We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Thursday, August 17. 2017
I don't want to write a commentary on the violence in Charlottesville. What happened is terrible, wrong, and any discussion of violence begins and ends with the violent acts themselves, not the activity commentators choose to associate it with. I rarely take part in group protests or political gatherings because the likelihood of one outlier who wants to impart damage is very high and I neither want to be associated with, nor a victim of, poor individual choices.
I do want to write a commentary on the removal of icons and monuments. In Tuesday's morning news, Bird Dog posted an article about Confederate statues in the Capitol building.
Before I dig in, I want to point out that if a statue triggers your emotions, I suggest you think long and hard about why you're having an emotional response to an inanimate object. I'd further point out that if these emotions regarding the statue are related to taking offense, or increasing your anger or hatred, you may want to see a therapist. I'm not a psychologist or psychotherapist, and maybe one of our other writers who are in that field can elaborate (or even tell me I'm wrong) about this point.
Consider one fact. Since Monday, monuments around the US have been removed, sometimes forcibly, in an angry response to Charlottesville. Taking this further, New York's governor, and NYC's mayor, have decided to review and remove 'symbols of hate'. One NYC councilman said "if not hate, at least symbols of hurt." I'll have to send him my list of statues that 'hurt' me.
I think politicians, and people, get bent out of shape over strange things. When I see virtually any protest forming, I begin to think "Don't those people have better things to do?" It's been a long time since I marched or protested or did anything political in a group setting. I generally don't like aligning with large groups that claim to speak for me. But a bigger personal issue is the current mindset is the assumption that if you don't agree with removal, you must somehow be sympathetic to the white supremacists. Thought Police abound in today's society, driven by emotions of hurt and hate. Moral equivalency is employed with alarming regularity, often unnecessarily and ignorantly.
I'll relate one experience I had in which I'd have to admit I was emotionally 'triggered'. It was a great learning lesson. I was in college. I was working on a TV show about hunger for the college station. A speaker arrived and handed out leaflets. One person pasted several of them on the set. It was an elephant with "GOP" written across his chest, preparing to drop a nuclear bomb. This was 1984, I was 22 years old and Reagan was being protested regularly on campus. I stood up, stated my opposition to the leaflet on the set, saying it neither had anything to do with hunger, and had everything to do with politics which we weren't discussing. I was told to be quiet and do my job. I protested again, saying it "offended my sensibilities" and that I couldn't work on a project like this. The professor who managed the station walked over, put his arm around me and said "you will be asked to do difficult and uncomfortable things throughout your life, and on your job. If you allow your emotions to get the better of you, it will cost you your job. Today, if you walk off the set, you will fail the day's project." I walked off the set, took my "F" for the day and still got an "A" for the class. But I learned a lesson. Don't let your emotions overwhelm you. I could have done the work and still been effective at my job. Today, I guess I could've sued for a "hostile workplace."
Continue reading "Monuments, Identity and Race"
Wednesday, July 12. 2017
Sorry, not sorry. A neologism which I hear young people use frequently, and now people my age are adopting. It's a great phrase. People want you to be sorry for something you did, you feel you're in the right. Sorry, not sorry.
Urban Dictionary has its first reference to this in 2012. It became a Twitter hashtag at about that same time, maybe 2011. This was predated by an alt-punk song from an obscure band, Amen, titled Sorry Not Sorry, but it seems to have come into common usage around 2011/2012. Today it's used primarily as a sarcastic comeback or response, usually for humorous purposes.
There is another aspect to this, though. It revolves around empathy. At least, that's where I see it coming from. Mainly because I tend to have so little empathy (and I'm told that's a problem). Sorry, not sorry for lacking that empathy.
Point is, I don't know why we have to be sorry for so many things. President Obama was on an "I'm Sorry" tour for 8 years and what did it get us? Not much. If the US did it, he was sorry about it. Why? Saying "sorry" doesn't change the past. It doesn't even change the future. Stuff happened, and I wasn't involved, so don't judge me on that.
Many things he was sorry for occurred long ago. I'm sorry Hiroshima happened, it was terrible. I'm sorry for all the death and damage and horrific after-effects, but it was war, so I'm not going to quibble whether Hiroshima or Nagasaki were worse than Tokyo or Dresden. Death happens in warfare. We don't have to be sorry for killing people in warfare.
Continue reading "Sorry, Not Sorry"
Posted by Bulldog in The Culture, "Culture," Pop Culture and Recreation at 15:27 | Comments (22) | Trackbacks (0)
Monday, July 10. 2017
You learn things in the strangest ways...
We took a surprise trip to the NJ/PA border to look at some apartments for a friend. She lives in Georgia and is thinking of relocating. We decided to use this as an opportunity to go bike riding along the Delaware Canal, and make a day of it.
Bike rides aren't all that interesting but are great exercise both physically and mentally (riding gives you tons of time to concentrate). I spent a great deal of the ride thinking about a person we'd met at one apartment. She said was a writer and a professor. A writer of anything I might attempt to read? Why yes, it turns out. She is a 'futurist' and writes about Artificial Intelligence. A topic which is changing my job on a daily basis. I told her I knew quite about AI, and look forward to the day it replaces me. She looked at me quizzically and said "Really? That's strange, most people would fear it. Besides, we have to hope it comes with a Universal Basic Income."
I simply looked at her and said "No, I don't fear it. I've studied history enough to realize change is good. The Industrial Revolution destroyed some jobs, it's true. But it created many more, and those jobs paid better. It also created new industries altogether. I see the same thing with AI. After all, AI is great, but it will probably always be better with humans working in tandem, rather than as a standalone, though some standalone items may exist. Overall I see more jobs coming from it, not fewer. Training is what needs to improve, not payoffs to those who don't want to learn."
I didn't get into a deeper discussion, since I wanted to ride my bike. She seemed amazed I was so nonplussed. Actually, I think she was surprised to meet anyone willing to discuss the topic but shocked at my indifference to her perceived negative consequences. My reasons are based on economics, but also her personal story, which made my ride a mental exercise.. She espoused a point of view which may seem to make sense, but her behaviors told a very different story.
Continue reading "AI and Universal Basic Income"
Friday, June 16. 2017
Living in the NYC area, I have plenty of wacky Progressive friends. They are really wacky these days. Of course, my Republican friends can be just as nutty, at times. It all depends on what you're discussing, though this should go without saying.
What's really crazy, though, is how one Progressive friend mentioned to me that polarization has reached "fever pitch" and the basis of her comment was the recent Congressional shooting. I shrugged and said it had been at that level for 24 years, really, and she'd simply chosen not to notice. Now that she's energized politically, it matters to her. No, no, no, she replied, that can't be it. It most certainly is.
All my Progressive friends are members of the #Resist movement. I am not a Trump supporter, but I'm not suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, either. He's had mixed results so far. Nothing outlandish, nothing crazy. I think he's accomplished quite a bit (both better and worse) for not passing a single piece of major legislation. His bluster and hyperbole bug me, but that's just talk and Tweets. I've seen and heard worse from regular politicians. Yet it's these words that set off the #Resist people. They go bonkers over every little thing! It's fascinating.
Continue reading "Obstruction By Any Other Name"
Thursday, June 8. 2017
I can't say I agree with the conclusions drawn by this Harvard Business Review article. If office politics are only about influence, the premise is that being political is actually beneficial.
I see a significant difference between being social and being political.
Is that really true? Did I join a fraternity to be political and gain power and influence? Did my joining mean there were political implications? As a member of my church, is membership political? And to influence, must we have power? I have always been taught that influence is not power, but access to, and ability to, inform and shift power.
I can see how these memberships can morph into political alliances or positions, but they are not inherently political, we don't necessarily join social groups for political reasons (though I know plenty of people who joined country clubs for political reasons).
We have too many sociologists, psychologists and anthropologists over-analyzing behaviors and assigning them improper value. I completely understand the value and benefit of good work socialization. We need to maintain relationships and behaviors to not just garner influence, but to just to get jobs done effectively. But the maintenance isn't in itself political, most often (certainly in my case) it's genuine, sincere and geared toward generating productive and useful outcomes.
My perspective is that it becomes political when it is self-serving or guided by less than sincere or honest motives. When subterfuge, dissemination of false or bad information, and exclusion take place it becomes political. The author tries to differentiate these behaviors as Machiavellian, anathema to proper behavior in an office. Certainly they are - but they are far too common, particularly in large organizations, simply because people can get away with it. By lumping good social action in with political behavior, this author does employees a disservice.
Monday, June 5. 2017
Wow. David Blaine used to amaze me with his 'street' magic. Since he became more performance artist than magician, I've been less impressed with his stuff. But magic is fun if it's done well. I don't think I've seen it done this well in a very long time.
Monday, May 8. 2017
I have seen a number of articles this morning about Macron's win. At least two were about how France is better than Britain and/or the US. However much satire is involved, and certainly Andy Borowitz believes himself to be a satirist, there is one problem with the concept (which Borowitz fervently believes is true) being promoted. That problem is Obama.
After all, both four and eight years ago, the US was so darn progressive and ahead of the curve. In such a short period of time, we've become mind-numbingly idiotic, to believe the press. This only happens when a non-Democrat is elected (I hesitate to say Republican because I really don't consider Trump a Republican in any traditional sense). Remember when Bush was elected, and re-elected? We were stupid then, as well.
Whether Macron is good for France or not remains to be seen, and is of little interest because it's France. They've hitched their wagon to losing causes far too many times to trust their instincts (for clarity, since Progressives have a problem with it, this statement was satire). For now, the Left is hailing his victory as the Waterloo of far-right politics. That's hard to support, since Macron is hardly a darling of the Left. Besides, even many policies which have been deemed 'far-right' could just as easily be labeled Leftist (traditionally, anti-immigration, closed-border, and protectionist views have been domains of the Left. It is only recently that they've been furiously adopted by the Right).
Continue reading "Macron Wins, Americans Officially Idiots"
Sunday, May 7. 2017
I was too busy getting lost, turning the wrong way, and competing with professional tour guides to take any photos. I hope someone took a few, because this year's tour was a great one. With 17 people (16 who finished, a very low attrition rate, with representatives from New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois - again!), we covered about 9.7 miles and saw many sites and sights. I'm not sure what those slow-walking people were doing - was it Tai-Chi of some kind, or perhaps a slow-moving flash mob? We stumbled on Edna St. Vincent Millay's townhouse (which reportedly also housed Cary Grant). Someone kindly purchased Magnolia Bakery cupcakes for the entire group (and they were delicious).
Mrs. Bulldog says the highlight of the trip was a visit to the Manhattan Contrarian's secret lair. It's beautiful and the location quite wonderful. His knowledge, assistance and willingness to put up with our gang were all admirable. I have to say, I always assumed magical, secret gardens existed, but now Mrs. Bulldog wants one.
I learned quite a bit more about Clement Clarke Moore and his family. The Moore farm's name is now the name of the district, Chelsea, and the Churches they oversaw (St. Peter's) or started (St. Luke's in the Fields) were both stops. Both churches are beautiful, and St. Luke's has some lovely gardens.
Next hike is already being planned. Alien environs, otherwise known as Brooklyn. We'll start in Manhattan with a crossing of the Brooklyn Bridge, and from there we'll study hipster culture, taste local bourbon and beer, and see what life is like outside Manhattan. Looking forward to it already. If our group is half as good, or even half as large, we'll be in fine fettle.
I'd like to thank Atlas Obscura for assistance in planning our trip.
Wednesday, May 3. 2017
So who gets to make the decision about what is truly 'fake news'? I know it when I see it, and every individual should have that right to decide. As I tell my friends, I apply Occam's Razor to everything I see and read. If it doesn't look or smell right, then it's probably fake and more digging needs to be done. Few people take the time or effort, anymore. So our government wants to do it for us. The politicians, at least, want to promote the concept that someone should be doing it for us. So guess what? They are. It's my view that Google's announcement last week to use algorithms to flesh out 'fake news' is going to be their Waterloo. Algorithms can't tell people what to read, what to believe, and can't discern truth from falsehood. All algorithms can do is push an agenda from those controlling the algorithm. So we'll be spoon fed pablum as real news seekers are cast aside as non-traditional sources or 'extremist' or having some other epithet applied to lower their score on the algorithm.
We may not have a Ministry of Truth, but lots of countries are trying to. If progress and opportunity slow and die in the coming years, the 'fake news' reaction will be why. After all, one clear case of how this is a problem is Man-Made ManBearPig Global Warming/Climate Change. Any site posting legitimate data and information which rebuts the Global Warming/Climate Change agenda will undoubtedly be labelled 'fake news'. From this point forward, any other opinion deemed 'incorrect' will fail the test and we can see where this algorithm will deprive people of good information.
Continue reading "It's Not Censorship If the Algorithm is Done Right"
Thursday, April 6. 2017
An historian seeks to 'disprove' the 'myth' of Social Security being a Ponzi scheme. His assessment? The fact that is has worked for almost 80 years. Just because it's operated for 80 years doesn't mean it's not a Ponzi scheme. Ponzi didn't last that long because his scheme just didn't force everyone into it. In addition, while the math indeed proves SocSec will go broke (to me, proof of a Ponzi scheme is that the investment, under constant conditions, will go broke eventually), what makes it a non-Ponzi is that government just has to raise taxes!
Brilliant! And all Ponzi had to do was get more people to join and charge them more as he got closer to failure!
Sorry, any pay-as-you-go system which has regular payouts in perpetuity and no clear way to link dollars in to dollars out in the future, and without a clear method of investment and growth, is a Ponzi Scheme. Saying government bonds fulfills the method of investment is like saying investing in the next big bank heist is an investment. You're relying on coerced collections rather than actual organic progress and growth.
Wednesday, April 5. 2017
This is a rant. If you think government works for the people, you may not want to read this. If you know government is essentially a means for legal theft, read on. I have just gone through a mind-numbing process which has left me absolutely cold and more determinedly Libertarian. Shrink the government, and shrink it fast. Don't worry about the process. Just time to get rid of the stupid, inefficient and idiotic things it does.
When my son was born, a friend bought a single share of Disney stock for him. Today, that would be slightly more than 3 (3.04) shares. At today's price, that represents $339.
When my son graduated from college, he began to pull together all his savings bonds, gifts, and various financial instruments to see what was at his disposal. Sadly, he couldn't get the stock. It had been taken by the state of NJ in 2012. Presumably because the corporation had had no contact with me for over 5 years. Which is strange. I contacted the corporate offices and they had my name, address, email, and phone number. All of the correct information.
I never received any notifications of escheatment, never received any kind of warning from the shareholder office or the state.
What is even more galling is what happened after escheatment. NJ law stipulates after 1 year any financial instruments are to be sold. This meant the state was now holding about $220 in my son's unclaimed property, rather than the stock itself.
It's amazing to me that the state will have no problem finding me in 10 days to take my taxes. But when they take my property, they won't lift a finger to find me.
In fact, that's literally what the two brainless bureaucrats at Unclaimed Property Administration said to me. The state does nothing, outside of advertise in newspapers and the web, to contact people whose property they are holding. Here's the kicker. I was told the stock was sold in 2013, but the advertisement wasn't made until 2014. In other words, they held it for 2 years before even letting the world know they held it. So there was no way we were getting the stock back.
I can point fingers at the corporate shareholder office for not trying hard enough. They certainly didn't. But they would, presumably, keep trying unless the law steps in. The law did, in fact, step in and once its process started, nothing was done to assist in 'finding' me. The state, which presumably has greater resources to contact me when they want my taxes, didn't lift a finger to find me. The response from the unclaimed property division is that they have no relationship with the tax division. Of course not. That would actually require intelligence.
My son is only out $110, so this isn't the end of the world. As a big picture example of how useless government is, though - this is a classic example.
Wednesday, March 29. 2017
I'm no gourmet, and I'm not hip enough to even say I'm a 'foodie'. I dabble in cooking occasionally. I'm somewhat adept at certain types of chicken, and while grilling is supposedly the domain of the more masculine of the species (remember, gender is an attitude now), I'm only passable as a grillmeister. I can follow directions well enough, so if required I am actually capable of whipping up a decent meal from time to time.
My wife has a ton of cookbooks on our shelves, so I'm never at a loss for opportunity or options. She is also a fan of cooking shows, and I've learned to enjoy the dulcet tones of such celebrity chefs as Bobby Flay, Giada de Laurentiis, and Ina Garten. I couldn't really tell you what they actually cook or how they do it, but I know who they are and what they do.
Enough is enough, though. We don't need 200,000,000 cookbooks, we don't need new tools, shows and gadgets to get the best meal. By now, the right way to boil water has been fleshed out, and we should be able to provide sufficiently for ourselves. Shouldn't we?
Continue reading "Celebrity Cookbook Hell"
Sunday, March 19. 2017
I will recommend, for anyone who can, visit Cuba now. On one level, it will provide a great appreciation for everything we have in the US. In addition, the food is so good (and inexpensive) you will wonder how they got so many great chefs. Finally, the culture is unparalleled, an amazing amalgamation of past and present.
Visiting Cuba provoked many thoughts about what could have been, as well as visions of the past. I will post as many as I can, but I will start with a simple travelogue. It’s the best way to introduce the country, and the city of Havana, without provoking much commentary about such a wonderful destination. Still untouched in many ways, clearly this will not be the same country in 10, and possibly even 5, years.
There is a raw beauty to Cuba. It is almost impossible to not fall in love with this country upon arrival. The people are friendly, the climate nearly perfect, while the cityscapes of Havana and surrounding country retain an air of the not-so-distant past. Bt, it is a crumbling place, the majority of exteriors falling apart, much of the infrastructure antiquated and in need of update, and modern services and conveniences (for locals who can’t afford to pay) subpar. Even tourist spots are in the process of updating. They are improving rapidly. Often, entering a building you are convinced must be a hole-in-the-wall, only to find a modern and beautiful interior with wonderful food and music.
Continue reading "Havana Dreaming"
Wednesday, March 1. 2017
“There's as much crookedness as you want to find. There was something Abraham Lincoln said - he'd rather trust and be disappointed than distrust and be miserable all the time. Maybe I trusted too much.”~John Wooden
Tuesday, January 31. 2017
My poker night is this Friday, and I look forward to it each month. 50 people, food, libations, conversation and competition. There are afew heated moments. Not many, mostly good fun and the chance to take your friends' and neighbors' money. I have more or less broken even in this game. I keep pretty good records. We play a cash game for an hour, then a tournament, followed by cash games as people are bounced.
It's a game of incomplete information. Computers are good at games that have lots of available information, not games lacking in it. But poker often has more information available than we care to admit. Betting trends are like prices. They give signals. Being able to sort through the signals and recognize where value lies is a skill. But humans also think and behave in linear ways. If you have a non-random betting approach, a computer should be able to sniff it out.
A computer beating a human at Texas Hold 'em, even a limited table such as this, is quite a feat. The fact I happen to know the inventor of the computer makes it doubly interesting for me. He presented some of his yield optimization techniques to our team several times. I have suggested to our team we bring him back in.
Thursday, January 26. 2017
Entire group of senior State Department administrators resign.
Not yet clear why. Largest single loss of institutional memory and experience on record?
My uncle spent 30 years working at HUD under many administrations. He retired in the late 90's because the politicization under Clinton was too much to bear. I'm sure in the years since, all departments have gotten worse in this regard. It may be that these losses are no big deal. I'm less certain. My uncle was always a very strong believer in institutional memory. Not that everyone had to be retained, but you always need to maintain a level of management that understands the history and the operational capacity. That is why I believe the only way this is good is if the department is reduced dramatically. Which can happen, as there are well over 20 senior positions now open.
From a sheer "Wow, that's pretty big" point-of-view, I'm stunned at the turn of events. When you drain a swamp, you'd better be sure you know what is replacing the ecosystem. I am not confident in Trump, while I know many here are. At best, he remains 50/50 with me.
The article itself was the first I'd read shortly after this occurred. Many have since followed. I didn't post it to indicate support for the author's position, just that it was breaking news and rather surprising. A friend contacted me last night asking what I thought of all this. I replied "I still don't know. I don't trust the press, I don't trust Trump, I don't trust politicians in general, so I'm left trying to read whatever erratic signals continue to emanate from liars everywhere."
Sunday, January 22. 2017
It is rather interesting to think about some comments I've seen regarding the march. One, in particular, I've seen many times. "You just don't get it, and since you don't, my explaining it won't help you understand, and so you'll never understand." This was said several times to a friend of mine, and despite his request to be enlightened, nobody was willing to do it. I filled him in on the nature of why the women were marching (although I find it a confused message). However, the reaction to him was an indicator of why the Hillary forces lost the election to begin with. In a nutshell, we're all stupid and they don't want to take the time to explain anything - we just have to trust their superior instincts. It's also clear by now the only reason to vote for Hillary was 'she's a woman'. Which wasn't enough of a reason for me, any more than voting for Obama 'because he'll transform race relations' was a reason (given the state of race relations after his transformative role, one can only imagine how awful gender relations may have been after Hillary!).
I had another person say to me, "Your privilege is showing." Privilege is a word which drives me insane. We all have crosses to bear, burdens in life which must be dealt with, and biases to fight. I've seen, and supported the cases of plaintiffs suing for, sexual discrimination. I've also experienced age discrimination. I'm aware of the discrimination which used to take place against my Irish ancestors. Suggesting I have privilege implies I am enjoying the benefits of something I didn't earn. I earn it every day I go to work and deal with the nonsensical idiocy of liberal Progressives who have lost their bearings over this election. Remaining quiet during their diatribes is difficult, but could cost me my job. There's no privilege in political discrimination, and that takes place every day. Still, I'm not marching for laws, or attention, or anything else to protect myself or my rights to believe what I want. My 'privilege' regarding gender ends the minute women start having their conversations which exclude men (see the paragraph above).
Continue reading "A Few Thoughts on Yesterday"
Thursday, January 19. 2017
I focus on the fact, in general, our lives are improving. Today, most of us hold more computing, audio and video power in our pocket, at a reasonable cost, and this device can help us control our houses, cars, and money with a few swipes. We text or call someone and are sure they got a message. Our diets are vastly improved, our choice of diets extensive, and we have more options regarding the quality and types of foods. When I was in my teens, few people had flown in a plane. Today, most have. I was the first of my friends to visit Europe in 1976. Today, most of them have kids who have vacationed or studied abroad.
Continue reading "The Most Dangerous Time to Live"
Wednesday, January 18. 2017
Complexity Theory fascinates me. I have always enjoyed math and physics as an avocation. Physics was, originally, my college major, but I soured on it in my second year. Classes were very cut-throat, and I didn't have that mentality. Today it's a fun hobby. Years ago, I attended a conference sponsored by the Santa Fe Institute, which sought to apply the principles of Complexity to a variety of industries. I managed to convince my firm to send me, and it was one of the more interesting conferences I'd ever attended.
I've wanted to apply several ideas I picked up there to business. Unfortunately, I've never had the opportunity. I'd be interested to see what this recent discovery on the math of innovation can yield.
I'm sure there are some great applications of this concept. I haven't thought much about it, having just read the article. I can, however, see some bad applications. If innovation can be quantified mathematically some people may be lead to believe you can arbitrarily 'create' innovation. It's pretty clear the math doesn't work that way, since innovation seems (even in the equation) to spring more or less organically and its benefits are related more to acceptance rather than application.
Thursday, January 12. 2017
I am not delving into the psychology of empathy. I'm not trained in it, and I don't know enough to make a statement from that position. I can, however, write about its effect on my own experiences, from my own therapy, and from a recent event which sparked a challenging debate.
That event was Meryl Streep's Golden Globes acceptance speech. I watched about 5 minutes of it, then left. Because I can, and I chose to. While I agreed with a bit, there was far more there than I was interested in hearing. To begin with, I don't watch award shows, I happened to switch it on at just that moment and thought I'd like to see her receive her award. If I am going to watch an awards show, I want to be entertained, not lectured. I turned it off. I did read the text the next day when the brouhaha around it began. Mainly because New York, the center of 'if you disagreed with her, you're insane and wrong and must have something wrong with you' began to show its ugliness. In other words, "Hillary lost and WE STILL HAVE NO CLUE HOW AND WHY IT HAPPENED SO WE MUST LASH OUT!" Meryl was offered a moment to lash out, and she did. Following some kind of empathic tribal code, her supporters rushed to demonize anyone who didn't 'feel' the same way Meryl did.
Continue reading "Has Lack of Empathy Been Pathologized?"
Wednesday, January 4. 2017
I received a link this morning to an article which suggests readers should more or less 'be afraid' of a certain group of technology companies. Over the course of time, many firms have acted in an amoral or immoral fashion. These tech firms have all probably also behaved poorly at various points. But the value they provide is significant. Fearing them is not sensible. There is good reason to not fear them. History indicates they are likely to all be undone or greatly diminished at some point in time. For most of the 1980s, the 'company' I was supposed to fear was the entire nation of Japan. For most of the 2000s, it's been China. Funny how Japan has been in a 20 year funk while China is just now dropping like a stone (apparently, Bitcoin prices are soaring over there - a sure sign of instability).
I consider articles like the above link to be a form of fake news, because it's an emotional appeal based on faulty logic. Articles of this nature appear every 10 years or so about various companies. Aside from China and Japan, I've read articles like this about GM, GE, Exxon, IBM, Cisco, Oracle, Bank of America, Citibank, AT&T, Coca-Cola, ITT, and a host of other large firms who, in total, represented large and innovative firms at various points in time. They were firms which happened to benefit from temporary blips in demand and consumer behavior. Point is, almost all are still fairly large firms, but their dominance has diminished, our fear subsiding as our interests and spending patterns change.
In every case, consumer behaviors shifted, innovation moved in different directions, or smaller more competitive firms caught up with these firms. But in almost every case, the dominant positions they claimed were lost. I see the same thing happening with Alphabet, Facebook, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft at some point. In fact, Microsoft is no longer the dominant company it once was - it, too, was part of the group mentioned above back in the 90's as a potentially dangerous 'monopoly'. I guess being downgraded from 'monopoly' status is just as frightening as being part of a group of large firms which all compete with each other?
The idea that there is something new and different happening with these tech firms is misguided. Railroads dominated the economic scene for many decades in the 1800s, then oil companies, then car manufacturers. Each one was demonized in similar fashion. Tech offers greater opportunity than any of these firms did, as well as great potential for abuse. But you take the good with the bad, and the good usually outweighs the bad in an overwhelming fashion. I'll take my chances with these firms as opposed to any government oversight and regulation, thank you. Their fear and dislike of each other will keep them on a far more even keel than any pinhead politician.
Thursday, December 22. 2016
The year is winding down and I'm still struggling with the same nonsense I've been dealing with in the office since last August. It is getting worse for a few reasons. But I'm not making a case for the year ending badly. Instead, I've got a different point of view because through these months I've kept a generally positive attitude. After all, there is plenty to be grateful for, and I am looking forward to 2017.
I'll start with politics. This isn't something I'm grateful for, but I'm grateful for learning new ways to deal with the nonsense it represents. In part, I mean the election, though that's minor. I was unmoved by the outcome, but this is NYC and many are still having fits. My new VP decided to start sending a daily email update in which she shares articles and commentary on industry events. Every day includes the latest anti-Trump article. I understand she supported Clinton (I didn't support either major candidate), but I don't care for her bias infecting the workspace. It's unhealthy. I know many people in the office who voted for Trump and don't share her point of view. Neither me or any of them are in a position to say something.
Continue reading "Some Year-End Mental Housecleaning"
Posted by Bulldog in The Culture, "Culture," Pop Culture and Recreation at 19:12 | Comments (6) | Trackbacks (0)
Monday, December 5. 2016
Validation is always welcome. It's great to see someone pick up on your writing and think "I am glad I was able to add to the discussion." I believe this holds when a piece is shared on a site opposing what you've written. I'm not interested in an echo chamber.
Twenty months after writing this post on data, I received notification of its inclusion on another site. Upon reading, one might be inclined to believe I'm not a fan of data. Not true, I just don't put my full faith in everything as it is presented, or simply because it's presented, to me.
Since my post, 20 months have passed and nothing has changed. In fact the 2016 election was an example of organizations simply accepting data, becoming reliant on it, while few questioned its value. The data left me, and many others, inclined to believe Hillary would win. At the same time, it left me angry about how it was presented in a "See? We have more information and you don't know what's really going on" manner. The day of the election, however, the long lines I saw (in New York City) left me with the impression the data may not be telling the whole story. If Hillary voters in a safe city were turning out in droves, I came to the conclusion turnout would be high across the board, and high turnout usually coincides with a desire for change. The data itself may not be 'wrong' but whoever was using it was doing so improperly.
Continue reading "Data and Risk"
Wednesday, November 16. 2016
Problem is...McSorley's is closed! You'd think, after all this time, of all the beer halls in NYC, McSorley's would get a pass, right? Nope. Could this be the end of McSorley's? Probably not, we're told. I certainly hope not.
Tuesday, August 30. 2016
Vienna was our base, as my sister and her family live there. The hockey tournament was in Prague. So, 5 days in Vienna, drive 3 hours and spend 5 days in Prague, then drive back and enjoy 2 final days in Vienna.
Vienna offers the ability to take boat/train/bus to Bratislava and Budapest for the day. It's proximity to Prague was obviously useful, and the road there allowed us to stop in Heldenberg to see the Spanish Riding School's summer stables, then stop in Telc for lunch (or Jihlava for lunch on the return).
These stops were very nice. Telc, in particular, was a great 3 hour stop. Highly recommend it to anyone passing through. Wonderful town square, beautifully restored. Make sure you climb to the top of the (very claustrophobic and designed for short people) bell tower. But Prague was our main goal. Not just for the hockey (which didn't work out well for our side), but take in one of the most wonderful cities in Europe.
Continue reading "What I Did on My Summer Vacation - Prague"