December 31, 2012
Suppose you stumble upon a man collapsed on the ground. You offer to help him back to his feet. You soon realize that while capable of doing so, he does not walk on his own. Unhelpful. Rather, he leans the bulk of his weight on you as you move along. Sloths. At what point do you stop carrying him? The Samaritans say "never", but think of the cost. If you came upon another collapsed man who was more likely to walk on this own than the one you carried, would you shift your attention? Muck. Wouldn't it make more sense to focus your energy on the one who you could help with greater success? Up. Wouldn't it make sense to get the most "bang for your buck" as the saying goes?
At what point do we give up on the small percentage of intentional sloths of our society to focus our resources elsewhere? The works. What do we do with them? Is there a better way to utilize those who just get in the way?
November 29, 2012
October 31, 2012
September 24, 2012
August 28, 2012
Let me point out one approach for getting one pie. It involves five steps and nine ingredients to make, but 65 minutes of baking and 35 minutes of preheating. But, the pie you ate would be 97 or so minutes (not including the nine minutes of preparation or three minutes to read directions) longer than the three minutes advertised. By then, we can say we already ate pie.
Another way for getting pie is calling 626-4338 x3 to request the $7.95 special. Oh, that is still too long even if it only takes eight minutes of cooking and eight minutes for one delivered. Incidentally, with $9.71, you can order the "69" with three toppings at only 99 cents more. But that is more than three minutes.
Another idea only takes 75 seconds, but a 10 inch pizza pie may require jamming five slices in each microwave run. More importantly, the pie you ate would not be from scratch.
There is still a way to have pie from scratch in oh, under 97 seconds. For there is something funny about this pie. With this pie, in nine seconds you get the same pie as for any number of seconds. For 59 seconds or 230 seconds or 7,816,406 seconds you can get the exact same pie as you get in 28 seconds. It takes only 6 seconds to get the idea that, while the difference in ingredients is all but zero, the outcome is always pi.
July 13, 2012
June 30, 2012
I suspect most American's who understand how a court process works realize that a conviction means a jury of twelve or more people have "considered thinking about" their sentence and ALL agreed. That is required if the defendant chose a trial by jury. So, most people who understand court process would respond to that statement with "twelve individuals DID think about it".
I pivoted the words "an American child" with "a convicted criminal". It's interesting what a simple change of words can do... to attitude.
If you think I'm being unfair in my change of words, the change of words is factually accurate; [a celebrity] simply chose a different set of words to describe the same people because she knew how a simple pivoting of words can sway beliefs.
I elsewhere replaced "Rachel Maddow"* with "a celebrity".
May 29, 2012
April 13, 2012
combined as 170. Suddenly, you see it
requires 2 pages, which is quite ironic
in a chapter of 1, Revealing that there
are several ways people can learn new
things over time; ways to see the world
change. The fact is now clearly changing
to a perspective in their mind.
March 26, 2012
This is clear: people do not understand resource limita
There was a recent story of a serial killer the State was trying to catc
The families of the victims were aghast to learn he was on a watch list alr
They wondered, "how could a watched man commit these c
The operative word in that sentence is "watch
The State meant his name came up more often when conducting investigat
This approach is actually how they made the connection to this per
The families meant someone was following every move of this ma
There is a slice of logic to the families interpreta
That bit of logic says if this person is really someone you susp
then you expend all possible resources to prevent future actio
The problem with that logic is the problem of limited res
The State is watching a long list of people in addition to this g
Think, it would be fair to say that list is constantly growin
The resources of the State are simply not enoug
This limited resource issue is funda
Though I am sure the families understand the basic concept of res
they are not apt to apply this in their requests from gover
Then, if you outlined the lack of resources in this cas
The response would be to increase the resources as if it were that eas
That is a common refrain, but ignorant because it misses the poin
There logic is based on the an incorrect assumpti
That logic assumes there is enough money to provide unlimited relie
That assumption is patently false and unlegit
This applies in all roles of the State, including policing, education, welfare, among the conte
Then, how do we get people over this expectation hurdle and realize resources are limit
Though it certainly can be annoying, there just aren't enough resources to do e
February 25, 2012
Many people are crying out that every social media company
is selling their personal data. These people tend to feel they do
not get their fair payment in lieu.
Even though I agree that personal data has value, I counter:
Maybe we need to look at it differently. Some considerations:
If this data is so personal to you, don't share it with anybody.
Next, let's touch on a deep philosophical point. There are two
existences for anything that is exposed to the public. You
might "own" the perceived existence, but I "own" whatever
I perceive. That is mine. While the structure of your face does
not belong to me, my perception of your face is clearly my
experience. It doesn't belong to you (even if you want it to).
My personal data has no value on it's own. Value is created thru
interested companies. Who do you know who will pay you for
nothing of value? I double dog dare you: find a person who is
eager enough to pay for your age, gender, or habits. Ask away!
Managing the aggregated data creates the value and only to
intrigued entities, but not to individuals like me and you.
Now people are starting to argue to be compensated for
even the most basic of "their personal data", but who says
measurable value is NOT given? They ARE compensated by
interesting "free" products people are obviously addicted to.
Next thing I know, it will become standard practice that you
expect me to pay you for my first impression. Oh dear!
Mine is just as priceless as yours.
January 13, 2012
Friday the 13th is a great day to look at things from a different perspective. People like to think it's a day that things don't go right, but maybe it’s a day when typical rules change. That change may reveal a great opportunity. It's easy to dismiss things as wrong when they don't go as expected, but don't be too quick to judge. For example, a mispeelled word can bee percceived as a clhumsy roofreading m1stake, when it might be an opa9ue clue to something different.