]]>
I can wake up on a Saturday, drag myself to the kitchen for a hot cup of coffee and then drag myself to the couch and behold some terrific basketball on television. It does not get any better than that.
Except for Dick.
If I died today and never had to hear the phrase "diaper dandy" again, it might be worth it. Every year I wish for the same thing for Christmas - Dickie V to retire. Not yet it seems. Another year of those annoying phrases, stupid pizza commercials and hearing him plug his charity when the other commentator asks him about Michigan State.
Dick Cheney. Dick Clark. Dick Vitale. Do not name your child Dick.
A few weeks back I got to watch UNC dismantle my Spartans fairly easily, although not was completely as the championship last year. Finally Tyler Hansborough is gone so I can at least root for UNC when they are not playing MSU.
Like today when they played Texas. In past years Texas has been ranked highly and MSU has gone down to Texas to beat them. This year that seems unlikely. Texas is a monster and they made UNC look easy today. Not good for MSU next week.
After that great game, CBS is showing Duke against Gonzaga. Two observations:
1) The HD camera's on CBS seem different this year. The picture quality is different. The picture seems closer and more intimate, more like a hand-held than the traditional TV-camera-from-afar look Im used to. Could be a good thing.
2) Duke continues to recruit the best playing, worst looking basketball players in the nation. What is up with that?
For the first time ever, MSU was ranked #2 for 3 weeks. Before they started loosing.
It is just not normal for MSU to be ranked highly. They are never the best team in America and they are never consistent. I think that is part of what I enjoy about them. They are always emotional and you never know what they will do. It makes March Madness even more fun and they almost always deliver in the tournament. Having them in the championship last year was a bracket buster for my office pool competition.
I really thought they would not be very good this year after losing Suton so I was surprised by the high ranking but its over already. Top 20 is ok but top 10 is a distraction for the boys in green.
The other notable difference about this year is that we dont have cable TV and havent for months. Thanks to free over the air HD broadcasts and free games online with ESPN360, I am seeing all the sports I normally would. ESPN360 is not great picture quality, about comparable to analog cable, but the price is right.
Next month I will have to decide how much the Big10 channel and HD content matter to me and whether it trumps my dislike for cable TV companies.
]]>And you will have lots of time to find Obama's birth certificate.
It's a win-win situation.
]]>Lou Dobbs Leaves CNN
Wall Street Journal
NOVEMBER 12, 2009
Lou Dobbs, a CNN anchor known for his strong views on immigration, said his show Wednesday was his last for the cable-news network.
"With characteristic forthrightness, Lou has now decided to carry the banner of advocacy journalism elsewhere," CNN/US President Jon Klein said in a statement, adding the network will miss his "megawatt smile and larger than life presence."
I thought it was very strange when he won the award. Listening to his speech, largely defending the use of force, I wondered if any of those judges now regret their vote.
At the time, it was said they they gave him the award as a recognition of change from President Bush/Cheney. As in, "thank God America has a new president". As in, "the biggest accomplishment for world peace is getting rid of Bush/Cheney."
But whatever change Obama has made in military terms has been, shall we say, subtle. I am not very knowledgeable in this area but as a casual observer, like most American's, I dont see much change.
We are still spending a fortune (of borrowed money) on military action in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We still talk about "surges" and armored vehicles, and bombs, and the burden on our troops of being deployed for almost a decade now.
We still describe our desire to meddle in those two countries (as well as Israel, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and India) as a national security priority.
We still talk about terrorism as a military problem and not a police problem.
Eight years. It is really rather amazing how long this thing has dragged on and how little we seem to have learned from 9/11.
We have a new president but American policy and thinking about international relations still seems like the same old, same old.
Years ago, I heard the idea that some conservatives believed the only way to end the so-called "welfare state" was to bankrupt the state. Bush/Cheney made a lot of progress on that financial goal and our banking bailouts continue the progress.
Lately I wonder if the same argument can be made about our military spending. The only way to really change our dependence on using military force for all problems is to bankrupt the government. I wonder how long it will take to find out.
]]>Those commercials were designed to make you feel better about an industry that has been reviled as far back as the Bible (and rightly so), but they did have a good message.
Want to know what I think is priceless about living in the USA? The rule of law.
I regularly hear people, generally conservative folks, whine and complain about paying taxes and it just gets me mad. How ignorant! How selfish! Some people have no idea how good we have it here. I know it is natural to take something for granted until you lose it but still.
How can folks be so ungrateful for the quality of life we have here at a time when we pay all this attention on Iraq and Afghanistan? What do people think we are trying to do over there? We are trying to create the rule of law. Look how hard that is and then think about how much we take for granted here and shouldnt.
We have the big stuff here.
Those are the big things and they are priceless. They are also things that happen because of the rule of law.
In this country, we solve our disputes with lawyers. Life is not perfect but we do not solve our problems with an AK47 or explosives nor do we have to resort to bribes and kidnapping to make a living.
And we also have the little stuff.
Because we have the basic rule of law here, we can use our tax money to provide these other niceties of life which are also priceless.
The irony is that we get to sit around and complain about paying taxes simply because we have it so damn good. We are rich because there is almost no fear in our lives. We live with a level of luxury and peace that billions of people want for themselves. And we barely appreciate it.
]]>Today I woke up to the news that the suspected shooter had been found and shot dead.
First off, I hoped that they got the right person.
Second, I asked myself why. Why would that guy have murdered these 4 policemen he did not even know?
And that seems to be the theme of recent news. Why? Why did he/they do it?
Israel wants to prosecute some 900 year old guy from Ohio for alleged crimes in a Nazi concentration camp during WW2. Why did we murder so many families in those camps?
Cambodia is prosecuting some guy there for similar war crimes by the Khymer Rouge. Why did Cambodians turn on each other and murder half their countrymen?
A while back, a 16 year old girl in Richmond, CA was brutally raped by a group of men outside her high school - and no one called the police or stopped it. This morning there was a radio story on Richmond, CA as a former resident asked how this had happened in his hometown. I actually lived and worked in Richmond for a time and when I first heard the story all I could think about is why this happened and what those men were thinking.
Why are human beings so inhuman to each other?
From acts of individual violence to systemic violence and genocide, why do we do it? I dont have any answers. I just find myself shaking my head and asking why.
As the local TV stations ran updates on the story all day long, I kept waiting for the usual response from the NRA and gun lovers. You know, the one where they assure us that guns save lives. The one where they say this tragedy would have been stopped if the victims had been armed with guns.
Well these victims were police and they were armed with guns. They even had bullet-proof vests on! It sounds like the shooter was wounded but that did not stop him from killing his intended victims.
No, we dont need more guns we need less. Guns increase killings they dont discourage them. Look at Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, Mexico and the USA.
This tragedy would not have happened if we were more concerned with safety and less concerned with making money by selling weapons. Maybe we cannot stop the movies and video games that glorify killing people with guns or the delusional folks that need a gun to feel important but we can stop the guns by making them illegal. There are no gun killings without gun factories.
If you want to keep single-shot hunting rifles and bird-shot shotgun ammunition, fine. Every other handgun, high-powered rifle, automatic weapon and ammunition should be banned and the factories strictly controlled. It is time to make our country and the rest of the world a safer place by ending the weapon industry. It is time to grow up and say that making money is less important than saving lives.
]]>I just got my annual social security statement.
Full retirement now means 67.
To get the highest monthly payment, the statement suggests waiting to 70.
Similarly retiring at 62 yields the lowest payment.
That 70 number looks attractive... I sure hope you love your job.
And more importantly, I sure hope it loves you. I find it hard to imagine doing the job I do now at 70, given the competition from college hires and the developing world as well as the rate of change.
Im sure there are a lot of folks who plan to work until 70. I just wonder if there will be jobs around for them to work.
I blame myself for being slow but I also blame the system our government created for being overly complicated and obtuse.
After doing my research, I decided to start with an ESA account because of one thing: I can invest in anything I want. I have total control. I will also need to use a 529 plan because we need to save more than $2k/year but I have put the decision about which plan (and which type of plan) off for now.
What I want is a larger ESA plan but all I ever hear about is 529 plans. Why?
First off, ESA accounts are capped to $2,000 of savings a year. Again, I ask why?
My first instinct is to follow the money and my first guess is that the government (paid off by the industry) push 529 plans because it means more jobs for the financial industry.
529 plans are free money for investment funds and every state has at least two funds. Those state funds just funnel money into a handful of investment companies (Schwab, Fidelity, etc) who collectively take in billions of dollars with little or no oversight. Their customer is state governments not individual savers.
Customers, like myself, put money into the fund and have little to no say about how the money is spent.
We are given a very small set of investment options to choose from. (Who picks those?)
In many funds we are limited to a single allocation change per year. Yes, I said YEAR!
You read the newspaper and see the financial bubble and meltdown coming? Well good luck doing anything about it in a 529 plan; you get to ride it out.
You think you are saving for college but in reality you are just creating jobs for investment companies who get to manage billions of dollars of dumb money. After all, the best customer is a silent, powerless customer.
I can see the industry arguing that this a "fire and forget" strategy for savings. Most people dont have the time or skills to evaluate investments so they will do it for us.
That is a good argument but they should also offer a self-managed fund.
The ESA limits and 529 limits should be equal. If you want to trust in your anonymous brokers, go for it but let me invest in myself.
We dont have that system so I suspect self-interest at work on the political process.
And recent news indicates that a lot of people are pulling money out of 529 plans for just this lack of control. Why should we support a system we feel is flawed?
More Parents Are Becoming 529 Dropouts
Investors and Advisers Seek More-Flexible Options in Wake of Market Turmoil
Wall Street Journal
11-11-09
"Any new money going to my kids' college education is going into something that I manage myself," he said. "I know I could do better and I can be safer."
In recent years, 529 plans have been pitched as the ultimate college-savings vehicle. The plans are sponsored by states, and their investment options and fees can vary widely.
But in the wake of last year's market collapse and some high-profile fund blowups, some investors—and financial advisers—are paring back their reliance on 529 plans and in some cases are considering alternatives. After tucking some $15.5 billion into 529s in 2006 and an additional $15.2 billion in 2007, investors contributed an estimated $5.2 billion last year, according to Financial Research Corp., a Boston research firm owned by Mercatus Partners LLC. So far this year, investors have put an estimated $4.8 billion into the plans.
I have the same complaints about 401k plans. Again, their customer is the corporation/employer not the employee/saver. And the result is poor selection and lack of control. But that is another post for another day.
]]>
]]>
My first answer is a Big POS.
Google’s first answer however is the right one, Microsoft’s Business Productivity Online Suite.
It is a little thing but I just don’t understand how we pick names like that.
Online Productivity Suite (OPS) or Microsoft (MOPS) are all better in English and in acronym than that BPoS.
Or maybe its just me. I wasnt fond of "Bing" or "squirting" or "Live". I guess I just dont think like my company's outbound marketeers do.
Salaries have been flat for years, the stock market took a fall last year, whole industries are on government-paid life support, and the un-employment rate (including the under-employment rate of people who want to work more but cannot) is higher than the great depression.
As I drive to work, I see all those BMW's and Lexus'.
As I look for a house to live in, I see all those incredible prices, so much higher than average incomes.
And I think to myself: Just how are all these people able to afford so much??
Then I see articles like this and I say: I thought so. A lot of people cannot afford that stuff - and its going to end badly for them.
This was a good article that is a reminder that things are often not what they seem. And if you have been unemployed before, it is also a reminder of just how bad that feels.
]]>Life on Severance: Comfort, Then Crisis
Wall Street Journal
NOVEMBER 10, 2009
SILVER SPRING, Md. -- Paul Joegriner hasn't worked since March 2008, when he was laid off from his $200,000-a-year job as chief executive officer of a small bank. But you wouldn't know it by appearances.
His wife, Marzena, shuttles their two young children to private school every morning. The family recently vacationed in Virginia Beach, Va., and likes to dine on Porterhouse steaks. Since losing his job, Mr. Joegriner, 44 years old, has had several offers. He's turned each down in hopes of landing a position comparable to what he held before.
The family's lifestyle over the past year and a half has been propped up by a $200,000 severance package and another $100,000 in savings -- funds the family has burned through rapidly. By Mr. Joegriner's own calculations, the family will be out of money in six months if he doesn't find work.
"It will be D-Day," he says. "But on the outside, no one has any idea that we're in trouble."
Mr. Joegriner is a member of what might be called the severance economy -- unemployed Americans who use severance pay and savings to maintain their lifestyles. Many lost their jobs in 2007 and 2008, and thought they'd soon find work. Now, they're getting desperate.
Broadcasting and Television are in trouble. They have been living high on the hog for decades and like San Francisco's Bay Bridge, the media empires are showing cracks.
Internet TV is surviving and it totally changes the game.
First off, it allows content owners to reach viewers directly. They no longer need intermediaries like Comcast and possibly even broadcasters like the major networks.
The problem for content producers is finding money. Eventually, small content producers (who dont need much to survive) will start making money with direct-to-consumer fair.
The problem for traditionally media companies is keeping enough money flowing to support their massive overhead. (Prognosis - cloudy.)
Internet TV fundamentally breaks up the business structures that have made companies fat, dumb and happy. For decades.
ipTV is to TV what Google is to newspapers. A new technology that requires new business models.
There is are actually a lot of similarities with Google so I think there should also be some money in this for someone who can think in the new model and get the content contracts to make it work. That is the big problem right now holding everything back - restrictive legal contracts held by monopolies that want to stay that way.
Content delivery companies like Comcast get money from users for putting a pipe in every house. The content itself is largely paid for by advertisers though.
And ipTV is MUCH better for advertisers.
I create an account with Hulu (or whoever). They know my name, my address, my email. (Never had that before.)
I gladly tell them what shows I like to watch and which episodes of those shows I enjoy. I can select, rate, post comments, and share. (Definitely never had that before. Advertisers can direct-message customers of specific shows.)
They can then observe the hell out of me. They already have a name and address. They can then see how much I actually watch. When I watch. How many sittings it takes to get through an episode or a series. Do I pause or watch straight through? Do I channel flip? Do I watch kids TV during the day and porn at night? Am I 100% cooking shows? Or dancing shows? or sci-fi?
For decades, advertisers have had to totally guess about TV audiences. Ridiculous monopolies like Neilsen's exists (and profit handsomely) just to "inform" advertisers about user behavior using lame survey techniques. The resulting guesses drive billions of dollars of advertising and TV content decisions even though the data is so shallow you couldn't wash a bird in it.
Quite frankly, our media system is retarded and due for a tumultuous change. Which will probably be good for everyone but the traditional players.
If the Internet gets sports, game over.
If Comcast buys NBC, and shuts down Hulu, we will have to wait longer. But that only puts more pressure on illegal providers of bittorrent to give the people what they want - free content.
Free is a painful product to fight but internet TV is just a better product for customers and eventually companies will have to adjust, one way or another.
]]>At first we just tried to live with the free broadcast HD channels from the basic networks. This content is free and I can record it with our DVR but it is filled with commercials and there are some niggles with the antenna.
Then I started to really use Hulu. Much like Amazon's MP3 store, when Hulu first launched it was lame because they did not have much content. Now they have a great catalog.
Stargate Universe (syfy), Fringe (Fox), Modern Family (ABC), 30 Rock (NBC), Everything is Sunny in Philadelphia (USA)... All the major networks and some cable channels are showing full episodes on Hulu for free.
Forget the overpriced, crappy "on demand" stuff Comcast (and Apple and Amazon) wants you to purchase. Internet TV on Hulu is what you really want.
You create an account and add subscriptions to shows you want. When a new episode comes out, it shows up in your queue. Watch what you want when you want where you want. It works from a browser on any computer. It is a true on-demand system.
But wait! There is more to love...
The shows have commercial breaks but there is only 1 commercial. ONE!!! It is such a trip to stop the show for just 15 seconds. I love it and it really makes you aware of how much crap you are used to paying to see on cable TV.
The commercials are really different. First off, they are short. The longest I have seen is 30 seconds; the shortest is 5 seconds. Each show has very different types of commercials. SyFy was only showing me adverts for Google's Chrome browsers. The other channels often show public service announcements. The selections is pretty ghetto now but that adds to its charm.
The only complaint I have with Hulu as a user is that it relies on Adobe Flash and Adobe Flash kind of sucks. The image quality is good and the player interface is fine but it requires a powerful PC to show properly, especially HD.
Even though I have a nice video card with hardware acceleration for movies, Flash does not support hardware acceleration. (Adobe says "maybe next year" which is rather insulting at this point. What the fuck have you been doing all this time, Adobe?)
Hulu looks good on all of our Mac's but, ironically, my 3-year old HTPC (which is only for movies like this) cannot handle it without lots of annoying skipping. (By comparison, Netflix uses Silverlight and it works flawlessly on all our machines.)
If you arent yet, you should check out Hulu and show the market that you are tired of paying Comcast thousands of dollars a year for commercial-laden content that you dont really want anyway.
As I have said for a while, the only reason to pay Comcast is for sports. Sports over the Internet, especially for college, is an enormous untapped market. I still cannot believe that no company is out there making that work yet. Seriously.
]]>When the iPhone came out, I surprised my wife by spending $800 for 2 new phones. She was skeptical about the enourmous price but I was right: in no time at all, we both loved the phones. The iPhones were an enormous leap over our Motorola phones. I started texting for the first time in my life, the map continues to be amazingly useful, visual voice mail… the iPhone is fantastically useful.
Two years later, I would like to purchase the newer iPhone. It is faster and has true GPS. But it is expensive. I would have to spend $200 for the phone and our montly bills would go up. The total cost of ownership is higher.
The new phones are incrementally better but not enough to justify the cost. At least for us. They are a want not a need.
Recently I have been seeing all these advertisements about “iPhone killers” from Microsoft and RIM and Google. I could not be less interested in them. I have an iPhone, why would I want something else?
I cannot think of any reason at all to leave the iphone for another phone except that I was forced to.
This is a textbook example of product innovation. If customers are happy, it takes a lot more than being “better” to get them to change products. You have to be undeniably tons better (like the iPhone was to the SLVR) to get people to act. If your “betterness” is deniable or unclear, good luck.
Clearly everyone doesn’t have an iPhone but I just cannot relate to the hype about any other phone. And I expect apple’s growth in phone market share to continue for a long time.