Competition and Productivity

There's a belief that competition drives innovation. Monopolies stagnate when they're allowed total control over entire industries. Invisible forces maintain control over competitors to ensure the right balance of efficiency and production.

Ergo, Microsoft needs Apple, Google needs Yahoo, Walmart needs Target, and Verizon needs AT&T. But having said all that... these companies are in competition with one another for dominance and control of their respective marketplace. They each individually want to control the market and set prices at whatever they want. As a result, you see them use every opportunity to get advantages over each other. From advertising to prices to cross-promotions with other favored industries... there's always some way to gain an advantage. And that's to the benefit of everybody.

However, another way to gain a competitive advantage is to "trim the fat". Oftentimes, this resolves to identifying the least productive areas of the business and figuring out how to integrate their functionality into other areas (this is called "synergy") or creating better methods of accomplishing the same things (called "innovation"). With synergy and innovation, companies are able to produce the same quality of goods and services for less cost and with less manpower. This is generally good, until you consider the last bit about "less manpower".

Industries keep around their labor force to maintain expert knowledge during the transition from the old systems to the more efficient new systems. As the expert knowledge is utilized to iron-out bugs with the new synergies and innovations, the expert knowledge becomes common knowledge. After that, less emphasis is put on maintaining the personnel who had the expert knowledge. In addition, other pressures are applied for the business to build profits. The natural response to that is... job cuts! So the people who aren't needed anymore because their roles have been replaced are let go.

Then you have unemployment... which is where the country is currently at. 6.5% of the current workforce is unemployed. That's how new industries are created. Either the emerging energy industry will find a place for those people or something new will come along. If not... something cataclysmic will happen. And that is... the government will step in and find work for the unemployed. At the end of the day, the final competitive balance that Google, Microsoft, Walmart, and AT&T have to face is Washington. If those companies lay off too many of their employees... Uncle Sam will pick up the slack. That's the PRIMARY FUNCTION of government... security for its population.

Ergo, if companies don't want to answer to a stronger central government, they need to stop laying off their workforce or else the government will step in and start "hiring" all these people in some capacity or another.

This is why it is particularly unnerving that The Federal Reserve has not stepped in to bailout General Motors. It's as if the government has a different plan for Detroit (maybe they want to implement the GTC!). Either way, there's a waiting game to see if GM can pull themselves out of the muck or if the government enact some radically new legislation that'll make large scale automotive manufacturing obsolete.

What is also particularly unnerving is the Exxon has sat on their hands through the entire Gas/Energy crisis. It's as if they don't care. How dare they have record profits while other industries suffer. Fuck them. With their billions in profits, they ought to rebuild Detroit and New Orleans! At the very least, they *ought* to make headlines with whatever their efforts have been to replace the fossil fuels that have been the lifeblood of their company for so long. Investment in solar technology? Investment in wind power? No, as far as we know the executives at Exxon are swimming in their profits like Scrooge McDuck used to swim in his vault. And as a result... by sitting on their profits I predict a rude awakening for Exxon during the upcoming administration.

And that's the invisible hand of the market. Corporations versus governments. And in the end... everybody wins.

The Director

My friend, Chris, does photography workshops for aspiring artists. I would link his webpage, but off the top of my head I don't know it. Anyway, during his workshops one of the topics which is apparently discussed is how to use an Adobe software product called Lightroom. Supposedly, this is "the best thing out there" for managing catalogs that include thousands of images. Having spent an afternoon clicking "Next, next, next" through a list of 1500 vacation photos from August, I easily believe that Lightroom provides a lot of added value for its users.

That said, according to Chris, there aren't many options for photographers who want to get the most out of Lightroom. Sure, they can sign-up for Chris' workshop and get the day long immersion, but that isn't economically sound for everybody. Another option is a series of videos that are available here. I watched about half an hour of these with Chris last week and they are *boring*. Plus, the full collection is like 8 hours long. Often, the presenters is these videos are rambling. Seldom, they are engaging. In sum, if you have 8 hours to spend learning Adobe Lightroom, you may as well just spend that time digging into the product and figuring it out on your own. There is simply no value in highlighting every button, menu, or toolbar in the product.

Thus, I met with Chris last week to brainstorm ideas on how to make a quick, engaging video that educates users on the different uses of Adobe Lightroom. I'm going to be the director and the cameraman. He's going to write, edit, and star in it. His photography workshop partner Aaron is going to co-star in it. We'll all be producers, I suppose. The plan is to start filming in Boston in the beginning of November and finish by the end December. I recall editing of my movie took months, but this should be a lot easier because their will be a much easier flow to piece together.

And I leave you with semi-meaningful statistics:

Current RBCDD Score: 27
Commissioned Artwork in October: 3
Ideas: GTC, LE, 2076, CPFP, CBLRP

My Travels

I found a link on ESR's page to a service that provides a convenient way to link an image that illustrates a person's travels and for posterity I have decided to post the map of places where I've been. Do note, my only journeys outside of our country's borders have been to St. Catherine Street, but I think this map helps show that I know how to get around.



A major trip which I will eventually take is to Alaska. For travel information to Alaska, I have found the online resource Romancing Alaska. It's very low-tech but it has great information and excellent recommendations.

Evolutionary Thought

There are quite a few things that I would like to discuss in the future, so I will leave this as a springboard to remind myself about those. Right now there are quite a few things that are occupying my time and if I can find the time it is my goal to eventually elaborate. Unfortunately, without access to the internet at home it is problematic for me to find the time to keep up with this online tomfoolery. But on the plus side, do you know how many fewer hours I spend on Facebook per week? I estimate between 3 and 5.

The first point of discussion comes from the "Something Old" category. I joined the MIT Gym and have been running lately. It is good to workout several times a week, but I've limited myself to the treadmills, which means the return of the Running Beer Diet. Though, in the latest incarnation the torture is enhanced (version 2.0) so that it's now the Running Beer Coffee and Dessert Diet. If you want an explanation of how the diet work, ask me. I invented it.

The second point of discussion is the my APAS proposal has gained some legs inside of my organization and I've met with leaders from the Space Programs Division. In connection with this, today I ordered Human Spaceflight by Larson to gain more information on this topic.

The third point of discussion is that I am being artsy. I commissioned a local printer to produce a number of images from the trip to South Dakota and Wyoming that I took. They look marvelous. This coming Saturday, I am going to meet with a framer who will teach me what I need to know to make the overall presentation look really nice. When all is said and done, the goal is to decorate my apartment with fine art.

The fourth point is that it has occurred to me recently to setup a financial consulting services business to help middle class individuals who need to make big financial decisions. My theory is that recent economic indicators highlight the fact that America, as a culture, is not geared towards making responsible economic decisions.

The final point of today's post is that editing on my novel is going really slowly and I wish I had more time for it.

S. 3325, Intellectual Property, and Art

The Senate is talking about Intellectual Property laws...

It seems a subcommittee have approved S. 3325 called the "Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008". The full Senate, House, and President would still have to approve the bill for it to become law, so you still have time to notify your Representatives to attempt to kill this thing. In my opinion, our government will pass it and deal a blow to copyright violators.

The strongest worded argument against this bill (and the best explanation of it) is here.

A dry, but interesting take in favor of this bill is here.

[In my discussion, I refer to it as "art" instead of "Intellectual Property". Science is intellect. Real estate is property. Art is intellectual property. These subtleties should not be confused.]

My take: I could care less about this in terms of how it directly affects me. I don't infringe on the copyrights of others as a matter of principle, and I don't support artists who would be so callous as to assert that I don't have a right to copy their stuff if I please. In that respect, I oppose any laws which supposedly protect these artists (or rather, the companies who represent them). Specifically, I oppose laws that place a value on digital content in the first place. The only copyright that I do support is that somebody should not be able to profit from another person's artwork (charging people to watch the Super Bowl at your house or selling pirate DVDs, for instance). As a matter of course, though, if digital artifacts weren't copyrighted in the first place, these business models would crumble.

But if you'll allow me to go off on a tangentially related rant.... it's my belief to strive for an economy where artists do it for the love of creation, the desire for fame/notoriety, and not the greed of monetary gain. In that spirit, I am going to suggest a financial encumberance that will downplay greed and cut "Big Business" out from the position of funding the creation of most types of art (arguably, BB would still maintain control over mediums of art that require large-scale co-ordination and efforts to orchestrate (such as big budget movies and video games)).

My proposal would be to offer tax incentives (via a "deduction" applied to decrease the "gross income" of creators during the year so that their overall tax burden is lessened). This would have the effect (in my opinion) of enticing businessmen and laborers to create and support art in their free time. Meanwhile, "starving artists" would benefit from this by earning the right to claim a high "artistic deduction" which would position them to be supported by minimium wage occupations. This would work so that an individual who has significant artistic talent could work at McDonald's to earn $25k and create art that qualifies him for a $50k tax deduction. As such, his "taxes" would be calculated based on $0 income. The additional $25k (because his previous gross was in the poverty range) would be refunded based on some TBD percentage. Meanwhile, a person who works as a bank manager might make $75k per year and dabble in performing arts during the holiday season. Let's say for the sake of argument that these performances (made to the public) would qualify him for a $10k tax deduction so that his annual tax burden is decreased to $65k. This presents a good incentive for him to continue to do this year to year.

Now the trouble becomes determining how to calculate how much the "tax deduction" should be, and that comes down to picking values. For example, if you did a painting that was accepted to be displayed in a public place you'd get a $2,000 tax deduction. You took photographs of a natural phenomenon and published them on the internet in a noteworthy archive? A $500 tax deduction. You metaphrasted Shakespeare's Sonnets? A $1,000 tax deduction. You donated $40 to charity at a public concert? Write it off as a tax deduction. Additionally, some types of art require multiple years to create (books, animations, statues), so there would be additional consideration to let people claim a certain amount of time and evaluate that using a predetermined rate (say, $10/hr).

Again, this is letting people work on their own projects in their free time in a manner that will allow them to lower their tax burden for the express purpose of producing a work of art that will be free of copyright to be enjoyed by the general public.

Now, politicians would argue that all these "tax deductions" would be lowering the government's income. Meanwhile, others would clamor that the corruption of big businesses would see the lucrative value of the deductions and take advantage of them for greedy purposes. But these arguments wouldn't understand the goals of the proposal in the first place. The whole point of the exercise is to expand the culture of creation. There are gains when Joe Smith has an incentive to get together with his buddies to put together a musical arrangement and publish it on the internet. Maybe, they can even find somebody with filming and editing experience who could cut a video for them. Perhaps (and this is the fear of the music industry), the Joe Smith Band has a fresh flavor that catches the ears of suburbanites and gives them a new tune to bop their heads to. To that end, the Joe Smith Band would receive their tax deduction for creating a song (maybe $1,000) and receive some bonus deduction for a production that influences the popular culture (maybe $25,000). This will trim the taxes that Uncle Sam can take from them during the year when they released their song and in the year where it gained notoriety. This provides them with a strong incentive to channel their energy into creative work. And by releasing their creation to the public without copyright, the Joe Smith Band doesn't have to worry about their work being "intellectually protected". And thus, the bill that has been approved by the Senate subcommittee misses the mark in terms of protecting artists who strive to create art. Instead, I would urge the subcommittee to focus on urging artists to create NEW art instead of making inane rule to "protect" them from revenues generated from their OLD art.

That is all. Thanks for listening.

Camping, Cooking, and Communication

I've got the "Three C's" on my mind.

I recently got back from a camping trip. This was good fun, but now I've got a living room full of camping equipment that I'll probably never use more than 3 or 4 times a year. Furthermore, since I borrowed some of the most fundamental camping stuff (a tent, camping stove, and mattress pad), I don't even have a full set of supplies to go on my own impromptu trips with. My suggestion is that it would be nice if there was some kind of "Need/Want" system where people could request/offer what they've got to achieve maximum utilization.

I love cooking. Really, it gives me personal joy to be able to create delicious food. But the thing is... its time consuming and clean-up is a bitch. Any meal where I am doing something experimental requires at least some forethought and planning to figure out (a) what ingredients I already have, and (b) what ingredients I need to go to the store and buy. And for some reason, going to the store with a specific list always throws me off my game and seems like extra work. The average cooking pot or pan sits in my sink piled up with dishes and glassware for 3 or 4 nights before I get enough time and motivation to attend to it. Anyway, the point is I wish that I could join a group with 7 or 8 others who share a passion for cooking, but don't have the time. Each person would do one meal per month so that you generally get 2 meals per week. This way, you get the joy of eating lots of great meals and the pleasure of spending less time actually cooking.

And communication... I want cable, phone, messaging, music, and internet in one package for an affordable monthly price. Is this possible? If the country could get its act together and not let the service providers bully their customers, I think they could run profitably while delivering all these services for a mere $40 per month. Then again, there are a lot of "sit on their hands" staff workers who are employed by Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Sirius XM, Clearchannel, TimeWarner, Cablevision, and DirectTV who need to collect their weekly paychecks so they can feed their families. It's a shame that there are so many free-loaders in this entertainment cartel to prevent prices from dropping below the $120 per month that people are accustomed to paying for these services. Can't they trim their fat so that they can afford to trim their prices for the benefit of all consumers?

Film/Theatre Pitch: Life's Experiences

During the weeks leading up to my recent trip to the Badlands, Yellowstone, and the Black Hills I was struck with some inspiration and suffered some perspiration in a failed attempt to become a writer/director/producer/actor/editor. It turns out, these are too many roles for a single person to have.

The concept is simple. In the spirit of (a) Rosencrantz & Guildenstern, (b) Vladimir & Estragon, (c) Holden McNeil & Banky Edwards, or (d) Randal Graves & Dante Hicks, I wanted to put together a production which features the idiotic banter of two actors during the course of a short period of time. The central theme of the plot was to be a fairly universal one: life. Precisely, I wanted to espouse about several of the most important choices made by a person through their formative years (i.e. occupations, relations, and passions). These are the choices that mold us... these are the choices that make us who we are... these are the choices which reinforce the old axiom, "You can be anything you want when you grow up".

The script calls for 5 diverse settings. This was to take advantage of the different places I visited on my vacation. The original plan was to film with Meghan and Tom at these locations during the trip, but like I said, that plan was a failure because I didn't feel comfortable going ahead with it (more on that later). Anyway, the first setting was desert. The second setting was the geyser plains and canyons of Yellowstone. The third setting was a beach. The fourth setting was a forest. The final setting was an urban park (such as Central Park in NYC).

The plot follows that the two protagonists awaken each day in a different, random location. They don't know they got there. They just get to enjoy each day for what it is. They explore, debate, and argue about their lives and their own individual experiences. They talk a lot about their past, present, and future. They frustrate with each other and luxuriate in their own uniqueness. But at the heart of it... they are shown to take a step back and reflect positively on everything (even the bad stuff).

To move the plot forward, I had imbued the protagonists with a "magic backpack" out of which they could draw any article of need or want that they can imagine. In this sense, they are put in a position where they can truly enjoy themselves and be comfortable. Also, a magic backpack provides some opportunities for comedy. And at the heart of it... that's what I was going for. A funny story that talks about serious topics in a very nonsensical way. I wanted to present something that will make an audience laugh, but also contemplate their own choices. You know what I mean? Something with layers.

And that's where I failed, because while I was able to put together a plot and (most of) a script that I felt comfortable with... I don't think I did a good job with the humor. When it came time to commence filming during Day 2 of the vacation, spurred by misgivings that Meghan and Tom expressed doubts in their acting abilities, I decided that a great idea would be thoroughly mediocre if not properly executed. And a comedy, without humor is certainly a poor execution.

At that time, I resolved to give myself more time to further development of the script so I can polish it and improve it. Also, I resolved to solicit help from others, because I realize that I am not capable of pulling off the feature length production by myself.

That's what this post is for... who wants to help? Presently I am in the "refining the script and planning" phase of the project. Casting, filming, and editing are to follow. I can't promise anything, but I can say that my ultimate goal is to enter the final production into a number of different film festivals and maybe win a couple of them. Then, after the film is produced I envision granting rights to various theater groups for a live production using the script from the film. After all, live action is better than film anyway. Film is just easier because you get to fix and cover-up mistakes as you go. :)

So, there it is. Who's in?