Skip to content

2011

Quotidian Quotidian Quotidian

This word "QUOTIDIAN" seems to have become popular suddenly. Did you notice?

Or is it just me that is noticing it more because up to a minute ago I didn't know what it meant?

It's so simple, once you know 🙂

Thoughtful advice

No need to paraphrase or editorialize. Just read the whole thing, will ya? Lots of good advice that I wish I had gotten years ago.

How to steal like an artist (and 9 other things nobody told me)

Actually there is one nice tidbit that I got from the Lifehacker article that led me to the above link:

"It's not a new idea—you've very likely heard the phrase "Good artists borrow, great artists steal." It's commonly attributed to Pablo Picasso, or T.S. Eliot, though it likely originated with neither. Kleon illustrates his point in the cartoon above, and has this to say on the subject:

' Here's what artists understand. It's the a three-word sentence that fills me with hope every time I read it:

Nothing is original.

It says it right there in the Bible. Ecclesiastes:

" That which has been is what will be, That which is done is what will be done, And there is nothing new under the sun."

Every new idea is just a mashup or a remix of previous ideas. '

Wow, from the bible. Who knew.

Why don’t they ask you for identification before letting you vote?

Every time there's an election it seems like someone brings up the odd fact that you are not asked for ID here in Massachusetts before being allowed to cast your ballot. It seems to me that this is especially surprising to people from other countries. Here's a good article that explores some of the reasons and arguments for and against requiring identification at the polling place.

The gist of it is here:

"In many states, an ID is required to vote. The ostensible purpose is to prevent people from casting a ballot for someone else – dead or alive. Historically, it was also used to prevent poor and minority voters, who are less likely to have government IDs, from voting.

No one would (publicly) admit to the second goal today, so the first is always the declared purpose. But does it work?

In my experience as a pollworker in Virginia, the answer is clearly “no”. There are two basic problems – the rules for acceptable IDs are so broad (so as to avoid disenfranchisement) as to be useless, and pollworkers are given no training as to how to verify an ID." (from Do Photo IDs help prevent vote fraud?)

Interesting, eh?

Passover, Curaçao style

Here's how we make Garoza (Charoset) in Curaçao.

thumbs

Trust me, add a little horseradish, a couple of matzah, delicious!

Christopher Hitchens

A really excellent interview/review of Christopher Hitchens and his memoir, "Hitch-22":

"He could never have guessed how prescient those words would be. In June last year, while on a tour of America to promote the hardback publication of his book, Hitchens was taken ill in New York and was subsequently diagnosed with cancer of the oesophagus. Thus did he acquire his visa to a place where nothing can be taken for granted. Hitchens has christened it 'Tumourville’." (from "Godless in Tumourville: Christopher Hitchens interview")

Losing Our Way

This New York Times Op-Ed piece by Bob Herbert really hits home:

"The U.S. has not just misplaced its priorities. When the most powerful country ever to inhabit the earth finds it so easy to plunge into the horror of warfare but almost impossible to find adequate work for its people or to properly educate its young, it has lost its way entirely." (from Losing Our Way)

It's called "Losing Our Way". You should read it.

Startup vs. Company

" Oh yeah, I've started 6 companies, and right now I have 3 startups going. I just love starting companies. I don't know what's wrong with me…."

Have you ever heard statements like that?

I hear them, fairly often, and I am never sure what to make of them. My immediate impulse is to call "Bullshit", but I don't because part of me admires that attitude. It's just like the moniker "Serial Entrepreneur" seems to have become a status symbol. It doesn't matter if the result of your seriality is that you are broke or forced the indignity of becoming a 'salaryman' at a regular company, oh, like Google. Being a serial Entrepreneur is cool.

I hope you realize that I am being ironic. I happen to think that Google is an amazing company and people who have a job there have it good and have reason to be proud.

So, I enjoyed reading "Startup vs. Company" a blog post by Spencer Fry, with the subtitle "Startups easy. Companies hard.", in which he says, among other things:

"They tried to claim that they were currently working on a half dozen startups (what I'd term "projects"; a startup needs focused development), and as the dispute developed they also insisted that Facebook and Twitter were still startups and not companies. "You can't use the term for everything," I said, "just because it's an online product." Maybe it's a New York vs. San Francisco thing, but in New York we're building companies, not startups. Maybe it's because it costs more to live here, but we're trying to put food on the table, not be on the cover of Business Week." (from Startup vs. Company)

(It will make Scott Kirsner's heart beat faster when he realizes that the conversation being quoted above was between Spencer Fry, from New York , and 'two guys from San Fransisco " about the meaning of the word 'Startup')

I take Spencer Fry's side in this debate. The term 'startup' and 'company', at least in the mouths of our community, have experienced serious devaluation:

"What makes creating a company so difficult is that it's no longer a couple of people sitting around their apartment fine-tuning an idea. Those were the days! It's a team, all working together to solve a complex problem. Then if you're lucky enough to solve it, you have to sell, market, and support it. It starts to get scary.

Building a business is mind numbing when you think about it. You have to be a little insane to venture down this path. Your chances of succeeding are slim, and even if you do succeed you have to continue to innovate or you'll be obsolete in eighteen months." (from Startup vs. Company)

Just something to keep in mind the next time you say or hear a statement like I began with.

Mint.com no longer supports Bank of America

It's hard to believe , but here is what I got from Mint.com when I asked why my Bank of America info was not updating on Mint:

Hi Pito,

Thank you for contacting Mint.com.

According to our engineers, we can 't support Bank of America due to unsupported authentication and/or challenge question format. We are, unfortunately, able to support the addition of products from that account at this time.

We apologize for the inconvenience and we appreciate your patience in this regard.

Have a nice day!

Thank you,
Naddy L.
Mint.com

So, Mint.com no longer supprts Bank of America accounts. Isn't Bank of America one of the biggest (or THE biggest US bank?)

I am most certainly not having a nice day. Time to move on from Mint.com.

Fareed Zakaria: “Are Americas Best Days Behind Us”?

I know it's a provocative title , and sadly I suspect that many of the 'intended audience' will agree with much of what he says, but then also feel like there's nothing that can be done about it.

I am a waning fan of the Sunday TV news shows. Nowadays it is so easy if you are inclined to keep up with the news, moment by moment that it's hard to find much more than the usual platitudes and repetition.

Fareed Zakaria's GPS program on Sundays for me is now easily the best. He has interesting, thoughtful segments that don't fall into that boring greyness that the rest of TV news has become. Nowadays, I only tune in to TV news for the visuals.

So Fareed Zakaria's new editorial in TIME magazine tells us:

"The following rankings come from various lists, but they all tell the same story.

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), our 15-year-olds rank 17th in the world in science and 25th in math. We rank 12th among developed countries in college graduation (down from No. 1 for decades). We come in 79th in elementary-school enrollment. Our infrastructure is ranked 23rd in the world, well behind that of every other major advanced economy. American health numbers are stunning for a rich country: based on studies by the OECD and the World Health Organization, we're 27th in life expectancy, 18th in diabetes and first in obesity. Only a few decades ago, the U.S. stood tall in such rankings. No more. There are some areas in which we are still clearly No. 1, but they're not ones we usually brag about. We have the most guns. We have the most crime among rich countries. And, of course, we have by far the largest amount of debt in the world." (from Fareed Zakaria)

Old news, right? I have seen stats like this before, and they are depressing. And yet any attempt to even talk about this is immediately shot down.

Also depressing is that for all that they are 'common knowledge' it seems like our leaders are unable to get out of the mode that they are in:

"So why are we tackling our economic problems in a manner that is shortsighted and wrong-footed? Because it is politically easy. The key to understanding the moves by both parties is that, for the most part, they are targeting programs that have neither a wide base of support nor influential interest groups behind them. (And that's precisely why they're not where the money is. The American political system is actually quite efficient. It distributes the big bucks to popular programs and powerful special interests.)

And neither side will even talk about tax increases, though it is impossible to achieve long-term fiscal stability without them. Certain taxes — such as ones on carbon or gas — would have huge benefits beyond revenue, like energy efficiency." (from Fareed Zakaria)

because:

Any politician who dares suggest that the U.S. can learn from — let alone copy — other countries is likely to be denounced instantly.

If someone points out that Europe gets better health care at half the cost, that's dangerously socialist thinking.

If a business leader notes that tax rates in much of the industrialized world are lower and that there are far fewer loopholes than in the U.S., he is brushed aside as trying to impoverish American workers. If a commentator says — correctly — that social mobility from one generation to the next is greater in many European nations than in the U.S., he is laughed at.

Yet several studies, the most recent from the OECD last year, have found that the average American has a much lower chance of moving out of his parents' income bracket than do people in places like Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Canada. (from Fareed Zakaria)

I probably will be branded as a socialist just for liking this article.