Some Blog Site

Harrison Bergeron should be required reading.  It’s a short story by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., and it helps show why personal responsibility and achievement should remain more important than government programs.  The government should protect freedom of opportunity and a level playing field, but it should not enforce equality of achievement or a level outcome.

The government should be like a referee – ensuring that everyone plays fairly, but not making every game end in a tie nor making sure the teams are evenly matched.  So be wary whenever you hear anyone, especially a politician, speak favorably about redistribution of wealth.

“For the Scripture says, ‘YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,’ and ‘The laborer is worthy of his wages.’
– 1 Timothy 5:18

In general, playing offense is easier than playing defense.  Defense has to perfect, but offense has to be good only part of the time.  For example, in football, the offense can fail 75% of the time but still drive down the field and score.  In hockey, the offense usually takes 29 shots at the goal, but only 3 go in, and that’s good enough.  (Hockey and football – it’s a good time of year.)

I was thinking that the same principle should apply to lawyering: it should be easier to be the prosecuting attorney than the defense attorney.  But it seems that the prosecutors have a harder time, at least in the high-profile cases.  That’s because the rules are that the prosecution must be beyond a reasonable doubt, and “scoring” is not as straightforward as in sports.  In the lawyer world, you win by convincing the jury of something, and perception counts for a lot: witness credibility, character testimony, etc.  So the offense can be good, but the defense just has to create a reasonable doubt, not necessarily stop all of the offensive shots.

Or maybe it is easier to be the prosecutor.  I have no lawyerly experience, so I’ll stick to sports.  Offense is over-rated, because it’s easier.  Defenders should get more credit for the job they do.  In my opinion, the MVP of Super Bowl 34 (AKA SB XXXIV) should have been linebacker Mike Jones.  The offense gets the glory: would Charles Woodson have won the Heisman Trophy if he hadn’t played offense and returned punts too?

At work I use a laptop, and at my desk I have a second monitor.  When my laptop is at my desk, it is connected to the docking station, and I have the laptop screen and the stand-alone monitor both active.

When going to a meeting, I will close the laptop, undock it, and then open it at the meeting.  Occasionally, I am greeted by a warning when I open the laptop.  Sometimes the warning appears after I go back to my desk and re-dock.

Actual un-retouched screen shot of the warning
Click on the image to see it full size.

I tried to set the screen resolution to zero by zero, as Windows XP recommended, but my computer wouldn’t let me.  Plus the warning is wrong.  How could zero be the best display size?  I know I could check the box to not show the message again, but it is just so amusing to read.  And reminds me to put realistic checks in any software I write.

As with most warnings that Windows generates, I will ignore this one too.

“Surely God will not listen to an empty {cry,} Nor will the Almighty regard it.”
– Job 35:13

T. Boone Pickens’ plan needs funding.  What better way to fund all that capital than with new oil wells here in America?  But that’s not what he wants.  He wants my support to build windmills.

Why does he need support?  He’s already a billionaire who can afford to build windmills on his own.  If wind power is that much of a better deal than oil, then it should be a good business on its own and not need support from people.  How many other businesses need my support or a national advertising campaign before anything happens?

If he needs the government to do something first, that just means that my tax dollars are going to go to some billionaire.  Anytime the government has to get involved, I get suspicious.  Why does he need my support?  To get Congress or the new President to act?  Why do they need to act?  So that his plan get political preference and he can make even more money?  I don’t mind if he tries to make money, but your business should be able to work without getting the government to pass some law in your favor.

If he wants to build windmills, fine.  But why disrupt the entire transportation industry at great cost?  And to change the fuel from one non-renewable fossil fuel to another non-renewable fossil fuel?  And cause the prices for everyone else who depends on natural gas to increase?  Supply and demand says that if there is a large increase in demand (all the cars) without a large increase in supply (wind power is going to replace how many natural gas-fired power plants?), then prices for natural gas are going to increase.  That will cause problems for homes and businesses who use natural gas.  But since he owns natural gas businesses, an increase in prices is exactly what he wants.

Electric cars would be better than Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) cars, since the infrastructure is already there and cars are either being manufactured or planned on being manufactured in decent volumes.  Instead of diverting all the extra CNG to cars, have the extra wind power go to recharging plug-in electric vehicles.  Why doesn’t Mr. Pickens want to do that?  Because he already bought a bunch of CNG refueling stations, gas stations that sell CNG.  He has placed his bets and is now trying to tilt the game in his favor.

Just build some windmills and skip the ad campaign and government lobbying.

“The east wind carries him away, and he is gone, For it whirls him away from his place.”
– Job 27:21

It used to be that my bad dreams would be that I was late to class, either because something happened to make me late or, worse, I couldn’t find the room.  As far as bad dreams go, that’s not too bad, I suppose.  And I have that type of dream only once or twice a year.  Most of my dreams are either innocuous or bland enough to be forgotten rather quickly.

I suppose they would be classified as annoying dreams, not bad dreams or nightmares.  The most annoying variation of this theme is the dream where I am at school, know I am supposed to be in class, but can’t find the paper with my schedule printed on it.

I am officially getting older now.  My last bad dream had to do with being late to a meeting at work.  I hate being late to things, but work?  A meeting?

I am approaching, but have not yet reached, the point at which I will have been at my job for longer than I have been in formal schooling.  There were 12 years of elementary, middle, and high school, plus 4 years of college = 16 years.  And I have been in my job for only 11 years.  So I should have 5 more years of school dreams left before my mind switches over to work dreams.  Maybe it’s a gradual transition.

In the business world, there is an old saying that there are three options for whatever you’re buying: price, quality, or speed – and you can choose only two.

A good example of this has been any retail item.  You can buy a certain item at a retail store, and you have chosen speed and quality.  You can buy the same item from a mail order or internet retailer and have it shipped to you, and you have chosen quality and price.  The store item is available immediately but for a higher price than the mailed item.  The mailed item will take a couple of days for shipping but will cost less.

The same concept applies to any business program, in particular regarding employees working on a project.  If a project needs to be done quickly, you’ll have to pay more by either paying employees overtime or hiring more people.  If it needs to be done quickly but you don’t pay more, then people will cut corners and do only certain items, sacrificing quality.  And if the project needs to have high quality and low price, then it will take a long time.

There are some articles that indicate that by improving quality, or by improving speed, you can reduce costs.  That is true, but it is true for a long-range purpose not individual projects.  Let’s say you bid on a project and you say that it will cost X and take two weeks to complete.  If the customer says that two weeks isn’t fast enough and he wants one week, you’re not going to be able to improve your processes enough to meet that demand.  What those other articles are talking about is long-term process improvement such that your initial quotes are improving.  But if you quote something accurately, changing one part of the “quality-speed-cost triangle” will affect one or both of the other parts.

If you are a manager, please pay attention to that concept.  Don’t demand immediate results from too few employees and then be surprised if problems appear later because of poor quality.

“each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work.”
– 1 Corinthians 3:13

Due to excessive spam on this post, comments have been closed for this post only.

There was a presidential debate last night.  Not that the debate was presidential, but it was a debate between two candidates for president. I think debates are useless.  I came to that conclusion after the vice-presidential debate.  Not that the debate was vice-presidential, but… ohnevermind.

First of all, you can’t trust what a candidate says while campaigning.  Sure, sometimes he will be telling the truth, but the promises may be tailored to a specific group of voters and not represent in general what the candidate believes or will do.

And secondly, how is a debate supposed to represent anything that will be done in office?  It’s not like a president ever has to debate someone.  That’s not in the job description of vice-president either.  I know, you’re supposed to be able to compare the candidates because of the debate.  But it would be more realistic, more representative of a president, if they were to hold press conferences.  Competing press conferences maybe.  Presidents have to deal with that, but they don’t ever have anyone next to them disagreeing with them and saying the bad things they have done or plan to do.

What you hear during a debate is pretty similar to the political ads that run during the 100 other days of campaigning.  So don’t look to the debates or campaigns if you are trying to decide who gets your vote – look at the candidate’s track record.  Look at the history of votes, decisions, accomplishments, scandals, etc.  That will tell you how he will be as a president.