daddy Doll). I'm always impressed by that kind of creativity. Almost always, I think 'Gee, I wish I could help with that', and almost always, I don't. Usually, there's a reason -- the posters, for example, cost fifty dollars each. I could afford one or two of them, but I convince myself that only contributing to one or two would hardly help. I am envious when others find a way to get their company to help in a big way. I'm thinking of an article I read where a man, whose son was grievously injured in Iraq, wrote an email about it that was circulated among coworkers in IBM, and the email eventually made its way to the chairman of the board, who arranged for the company to donate something like ten thousand copies of their translation software for use in Iraq, in recognition of the son's sacrifice. Geez, I think, how come I can't arrange something like that?
We also found out, courtesy of the Post's Outlook section, that Monica Goodling, the assistant to the Attorney General who resigned, no reason given, and who refused to testify because she feared self-incrimination, is a graduate of Messiah College, a local college. That surprised us, for a couple of reasons. First, Messiah is a small school, and the idea that someone graduated from there and ended up in a fairly prominent position is startling; usually, Messiah graduates end up as first assistant manager in charge of home loans at an area bank, though only after doing two or three years working in down-trodden areas helping build health clinics or as actual religious missionaries. For one of their own to make that leap is pretty impressive. Which leads me to the other reason -- that someone with the depth of religious conviction that she probably had -- as you might guess from the name, Messiah is a religiously oriented school, but its not oppressive about it; you don't find religious screeds everywhere, and, of course, they don't have Truth Squads keeping the faithful faithful, unlike certain other - ahem - religions -- to get into that kind of trouble is startling. Hearing that she came from Messiah made me assume she had firm, fairly inflexible religious values, which might well have spoken to why she was chosen over other candidates for a position in a faith-based presidency. I gather that she wasn't all that pure of heart, though, since she apparently pushed out qualified but non-Christian people in favor of others who were Christian though possibly not as qualified -- but still, I feel sorry for her -- much more so than for her boss, or her boss's boss.
I was pretty surprised to hear that the Supreme Court had ordered the EPA to review the effect of greenhouse gases, as I was fairly sure they couldn't do that. I would have bet that the Supremes would say that they didn't have the authority to review the actions of the EPA, especially in a Bush administration. Turns out that they didn' order any such thing, but they did come close-- they said that the EPA has the authority to do such reviews, which opens the door for the EPA to be sued if they don't do it. Whats also interesting is the breakdown of the vote -- as I recall, it was 5/4 -- because the Chief Justice said that Massachusetts, which brought the action, didn't have standing to do so, couldn't show that any injury was brought to it because the EPA either acted or failed to act, and had no clear course of recompense if they could show injury; the justice who wrote for the majority said that not only did they have standing, but as a State they had a special standing; they most certainly could show injury, and they did have a clear course of recompense. Makes me wonder if they listened to the same case.
We went looking for a replacement for our 1991 Buick Regal, which is beginning, a bit, to show its age. My wife said that her first choice would be a hybrid, so thats what we looked at, primarily, checking out the Honda Civic hybrid, the Toyota Prius hybrid, and then also the Hyundai and Kia lines. We also looked at Saabs, just for grins. We did not even slow down going past the Hummer lot, though my wife did say that her goal was to change her gas mileage, and a Hummer would certainly do that. I must say, I was impressed by both the Civic and the Prius -- they're gotten bigger (as have we), the prices are acceptable (there's about a five thousand dollar bump from a non-hybrid to a hybrid), and the mileage is amazing -- about 40/50 for the Civic, and about 50/60 for the Prius. We need to write down what our priorities are, and examine some basic assumptions, but I do believe we'll be getting one of those in the not too distant future.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
John Edwards
A quote from a Salon interview:
Are you confident that if the Democrats stood firm, Bush, who is certainly the most stubborn president of our lifetime, would back down? or would it just ratchet up into a confrontation?
Why should we presume that he won't back down, and therefore we must back down? That's not what we should do. We should be strong for the troops, for America and for the entire world. The Democrats need to be strong. That's what we ought to do. That's what I'd do.
Nice, huh?
AntiVirus
People who write software viruses are scum, and could I drop them into a vat of boiling oil, I would gladly do so.
No, I didn't get one.
But I did get to spend ninety minutes of quality time with the 'support' group for Symantec, makers of Norton AntiVirus.
About whom, I'll simply say: when this year's subscription is up, I'll ditch them entirely, because they're bloated and nonresponsive.
How nonresponsive? When I tried to renew a subscription to one of their products, their automated system said it could not find the code key. I just deleted it (good move) and bought the new version (bad move). Bad because the day after I did that, the other PC started saying that its software was expired, three months after it was renewed.
After the ninety minutes of quality time, I gave up, deleted and rebought that software, and now I'm done.
But Symantec can go tothe dogs for all I care. Never again.
No, I didn't get one.
But I did get to spend ninety minutes of quality time with the 'support' group for Symantec, makers of Norton AntiVirus.
About whom, I'll simply say: when this year's subscription is up, I'll ditch them entirely, because they're bloated and nonresponsive.
How nonresponsive? When I tried to renew a subscription to one of their products, their automated system said it could not find the code key. I just deleted it (good move) and bought the new version (bad move). Bad because the day after I did that, the other PC started saying that its software was expired, three months after it was renewed.
After the ninety minutes of quality time, I gave up, deleted and rebought that software, and now I'm done.
But Symantec can go tothe dogs for all I care. Never again.
JumpStop
This morning, I was leafing through a decorating magazine as we had breakfast. The magazine was glossy and well-photographed, with every room filled with casually-tossed (yet just so) throw pillows, the inevitable bowl of fruit on the gleaming marble countertops. The homes were, by and large, amazing, with vibrant, rich transformations from their prior lives as, apparently, goat-stalls into rooms worthy of Louis XVI (if he takes his shoes off prior to coming in). Not that I scorn this stuff -- I just could never see myself paying for it. But there are things in there that I just wonder about.
One is a shower head that promises to deliver a strong, intense spray with which to 'jumpstart your day'. I know that the image of the shower users varies between the muscular, athletic guy who wants nothing more than a blast of water, cold, preferably, and plenty of it -- showering under Niagara Falls would be just the ticket for that guy -- and the soft, dreamy cloudscape that the woman wants, with candles flickering in the corners of the room, and a gentle mist throughout. Our shower is -- well, its a shower. It does the job. Its not as strong as I'd like, but its not bad. It certainly does not jumpstart the day, and thats a good thing. As my wife put it, when she was younger, she didn't need a shower to jumpstart the day, and now that she's older, she doesn't want one. I'm much the same way. I need to ease into the day. Don't ask me to think, and especially don't ask me to do anything complicated. It takes me a while to wake up, and being shocked into shivering awakeness by a blast of water doesn't sound to me like the ticket for a fine start to the day.
Occasionally, I find myself wondering how the wealthy ease into their days. I imagine it something like the sequence in the film Trading Places, where the manservant brings them up a cup of coffee and a crisp croissant on a tray and gently awakens them. There are devices that will simulate that -- for example, the Voco Clock , which offers pleasant recorded messages to slowly wake you up. I have to admit that the couple of times I've actually had breakfast in bed, it didn't strike me as all that wonderful, as I had to be very careful not to slosh or spill anything by a sudden incautious move. The idea, though, is pretty delightful.
And about as far away from being jumpstarted as you can imagine.
One is a shower head that promises to deliver a strong, intense spray with which to 'jumpstart your day'. I know that the image of the shower users varies between the muscular, athletic guy who wants nothing more than a blast of water, cold, preferably, and plenty of it -- showering under Niagara Falls would be just the ticket for that guy -- and the soft, dreamy cloudscape that the woman wants, with candles flickering in the corners of the room, and a gentle mist throughout. Our shower is -- well, its a shower. It does the job. Its not as strong as I'd like, but its not bad. It certainly does not jumpstart the day, and thats a good thing. As my wife put it, when she was younger, she didn't need a shower to jumpstart the day, and now that she's older, she doesn't want one. I'm much the same way. I need to ease into the day. Don't ask me to think, and especially don't ask me to do anything complicated. It takes me a while to wake up, and being shocked into shivering awakeness by a blast of water doesn't sound to me like the ticket for a fine start to the day.
Occasionally, I find myself wondering how the wealthy ease into their days. I imagine it something like the sequence in the film Trading Places, where the manservant brings them up a cup of coffee and a crisp croissant on a tray and gently awakens them. There are devices that will simulate that -- for example, the Voco Clock , which offers pleasant recorded messages to slowly wake you up. I have to admit that the couple of times I've actually had breakfast in bed, it didn't strike me as all that wonderful, as I had to be very careful not to slosh or spill anything by a sudden incautious move. The idea, though, is pretty delightful.
And about as far away from being jumpstarted as you can imagine.
Friday, April 06, 2007
You want a Latte with that?
The local supermarket chain (one of three, but the dominant one) has opened up a small coffee shop in the corner of the store. This appears to be the coming thing, as other branches of this same chain also have coffee shops in them. This one is a little different; though not at all lavish, it does have some interesting touches, such as a fake fireplace going in the corner, and a couch and stuffed chairs nearby. They don't look all that comfortable -- I don't think that the staff from the local Starbucks will be flogging it down here to see what the competition is doing -- but still, its an interesting idea. I would bet that when the concept was pitched at the store's headquarters, it was sold as something that would make the store a destination, rather than simply the place that you came to get your peas and cheerios. They're trying to upscale the image -- or as much as you can when the high pitched beeping of the cash registers is clearly audible, partially because the little cove that holds the store doesn't have a ceiling -- the next thing you see is the ceiling of the store itself, twenty feet up and studded with wires and pipes. But they're trying.
I saw an article not too long ago about the effort that Starbucks is making to reinvigorate their franchise. Apparently there is some concern that they've saturated their market, and then some, what with a Starbucks about every mile in some places, and occasionally less than that. The chairman of the company said that he wanted to get away from the cookie-cutter impression, where they all looked, sounded, and smelled the same -- he wanted to get back to people actually grinding the beans there, and mixing the whipped cream personally, because he thought that those things were attractive to customers. Whats ironic about that is that he lead the drive to commoditize Starbucks, and he or his flunkies did away with the things that made Starbucks 109 in Des Moines, say, different from Starbucks 5003 in La Jolla. And now he wants it back -- individuality, but in a manner acceptable to the corporate mind.
I don't know a whole bunch about the industry thats behind these shenanigans, but I know about the concept of mass customization, and about making the customer feel like they're getting a one-off unique experience even when they're truly not. I have a general sense of the psychology that goes into it, and what they're trying to do. Wish I knew more, though -- not at the MBA level (from whose mostly dry tomes I learned most of what I know there), but at the storefront level. I'd love to know how it's really playing out in the trenches.
I saw an article not too long ago about the effort that Starbucks is making to reinvigorate their franchise. Apparently there is some concern that they've saturated their market, and then some, what with a Starbucks about every mile in some places, and occasionally less than that. The chairman of the company said that he wanted to get away from the cookie-cutter impression, where they all looked, sounded, and smelled the same -- he wanted to get back to people actually grinding the beans there, and mixing the whipped cream personally, because he thought that those things were attractive to customers. Whats ironic about that is that he lead the drive to commoditize Starbucks, and he or his flunkies did away with the things that made Starbucks 109 in Des Moines, say, different from Starbucks 5003 in La Jolla. And now he wants it back -- individuality, but in a manner acceptable to the corporate mind.
I don't know a whole bunch about the industry thats behind these shenanigans, but I know about the concept of mass customization, and about making the customer feel like they're getting a one-off unique experience even when they're truly not. I have a general sense of the psychology that goes into it, and what they're trying to do. Wish I knew more, though -- not at the MBA level (from whose mostly dry tomes I learned most of what I know there), but at the storefront level. I'd love to know how it's really playing out in the trenches.
Winter Again?
It seems like just yesterday that we were basking in the sun, relatively speaking; but this morning we have snow flurries, the sky is overcast, and the temp's around 30.
I am thinking that somehow this is Bush's fault, though I admit that I'm having a little difficulty establishing the casual link.
I am thinking that somehow this is Bush's fault, though I admit that I'm having a little difficulty establishing the casual link.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
I Can SEE That !
If you're like me, such that you really like when technology makes it possible to see things about your world in a quick, convenient manner --
Oh, heck. If you think graphics are sexy, and you're a bit of a geek, check this.
There, that's better.
Oh, heck. If you think graphics are sexy, and you're a bit of a geek, check this.
There, that's better.
Doing the Numbers
There's been a fair amount of aisle chatter in my office of late regarding retirement, and the planning thereof. Part of this has been motivated by the rumour of organizational changes to come, and part of it is from a series of presentations that the company has started on the general topic of financial planning. Several of our people went to an on-site presentation, the first of several planned for the area; I'll be attending an on-line one in a few weeks. As a result, I likely will not get the pretty three-color handouts, but that's okay, as I assume they'll be available as PDFs (incidentally, re: PDFS-- check out Foxit Software's free PDF reader. Faster than Adobe. And free. ) so I can read them as needed. I did look at the material that one person brought back; much of it is very basic (possibly a nod to the idea that many people, even now, don't like to think about where their finances are, and even less about where they need to be) but some of it looks interesting, with some numbers and concepts that I didn't know or had not heard recently.
Yet, with all of that, I noted that when I told one of the attendees about the 'four per cent per year' concept (and I was careful to emphasize that this was a very rough cut), he asked me to walk through the example again, nodding as I did. Apparently, I'm not the only one who wants a quick, clean answer -- even if its not terribly reliable.
Yet, with all of that, I noted that when I told one of the attendees about the 'four per cent per year' concept (and I was careful to emphasize that this was a very rough cut), he asked me to walk through the example again, nodding as I did. Apparently, I'm not the only one who wants a quick, clean answer -- even if its not terribly reliable.
News Flash
Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
Okay, thats old news -- but its still relevant. In this case, the observation comes from talking with my wife as we walked through a surprisingly blustery April day. She'd gotten a very unpleasant surprise yesterday, when a dull ache in her jaw turned into a surprise visit to an endodontist for a root canal. The procedure went well, and she's glad she went, but she admitted that part of the post-experience visit was a sudden vigor to floss again. Like most people, she would get religion about that immediately before going for a dental visit, and immediately after, and then it would trail off until the next time. Now, she says, she really wants to be consistant, but she knows that she's going to fall, again, because she always does. I told her that my experience has been that when you fall, however you do, for however long you do, just accept it, do what you can to fix it, and move on. Put mechanisms in place to help you remember next time, and when you fall again, if you do, just do it again. Like my bathroom cabinet note about every day being a chance to get it right, put a note on the mirror about flossing -- or whatever it is you want to focus on.
I told her that for years my attitude was that if things went wrong, I was doing the best I could (which of course wasn't true), so SORRY! It effectively absolved me of blame. It took me a very long time to realize that I could accept the blame without feeling that I was therefore worthless and incompetent, and oh by the way, therefore unable to do anything about it, and therfore didn't HAVE to do anything. I could always do something -- maybe not enough, but something, and maybe just a little more each day or each week. But it all started with accepting that I was going to fail, and figuring out some way to recover from it and move on. In a way it was like my belief in organizational processes -- that they have to assume that people are going to fail, that there are things that they just will not want to do, and will actively go out of their way to avoid doing (while still acknowledging that they should do it, and will...real soon now). The processes have to account for that, and steer them back to, if not the path of righteousness, at least the path of 'good enough'. Because thats the area where you want to be. Not perfect, nice as that would be -- but good enough.
Not that thats ever good enough for auditors, of course.
And thats my insight for today. The choir will now sing.....
Okay, thats old news -- but its still relevant. In this case, the observation comes from talking with my wife as we walked through a surprisingly blustery April day. She'd gotten a very unpleasant surprise yesterday, when a dull ache in her jaw turned into a surprise visit to an endodontist for a root canal. The procedure went well, and she's glad she went, but she admitted that part of the post-experience visit was a sudden vigor to floss again. Like most people, she would get religion about that immediately before going for a dental visit, and immediately after, and then it would trail off until the next time. Now, she says, she really wants to be consistant, but she knows that she's going to fall, again, because she always does. I told her that my experience has been that when you fall, however you do, for however long you do, just accept it, do what you can to fix it, and move on. Put mechanisms in place to help you remember next time, and when you fall again, if you do, just do it again. Like my bathroom cabinet note about every day being a chance to get it right, put a note on the mirror about flossing -- or whatever it is you want to focus on.
I told her that for years my attitude was that if things went wrong, I was doing the best I could (which of course wasn't true), so SORRY! It effectively absolved me of blame. It took me a very long time to realize that I could accept the blame without feeling that I was therefore worthless and incompetent, and oh by the way, therefore unable to do anything about it, and therfore didn't HAVE to do anything. I could always do something -- maybe not enough, but something, and maybe just a little more each day or each week. But it all started with accepting that I was going to fail, and figuring out some way to recover from it and move on. In a way it was like my belief in organizational processes -- that they have to assume that people are going to fail, that there are things that they just will not want to do, and will actively go out of their way to avoid doing (while still acknowledging that they should do it, and will...real soon now). The processes have to account for that, and steer them back to, if not the path of righteousness, at least the path of 'good enough'. Because thats the area where you want to be. Not perfect, nice as that would be -- but good enough.
Not that thats ever good enough for auditors, of course.
And thats my insight for today. The choir will now sing.....
Amazed
Bush amazed me.
From the LA Times web site:
WASHINGTON — President Bush on Wednesday appointed as his top regulatory official a conservative academic who has written that markets do a better job of regulating than the government does and that it is more cost-effective for people who are sensitive to pollution to stay indoors on smoggy days than for government to order polluters to clean up their emissions.
As director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the White House Office of Management and Budget, Susan E. Dudley will have an opportunity to change or block all regulations proposed by government agencies.
In a flurry of nominations and appointments, Bush also named a researcher at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, as deputy director of the Social Security Administration. Andrew G. Biggs has been an outspoken proponent of converting Social Security benefits into self-directed retirement accounts, which Bush favors but Democrats have stopped cold. Bush nominated Biggs to that post in November, but the process stalled in February when the Senate Finance Committee refused to hold confirmation hearings because of his views on privatization.
And as ambassador to Belgium he installed Sam Fox, a St. Louis businessman and GOP fundraiser who contributed $50,000 to the Swift Boat veterans' controversial campaign against Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential race. The White House actually withdrew Fox's nomination to that same job last week in the face of strong opposition from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
How did he amaze me? Because I didn't think he could get sneakier. Once again using a recess as a way to make appointments that wouldn't pass muster in the Congress -- how low is that?
Is it impeachment time now? Yes, I think it is. Not just because of this, but because of the indicative nature -- that Mr. Bush simply does not care what the Congress thinks. Doing this end run against the Senate -- that's just plain wrong. That ability was intended for quick action during periods when the Senate could not be brought into session. Clearly, this isn't the case now. It's an abuse of power.
I'm not an alarmist, but now I find myself wondering: if he next said that the Congress should be disbanded as irrelevant, or 'counter revolutionary' -- if he said that the Presidency needed to be defended, and called out the tanks -- would I be all that surprised? A strong Presidency is one thing. This one is verging on the imperial, or the dictatorial.
Impeach him. Censure him, at the least. Don't tolerate this. As a bumper sticker I saw today put it --
From the LA Times web site:
WASHINGTON — President Bush on Wednesday appointed as his top regulatory official a conservative academic who has written that markets do a better job of regulating than the government does and that it is more cost-effective for people who are sensitive to pollution to stay indoors on smoggy days than for government to order polluters to clean up their emissions.
As director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the White House Office of Management and Budget, Susan E. Dudley will have an opportunity to change or block all regulations proposed by government agencies.
In a flurry of nominations and appointments, Bush also named a researcher at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, as deputy director of the Social Security Administration. Andrew G. Biggs has been an outspoken proponent of converting Social Security benefits into self-directed retirement accounts, which Bush favors but Democrats have stopped cold. Bush nominated Biggs to that post in November, but the process stalled in February when the Senate Finance Committee refused to hold confirmation hearings because of his views on privatization.
And as ambassador to Belgium he installed Sam Fox, a St. Louis businessman and GOP fundraiser who contributed $50,000 to the Swift Boat veterans' controversial campaign against Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential race. The White House actually withdrew Fox's nomination to that same job last week in the face of strong opposition from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
How did he amaze me? Because I didn't think he could get sneakier. Once again using a recess as a way to make appointments that wouldn't pass muster in the Congress -- how low is that?
Is it impeachment time now? Yes, I think it is. Not just because of this, but because of the indicative nature -- that Mr. Bush simply does not care what the Congress thinks. Doing this end run against the Senate -- that's just plain wrong. That ability was intended for quick action during periods when the Senate could not be brought into session. Clearly, this isn't the case now. It's an abuse of power.
I'm not an alarmist, but now I find myself wondering: if he next said that the Congress should be disbanded as irrelevant, or 'counter revolutionary' -- if he said that the Presidency needed to be defended, and called out the tanks -- would I be all that surprised? A strong Presidency is one thing. This one is verging on the imperial, or the dictatorial.
Impeach him. Censure him, at the least. Don't tolerate this. As a bumper sticker I saw today put it --
Fight Mad Cowboy Disease!
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Feel Your Boobies
...is a catchy bumper sticker I've seen that advocates frequent breast self exams.
But how often should mammograms be done -- yearly or less often?
Apparently, the answer is: yes.
But how often should mammograms be done -- yearly or less often?
Over 40? Expert Says Get Annual Mammogram
CBS News -34 minutes ago
(CBS) The American College of Physicians has said that women in their 40s do not necessarily need to
have a mammogram each year, but should get one periodically instead.
CBS News -
(CBS) The American College of Physicians has said that women in their 40s do not necessarily need to
have a mammogram each year, but should get one periodically instead.
Apparently, the answer is: yes.
Dire Thoughts
On the way in to work, I was thinking about strange things. Like, lions and hyenas, and crystal meth.
The lions and hyenas comes from an analogy I've heard before, and saw again last night in the Executive Orders novel, the idea being that as powerful as a lion is, it cannot, alone, defend itself, let alone its kill, against a swarm of hyenas. If it moves to attack one hyena in one direction, one or two attack it from the rear. The message is that raw power can be negated by small, coordinated attacks. That images really distresses me. Its just not right -- and of course, I'm not thinking about the fate of animals in the jungle, but the idea that powerful countries can be hamstrung by much smaller, much less powerful ones. I found myself first thinking Damn, thats awful., and then wondering: if you assume that there is a defense against that sort of thing, what is it? Which led me to thinking about what Donald Rumsfeld said about asymmetrical power.
And the crystal meth was from an NPR article about the heavy flow of that drug into the United States from Mexico, partially encouraged by the success of the US in shutting down domestic production. Apparently, the imported stuff is much more deadly, and the people doing it are much more deadly, too. They had a sequence of a forty-five year old grandmother getting busted with crystal meth and rolls of money in her purse. She was crying, wailing that she didn't know it was there, and what would this mean to her grandchild, and her 17 year old daughter, the child's mother. All I could think of was how horrible this whole thing was.
In some way, I'm not sure how, the thoughts are connected -- power doesn't always work against small, sneaky, agile, unscrupulous opponents. So what does? How do you combat the hyenas?
Dire, huh?
The lions and hyenas comes from an analogy I've heard before, and saw again last night in the Executive Orders novel, the idea being that as powerful as a lion is, it cannot, alone, defend itself, let alone its kill, against a swarm of hyenas. If it moves to attack one hyena in one direction, one or two attack it from the rear. The message is that raw power can be negated by small, coordinated attacks. That images really distresses me. Its just not right -- and of course, I'm not thinking about the fate of animals in the jungle, but the idea that powerful countries can be hamstrung by much smaller, much less powerful ones. I found myself first thinking Damn, thats awful., and then wondering: if you assume that there is a defense against that sort of thing, what is it? Which led me to thinking about what Donald Rumsfeld said about asymmetrical power.
And the crystal meth was from an NPR article about the heavy flow of that drug into the United States from Mexico, partially encouraged by the success of the US in shutting down domestic production. Apparently, the imported stuff is much more deadly, and the people doing it are much more deadly, too. They had a sequence of a forty-five year old grandmother getting busted with crystal meth and rolls of money in her purse. She was crying, wailing that she didn't know it was there, and what would this mean to her grandchild, and her 17 year old daughter, the child's mother. All I could think of was how horrible this whole thing was.
In some way, I'm not sure how, the thoughts are connected -- power doesn't always work against small, sneaky, agile, unscrupulous opponents. So what does? How do you combat the hyenas?
Dire, huh?
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
The Number
One of the points that The Number makes again and again and again is that the number has to reflect what you want to do with your life, from this point on. There are caveats out the wazoo about that, but that's a key, pivotal point. If you don't know what you want to do, you won't have a clue about how much money you'll need in order to be able to do it. Oh, for sure, you'll know that More is Better, but how much more, you won't know -- which is partially why so many people assume that its got to be a Big number. What a Big number is varies by person. I used to think that a Big number was having five hundred thousand dollars, and I still think that -- but now I also know that it depends on when I intend to start drawing down on it, and how I intend to start drawing down. Start now, live large, and five hundred thousand might get me through five years. Five years???? Okay, perhaps ten. But not more than that, not if thats your only source.
So that translates into When can I start drawing down? If you think you're going to live for ten years or less, you can start right now. If you think you're going to live for thirty more years, not for another twenty. What do the odds say? How long did your parents live, and their parents? Well, my father died when he was 69; my mothers still alive at 83. My grandmothers both died in their eighties; the only grandfather I remember died in his seventies. So, based on that, I've got a likelihood of living till some time in my late seventies, early eighties. If I had the $500K, and those spending plans, I could start in my late sixties -- but if I'm in robust health, maybe thats too soon. Whats the old joke? Modern medicine makes it possible for most of us to live until we're senile? And poor, too.
I'm not fixated on it, but I think about the number every so often, and about when I can stop working. And I twitch whenever the examples in the book say things like 'assume you're sixty, and you've got three million in investments.' What? Three...million??? Hey, its just an example. But still: examples like that make me twitch. So I cut to the chase, about two thirds of the way through the book, to where I knew the book had a quick and dirty assessment of what the number would be, and, first cut through, my jaw dropped.... and not from pleasure. I need how much? Thats like DOUBLE what we have now! I am so screwed....
Then I thought Wait a minute... thats assuming that you have no other sources of income. But you will -- pension (small, but there), two 401Ks (three, counting my wife's), Social Security (which I like to refer to as Sociable Security). So how much do you need, assuming all of those are there when you want them? (And I know, I know: given how companies can apparently get away with murder, that might be a shaky assumption.) But still: how much? So I took out the spreadsheet, subtracting the column with the estimated expenses from the column with estimated sources, so that I knew how much of a differential we'd have to generate from other sources (ie, withdrawals from The Number), and cranked that number. I used four percent as the assumed withdrawal per year -- that's the assumed withdrawal that you see used a lot, incidentally. It assumes that you want to fund a retirement for about twenty five years, with the same amount of withdrawal per year. So, for example, if you need to generate one hundred thousand dollars a year to live the life you want, you'll need 2.5 million to fund it. Why? Because four percent of 2.5 million is one hundred thousand, every year for 25 years, about. (Is there more to it than that? Oh, yeah.)
So, how much do I need in order to generate that differential for twenty five years? I cranked the numbers, closed my eyes, and pressed the button.
I feel a little better. Not totally, because I'm a worrier, but still: better. Somewhat. If the rough cut is right, I may end up senile, but we won't be poor. Not real poor, anyway. And even if we do, as my wife likes to point out, one of the benefits of senility is that you don't know you're poor. Or senile, for that matter.
Incidentally, if you pick up the book (and I really recommend it: though I did cut to the chase three quarters of the way through, I intend to read the whole thing, because its worth reading), that rough cut, including its expansion, is on a single page, in Appendix A. In case you're as impatient as me.
So that translates into When can I start drawing down? If you think you're going to live for ten years or less, you can start right now. If you think you're going to live for thirty more years, not for another twenty. What do the odds say? How long did your parents live, and their parents? Well, my father died when he was 69; my mothers still alive at 83. My grandmothers both died in their eighties; the only grandfather I remember died in his seventies. So, based on that, I've got a likelihood of living till some time in my late seventies, early eighties. If I had the $500K, and those spending plans, I could start in my late sixties -- but if I'm in robust health, maybe thats too soon. Whats the old joke? Modern medicine makes it possible for most of us to live until we're senile? And poor, too.
I'm not fixated on it, but I think about the number every so often, and about when I can stop working. And I twitch whenever the examples in the book say things like 'assume you're sixty, and you've got three million in investments.' What? Three...million??? Hey, its just an example. But still: examples like that make me twitch. So I cut to the chase, about two thirds of the way through the book, to where I knew the book had a quick and dirty assessment of what the number would be, and, first cut through, my jaw dropped.... and not from pleasure. I need how much? Thats like DOUBLE what we have now! I am so screwed....
Then I thought Wait a minute... thats assuming that you have no other sources of income. But you will -- pension (small, but there), two 401Ks (three, counting my wife's), Social Security (which I like to refer to as Sociable Security). So how much do you need, assuming all of those are there when you want them? (And I know, I know: given how companies can apparently get away with murder, that might be a shaky assumption.) But still: how much? So I took out the spreadsheet, subtracting the column with the estimated expenses from the column with estimated sources, so that I knew how much of a differential we'd have to generate from other sources (ie, withdrawals from The Number), and cranked that number. I used four percent as the assumed withdrawal per year -- that's the assumed withdrawal that you see used a lot, incidentally. It assumes that you want to fund a retirement for about twenty five years, with the same amount of withdrawal per year. So, for example, if you need to generate one hundred thousand dollars a year to live the life you want, you'll need 2.5 million to fund it. Why? Because four percent of 2.5 million is one hundred thousand, every year for 25 years, about. (Is there more to it than that? Oh, yeah.)
So, how much do I need in order to generate that differential for twenty five years? I cranked the numbers, closed my eyes, and pressed the button.
I feel a little better. Not totally, because I'm a worrier, but still: better. Somewhat. If the rough cut is right, I may end up senile, but we won't be poor. Not real poor, anyway. And even if we do, as my wife likes to point out, one of the benefits of senility is that you don't know you're poor. Or senile, for that matter.
Incidentally, if you pick up the book (and I really recommend it: though I did cut to the chase three quarters of the way through, I intend to read the whole thing, because its worth reading), that rough cut, including its expansion, is on a single page, in Appendix A. In case you're as impatient as me.
Thoughts on a Warm Day
Its about sixty degrees out, which is roughly a quarter warmer than normal. It'll be dropping for the remainder of the week, so that by Easter it'll be in the mid forties. Still, it's nice to see. Already, the first weeds are sprouting, and the first flies have shown up.
I've been reading several books at once, according to how challenged I feel like being -- The Number, and Executive Orders, and The Man in the Arena -- and today, I picked up another, from my daughter. Its one of hers, a novel about a girl in ancient China who discovers a surprising affinity between herself and dragons. I'll read it, partially out of curiosity, and partially as a compliment to her, for having picked it.
Listening to the dialogue between the president and the democrats is a little sad. It certainly doesn't sound like anything good will come out of this. I had said a few days ago that the Congress didn't have the right to manage, let alone micromanage, things that the president was doing, but now I'm having second thoughts about that. If funded, he's going to keep pressing a war that people don't want to be in, by and large, and that's not right. So, if he's not willing to listen, let alone negotiate, don't they have the responsibility to reflect what people want? Barring them knowing something that, if widely known and understood, would make the people feel differently, I think they do. Still don't like seeing it, though. Listening to one senator today, he usually sounded as if he was making sense, but then every so often he'd toss in a phrase about 'it'll be the presidents fault if the military's not funded', and I don't think thats true -- at least, not in a black and white sense. Or he's say things that sounded like the congress was simply reflecting the will of the people, as demonstrated in the last election, and I thought 'well, no, the election was not just about the war'. The president's no better, saying that the congress is playing politics with soldiers who are in harm's way (they like that phrase on both sides of the argument, I notice); when what you do is politics, its kind of hard to not play politics full time. He did say one thing, about 'the plan is starting to work', and I wished I could believe him -- but I can't, because I think he's not believable. I want to say 'not trustworthy', but I don't think thats true. I think that personally, he probably is. But not this time.
Things are as strange as ever at my job. The current audit is just about over, and we're probably not going to do too well. My group's manager is huffing and puffing about how that seems to say that we're 'not as tight as we should be'; he's right, but I don't think its entirely our fault. I think that the organization as a whole tends to have a skewed attitude toward these things. That said, not doing well in one isn't a pleasant experience, and we'll probably have to grovel and cover ourselves in ashes for a while -- until the press of events speeds up, and we turn focus to something else. Its then that a stable process would save us -- but we don't have one. We're going to try to come up with one, but I don't have high hopes. I've known that I'm naive about this kind of thing for years.
I've been reading several books at once, according to how challenged I feel like being -- The Number, and Executive Orders, and The Man in the Arena -- and today, I picked up another, from my daughter. Its one of hers, a novel about a girl in ancient China who discovers a surprising affinity between herself and dragons. I'll read it, partially out of curiosity, and partially as a compliment to her, for having picked it.
Listening to the dialogue between the president and the democrats is a little sad. It certainly doesn't sound like anything good will come out of this. I had said a few days ago that the Congress didn't have the right to manage, let alone micromanage, things that the president was doing, but now I'm having second thoughts about that. If funded, he's going to keep pressing a war that people don't want to be in, by and large, and that's not right. So, if he's not willing to listen, let alone negotiate, don't they have the responsibility to reflect what people want? Barring them knowing something that, if widely known and understood, would make the people feel differently, I think they do. Still don't like seeing it, though. Listening to one senator today, he usually sounded as if he was making sense, but then every so often he'd toss in a phrase about 'it'll be the presidents fault if the military's not funded', and I don't think thats true -- at least, not in a black and white sense. Or he's say things that sounded like the congress was simply reflecting the will of the people, as demonstrated in the last election, and I thought 'well, no, the election was not just about the war'. The president's no better, saying that the congress is playing politics with soldiers who are in harm's way (they like that phrase on both sides of the argument, I notice); when what you do is politics, its kind of hard to not play politics full time. He did say one thing, about 'the plan is starting to work', and I wished I could believe him -- but I can't, because I think he's not believable. I want to say 'not trustworthy', but I don't think thats true. I think that personally, he probably is. But not this time.
Things are as strange as ever at my job. The current audit is just about over, and we're probably not going to do too well. My group's manager is huffing and puffing about how that seems to say that we're 'not as tight as we should be'; he's right, but I don't think its entirely our fault. I think that the organization as a whole tends to have a skewed attitude toward these things. That said, not doing well in one isn't a pleasant experience, and we'll probably have to grovel and cover ourselves in ashes for a while -- until the press of events speeds up, and we turn focus to something else. Its then that a stable process would save us -- but we don't have one. We're going to try to come up with one, but I don't have high hopes. I've known that I'm naive about this kind of thing for years.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Stunning
There is a point in a professional fight where the additional blows to the opponent are increasingly less effective in removal of cognitive ability, because by then the opponent isn't 'thinking' any more. He's so battered, he's running on instinct and impulse. Such as me, at the moment. Turns out that I was wrong when I said that the local dentist's share in this dental fandango would be less than the surgeon's.
Here's a clue. When a dentist uses the words 'custom-made' and 'titanium' to describe something large he's planning on putting in your mouth, and mentioned that he's divorced (again)...this is going to be an expensive conversation.
Here's a clue. When a dentist uses the words 'custom-made' and 'titanium' to describe something large he's planning on putting in your mouth, and mentioned that he's divorced (again)...this is going to be an expensive conversation.
April Fewl
Okay, I'm a day late; sue me.
Its a good day to stay in bed -- slight drizzle, fairly dense fog, and when I got into work email, someone had been nice enough to create a problem record for me for the system problem I had resolved yesterday. I usually think that problem records are a good idea badly executed, and this is no exception. The logic behind a problem record is that if this should happen again, we'll see what fixed it last time. It usually doesn't work that way because a) the people resolving the problem don't look at problem records (assuming they even can; I was at home, and our problem records system isn't accessible from outside the work firewall -- the systems themselves are, but the administrative record keeping system isn't. Go figure.) and b) if you were to look at the system, you'd have to make a leap of faith about what any existing records might have used to designate the problem.
Take yesterday, for example. The initial manifestation was that a piece of automation software that's supposed to start other software wasn't doing so -- it was, itself, starting and then immediately stopping without an error message of any kind. (As it turned out, there were error messages, but the operator didn't notice them; just as well, because they weren't indicative of the problem.) Would such a problem be written as 'SA Didn't Start' or 'Systems Automation Didn't Start' or 'System won't IPL successfully' or.... you get the idea.
As it happens, to my knowledge, this particular problem had never occurred on this account before, so such a search, even if flawlessly executed, would have found nothing. So, why the problem record? Its for the other reason that we do this -- so that we can demonstrate to auditors that we have a vibrant and viable problem tracking and notification system. Very key in our auditor-conscious environment.
I'll be at home for the next hour, roughly, at which time I get to go to the local dentist, whereupon he'll inform me what he thinks his share of this dental process will be. The good news is, that it probably won't be nearly as stunning as the surgeon's piece; the bad news is that this cost is in addition to what I thought I'd have to pay back when this all started. It will almost certainly be done next year, which means it'll be covered by dental insurance. And, after the expensive fiasco this year, you can believe that I'll be looking at that very, very closely!
Its a good day to stay in bed -- slight drizzle, fairly dense fog, and when I got into work email, someone had been nice enough to create a problem record for me for the system problem I had resolved yesterday. I usually think that problem records are a good idea badly executed, and this is no exception. The logic behind a problem record is that if this should happen again, we'll see what fixed it last time. It usually doesn't work that way because a) the people resolving the problem don't look at problem records (assuming they even can; I was at home, and our problem records system isn't accessible from outside the work firewall -- the systems themselves are, but the administrative record keeping system isn't. Go figure.) and b) if you were to look at the system, you'd have to make a leap of faith about what any existing records might have used to designate the problem.
Take yesterday, for example. The initial manifestation was that a piece of automation software that's supposed to start other software wasn't doing so -- it was, itself, starting and then immediately stopping without an error message of any kind. (As it turned out, there were error messages, but the operator didn't notice them; just as well, because they weren't indicative of the problem.) Would such a problem be written as 'SA Didn't Start' or 'Systems Automation Didn't Start' or 'System won't IPL successfully' or.... you get the idea.
As it happens, to my knowledge, this particular problem had never occurred on this account before, so such a search, even if flawlessly executed, would have found nothing. So, why the problem record? Its for the other reason that we do this -- so that we can demonstrate to auditors that we have a vibrant and viable problem tracking and notification system. Very key in our auditor-conscious environment.
I'll be at home for the next hour, roughly, at which time I get to go to the local dentist, whereupon he'll inform me what he thinks his share of this dental process will be. The good news is, that it probably won't be nearly as stunning as the surgeon's piece; the bad news is that this cost is in addition to what I thought I'd have to pay back when this all started. It will almost certainly be done next year, which means it'll be covered by dental insurance. And, after the expensive fiasco this year, you can believe that I'll be looking at that very, very closely!
Sunday, April 01, 2007
Time Check
Someone owes me eight hours.
I know this because I got up at 7AM, its now almost 9 PM, and I can only account for about six hours -- two of which were spent talking to one of the operators at our data center, resolving a problem (I kept thinking Tell me this is an April Fools prank, okay?), one was spent cooking breakfast and then eating, one was spent running errands, and two were spent taking a nap.
Okay, some time was spent looking at the email box, and wondering why I've had so few responses lately, but heck, that wasn't but ten minutes. Maybe fifteen. Call it six-plus hours.
Somewhere, someone is delighting in the arrival of an extra third of a day, and I want it back.
I know this because I got up at 7AM, its now almost 9 PM, and I can only account for about six hours -- two of which were spent talking to one of the operators at our data center, resolving a problem (I kept thinking Tell me this is an April Fools prank, okay?), one was spent cooking breakfast and then eating, one was spent running errands, and two were spent taking a nap.
Okay, some time was spent looking at the email box, and wondering why I've had so few responses lately, but heck, that wasn't but ten minutes. Maybe fifteen. Call it six-plus hours.
Somewhere, someone is delighting in the arrival of an extra third of a day, and I want it back.
Humming
If I had a lot of money, one thing that I would for sure do is arrange for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir to do an album of tunes like The Theme from F Troop, and The Theme from The Addams Family, and The Theme from The Munsters. Absolutely. And probably some Beach Boys stuff, and maybe a little Simon and Garfunkel.
I guess the world is lucky that I'm not wealthy, hmm?
Some interesting stuff in today's paper. One very long article in the Times is about amazingly talented and achieving girls -- fluent in Spanish, classical guitarist, 3.5 GPA, track team -- and how no matter how well they do, they feel that they're not quite good enough (well, sure, I can do all those things, they'll say, but I can't paint worth a damn!), or that the level of competition has risen dramatically because there are so many girls performing at that level these days. I'm interested in the article, for obvious reasons, but I did notice years ago that so far as education is concerned, there's a recurring theme about kids -- if boys tend to do better than girls, then its a crisis and we are abandoning our daughters; if girls tend to do better than boys, then its a crisis, and we're forgetting about our sons; and if they're doing about the same, well, shucks, its just so hard to stand out these days. Its an interesting topic, but I'd like to see something more insightful.
Years ago -- decades ago -- a woman whose husband was, I believe, editor of the New York Times used to periodically poke her husband and insist that the paper do an article about garbage collection in New York City. The greenest, rawest recruit would get the assignment, and an article would get written, which would keep her happy until the next time. Until the day that the newest recruit happened to be a supremely talented individual who went all out, writing thousands of words about it -- where does it come from, why is it a problem, what are we doing, what aren't we doing, who's involved, what's the attitude in other cities, other states, other countries -- by the time he was done, he'd covered the subject so intensely that she never asked again. I'd like him to write about the state of education.
Another interesting article, also in the Times, is about a fellow who switched from the Democratic party in the late nineties and was very active in the effort to get George Bush elected in 2000 and again in 2004. He likes Bush, and what he says, but he's come to the conclusion that Bush has failed in what he is doing and in what he has said he would do. Its a very well written article. Obviously, I am predisposed to like it, but what I am particularly impressed by is that he does not say Bush is bad, or stupid, or ignorant, but rather that he has become insular -- inbubbled, I think he called it -- and has lost touch with what people are telling him about their feelings regarding the economy and the war. He's not even saying that he thinks Bush is wrong, though he apparently does; what he says is that someone whom he still likes is taking the country in the wrong direction, and that because he was so active in getting Bush elected, he feels it's incumbent upon him to be active in telling people that he was wrong. He says that he now feels that an election that just wins 51% of the vote isn't right -- it should bring the country together in a sense of common purpose. At which point I looked up at my wife, to whom I'd been reading parts of this, and said 'Yes, what we need is a President who's a uniter, not a...'
Demetri Martin is a pretty funny guy....
More later, perhaps...
I guess the world is lucky that I'm not wealthy, hmm?
Some interesting stuff in today's paper. One very long article in the Times is about amazingly talented and achieving girls -- fluent in Spanish, classical guitarist, 3.5 GPA, track team -- and how no matter how well they do, they feel that they're not quite good enough (well, sure, I can do all those things, they'll say, but I can't paint worth a damn!), or that the level of competition has risen dramatically because there are so many girls performing at that level these days. I'm interested in the article, for obvious reasons, but I did notice years ago that so far as education is concerned, there's a recurring theme about kids -- if boys tend to do better than girls, then its a crisis and we are abandoning our daughters; if girls tend to do better than boys, then its a crisis, and we're forgetting about our sons; and if they're doing about the same, well, shucks, its just so hard to stand out these days. Its an interesting topic, but I'd like to see something more insightful.
Years ago -- decades ago -- a woman whose husband was, I believe, editor of the New York Times used to periodically poke her husband and insist that the paper do an article about garbage collection in New York City. The greenest, rawest recruit would get the assignment, and an article would get written, which would keep her happy until the next time. Until the day that the newest recruit happened to be a supremely talented individual who went all out, writing thousands of words about it -- where does it come from, why is it a problem, what are we doing, what aren't we doing, who's involved, what's the attitude in other cities, other states, other countries -- by the time he was done, he'd covered the subject so intensely that she never asked again. I'd like him to write about the state of education.
Another interesting article, also in the Times, is about a fellow who switched from the Democratic party in the late nineties and was very active in the effort to get George Bush elected in 2000 and again in 2004. He likes Bush, and what he says, but he's come to the conclusion that Bush has failed in what he is doing and in what he has said he would do. Its a very well written article. Obviously, I am predisposed to like it, but what I am particularly impressed by is that he does not say Bush is bad, or stupid, or ignorant, but rather that he has become insular -- inbubbled, I think he called it -- and has lost touch with what people are telling him about their feelings regarding the economy and the war. He's not even saying that he thinks Bush is wrong, though he apparently does; what he says is that someone whom he still likes is taking the country in the wrong direction, and that because he was so active in getting Bush elected, he feels it's incumbent upon him to be active in telling people that he was wrong. He says that he now feels that an election that just wins 51% of the vote isn't right -- it should bring the country together in a sense of common purpose. At which point I looked up at my wife, to whom I'd been reading parts of this, and said 'Yes, what we need is a President who's a uniter, not a...'
Demetri Martin is a pretty funny guy....
More later, perhaps...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)