After violating my wife, the robber, sitting there, began to speak comforting words to her. Of course I couldn’t speak. My whole body was tied fast to the root of a cedar. But meanwhile I winked at her many times, as much as to say “Don’t believe the robber.” I wanted to convey some such meaning to her. But my wife, sitting dejectedly on the bamboo leaves, was looking hard at her lap. To all appearance, she was listening to his words. I was agonized by jealousy. In the meantime the robber went on with his clever talk, from one subject to another. The robber finally made his bold brazen proposal. “Once your virtue is stained, you won’t get along well with your husband, so won’t you be my wife instead? It’s my love for you that made me be violent toward you.”
While the criminal talked, my wife raised her face as if in a trance. She had never looked so beautiful as at that moment. What did my beautiful wife say in answer to him while I was sitting bound there? I am lost in space, but I have never thought of her answer without burning with anger and jealousy. Truly she said, … “Then take me away with you wherever you go.”
There’s a weird symmetry between the Right and the Left. It’s difficult to articulate, but it’s becoming clearer to me now. They’re both Keynesians, only in different domains. The Left are Keynesians about economics, the Right are Keynesians about political strategy. The trouble with either is that Keynesianism doesn’t work very well anywhere it’s applied.
Lest I lose my reader straight out of the gate, allow me to explain in simpler terms the defining characteristics of what I’ll call the “Keynesian Model.” This model:
Deals almost exclusively in macro-level aggregates.
Holds that these aggregates are mostly informative.
Information can be successfully used for macro purposes.
For example, in economics, Keynesians want to tweak or “stimulate” the economy by raining largess on particular sectors to stimulate aggregate labor demand, say.
But the trouble with this way of looking at the world is:
The micro-level is where most of the action is.
The devil of the economy is in the details of billions of individual means-ends actions, coordinations and transactions, which makes knowledge mostly local.
These details are far to complex to be reduced to aggregates and manipulated to positive effect.
>You don’t have to feel like a waste of space You’re original, cannot be replaced If you only knew what the future holds After a hurricane comes a rainbow Maybe you’re reason why all the doors are closed So you could open one that leads you to the perfect road Like a lightning bolt, your heart will blow And when it’s time, you’ll know You just gotta ignite the light and let it shine Just own the night like the 4th of July ‘Cause baby you’re a firework Come on, show ’em what you’re worth Make ’em go, oh As you shoot across the sky
The American economy’s chronic addiction to cheap oil is obvious. Less well known is the story of when that addiction began and why the United States became so reliant in particular on Saudi Arabia for its continued goodwill and cooperation. The same is true of America’s toxic relationship with Iran. The two countries have been at each other’s throats for so long now that it seems hard to believe they were ever allies—let alone partners in a secret contingency plan to invade Saudi Arabia and seize its oil wealth. Until these tensions are resolved, and until both countries come to terms with their complicated shared history, it seems inevitable that the tree of American-Iranian relations will bear poisoned fruit for many years to come.
>Publishers can’t charge enough money for 60-page books to survive; thus, writers can’t make a living by writing them. But readers are beginning to feel that this shouldn’t be their problem. Worse, many readers believe that they can just jump on YouTube and watch the author speak at a conference, or skim his blog, and they will have absorbed most of what he has to say on a given subject. In some cases this is true and suggests an enduring problem for the business of publishing. In other cases it clearly isn’t true and suggests an enduring problem for our intellectual life. One thing is certain: writers and public intellectuals must find a way to get paid for what they do—and the opportunities to do this are changing quickly. My current solution is to write longer books for a traditional press and publish short ebooks myself on Amazon. If anyone has any better ideas, please publish them somewhere—perhaps on a blog—and then send me a link. And I hope you get paid.
I think you have to look at Dag Hammarskjöld as Secretary-General as someone who had dedicated himself to – for him – the most important cause in the world, which was the UN and peace in a divided east-west nuclear world. He didn’t really feel that there was too much time for much else except he thought that literature, all the arts, particularly music and painting, were an absolute key part of life and he was very active in all these areas.
I think you have to remember that Hammarskjöld was operating in the Cold War. And during the Cold War, everyone – including one’s children if they were over five – had at the back of their minds a constant feeling that if you were in New York or Washington or Moscow, you might quite likely encounter a nuclear war, suddenly and quite unexpectedly. It was a very disagreeable background – I mean nuclear war, east-west, was perfectly possible.
Disruptive innovation describes a process by which a product or service takes root initially in simple applications at the bottom of a market and then relentlessly moves ‘up market’, eventually displacing established competitors.
An innovation that is disruptive allows a whole new population of consumers access to a product or service that was historically only accessible to consumers with a lot of money or a lot of skill. Characteristics of disruptive businesses, at least in their initial stages, can include: lower gross margins, smaller target markets, and simpler products and services that may not appear as attractive as existing solutions when compared against traditional performance metrics.
Because companies tend to innovate faster than their customers’ lives change, most organizations eventually end up producing products or services that are too good, too expensive, and too inconvenient for many customers. By only pursuing “sustaining innovations” that perpetuate what has historically helped them succeed, companies unwittingly open the door to “disruptive innovations”.
Some examples of disruptive innovation include:
Disruptor Cellular phones Community colleges Discount retailers Retail medical clinics
Disruptee Fixed line telephony Four-year colleges Full-service department stores Traditional doctor’s offices
… under the right circumstances, groups are remarkably intelligent, and are often smarter than the smartest people in them. Groups do not need to be dominated by exceptionally intelligent people in order to be smart. Even if most of the people within a group are not especially well-informed or rational, it can still reach a collectively wise decision. This is a good thing, since human beings are not perfectly designed decision makers. Instead, we are what economist Herbert Simon called “boundedly rational.” We generally have less information than we‘d like. We have limited foresight into the future. Most of us lack the ability — and the desire — to make sophisticated cost-benefit calculations. Instead of insisting on finding the best possible decision, we will often accept the one that seems good enough. And often we let emotion affect our judgment. Yet despite all these limitations, when our imperfect judgments are aggregated in the right way, our collective intelligence is often excellent.
This intelligence, or what I’ll call “the wisdom of crowds,” is at work in the world in many different guises. It’s the reason the Internet search engine Google can scan a billion Web pages and find the one page that has the exact piece of information you were looking for. …
Modern economic growth is characterized by unparalleled technological change, which has transformed the world more in the past two centuries than all the other events put together since the beginning of agriculture 10 millennia ago. This technological change was accompanied by a prodigious increase in the use of inanimate energy, particularly fossil fuels and other renewable and nonrenewable natural resources. The associated industrialization and increases in agricultural productivity, urbanization, population, mobility, trade, and consumption of material goods have transformed the social, cultural, and physical landscapes of societies.
The significant part of the world’s wealth is in the form of urban land and buildings, commercial property and residential property and infrastructure capital. The real estate, and now the world’s population, is mostly concentrated in an urban area, as a town, large town, city, large city, metropolis, conurbation, megalopolis (unified super-city), or ecumenopolis (the urban world).
Over the last several years we have seen how the concept of Intelligent or Smart Cities has been fast moving from the academic world of conferences and workshops to the strategic planning of national governments and primary commercial projects of global IT corporations, multinational infrastructure providers and system integrators. Unlike the traditional legacy city, a smart city, new or retrofitted, is anticipated as a prime city of well being, prosperity and productivity. It is characterized as an innovative urban settlement with Intelligent Information and Communications Technology Infrastructure inbuilt in the Environment, Transport, Utilities and Energy Networks, Buildings, Social Infrastructure, Government, and Services.
Er hat eine Begründung für den Abzug geliefert, die das offizielle Ende einer expansiven Epoche amerikanischer Außenpolitik darstellt, „eines Jahrzehnts des Krieges“, wie Obama in seiner Ansprache an die Nation sagte, in dem Amerika Gefahr lief, „sich zu überdehnen“ bei dem Versuch, „jedem Übel zu begegnen, das sich in Übersee finden ließ“.
Es sei Zeit, sich „auf Nation Building bei uns zu Hause zu konzentrieren“. Erst mit dieser Rede ist die neokonservative Ära endgültig vorbei. Wer darüber jubelt, könnte sich bald eines Besseren besinnen. Denn gefährlicher als der amerikanische Expansionismus ist der regelmäßig auf solche euphorischen Epochen folgende Kater des amerikanischen Isolationismus.
Was den Abzug aus Afghanistan betrifft, so geht er den Militärs zu schnell vor, dem kriegsmüden Volk zu langsam. Der Streit darüber ist aber müßig, weil der Zeitplan von etwas Wichtigerem diktiert wird als dem Schicksal Afghanistans – nämlich vom Schicksal des Präsidenten.
Bis zum Wahltermin im November 2012 wird Obama genügend Soldaten nach Hause geholt haben, um seinen Anhängern die Ernsthaftigkeit seiner Absichten zu demonstrieren, aber nicht so viele, dass Afghanistan kollabiert.
A good friend of mine sent this to me this morning, and I thought I would pass it along. I completely agree, and it’s well worth remembering for those of you that feel guilty when indulging in time with your girlfriends. Which, by the way, I never do! Thanks to all my girlfriends, all over the world, for all the laughs and good times we’ve shared.
“I just finished taking an evening class at Stanford. The last lecture was on the mind-body connection – the relationship between stress and disease. The speaker (head of psychiatry at Stanford) said, among other things, that one of the best things that a man could do for his health is to be married to a woman whereas for a woman, one of the best things she could do for her health was to nurture her relationships with her girlfriends. At first everyone laughed, but he was serious.
Women connect with each other differently and provide support systems that help each other to deal with stress and difficult life experiences. Physically this quality “girlfriend time” helps us to create more serotonin – a neurotransmitter that helps combat depression and can create a general feeling of well being. Women share feelings whereas men often form relationships around activities. They rarely sit down with a buddy and talk about how they feel about certain things or how their personal lives are going. Jobs? Yes. Sports? Yes. Cars? Yes. Fishing, hunting, golf? Yes. But their feelings? Rarely. Women do it all of the time. …”
“Saiou ga uma” is a Japanese phrase that means “Saiou’s horse.” It’s an abbreviation of “Ningen banji saiou ga uma,” by which a famous Japanese proverb is known.
The literal translation is “All human affairs are like Saiou’s horse”. It basically means you can never really know what will prove to be “good” or “bad”. The meaning came from a Chinese folk tale about an old man called Sai. Here’s the story:
Once upon a time, an old man, Sai, lived near the Chinese Northern Fort. One day his horse ran away. His neighbors commiserated with him over his misfortune, but Sai said “How do you know this is not really good luck?”.
A few days later the horse returned, bringing another horse with it. When his neighbors congratulated him on his good luck, the old man said “How do you know this is really good luck?”
Sure enough, some while later Sai’s son fell while riding the horse, and broke his leg. The neighbors called it a misfortune.
But it turned out to be good fortune when all the young men of the village were ordered to join the Emperor’s army. Sai’s son didn’t have to go because he had a broken leg.
Psychologists call this reframing. When you take an event and view it from slightly different circumstances, its meaning can change dramatically.
My grandfather used to say that we were born as smart as we’d ever be, and that we became less bright with age. I never understood what he meant, until today.
You see, when we’re born we see the world in an uncomplicated way. We know what we need, and we ask for it. We like nice people, and we don’t like mean people. We sleep when we’re tired, we eat when we’re hungry, and we stop eating when we’re full.
As we grow older, we eat and drink to console ourselves, rather than addressing what’s bothering us. We overwork to avoid close relationships, rather than finding people we can trust to form strong bonds with. We hold grudges, play games, spend more than we make, want things we don’t need, and we get too far away from our basic human needs. In other words, we complicate things.
Today, on what would have been my grandfather’s 88th birthday, I dedicate this list to my Papa. Thank you for everything. I finally get it.
1. Don’t try to read other people’s minds
7. Don’t try to be friends with everyone. Cultivate closer relationships with fewer people.
Most men don’t have a life. Instead we have an act, an outer show, kept up for protection. We pretend things are fine, that everything is cool, and sometimes we even fool ourselves. But ask a man how he really thinks, and the first thing he thinks is “What am I supposed to say?” The average man today is deeply unhappy, but he would be the last to admit it.
Most women are not like this. Women today act from inner feeling and spirit, and more and more they know who they are and what they want. The Women’s Movement helped this along, but women were always more in touch with themselves and each other. The men in relationships with these strong and healthy women are no match for them, in every sense of that word. Conversations go nowhere, and relationships collapse, because to be in a relationship, you have first to know who you are, and the man does not have this worked out.
Google’s recent change to its search algorithm has dramatically shaken up the businesses of websites that moved up or down its search rankings. Sites whose rankings rose to the top found that their traffic and revenue soared — but the adjustment had an equally devastating effect on those that were dropped.
The Online Publishers Association, a group of content producers comprising many of the Internet’s largest properties (including CNN.com), estimates that the algorithm change shifted $1 billion in annual revenue.
Some of the losers felt the hit immediately. Mahalo.com laid off 10% of its workforce last week thanks to what CEO Jason Calacanis called “a significant dip in our traffic and revenue.”
The stakes are high in the Google-placement game. The top spot on a search page typically attracts 20% to 30% of the page’s clicks, according to Adam Bunn, SEO director of Greenlight. After that comes an enormous tail-off: Positions 2 to 3 generate 5% to 10% of the clicks, and links below the fold receive less than 1% of users’ attention. Fall off to the second page and your search-engine-driven clicks will be negligible.
… we frequently link to Wikipedia for background information on an author or topic in the history of science. This practice is subject to some controversy, so this post will explain why we do so.
We will also distinguish between sources appropriate for original research and the use of Wikipedia as a ready reference.
… external links should not be taken as an endorsement of the content you find at Wikipedia or any other external website. Wikipedia articles are of markedly uneven quality, and even when Wikipedia is at its best, there is a difference between setting context with background knowledge (where a general, non-professional source like Wikipedia is appropriate) and conducting actual research in the history of science. For the latter, reliable professional secondary sources are required such as you will find with the aid of reference works like the Isis Bibliography for the History of Science, the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, and other reference resources. We link to Wikipedia for background knowledge; we will point you to reliable professional sources when you are doing research.
Wikipedia remains useful for obtaining general background information as a springboard for research (it is not a substitute for research). It is easily accessible, and often the most informative ready reference on the web. Consult it to get your bearings, but then guide your actual research by relying upon the professional literature. Go beyond where Wikipedia leaves off. At a bare minimum, independently verify anything you use from Wikipedia. And as always, if you use it, cite it.
It always struck me how everything seemed larger in scale on Summit Street: the double-storied houses, their smooth lawns sloping down to the sidewalks like golf greens; elm trees with high, thick branches — the sort of branches from which I imagined fathers suspending long-roped swings for daughters in white dresses. The leaves, once golden and red, were turning brown, dark orange. The rain had stopped. I don’t know why, but we walked in the middle of the road, dark asphalt gleaming beneath the slick, pasted leaves like the back of a whale.
Pictures from the mid-1960s Lunar Orbiter program lay forgotten for decades.
Nancy Evans was at her desk when a clerk walked into her office, asking what he should do with data tapes that had been released from storage.
“What do you usually do with things like that?” she asked.
“We usually destroy them,” he replied.
“I could not morally get rid of this stuff,” said Evans.