RANT: don’t have a good place to put this!

Sunday, March 17, 2013

“Think about the last time you met someone new. What did you think of them? What did you tell yourself about what they thought of you?”

This is a tough one.

I don’t usually care what folks think of me.

Egotistical?

Yes.

Sadly, I’m a very shallow person. I only care what I think!

FOr example, there are two parents in a local dive with their two young children.

One younger girl and one slightly older boy.

“Celebrating” saint patricks DAY, with green face paint and hats.

Why do I feel that this is NOT what saint pat would want?

When I read all the jokes about the Irish, facebook posts, and assorted stuff, I think “pioneer society”.

Padriac, I am thinking of you.

I wonder if I’d have been better off following in your footsteps / example.

We’ll ever know.

I have this vision of hitting Saint Pete’s Gate and finding out what could have been?

Argh!

–30–


IPAD: can’t interact with contacts from gmail client

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Interesting.

From the natve GMAIL client on the IPAD, I can’t figure out how to save a contact.

Argh!

AND, it apparently doesn’t support the native IOS address book.

I am really getting tired of having to maintain addresses.

Plaxo had promise but all they wanted was to spam, charge, and interfere.

Maybe I should write an X500 directory service.

LinkedIn, Facebook, and everyone else has a different agenda.

I just want one synced address book!

Argh!

–30–


TECHNOLOGY: Computers … …

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Here’s a great quote to inspire you to write:

“To err is human, but to really foul things up you need a computer.” – Paul Ehrlich

# – # – #  

As a corollary of this, I came up with the idea of “negative progress”! I can screw up more in a wasted effort than any profess that I can make on a good day. 

seems so obvious to me, other than the concept of checkpoints, where one can fall back to a previously know good state, that one can actually “destroy” progress.

Given enough time, I am sure I can come up with examples, but who cares?

– # – # – # – #   


SOFTWARE: Googles RSS Subscription Extension, Removed From Chrome Web Store

Saturday, March 16, 2013

a reason to abandon Chrome?

 

 

Google’s RSS Subscription Extension, Removed From Chrome Web Store: “Three years ago I tried to convince the Chrome team that it makes sense to add native support to feeds. At that time, Google built an extension that showed feed previews and allowed you to subscribe to feeds. The explanation for building an extension instead of implementing the feature in Chrome was simple:

‘This decision was made based on our philosophy of trying to limit ourselves to adding only the UI features that a vast majority of users need and allow each user to customize the browsers to fit their needs with Extensions. Given that most people are not familiar with and don’t consume RSS feeds, we thought that RSS support would be a better fit as an extension, at least to begin with.’

In 5 months, more than 300,000 people installed the extension. More than 1,600 people starred a feature request for implementing RSS detection natively. Chrome still doesn’t have this feature and the extension released in 2010 has been removed from the Chrome Web Store a few days ago. The issue is that the extension used Google Reader to preview feeds and Google Reader will be discontinued in July.

‘RSS Subscription Extension’ had 869,743 users. Fortunately, it wasn’t the only extension for subscribing to feeds. Here’s another extensionbased on an old version of Google’s extension.

(Via Google Operating System.)


POLITICAL: Where do the Second and First Amendment intersect? A fat old white guy injineer wants to know.

Saturday, March 16, 2013

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2013/3/us-senate-judiciary-committee-passes-semi-auto-and-private-sales-bans.aspx

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Passes Semi-Auto and Private Sales Bans

Posted on March 15, 2013

*** begin quote ***

On March 12 and 14, the Senate Judiciary committee held two working sessions to deal with gun-related bills.

The result of those hearings was the passage of Sen. Charles Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) S. 374, the “Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013”–which would criminalize virtually all private firearm sales, even temporary transfers–and Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) S. 150, the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.”

Both of these bills pose a direct threat to our Second Amendment rights and both were passed on party-line votes, with committee Democrats supporting the bills and all Republicans voting no.

*** end quote ***

Respectfully, let’s apply these restrictions to the “First Amendment”?

You can blog, xerox, or anything else.

DO you think this is what the Dead Old White Guys had in mind?

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Mar-16 @ 20:11  


ECONOMICS: Why is the taxpayer the “bank” for the Bankers?

Saturday, March 16, 2013

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-15/why-we-should-rip-the-banks-in-two.html

Why We Should Rip the Banks in Two

Equity-capital ratios in the range of 20 percent to 30 percent would make banks safer, so you’d expect the return on bank equity to fall. That’s a feature not a bug. Bankers who have been feasting on profits from excessive risk-taking will see their pay fall too. Count that as a further benefit. It might do a little something to slow the 30-year trend toward greater income inequality.

Bankers might call these proposals radical, but in fact they’re moderate. The structure of the banking system wouldn’t change. Banks would still operate two essentially different businesses: selling short-term debt and making loans. The potential for a mismatch would remain. More capital would certainly help, and taxpayers would be less on the hook, but the risk of bank failure wouldn’t disappear. The same goes for making banks smaller, so that more of them could be left to fail on their own. It would help, but it doesn’t address the underlying problem.

There’s a way to do that. Divide the banking business in two. Deposit-takers don’t have to be credit-creators — they can be told to hold entirely safe assets. Credit-creators don’t need to take deposits — they can fund their operations by borrowing in financial markets. As renowned Yale economist James Tobin once said, “The linking of deposit money and commercial banking is an accident of history.” He and other thoughtful scholars have been discussing how to correct this “accident” for many years.

*** end quote ***

Why does the taxpayer get stiffed?

That’s not supposed to be the way it works.

You fail; you go bankrupt.

I understand that we don’t want the poorest saving their pennies to be wiped out.

But they are being wiped out by inflation. Even the middle class is being screwed royally.

So why can’t we figure out a compromise?

“Crony capitalism”!

It’s the illusion of a “free market”. But it’s one where the politicians, lobbyists, and the “rich” can’t lose.

Kill the Federal Reserve. Andrew Jackson was ABSOLUTELY correct.

Restore GOLD as the basis for the monetary unit. (OK, if you don’t like gold, how about a loaf of bread, gallon of milk, barrel of oil? Or a basket of them?)

Economists are fond of mental experiments. Let’s try this one: “If money grew on trees, then it wouldn’t be very valuable.”

What is a dollar anyway?

Dammed if I know.

I know what it used to be.

Then Govenrments like Abe lincoln and FDR and … wanted to spend more than they dare take in in taxes.

Sorry!

I’d deny them the printing press and the debt window.’

Yeah, a road may need to be financed over it life. But our congress critters can’t be trusts.

Privatize everything!

Argh!

# – # – # – # – #   

 


ECONOMICS: Rebuilding in Flood Zones

Saturday, March 16, 2013

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2013/03/rebuilding-in-flood-zones/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheBigPicture+%28The+Big+Picture%29

Rebuilding in Flood Zones
By Barry Ritholtz – March 10th, 2013, 3:00PM

# – # – #  

Isn’t this the definition of insanity?

And as a taxpayer, why am I on the hook?

Argh!

# – # – # – # – #   


RANT: Senator Harkin introduces a bill which would require the president to develop a centrally planned manufacturing strategy.

Friday, March 15, 2013

Senator Harkin introduces a bill which would require the president to develop a centrally planned manufacturing strategy.: “

obama harkin cc

One can track the bill HERE

The contempt for the market and the freedom of the average individual seems to have no bounds for some of our politicians. They have absolutely no understanding of the natural order of things, or efficiency, or innovation, or creativity. They always want to manage. They want to get into everyone’s business. They want control.

 

And that’s what it really is all about folks- control. Many people in Washington DC do not consider you capable of making your own decisions. You are little more than chattel, serfs, drones (the non-flying kind) to be shuffled and prodded to do the will of those who know what is best for society.

A free individual? Don’t be so naive. You are not free. Frankly you should give up such quaint notions and capitulate. You’ll be much happier as a cog. You’ll see.

Let’s plan everything in this country. And let’s let Tom Harkin and the President do it. I am sure it will all work out great.

(From The Business Insider)

In effect, Senator Harkin wants the President to centrally plan the economy. Never mind that the President has zero experience in business or manufacturing. But hey, this worked out so well for Stalinist Russia, it’s no wonder Mr. Harkin wants to copy that model.

Click here for the article.

The post Senator Harkin introduces a bill which would require the president to develop a centrally planned manufacturing strategy. appeared first on AgainstCronyCapitalism.org.

(Via Against Crony Capitalism(dont delete) – Against Crony Capitalism.)

# – # – #  

Can you imagine a worse idea?

I can’t. We already have too much interference in the free market. Or, the facsimile we have of one!

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Mar-15 @ 18:25  


INTERESTING: Lessons in Design and Strategy from China’s First Emperor

Friday, March 15, 2013

Lessons in Design and Strategy from China’s First Emperor: “

How to standardize, enforce accountability, and employ design thinking in coining your image and legacy.

The questions of what makes good design, what it should aspire to be, why it’s essential to culture, and how it harmonizes with human life have long occupied modern thinkers and pundits. That’s precisely what Herald Tribune design critic and writer extraordinaire Alice Rawsthorn sets out to answer in the newly released Hello World: Where Design Meets Life.

Rawsthorn begins with a necessary definition of the essence and cultural significance of design, so often misunderstood and diminished to mere decoration:

Design is a complex, often elusive phenomenon that has changed dramatically over time by adopting different guises, meanings and objectives in different contexts, but its elemental role is to act as an agent of change, which can help us to make sense of what is happening around us, and to turn it to our advantage. Every design exercise sets out to change something, whether its intention is to transform the lives of millions of people, or to make a marginal difference to one, and it does so systematically. At its best, design can ensure that changes of any type — whether they are scientific, technological, cultural, political, economic, social, environmental or behavioral — are introduced to the world in ways that are positive and empowering, rather than inhibiting or destructive.

One of Rawsthorn’s most illustrative examples comes from Ying Zheng, who took the throne as king of the Chinese State of Qin in his early teens in 246 BC and went on to become the first emperor of unified China in 221 BC. Today, he endures as one of the most formidable figures in world history, equally known for his military might and his uncompromising despotism, which included book-burning and burying scholars alive. Design, as it turns out, was his major ally, which he employed on various levels, from the practical to the tactical to the political.

One of his major feats, Rawsthorn tells us, was standardization:

The design of all weaponry was improved under Ying Zheng’s command. The optimum size, shape, choice of material and method of production for each piece was determined, and every effort made to ensure that weapons of the same type adhered to the chosen formula. The Qin army had used bronze spears for over a thousand years, but the blades were rendered shorter and broader. The dagger-axes were redesigned too. Putting six holes in the blades, rather than four, ensured that their bronze heads could be attached more securely and were less likely to shake loose in the frenzy of battle.

Even more important were the changes to Qin’s bows and arrows. Archers were critical in determining the outcome of every stage of combat in Ying Zheng’s era, but their weapons were made by hand, often to different specifications. If an archer ran out of arrows during a battle, it was generally impossible for him to fire another warrior’s arrows from his bow. Similarly, if he was killed or injured, his remaining ammunition would be useless to his comrades. And if a bow broke, that archer’s arrows risked being wasted. The same problems applied to more complex weapons like crossbows. The result was that an army’s progress was often impeded by weapons failure because its archers were unable to fight at full efficiency, if at all.

With standardization also came a new level of production accountability:

Ying Zheng’s forces resolved these problems by standardizing the design of their bows and arrows. The shaft of each arrow had to be a precise length, and the head to be formed in a triangular prism, always of the same size and shape. The components of longbows and crossbows were made identical too, and these design formulas were rigidly enforced. Each piece of government equipment was branded with a distinctive mark to identify who had made it and in which workshop. If a particular weapon was deemed substandard, the offending artisans would be fined, and punished more severely if the problem recurred.

But Ying Zheng didn’t stop at weaponry. Next, he rebranded his very persona, renaming himself Qin Shihuangdi, or ‘First Emperor of China,’ and employed design in shaping various aspects of culture and commerce, from literacy to currency, even enforcing his own reputation by way of early propaganda design:

A unified system of coinage was introduced, as were standardized weights and measures, a universal legal code and common method of writing. These changes made daily life more orderly, and boosted the economy by making it easier for people from different regions to trade. They also had a symbolic importance in helping to persuade the new emperor’s subjects, many of whom had fought against his army in battle, or had family or friends who had died doing so, that they had a personal stake in his immense domain. Take the new coins. Every time a farmer or a carpenter used them, they saw a tangible reminder that they themselves were part of a dynamic new empire, and had good reason to feel grateful to its visionary founder and ruler.

[…]

He also made sure that the inhabitants of even the most remote regions knew of his power and achievements by ordering descriptions of his feats to be carved into mountains across China.

This use of design strategy, in fact, was a primitive example of the buzzworthy concept currently known as ‘design thinking’:

Qin Shihuangdi [identified] what he needed to do to secure the future of his regime, and to communicate the results to his subjects. There are parallels between his strategic use of design and its role in successful corporate identity programs, such as Nike’s, and communication exercises like Barack Obama’s presidential election campaigns.

But Qin Shihuangdi’s greatest design feat was the application of design as a medium of self-expression, specifically in the preservation of his legacy. He commanded the construction of a monumental burial chamber — a massive underground palace spanning over twenty square miles on Mount Li, discovered there accidentally by farmers in 1974. Its construction was so demanding and grueling that many of the workers died in the process of it and were buried on the site. Rawsthorn explains:

Just as Qin Shihuangdi had deployed design with extreme efficiency to amass wealth and power during his life, he used it to secure what he believed would be an equally resplendent death, by creating the afterlife of his fantasies, which served a practical purpose too. Building such an outlandishly extravagant burial site was so eloquent a testimony of his might that it reinforced it as effectively as his celestially planned palaces, mountain inscriptions and the new imperial currency. But it was also a physical manifestation of the inner world of his imagination, a material expression of how China’s first emperor saw himself, and wished to define his place in history, which presaged contemporary design spectacles such as Olympic Games opening ceremonies, the Arirang Festivals in North Korea and the elaborate sets of Chanel’s haute couture shows at the Grand Palais in Paris.

[…]

Yet unlike latter-day design tacticians such as Apple, Chanel, Nike, Barack Obama’s campaign advisors and the despotic Kim dynasty, Qin Shihuangdi conceived and executed his design feats entirely instinctively.

Hello World is compelling in its entirety, spanning such varied yet interrelated illustrations of design as the London Underground and the breeding of dogs.

Donating = Loving

Bringing you (ad-free) Brain Pickings takes hundreds of hours each month. If you find any joy and stimulation here, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner:

 
♥ $7 / month ♥ $3 / month ♥ $10 / month ♥ $25 / month

You can also become a one-time patron with a single donation in any amount:

Brain Pickings has a free weekly newsletter. It comes out on Sundays and offers the week’s best articles. Here’s what to expect. Like? Sign up.

Brain Pickings takes 450+ hours a month to curate and edit across the different platforms, and remains banner-free. If it brings you any joy and inspiration, please consider a modest donation – it lets me know I’m doing something right. Holstee

(Via Brain Pickings.)


CORRUPTION: What a surprise buying a politician

Friday, March 15, 2013

http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/2013/03/radioactive-fraud-company-overcharged-taxpayers-for-cleanup-of-hazardous-waste-gave-big-money-to-senator/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+againstcronycapitalism+%28AgainstCronyCapitalism.org%29

Posted on March 10, 2013 by Editor

Radioactive Fraud: Company overcharged taxpayers for cleanup of hazardous waste, Gave big money to Senator.

*** begin quote ***

A story of nuclear waste and tax dollar waste, a company which was contracted to clean up radioactive refuse has been overcharging taxpayers (by a lot) for over a decade. In 2009 however the times got particularly good when the stimulus train came through town. It dropped off $1.9 billion, with a little help from friends in high places.

*** end quote ***

Yeah, just billions from the taxpayer’s pocket!

# – # – # – # – #