thematthudson.com

Really?

2010-01-09T08:43:00.000-08:00

This may just be funny to me, but it seems a little early to be talking about unprecedented declines.... Accurate - yes, but.....

Article.

November

2009-11-15T13:04:00.000-08:00

November is a great month; football on the weekends, a holiday focused on eating, the demise of Midwest weather (and not being a part of it), and a feel-good reason to grow a mustache. Along with millions of 'Mo Bros and Sistas' around the world, I've been letting my upper lip get a little furry for the month to raise awareness and funds for the prostate cancer foundation and the Lance Armstrong foundation.

A Mo Bro starts Movember – the month formerly known as November – clean shaven, and grows a moustache all month long, garnering support from friends and family in the form of donations. What’s more, a Mo Bro is a walking billboard for the cause as his new look opens the door for him to talk about cancers affecting men – making the moustache a symbol, much like the pink ribbon is for breast cancer.

If you feel inclined, please donate here. Not only will I match whatever you donate, but Google will then match whatever I raise (up to $3k). That means that every dollar from you turns into four for the cause - all tax deductible.

Make some moves.

The Knack

2009-10-16T08:35:00.000-07:00

Happiness index

2009-10-06T09:01:00.000-07:00

I saw my first pointer to Facebook's new 'Gross National Happiness' index - fascinating stuff. Not all too surprising that people are the least happy during the week and happiest on the weekend. Makes you wonder why most spend 5 days out of 7 unhappy.

Forwards

2009-08-19T10:05:00.000-07:00

Update: Looks like you can find many more of these at http://www.ruminations.com/site/

A friend forwarded me a collection of thoughts from people my age - picked out a few that resonated:

------------------------------------------------

Random thoughts from people our age...

-I wish Google Maps had an "Avoid Ghetto" routing option.

-More often than not, when someone is telling me a story all I can think about is that I can't wait for them to finish so that I can tell my own story that's not only better, but also more directly involves me.

-Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong.

-I don't understand the purpose of the line, "I don't need to drink to have fun." Great, no one does. But why start a fire with flint and sticks when they've invented the lighter?

-Is it just me, or are 80% of the people in the "people you may know" feature on Facebook people that I do know, but I deliberately choose not to be friends with?

-Do you remember when you were a kid, playing Nintendo and it wouldn't work? You take the cartridge out, blow in it and that would magically fix the problem. Every kid in America did that, but how did we all know how to fix the problem? There was no internet or message boards or FAQ's. We just figured it out. Today's kids are soft.

-There is a great need for sarcasm font.

-Sometimes, I'll watch a movie that I watched when I was younger and suddenly realize I had no idea what the f was going on when I first saw it.

-How the hell are you supposed to fold a fitted sheet?

-I would rather try to carry 10 plastic grocery bags in each hand than take 2 trips to bring my groceries in.

- I think part of a best friend's job should be to immediately clear your computer history if you die.

-The only time I look forward to a red light is when I’m trying to finish a text.

- A recent study has shown that playing beer pong contributes to the spread of mono and the flu. Yeah, if you suck at it.

- Lol has gone from meaning, "laugh out loud" to "I have nothing else to say".

- I have a hard time deciphering the fine line between boredom and hunger.

- Answering the same letter three times or more in a row on a Scantron test is absolutely petrifying.

- Whenever someone says "I'm not book smart, but I'm street smart", all I hear is "I'm not real smart, but I'm imaginary smart".

- How many times is it appropriate to say "What?" before you just nod and smile because you still didn't hear what they said?

- Every time I have to spell a word over the phone using 'as in' examples, I will undoubtedly draw a blank and sound like a complete idiot. Today I had to spell my boss's last name to an attorney and said "Yes that's G as in...(10 second lapse)..ummm...Goonies"

-What would happen if I hired two private investigators to follow each other?

- While driving yesterday I saw a banana peel in the road and instinctively swerved to avoid it...thanks Mario Kart.

- Obituaries would be a lot more interesting if they told you how the person died.

- I find it hard to believe there are actually people who get in the shower first and THEN turn on the water.

-Shirts get dirty. Underwear gets dirty. Pants? Pants never get dirty, and you can wear them forever.

- Bad decisions make good stories

-Whenever I'm Facebook stalking someone and I find out that their profile is public I feel like a kid on Christmas morning who just got the Red Ryder BB gun that I always wanted. 546 pictures? Don't mind if I do!

-If Carmen San Diego and Waldo ever got together, their offspring would probably just be completely invisible.

-Why is it that during an ice-breaker, when the whole room has to go around and say their name and where they are from, I get so incredibly nervous? Like I know my name, I know where I'm from, this shouldn't be a problem....

-You never know when it will strike, but there comes a moment at work when you've made up your mind that you just aren't doing anything productive for the rest of the day.

-There's no worse feeling than that millisecond you're sure you are going to die after leaning your chair back a little too far.

-I'm always slightly terrified when I exit out of Word and it asks me if I want to save any changes to my ten page research paper that I swear I did not make any changes to.

- "Do not machine wash or tumble dry" means I will never wash this ever.

-I hate being the one with the remote in a room full of people watching TV. There's so much pressure. 'I love this show, but will they judge me if I keep it on? I bet everyone is wishing we weren't watching this. It's only a matter of time before they all get up and leave the room. Will we still be friends after this?'

-I hate when I just miss a call by the last ring (Hello? Hello? Dammit!), but when I immediately call back, it rings nine times and goes to voicemail. What'd you do after I didn't answer? Drop the phone and run away?

-When I meet a new girl, I'm terrified of mentioning something she hasn't already told me but that I have learned from some light internet stalking.

-I like all of the music in my iTunes, except when it's on shuffle, then I like about one in every fifteen songs in my iTunes.

-Sometimes I'll look down at my watch 3 consecutive times and still not know what time it is.

-I keep some people's phone numbers in my phone just so I know not to answer when they call.

-My 4-year old son asked me in the car the other day "Dad what would happen if you ran over a ninja?" How the hell do I respond to that?

Leaving Microsoft to Change the World - John Wood

2009-07-10T14:25:00.000-07:00

I finished reading this piece by John Wood a few weeks back - an easy read, but definitely carries a lot of rhetorical questions. As a little background, John is the founder and executive chairman of Room to Read - a non-profit whose mission is to partner with local communities in the developing world to bring quality education to their children. Prior to starting Room to Read, John was a senior executive at Microsoft who liked to escape from the 80 hour weeks every now and then to backpack across the globe.

During one such trek in Nepal, John "visited several local schools and was amazed by the warmth and enthusiasm of the students and teachers, but also saddened by the shocking lack of resources." Shortly after, room to read was born.

There were a few comments/points that John made which really resonated with me:

His choices and path in life are very admirable - which should be a given. That said, it's not for everybody. And that's okay. Not everybody needs to drop everything and pursue something the way he has. If they did, he wouldn't have any funding. :) But to pursue something so holistically and to live with so much passion is an absolute must - regardless of what you're doing.
Starting Room to Read was not a conscious decision - at least in the form it ended up in. Originally he simply set out to make a one-time donation to create a single library for a school, but over time it got bigger and bigger and he just went with the momentum.
A core part of his message was that he developed the necessary skill sets to succeed with Room to Read while he was working in the private sector - at Microsoft in particular. Said differently, until you think you can actually make contact, there isn't strong logic to step up to the plate.
Partially contrasting the above statement, Thomas Edison once said "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed up in overalls and looks like hard work."

Overall this was a good read. It's not very long, but it's also more of a documentary-esque read. Not gonna lie, it brought out a tear or two and several solid laughs while on the bus to and from work.

Recommended.

Road Biking

2009-06-26T18:56:00.001-07:00

It's been about two years since I moved to San Francisco and even before I got out here, one of my goals was to bike to work 1 or more times a week. However, I didn't end up buying a road bike until late June of last year (shortly after selling my extremely useful hipster bike), and I really didn't start biking consistently until I agreed to do the Death Ride in January.

Now, the Death Ride is only two weeks away - but I sold my ticket this past Tuesday. Why? Well, I went on my first century ride last Saturday and I came to a couple important conclusions.

First of all, I enjoy biking to work. The route I take is about 50 miles and it takes me about 3 hours to do. I'll typically get up at 5 or so and be out the door by 5:20am. It's very scenic, not too challenging, and is a good workout before starting the 9-5.

A century ride, on the other hand, practically takes an entire day - one of my two precious weekend days at that. And on top of that, it requires some more restraint and healthy eating habits the previous day. Training for the Death Ride requires a few century rides (as it a 130 mile ride with over 15,000 ft of climb), and those training days are very inconveniently positioned during a period with ample beer, sun, and summer dresses.

Furthermore, the ride I went on last weekend was a disaster. Around mile 73, I got two flats and ran out of C02 cartridges to refill the air in my tires. 2 hours later and a short trip in a squad car, Will picked me 30 miles outside of San Francisco. FML. Let's just say I was not happy with my bike and have yet to repair the tire.

I've made two important conclusions from this experience: One, I generally enjoy sports are more 'short duration'. And two, the incessant reminder of this Calvin and Hobbes piece on biking.

Confession

2009-06-19T18:35:00.000-07:00

I really got a kick out of this...

Quick Read

2009-06-18T08:09:00.000-07:00

My friend Dan pointed me to this a few days back - an interesting read on the art of speculative investing. More interesting were the short snippets Watts filled the last 30 pages with. A few that resonated with me:

If a horse knew his strength, no man could drive him. If man knew his power, the universe could hardly contain him.

Man rules man; ideas rule the world.

The distant is the great, the near the little. But the little-near controls man rather than the distant-great.

To have made one's self ridiculous, and not to mourn over it, is a supreme test of virtue.

Use condition's possessions. You must use your body or lose it; use your mind or lose it; use your soul or lose it.

Teach by indirection rather than by direction; by suggestion, rather than instruction.

If you want to go anywhere, start. If you want to do anything, begin.

The most complete man is he who touches life at the most points.

Hot, Flat, and Crowded - Thomas Friedman

2009-05-09T07:46:00.000-07:00

Thomas Friedman is at it again - this time writing a very drawn out analysis on the intersection between the climate crisis (hot), IT powered globalization (flat), and population growth (crowded). Similar to The World is Flat, I found the topic and all of Friedman's analysis really interesting and pretty spot on - albeit sometimes overly imaginative and his writing style is frustratingly redundant. While I don't consider patience to be one of my stronger virtues, I like to think I'm on the positive end of the spectrum compared to most*. And after only 100 pages I was constantly checking how many pages were left (which is really tough to gauge with a Kindle - btw).

As a quick recap, my favorite and least favorite bits:

Vision of the energy internet:
His chapter on the energy internet - exploring the intersection of IT and its potential in energy transmission, generation, and consumption - was great. Basically, Friedman put together a hypothetical day for someone post-energy-revolution and described how all of the systems (grid, plug in cars, refrigerators, etc.) worked together.

Outgreening al-Qaeda
This seemed like a little bit of a stretch to me. His point, simply put that by being green we are undercutting al-Qaeda, was valid and there wasn't anything overly objectionable to it, but using the fight against terrorism as a rational for a major overhaul in our energy infrastructure and lifestyle seems fluffy. Sure, we'll stop enabling petrodictators with our dollars - which will help, but I think we should focus on the 'right' reasons for this change. Said differently, if our military and state department miraculously rooted out terrorism tomorrow, I wouldn't want to lose any supporters in an energy/climate overhaul.

China
Quite obviously, China encompassed a big block of pages in a book about climate change, globalization, and population growth. In my view, this was probably the best written section (two actually: China and America). There were plenty of fresh ideas that kept the flow smooth and didn't leave me wondering "Did I already read this part?" One notable point was Friedman's assessment in comparing China and the US - specifically how the two governments work and what it would take for the two of them to institute a massive energy infrastructure overhaul. The gist: democracy is slow and painful - especially for decisions that need to be made quickly.

Government
Friedman didn't have a section devoted to the role of government in this 'revolution' - possibly for that very reason - but its presence and importance underpinned the entire book. As the President of Exxon noted, "Socialism collapsed because it did not allow the market to tell the economic truth. Capitalism may collapse because it does not allow the market to tell the ecological truth." In my view, it is up to government to serve two basic needs related to business: 1) Fund basic research (e.g. new materials) and 2) set up the environment in which everyone can compete. The former is easy - just throw money at it. The latter is really difficult and nobody has gotten it right. "Too much regulation" or "ignoring a problem (e.g. climate impact)" are the two points of feedback I hear the most. But however difficult the task is, again in my view, this will be the crux of whether or not Friedman will see his Green Revolution come to life. Do we or will we have strong, smart, and dedicated top-down leadership to address this and save capitalism. The jury is out, and will be for the next 50 years.

To wrap this up, I love reading non-fiction , but, I still like surprises. The best non-fiction I've read ties everything together at the end - almost in an 'ah-ha' moment. Friedman pulls the rabbit out of the hat too quickly. I need more of a storyline from him. Feedback aside, a great topic and a good read.

Recommended.

* That may be a completely bogus observation - I'll leave you to judge.

Transitions

2009-04-25T19:13:00.000-07:00

This is a transitional spring. Two weeks ago I changed teams at Google, moving from the revenue forecasting team over to the portfolio team in Treasury. This move has been planned for a few months - part of my rotation program (9 months to a year for each rotation - 3 total) - but still taxing nonetheless. New people, new systems, new responsibilities, new lifestyle.

On top of that, my housing situation is being somewhat reshuffled. As a brief recap, I've been living in a 3 bedroom flat for the last 6 months with Dan (friend from college) and Dale (guy found on Craigslist that has been living here for the last 6 years and was subletting two rooms). Dan and I used to live in a two bedroom, but were booted out when they decided to sell the place. Enter Dale.

Now Dale is moving out (to be married) and Dan decided that he had had enough of this spacious 3 bedroom which I have lovingly referred to as the shit hole since moving in. You might ask, "Well Matt, if the place isn't very nice compared to your old place, why stay?" It's simple. The rent is significantly cheaper than what I used to pay and I think with the right mentality and new roommates, this place can become pretty nice. Regardless, imagine if you could spend a good portion of your rent or mortgage on whatever you wanted. That's a lot of money. All I need is a bed, a fridge (for yogurt and beer), and a good neighborhood.

That said, once Dale decided to move out, the lease gets reset at the market rate (increases rent slightly). After talking with the landlord and getting him to agree to replace the health-code-violation-carpet with hardwood floors, I've decided to stay. But, I have to move all my stuff into the kithen (no carpet there) and live on a couch somewhere for the week that they replace the floors. That starts later this week. Ack.

Even though change is difficult, it's good. If change weren't difficult, it's not the change that you desperately need - that going back to my feeling stupid concept. Change is one of the mechanisms you can use to take risks and try new things. Obviously I'm not making a big change since I'm staying at the same location, but there were a few aspects of my decision that were big changes (new roommates, structure of the lease).

Cheers to change.

Random thoughts in parallel

2009-04-13T20:15:00.000-07:00

The last few weeks have been a whirlwind for me. I'm changing teams at Google (moving from the revenue forecasting team to the portfolio team in Treasury), classes started up again, and my housing/roommate situation has been in flux so I've been scrambling to interview new roommates while looking for alternative places to live. I'm hoping that things will calm down a little bit this week and I'll begin to strike a chord of normalcy. However, just to keep me on my toes, I'm getting a cold. :\

Regardless, through all of that junk three things have caught my attention and stuck with me over the last few weeks:

1.) It is good to feel stupid. Note that this is distinctly different from being stupid. What I mean specifically is that keeping track of how often you feel stupid is a good way to measure how much you are pushing yourself. Professionally, personally, if you're not pushing yourself and remain parked in your comfort zone, you'll infrequently feel stupid and your development will be stunted. Branching out and trying new things is essential as a human being and sometimes it's easy to lose track of that - especially given how important the things you're focusing on seem right now. What have I been doing to feel stupid? Starting in a new job or having to review integration by parts for my new class definitely end up high on my list, but TKB (turbo-kick-boxing) takes the cake. While I sure feel stupid, I undoubtedly look extremely stupid. :)

2.) Strengths vs. weaknesses. The opening paragraph of a book I recently thumbed through has been stuck on my mind for the last few days. In essence, why do we focus so much on improving our weaknesses rather than building on our strengths? When I think about the amount of energy I've put into developing my strengths vs. improving my weaknesses, it's at least 1:5 off kilter. Obviously it's a big win if you can turn a weakness into a strength, but it shouldn't be at the expense of significant gains elsewhere. Shielding yourself from a weakness is simple enough - be cognizant of it and account for it when making a decision (get outside help). I think most people allow their weaknesses to get the best of them simply because they refuse to account for it (either because of ignorance, or stubbornness). Imagine what you could accomplish if you spent twice as much time building on your strengths as you do now.

3.) Corners are the ultimate opportunity. The most tragic aspect of most opportunities is the fact that they can be passed by, without any recognition or consideration. But opportunities that present themselves when you're backed into a corner don't carry that attribute - you have to act. The corner forces a decision. I watched a horribly-reviewed-but-surprisingly-okay movie yesterday (The Day the Earth Stood Still) that alluded to this - that mankind can only change its nature when it is on the precipice of destruction. But let's not kid, getting backed into corner is never a pleasant experience. But what if you seek out the corner - almost preparing for it. You can never truly know what you're capable of unless you test yourself. Obviously it might be a semi-simulated corner, but I'll think of it more as a calculated risk rather than a shit-your-pants-risk.

The Truth

2009-04-08T18:47:00.000-07:00

Have been meaning to post for a while now (career development, late interest in mathematics, the ever increasing power of Jon Stewart)... too busy. :\

Props to Chris and Case for this humor:

WHY MEN ARE NEVER DEPRESSED
Men Are Just Happier People. What do you expect from such simple creatures? Your last name stays put. The garage is all yours. Wedding plans take care of themselves. Chocolate is just another snack. You can be President. You can never be pregnant. You can wear a white T-shirt to a water park. You can wear NO shirt to a water park. Car mechanics tell you the truth. The world is your urinal. You never have to drive to another gas station restroom because this one is just too icky. You don't have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt. Same work, more pay. Wrinkles add character. A wedding dress is $5,000 but a Tux rents for $100. People never stare at your chest when you're talking to them. The occasional well-rendered belch is practically expected. New shoes don't cut, blister, or mangle your feet. One mood all the time. Phone conversations are over in 30 seconds flat. You know stuff about tanks. A five-day vacation requires only one suitcase. You can open all your own jars. You get extra credit for the slightest act of thoughtfulness. If someone
forgets to invite you, he or she can still be your friend. Your underwear is $8.95 for a three-pack. Three pairs of shoes are more than enough. You almost never have strap problems in public. You are unable to see wrinkles in your clothes. Everything on your face stays its original color. The same hairstyle lasts for years, maybe decades! You only have to shave your face and neck. You can play with toys all your life. Your belly usually hides your big hips. One wallet and one pair of shoes - one color for all seasons. You can wear shorts no matter how your legs look. You can "do" your nails with a pocket knife. You have freedom of choice concerning growing a mustache. You can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives on December 24 in 25 minutes.

No wonder men are happier.

Outliers - Malcom Gladwell

2009-03-22T16:14:00.000-07:00

A few years ago I read both of Malcolm Gladwell's other bestsellers (The Tipping Point and Blink) and I really like his succinct, data-driven writing style. He doesn't belabor the obvious and supports his arguments with the right amount of evidence - not too much, not too little.

Style-wise, Outliers is much of the same. His arguments flow, carry the right amount of support, and all tie really well to his main thesis: that extraordinary success is not merely a result of innate ability or extraordinary capability, but also a combination of previously unconsidered factors - like your birth date. In his own words:

Biologists often talk about the "ecology" of an organism: the tallest oak in the forest is the tallest not just because it grew from the hardiest acorn; it is the tallest also because no other trees blocked its sunlight, the soil around it was deep and rich, no rabbit chewed through its bark as a sapling, and no lumberjack cut it down before it matured. We all know that successful people come from hardy seeds. But do we know enough about the sunlight that warmed them, the soil in which they put down the roots, and the rabbits and lumberjacks they were lucky to avoid?

Sure, I think that many recognize that opportunity and other factors play a role in a person's success, but I don't think they weight their importance enough. It's often the case that extraordinary success is more the result of situations or uncontrolled opportunities rather than intrinsic ability. I particularly like Gladwell's commentary on Canadian hockey leagues and self-fulfilling prophecies - quite interesting.

For me, success will be the result of opportunity and focus. What will I spend my 10,000 hours on? What have I already invested a ton of time in? What opportunities or waves should I try and ride? Or, as Mr. Jobs has said, should I even bother trying to connect the dots now?

Highly recommended.

Love toilet

2009-03-20T20:13:00.000-07:00

I know this is from a while ago, but I just saw it now... Awesome.

A Bold, Fresh Piece of Humanity - Bill O'Reilly

2009-02-28T20:36:00.000-08:00

As a bit of background, growing up I was not very political and took no part in any kind of student government. For whatever reason it just never really stuck. But in my senior year of college, enter The West Wing.

After burning through all seven seasons, I began consciously paying attention to what was going on in our government - mainly federal. The complexities of government, its responsibility to the people, and all of the opportunities for much needed improvement sparked my interest and pushed me to expose myself to more and more political or governmental content. Enter Bill O'Reilly.

Initially, I did not seek out Bill O'Reilly's opinions. I knew of his work, knew of his reputation as a hard-line conservative, and knew of the passionate disdain many liberals held for him. If he had not posted an hour of his radio broadcast on iTunes, I probably would have never started listening to his commentary on a recurring basis. Since I already had some decent exposure to liberal opinions, I wanted to start balancing my intake.

While Bill is definitely a traditionalist and conservative, he has not left me with the impression that he is a right-wing loon. Generally, he tries to keep his analysis objective and unbiased - often acting as a contrarian for argument's sake (this isn't always the case, but more often than not). All of this said, Bill and I definitely have our differences. But to keep this post brief, I'll exclude them here.

On the book itself, I thought he did a really good job. All throughout he mixes arguments or lessons into the fabric of his childhood and early professional years keeping the storyline both interesting and useful. And as a person that finds a 'bold, fresh approach' entertaining, I laughed out loud a few times.

In one section, Bill outlined five scenarios or questions to explore the complexity of 'evil' and outline some of the key differences between himself and many folks in the left wing. Quite interesting:

Explicit rap songs: "According to many teachers and child psychologists, explicit raps songs can, and do, negatively influence some children. Are these musical works and those who profit from them evil?"

While I definitely agree that music glorifying these acts is detrimental, laws inhibiting freedom of speech would be far more detrimental in the long run. This should be left to families. Institutionalizing (with law) the failure of families does not solve the root problem.

Horror movies (like Saw) that emphasize sadistically violent scenes: "...some sociologists believe a diet of this stuff desensitizes people, making them less likely to sympathize with the real-life suffering of others. So are the people profting from torture movies evil?"

Similar to my response to explicit rap songs, I think these types of movies should be eliminated through education. (e.g. making our population smart enough to see the stupidity or uselessness in these types of movies - or at least to practice moderation). Regulation or dogmatic encouragement to prohibit them from the family are caveman approaches - they don't solve the problem.

Child abusers: "Not surprisingly, studies show conclusively that much of the abuse and neglect is the result of persistent intoxication on the part of parents or guardians. Are child abusers evil even if they have a substance problem?"

Without question, these folks are not fit to parent a child and should spend time in jail or a correctional facility. Parenthood is the most important function for an individual. Why isn't there an institutionalized 'parent school' or 'parent apptitude test'? It should be free and universally accessible teaching folks everything they might need to know.

Terrorists: "Terrorists around the world are responsible for killing and injuring hundreds of thousands of human beings. Are all terrorists evil?"

Terrorists, murderers, rapists, and child abusers all commit equally pure acts of evil. While I don't think the people in which that evil is embodied are themselves inherently evil, they have been overtaken by it. They deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law - including the death penalty.

The Catholic Church: "Hundreds of Catholic priests have been found to be child molesters. In some cases, high-ranking Church authorities protected pedophile priests by preventing the authorities from discovering evidence. Is the Catholic Church evil?"

The folks involved in the cover ups and the acts themselves should definitely face consequences. But generalizing to the entire Catholic Church is unreasonable for this single case. That said, there is much more I could say here - but that would deter from my focus on Bill O'Reilly and this book.

One problem or characteristic I have with Bill O'Reilly is how quick he is to jump to a generalized conclusion or use generalizations in his arguments. As an example, Bill is a self-proclaimed warrior against all things evil. What is 'evil'? According to Bill, "if you knowingly hurt another human being without significant cause, like self-defense, you are committing an evil act. And if you do this as a matter of course, you are evil." Okay. But that seems like a pretty broad category and open to a lot of interpretation - hence many of the disagreements I have with Bill on a smattering of different issues. Fundamentally, I believe that people are inherently good. Evil is a characteristic, emotion, or mentality that is picked up from outside catalysts. Sure, some people are more prone to picking up evil tendencies just as some are more prone to catch the common cold. And just like some diseases, there are many cases when you've simply become too sick to recover. So in my mind, the cure for 'evil' is not regulation, blind and dogmatic rejection through family values, or another evil act. Rather, it's through education. Teaching people what is right and wrong from the get go; using our efforts to promote and encourage good acts (rather than focus on punishing the bad); And develop an atmosphere that incentivizes individuals to train, educate, and develop themselves and the people around them rather than leaving these opportunities to chance or underdeveloped systems.

"You either fight active evil or you accept it. Doing nothing is acceptance. there is no in-between." Okay Bill. I agree with that. But why should we focus so much of our energy to reactively fight evil, rather than proactively eliminating the root cause of evil - misunderstanding and ignorance.

Highly recommended.

My Kindle

2009-01-28T09:20:00.000-08:00

I like reading, but I wouldn't go so far and say I'm a big reader. One of my goals for this year is to finish one book each month (excluding vacations) - not all too impressive compared to some folks I know. Also, I have always preferred purchasing a hardcover copy of any book I read so I can build a Gatsby-esque library, just with the pages cut and the understanding that my eyes have spent one minute on each page.

That said, having a collection of books when I'm young (and moving) is totally impractical. Keeping this collection adds weight and boxes each time I move, requires the purchase of furniture to hold the books - which will eventually be thrown out (young person = crappy furniture), and hardcover books are always the most expensive to buy (compared to paperback or an ebook).

And even though I'm a gadget guy (and a fiscal tightwad), I never made the switch to the Kindle (or any other ebook reader) even though it is far cheaper and more practical at my age - I didn't want to give up on my library dream.

But over Christmas, my hand was forced. I received a Kindle from my mother and sister who had been watching me substitue books for underwear every year I came home for the holidays - there's a finite amount of space in a suitcase... I have to prioritize. At first, I was somewhat torn. I wasn't sure what to think. What about my library, the feeling of a good book in my hands, the satisfaction of turning a page or finishing a chapter, and being able to scribble notes in the margin? How could I tell them, politely, that I just didn't think it was going to work?

Three days later...

I admit - I was wrong. After turning it on, spending $30 on 3 best sellers (compared to a single hardcover) and reading a single book on it, I was convinced - I just needed a kick in the ass to try it out. It is way more practical, provides far better access to new books, and makes packing for vacation so much better. Forget the suitcase - I can put my Kindle and two pairs of underwear in my backpack now!

What I know to be true

2009-01-18T18:55:00.000-08:00

Everyday I realize that there are fewer and fewer certainties in life. While it's not uncommon for me to find out that something I've held to be true for years is in fact false, it is far more frequent for me to learn about something new or something I've been completely oblivious to my whole life. And from these discoveries, I am slowly recognizing that we live in the uncomfortable reality where each of us know very little of what is known - and by definition, nothing of what is unknown. Said differently, each of us understand a very small slice of the pie.

Here's a few things I know (for now):

Happiness is not fleeting. It is not a reaction to events or outside catalyst, but rather is entirely controllable. It is a state of mind. You've either flipped the switch to be in a happy-state or a not-happy-state. Obviously the switch may be improperly wired (for those of us with chemical imbalances), but the vast majority of us have complete control over what type of person and what type of life we want to lead. It is a conscious choice to be an optimist or a pessimist, to be a lover or a hater, to be positive or negative. You write your own definition.

Parking is a bitch. It is also one of the many reasons why I feel blessed to not have car. That said, if I did have a car and I had to park it in the street - there is one spot I would avoid with all of my being. Just outside of my apartment, about 3 driveways down, there is a street parking spot underneath a tree. And just as consistently as the sun rises, a flock of birds crap like they've been drinking water in Mexico for months directly on the windshield of any car in this spot. I saw one guy park his car there for nearly a month, and I'm pretty sure he had to shovel shit off the windshield like it was snow. Don't park there. It is a trap.

Success is relative. It's not about where you end up or what the final score was, but rather it's the summation of what you accomplished. It's the difference between where you ended up and where you started. I'm confident that most people would agree with me here, I just don't witness many practicing this belief. So many of us are focused on people at the very top - the wealthy, the rich, the famous - and look right past some of the remarkable stories of the people around us (and I'm not excusing myself from that statement). That is a tragedy.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - Jean-Dominique Bauby

2009-01-10T15:32:00.000-08:00

I recently finished this improbable memoir written by Jean-Dominique Bauby (1997) - a former french editor for Elle magazine who suffered a massive stroke at 43, leaving him aware of his surroundings but unable to communicate or move due to complete paralysis (aka locked-in syndrome).

In order to write this memoir, Bauby had a nurse or friend read the french alphabet back to him (from the most frequently used letter to the least) and he would blink with his left eye (the right eye was sown shut) to indicate the next letter. Tragic, I know.

Throughout the book Bauby refers to his body, this crippled and seemingly useless collection of flesh, as his diving bell - the curse that keeps him bedridden and unable to live in any capacity that might be regarded as a life. But through the extraordinary weight of this burden Bauby discovers and learns to appreciate one of the most taken for granted capabilities of the human body - imagination. It's through his imagination - his butterfly - that he is able to escape his diving bell and relive his memories or embark on a new adventure.

I know that Bauby's situation was rare - if not unique given his background. But the notion of a diving bell - that thing that brings a person down or makes a person feel trapped - is not unique. We all have one, or several, that hinder our dreams day in and day out. It may take the form of a body, an apartment (for the old and feeble), a job, or some other burden.

But by the same analogy, we all have our butterflies. The things in life that are capable of making us happy. Bauby was able to see past his diving bell, in the most dire of circumstances, and find something that made his life positive rather than negative.

That is what defines our character - what makes us who we are. Whether or not you live by your diving bell, or your butterfly.

Recommended.

Looking at 2009

2009-01-06T07:18:00.000-08:00

Even though this is a little late, a few predictions for 2009:

Michigan football will have another tough year. It won't be as disaturous as 2008 was for the Wolverines, but it will still be a disappointment. Overall record at 6-6 with one win between Notre Dame, Michigan St., and Ohio State.

On politics: Rod Blagojevich will get ousted. The Obama administration will pass a huge (and unnecessary) stimulus plan.

On the economy: From now until the end of December, the market will see some oscillations leaving the DOW around 9500 at the end of the year. One of the 3 major US car manufactures will go bankrupt or settle for a merger (either case leaving a lot of people out of work).

On geeky stuff: Apple will release their version of a netbook - a touchscreen, $700 price point. The Sunnyvale company will also continue to see their computer marketshare rise - 15% by the end of the year. The smart phone OS market will continue to trend towards the iPhone OS and Android at the expense of Symbian and RIM (Windows maintains through expensive distribution deals by MSFT).

On me: I'll move again - I'm not sure how long I can live without heat. Classes will continue going well (and provide a good balance to work) - I'll enroll all 4 quarters. My next rotation at Google will work out pretty smoothly, but I'll come to the inevitable conclusion that I still don't know what I want to do.

Happy new year.

Microtrends - Mark Penn

2009-01-04T15:19:00.000-08:00

Just before I left for Chicago (before Christmas), I finished reading Microtrends (after starting it in April.... sad, I know). Obviously this took me a while to get through, but that was more the result of a dwindling interest in reading rather than a poorly written book by Penn.

Nevertheless, I wasn't all too fond of the book but definitely found all of his arguments and snippets fascinating. To clarify - his writing was great and all of his arguments were compelling, but the medium for this topic and its presentation just did not suit well. Each chapter was only a few pages long and there wasn't really a storyline or compounding argument as you moved from chapter to chapter. Rather, the entire book feels like it was written as independent entries all under the theme of 'small changes in the world'. While this definitely made the read easier for me since I spread it out over such a long time, I prefer books that build.

That said, many of his ideas and observations were definitely interesting and ones that I'd recommend to read about. A few of my favorites:

Sex-Ratio singles. (the numbers play in my favor 53:47)
Stained glass ceiling breakers. (the movers and shakers in religion)
Swing is still king. (politics is still moved by the moderate middle)
High school moguls or teen entrepreneurs. (ever increasing entrepreneurial spirit)
Long attention spanners. (contrary to our A-D-D culture)
Social geeks. (no longer does being nerdy follow the same cliche)
International home-buyers. (foreign real estate investment in the US)
Vietnamese entrepreneurs. (per my father: "Communists have capitalism down now.")

Penn finishes off with a good point that I think will drive commerce in the next 50 years - extreme customization:

The great fear of the future has been that mass societies would become faceless societies, with people forced into conformity - everyone looking alike, dressing alike, and being required to think alike. This was seen as almost a necessary sacrifice in order to feed and clothe growing populations with diminishing resources. But I suggest we are headed in completely the opposite direction - a future in which choice, driven by individual tastes, becomes the dominant factor, and in which these choices are reinforced by the ability to connect and communicate with communities of even the smallest niches.

Recommended.

Lamb - Christopher Moore

2009-01-03T22:25:00.000-08:00

In what started out as an annoyingly-derisive (my view) novel described as the gospel according to Biff, Christ's childhood pal, Moore pieced together a pretty solid novel which fictitiously accounts for the first 30 years of Jesus' life through the eyes of a fictitious friend. And even though Moore acknowledges that there are many factual gaps in his story (specifically during Jesus' travels to Asia along the silk road), much of the story fits in pretty well with what is known (read: very little) about his life in the Bible.

Even though many might initially consider Moore's work a coy satire poking fun at what many hold dear and true, not more than halfway through the book does he lay (pretty thickly) some serious religious and moral undertones emphasizing what I consider to be two of the most critical parts of humanity: the golden rule and the interconnectedness of us all - regardless of your religion, something most can relate to.

If you can get through the first 100 pages of sass and sarcasm, it's not a bad read which explores what some of the struggles might have been for the human side of the Son of God.

Recommended.

The Price of Admission - Daniel Golden

2008-12-31T09:26:00.000-08:00

In this 298 page book Golden explores the admission's process and evaluative criteria for applicants to America's most prestigious universities (focusing on Ivy schools). He makes the case that these universities contradict society's implicit assumption that the world of elite academia is meritocratic. Rather, they bend and alter their standards "to admit children of the rich, famous, and powerful" keeping alumni and donors happy while securing a sizable endowment.

Golden, who quite obviously believes admissions should be focused on the student's academic record (GPA, AP classes, SAT, etc) rather than other factors, calls for the following changes (not exhaustive):

Eliminating legacy preference given to children of Alumni.
Separating the fund raising wing of the university from the admissions wing. In the last few decades, it has become all too common for below-average students to receive admitance as a 'development case' since their parents might offer a large donation.
Abolish scholarships for 'upper-crust' sports.

For the most part, I disagree with Golden. The one exception is point number two above - separating fund raising from admissions at all universities. I definitely agree that juggling both of those goals through a single decision process (or any form of hybrid) leads to trouble.

On everything else, I think Golden is being too narrow minded with his understanding of what college is. He argues as if academics is the end all and be all. That there is nothing for a student to learn outside of the classroom and consequently there is no reason for the university to invest (through the admissions process) in a student body that excels not only academically, but also atheltically, politically, and socially.

I understand his argument that when Ivy schools provide athletic scholarships for wealthier sports (like squash, polo, or equestiran sports), they create a feeder program for an exclusive and very wealthy group of kids (No kid in the Chicago public school system is going to Yale on scholarship for polo). However, the more that I think about it, the stronger I feel that it is necessary to maintain more than once class of sport. To regulate that all schools have to provide scholarships for the same sports would destroy much of the diversity that we see in athletic competition - a true shame. And at any given school, the scholarship sports reflect the culture of that school and maintaining that culture (or at least allowing it to grow naturally rather than through regulation) is nearly as important as the academics.

Further, I contest that the premise of his entire book is off base - that academics is pure and meritocratic. Maybe a lot has changed since he picked up his B.A. from Harvard, but since when has a person's GPA or SAT score been a good measure of their intelligence? Sure, it may be an indicator of intelligence, but it defintely is not a good measure. A class grade (even in mathematics) is just as subjective as a personality assesement in the admissions process. A straight A student is not necessarily a genius, they've just mastered their class-taking ability. A far cry from intelligence.

A bright person is going to make it, regardless of what school they went to or what their GPA was. They may decide to buy into the academic fevor and bust their balls for a 4.0, or they might develop their personality and skills sets outside of the classroom while settling for a 3.5. When it comes to admissions, champions don't complain about bad calls or the weather - they focus on what they can control. Going to USC instead of Yale or Arizona instead of Brown won't make or break a champion's dreams or ambitions - only a bad attitude or lack of desire will hinder someone like that.

We are coming to an age where information is easily disseminated across all boundaries (with the exception of the no-internet boundary...). I think universities as we know them today are headed for a shake-up in the next 20 years. Pissing and moaning about the admissions process seems like small beans to me.

Indifferent.

The Host - Stephenie Meyer

2008-12-27T00:32:00.000-08:00

As the first fiction book that I've read in over a year(!!!), The Host was a great novel written by the same author as the Twilight series - Stephenie Meyer. Before I dive into my review, let me first say a few things. 1.) I've never read anything from the Twilight series and have not had much of an interest. That said, I'm sure I'll be coerced at some point (likely by my mother) to read the first one and I'll subsequently love all of them. I am a sucker like that. 2.) There were definitely instances in the first 100 pages of this book when I said to myself, "Good lord, this is ridiculous. I can't believe I'm reading this." It took a little literary wherewithal (well executed by Meyer) to keep me interested.

So, for a little context: The premise behind this 619 page book is that a parasitic species, aptly referred to as Souls, have infected nearly all of the humans on Earth through a phased invasion without anybody noticing before it was too late. It's a relatively painless procedure for one of these shrimp-looking-souls (my imagination) to infect a human host with the unfortunate effect of eliminating the conscious of the human and replacing that with the soul's. Moreover, there is generally very little difference between a soul-controlled human and a normal person, with the exception of being overly altruistic and polite. Now, I know what you're thinking as I was thinking the same exact thing.... it seems, well, a little out there.

But I gave Meyer 100 pages to convince me - and she did. The critical concept driving this story is that once a soul takes one of these bodies, the thoughts or conscious of a strong willed person remains in the soul-conscious body. Said differently, there are two pilots for the same plane. So with some pretty solid character development, a fluffy love triangle involving two male humans and a split-minded chick (human/alien), and a penchant for suspense, Meyer pieced together a great page turner. I definitely found myself staying up until far to late into the night plugging through chapters at a time.

Compared to the non-fiction I'm accustomed to reading, this was as easy of a read as they get. Light. Funny. Suspenseful. A simple mind enjoys simple pleasures. Not the best fiction book I've read, but well worth it. It also had the added effect sending me through a few Descartian moments of reflection.

Recommended.

Review of 2008

2008-12-26T13:42:00.000-08:00

Event though none of my predictions were too bold, I only credit myself as being correct 1/2 of the time. Not a very good score given the nature of my predictions - many about me.

As a review:

I did move out of my place in SF (+1) and was spot on for the time horizon (a few months past May) - even though I was forced out rather than voluntarily leaving. And luckily (or as an outcome of the child-like care I gave to my phone) I never broke my iPhone (0). Even though I didn't get the prediction right, that's a win in my book.

Our old curtains proved to be a piece of shit and collapsed rather quickly (+1). All was not lost though - these curtains (or drapes?) have been put to good use in my current natural-light-less room.

Ashamed, I spent almost no time golfing this past year (0) - similar to reading. A total shame.

Thankfully, Mike Huckabee saw no part in the Republican presidential ticket (0) - but I don't think the eventual VP pick was any better. It's no secret, I am not a Sarah Palin fan. While I'm fiscally conservative, believe in small government, and can appreciate traditional values, there are some things in life that just don't taste good undercooked. (She had the national political experience of a 5 year old)

Staying on politics, I do believe Mike Gravel (an undercooked egg) had the spaceship conversation with Dennis Kucinich - just in private (+0.5).

Michigan football beat Florida! So I'll credit myself as being partially correct (+0.5). And no, I don't want to talk about the 2008 season.

Rounding out the 9, I dumped my HD position as soon as I could (+1) and did end up losing some money in Vegas - only $200 on the year (+0.5).