Wednesday, December 30, 2009

The Brand Called You

Retrieved from Fast Company 

December 18, 2007
The Brand Called You
It's a new brand world.
That cross-trainer you're wearing -- one look at the distinctive swoosh on the side tells everyone who's got you branded. That coffee travel mug you're carrying -- ah, you're a Starbucks woman! Your T-shirt with the distinctive Champion "C" on the sleeve, the blue jeans with the prominent Levi's rivets, the watch with the hey-this-certifies-I-made-it icon on the face, your fountain pen with the maker's symbol crafted into the end ...
You're branded, branded, branded, branded.
It's time for me -- and you -- to take a lesson from the big brands, a lesson that's true for anyone who's interested in what it takes to stand out and prosper in the new world of work.
Regardless of age, regardless of position, regardless of the business we happen to be in, all of us need to understand the importance of branding. We are CEOs of our own companies: Me Inc. To be in business today, our most important job is to be head marketer for the brand called You.
It's that simple -- and that hard. And that inescapable.
Behemoth companies may take turns buying each other or acquiring every hot startup that catches their eye -- mergers in 1996 set records. Hollywood may be interested in only blockbusters and book publishers may want to put out only guaranteed best-sellers. But don't be fooled by all the frenzy at the humongous end of the size spectrum.
The real action is at the other end: the main chance is becoming a free agent in an economy of free agents, looking to have the best season you can imagine in your field, looking to do your best work and chalk up a remarkable track record, and looking to establish your own micro equivalent of the Nike swoosh. Because if you do, you'll not only reach out toward every opportunity within arm's (or laptop's) length, you'll not only make a noteworthy contribution to your team's success -- you'll also put yourself in a great bargaining position for next season's free-agency market.
The good news -- and it is largely good news -- is that everyone has a chance to stand out. Everyone has a chance to learn, improve, and build up their skills. Everyone has a chance to be a brand worthy of remark.
Who understands this fundamental principle? The big companies do. They've come a long way in a short time: it was just over four years ago, April 2, 1993 to be precise, when Philip Morris cut the price of Marlboro cigarettes by 40 cents a pack. That was on a Friday. On Monday, the stock market value of packaged goods companies fell by $25 billion. Everybody agreed: brands were doomed.
Today brands are everything, and all kinds of products and services -- from accounting firms to sneaker makers to restaurants -- are figuring out how to transcend the narrow boundaries of their categories and become a brand surrounded by a Tommy Hilfiger-like buzz.
Who else understands it? Every single Web site sponsor. In fact, the Web makes the case for branding more directly than any packaged good or consumer product ever could. Here's what the Web says: Anyone can have a Web site. And today, because anyone can ... anyone does! So how do you know which sites are worth visiting, which sites to bookmark, which sites are worth going to more than once? The answer: branding. The sites you go back to are the sites you trust. They're the sites where the brand name tells you that the visit will be worth your time -- again and again. The brand is a promise of the value you'll receive.
The same holds true for that other killer app of the Net -- email. When everybody has email and anybody can send you email, how do you decide whose messages you're going to read and respond to first -- and whose you're going to send to the trash unread? The answer: personal branding. The name of the email sender is every bit as important a brand -- is a brand -- as the name of the Web site you visit. It's a promise of the value you'll receive for the time you spend reading the message.
Nobody understands branding better than professional services firms. Look at McKinsey or Arthur Andersen for a model of the new rules of branding at the company and personal level. Almost every professional services firm works with the same business model. They have almost no hard assets -- my guess is that most probably go so far as to rent or lease every tangible item they possibly can to keep from having to own anything. They have lots of soft assets -- more conventionally known as people, preferably smart, motivated, talented people. And they have huge revenues -- and astounding profits.
They also have a very clear culture of work and life. You're hired, you report to work, you join a team -- and you immediately start figuring out how to deliver value to the customer. Along the way, you learn stuff, develop your skills, hone your abilities, move from project to project. And if you're really smart, you figure out how to distinguish yourself from all the other very smart people walking around with $1,500 suits, high-powered laptops, and well-polished resumes. Along the way, if you're really smart, you figure out what it takes to create a distinctive role for yourself -- you create a message and a strategy to promote the brand called You.
What makes You different?
Start right now: as of this moment you're going to think of yourself differently! You're not an "employee" of General Motors, you're not a "staffer" at General Mills, you're not a "worker" at General Electric or a "human resource" at General Dynamics (ooops, it's gone!). Forget the Generals! You don't "belong to" any company for life, and your chief affiliation isn't to any particular "function." You're not defined by your job title and you're not confined by your job description.
Starting today you are a brand.
You're every bit as much a brand as Nike, Coke, Pepsi, or the Body Shop. To start thinking like your own favorite brand manager, ask yourself the same question the brand managers at Nike, Coke, Pepsi, or the Body Shop ask themselves: What is it that my product or service does that makes it different? Give yourself the traditional 15-words-or-less contest challenge. Take the time to write down your answer. And then take the time to read it. Several times.
If your answer wouldn't light up the eyes of a prospective client or command a vote of confidence from a satisfied past client, or -- worst of all -- if it doesn't grab you, then you've got a big problem. It's time to give some serious thought and even more serious effort to imagining and developing yourself as a brand.
Start by identifying the qualities or characteristics that make you distinctive from your competitors -- or your colleagues. What have you done lately -- this week -- to make yourself stand out? What would your colleagues or your customers say is your greatest and clearest strength? Your most noteworthy (as in, worthy of note) personal trait?
Go back to the comparison between brand You and brand X -- the approach the corporate biggies take to creating a brand. The standard model they use is feature-benefit: every feature they offer in their product or service yields an identifiable and distinguishable benefit for their customer or client. A dominant feature of Nordstrom department stores is the personalized service it lavishes on each and every customer. The customer benefit: a feeling of being accorded individualized attention -- along with all of the choice of a large department store.
So what is the "feature-benefit model" that the brand called You offers? Do you deliver your work on time, every time? Your internal or external customer gets dependable, reliable service that meets its strategic needs. Do you anticipate and solve problems before they become crises? Your client saves money and headaches just by having you on the team. Do you always complete your projects within the allotted budget? I can't name a single client of a professional services firm who doesn't go ballistic at cost overruns.
Your next step is to cast aside all the usual descriptors that employees and workers depend on to locate themselves in the company structure. Forget your job title. Ask yourself: What do I do that adds remarkable, measurable, distinguished, distinctive value? Forget your job description. Ask yourself: What do I do that I am most proud of? Most of all, forget about the standard rungs of progression you've climbed in your career up to now. Burn that damnable "ladder" and ask yourself: What have I accomplished that I can unabashedly brag about? If you're going to be a brand, you've got to become relentlessly focused on what you do that adds value, that you're proud of, and most important, that you can shamelessly take credit for.
When you've done that, sit down and ask yourself one more question to define your brand: What do I want to be famous for? That's right -- famous for!
What's the pitch for You?
So it's a cliché: don't sell the steak, sell the sizzle. it's also a principle that every corporate brand understands implicitly, from Omaha Steaks's through-the-mail sales program to Wendy's "we're just regular folks" ad campaign. No matter how beefy your set of skills, no matter how tasty you've made that feature-benefit proposition, you still have to market the bejesus out of your brand -- to customers, colleagues, and your virtual network of associates.
For most branding campaigns, the first step is visibility. If you're General Motors, Ford, or Chrysler, that usually means a full flight of TV and print ads designed to get billions of "impressions" of your brand in front of the consuming public. If you're brand You, you've got the same need for visibility -- but no budget to buy it.
So how do you market brand You?
There's literally no limit to the ways you can go about enhancing your profile. Try moonlighting! Sign up for an extra project inside your organization, just to introduce yourself to new colleagues and showcase your skills -- or work on new ones. Or, if you can carve out the time, take on a freelance project that gets you in touch with a totally novel group of people. If you can get them singing your praises, they'll help spread the word about what a remarkable contributor you are.
If those ideas don't appeal, try teaching a class at a community college, in an adult education program, or in your own company. You get credit for being an expert, you increase your standing as a professional, and you increase the likelihood that people will come back to you with more requests and more opportunities to stand out from the crowd.
If you're a better writer than you are a teacher, try contributing a column or an opinion piece to your local newspaper. And when I say local, I mean local. You don't have to make the op-ed page of the New York Times to make the grade. Community newspapers, professional newsletters, even inhouse company publications have white space they need to fill. Once you get started, you've got a track record -- and clips that you can use to snatch more chances.
And if you're a better talker than you are teacher or writer, try to get yourself on a panel discussion at a conference or sign up to make a presentation at a workshop. Visibility has a funny way of multiplying; the hardest part is getting started. But a couple of good panel presentations can earn you a chance to give a "little" solo speech -- and from there it's just a few jumps to a major address at your industry's annual convention.
The second important thing to remember about your personal visibility campaign is: it all matters. When you're promoting brand You, everything you do -- and everything you choose not to do -- communicates the value and character of the brand. Everything from the way you handle phone conversations to the email messages you send to the way you conduct business in a meeting is part of the larger message you're sending about your brand.
Partly it's a matter of substance: what you have to say and how well you get it said. But it's also a matter of style. On the Net, do your communications demonstrate a command of the technology? In meetings, do you keep your contributions short and to the point? It even gets down to the level of your brand You business card: Have you designed a cool-looking logo for your own card? Are you demonstrating an appreciation for design that shows you understand that packaging counts -- a lot -- in a crowded world?
The key to any personal branding campaign is "word-of-mouth marketing." Your network of friends, colleagues, clients, and customers is the most important marketing vehicle you've got; what they say about you and your contributions is what the market will ultimately gauge as the value of your brand. So the big trick to building your brand is to find ways to nurture your network of colleagues -- consciously.
What's the real power of You?
If you want to grow your brand, you've got to come to terms with power -- your own. The key lesson: power is not a dirty word!
In fact, power for the most part is a badly misunderstood term and a badly misused capability. I'm talking about a different kind of power than we usually refer to. It's not ladder power, as in who's best at climbing over the adjacent bods. It's not who's-got-the-biggest-office-by-six-square-inches power or who's-got-the-fanciest-title power.
It's influence power.
It's being known for making the most significant contribution in your particular area. It's reputational power. If you were a scholar, you'd measure it by the number of times your publications get cited by other people. If you were a consultant, you'd measure it by the number of CEOs who've got your business card in their Rolodexes. (And better yet, the number who know your beeper number by heart.)
Getting and using power -- intelligently, responsibly, and yes, powerfully -- are essential skills for growing your brand. One of the things that attracts us to certain brands is the power they project. As a consumer, you want to associate with brands whose powerful presence creates a halo effect that rubs off on you.
It's the same in the workplace. There are power trips that are worth taking -- and that you can take without appearing to be a self-absorbed, self-aggrandizing megalomaniacal jerk. You can do it in small, slow, and subtle ways. Is your team having a hard time organizing productive meetings? Volunteer to write the agenda for the next meeting. You're contributing to the team, and you get to decide what's on and off the agenda. When it's time to write a post-project report, does everyone on your team head for the door? Beg for the chance to write the report -- because the hand that holds the pen (or taps the keyboard) gets to write or at least shape the organization's history.
Most important, remember that power is largely a matter of perception. If you want people to see you as a powerful brand, act like a credible leader. When you're thinking like brand You, you don't need org-chart authority to be a leader. The fact is you are a leader. You're leading You!
One key to growing your power is to recognize the simple fact that we now live in a project world. Almost all work today is organized into bite-sized packets called projects. A project-based world is ideal for growing your brand: projects exist around deliverables, they create measurables, and they leave you with braggables. If you're not spending at least 70% of your time working on projects, creating projects, or organizing your (apparently mundane) tasks into projects, you are sadly living in the past. Today you have to think, breathe, act, and work in projects.
Project World makes it easier for you to assess -- and advertise -- the strength of brand You. Once again, think like the giants do. Imagine yourself a brand manager at Procter & Gamble: When you look at your brand's assets, what can you add to boost your power and felt presence? Would you be better off with a simple line extension -- taking on a project that adds incrementally to your existing base of skills and accomplishments? Or would you be better off with a whole new product line? Is it time to move overseas for a couple of years, venturing outside your comfort zone (even taking a lateral move -- damn the ladders), tackling something new and completely different?
Whatever you decide, you should look at your brand's power as an exercise in new-look résumé; management -- an exercise that you start by doing away once and for all with the word "résumé." You don't have an old-fashioned résumé anymore! You've got a marketing brochure for brand You. Instead of a static list of titles held and positions occupied, your marketing brochure brings to life the skills you've mastered, the projects you've delivered, the braggables you can take credit for. And like any good marketing brochure, yours needs constant updating to reflect the growth -- breadth and depth -- of brand You.
What's loyalty to You?
Everyone is saying that loyalty is gone; loyalty is dead; loyalty is over. I think that's a bunch of crap.
I think loyalty is much more important than it ever was in the past. A 40-year career with the same company once may have been called loyalty; from here it looks a lot like a work life with very few options, very few opportunities, and very little individual power. That's what we used to call indentured servitude.
Today loyalty is the only thing that matters. But it isn't blind loyalty to the company. It's loyalty to your colleagues, loyalty to your team, loyalty to your project, loyalty to your customers, and loyalty to yourself. I see it as a much deeper sense of loyalty than mindless loyalty to the Company Z logo.
I know this may sound like selfishness. But being CEO of Me Inc. requires you to act selfishly -- to grow yourself, to promote yourself, to get the market to reward yourself. Of course, the other side of the selfish coin is that any company you work for ought to applaud every single one of the efforts you make to develop yourself. After all, everything you do to grow Me Inc. is gravy for them: the projects you lead, the networks you develop, the customers you delight, the braggables you create generate credit for the firm. As long as you're learning, growing, building relationships, and delivering great results, it's good for you and it's great for the company.
That win-win logic holds for as long as you happen to be at that particular company. Which is precisely where the age of free agency comes into play. If you're treating your résumé as if it's a marketing brochure, you've learned the first lesson of free agency. The second lesson is one that today's professional athletes have all learned: you've got to check with the market on a regular basis to have a reliable read on your brand's value. You don't have to be looking for a job to go on a job interview. For that matter, you don't even have to go on an actual job interview to get useful, important feedback.
The real question is: How is brand You doing? Put together your own "user's group" -- the personal brand You equivalent of a software review group. Ask for -- insist on -- honest, helpful feedback on your performance, your growth, your value. It's the only way to know what you would be worth on the open market. It's the only way to make sure that, when you declare your free agency, you'll be in a strong bargaining position. It's not disloyalty to "them"; it's responsible brand management for brand You -- which also generates credit for them.
What's the future of You?
It's over. No more vertical. No more ladder. That's not the way careers work anymore. Linearity is out. A career is now a checkerboard. Or even a maze. It's full of moves that go sideways, forward, slide on the diagonal, even go backward when that makes sense. (It often does.) A career is a portfolio of projects that teach you new skills, gain you new expertise, develop new capabilities, grow your colleague set, and constantly reinvent you as a brand.
As you scope out the path your "career" will take, remember: the last thing you want to do is become a manager. Like "résumé," "manager" is an obsolete term. It's practically synonymous with "dead end job." What you want is a steady diet of more interesting, more challenging, more provocative projects. When you look at the progression of a career constructed out of projects, directionality is not only hard to track -- Which way is up? -- but it's also totally irrelevant.
Instead of making yourself a slave to the concept of a career ladder, reinvent yourself on a semiregular basis. Start by writing your own mission statement, to guide you as CEO of Me Inc. What turns you on? Learning something new? Gaining recognition for your skills as a technical wizard? Shepherding new ideas from concept to market? What's your personal definition of success? Money? Power? Fame? Or doing what you love? However you answer these questions, search relentlessly for job or project opportunities that fit your mission statement. And review that mission statement every six months to make sure you still believe what you wrote.
No matter what you're doing today, there are four things you've got to measure yourself against. First, you've got to be a great teammate and a supportive colleague. Second, you've got to be an exceptional expert at something that has real value. Third, you've got to be a broad-gauged visionary -- a leader, a teacher, a farsighted "imagineer." Fourth, you've got to be a businessperson -- you've got to be obsessed with pragmatic outcomes.
It's this simple: You are a brand. You are in charge of your brand. There is no single path to success. And there is no one right way to create the brand called You. Except this: Start today. Or else.
Tom Peters is the world's leading brand when it comes to writing, speaking, or thinking about the new economy. He has just released a CD-ROM, "Tom Peters' Career Survival Guide" (Houghton Mifflin interactive). Rob Walker contributed the brand profile sidebars.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

China fears climate change openness | John Lee | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

China fears climate change openness | John Lee | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

China fears climate change openness

Beijing, which fears that external monitoring might reveal internal dysfunction, was backed into a corner by the US at Copenhagen

During the frantic final two days of negotiations at Copenhagen over the weekend, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton set a clever trap for Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao. Having just announced that the US would establish and contribute to a $100bn international fund by 2020 to help poor nations cope with the challenge of climate change, they added a non-negotiable proviso: all major nations would first be required to commit their emissions reduction to a binding agreement and submit these reductions to "transparent verification".

Everyone in the room knew that "all major nations" primarily meant China. From the beginning, China has steadfastly refused to accept outside monitoring and verification of its progress toward any promised targets. But the 11th-hour US proposal immediately isolated China. The onus was now on Beijing to agree to standards of "transparent verification". If it did not, poorer countries standing to benefit from the fund would blame China for breaking the deal.

Clinton's proposal had cunningly undermined Beijing's leadership over the developing bloc of countries. In anger, Chinese officials responded that such demands were an insult to China and would be a violation of Chinese sovereignty and national interests. Wen had been outflanked and was angry, even leaving the conference centre and subsequently snubbing Obama in a couple of previously planned bilateral and multinational meetings involving the US president.

Which raises the question: why the extreme response? China has long been engaging in a dangerous game of manipulating important economic numbers and concealing domestic commercial realities. Despite all its progress over 30 years, Beijing is afraid to shine too bright a light in dark places, and even more afraid that outsiders might be allowed to do so. In important respects, the government actually embraces opaqueness as a perceived advantage. The thought of "transparent verification" was seen as the thin end of the wedge, allowing outside experts broad authority to peer into the workings of middle China.

Teams of international economists, scientists, inspectors and statisticians roaming China to gather information on carbon emissions and reduction initiatives would have been unprecedented. In promoting China, Beijing projects an image of order and competence to the world. In parts of its wealthier coastal cities, China is that. But these international teams would undoubtedly discover exactly how dysfunctional the heart of the country really is. They would see first hand and report back how China's 45 million local officials remain the most formidable obstacle to improving transparency in China's sprawling economic structure – protecting their turf, defending their privileges, arbitrarily enforcing the law, and when it comes to economic performance blatantly cooking the books. Beijing still wants to assure outsiders that it remains in charge even though in important respects it is not.

This lack of accountability and transparency strikes at the heart of China's credibility in any global climate change agenda. Wen would not want foreign experts reporting to political masters in America and Europe that Beijing's capacity for compelling local officials and locally managed, state-controlled enterprises – some 120,000 companies and countless other subsidiaries – to implement climate change initiatives is extremely low. This would simply strengthen suspicions that decentralised China cannot actually honour future commitments despite promises that it intends to.

Then there is the further problem of cheating in current and future carbon reduction schemes. Developed countries need to feel confident that incentives offered to developing countries to cut emissions (in both absolute terms and emissions relative to economic growth) can be verified. Indeed, earlier this month, the UN body in charge of the clean development mechanism – a proviso under the Kyoto protocol allowing developed countries to purchase carbon offsets for funding "clean energy" developments elsewhere – suspended approvals for dozens of Chinese windfarms over suspicions that China had held back the building of planned windfarms and deliberately lowered previously allocated subsidies to make the wind farms eligible for earning credits – industrial policies that would disqualify these farms from benefiting under the scheme. China has so far received carbon credits worth more than $1bn, which is almost half of the total issued under the UN-run programme.

China's government has vigorously denied that it is attempting to illegitimately manipulate the scheme. But the point is that there is no system for independent and external verification; nor is Beijing proposing to allow one. Meanwhile, China had previously pledged that 15% (and possibly 20%) of its energy would come from renewable sources by 2020 and that special efforts would be made to close dirty power plants and impose world-class vehicle efficiency standards and proposed various other measures to cut emissions. Again, developed countries suspect that China will receive plaudits and concessions from any future carbon emissions regime without actually keeping its promises.

Alas, given the desperation to announce a "deal", Obama backed down. The so-called "Copenhagen accord" merely compels developing nations to self-report their emissions every two years and allow outside scrutiny of the data. China is off the hook for the moment, but whether this is enough to satisfy the US Congress when deciding whether to approve any future binding agreement is another matter.

哥本哈根溃败记录—我所知道的真相 - 我在乎,我行动 | 绿色和平 - 官方博客

Another account of what happened.

哥本哈根溃败记录—我所知道的真相 - 我在乎,我行动 | 绿色和平 - 官方博客

What exactly is “Climate Aid”?

What exactly is “Climate Aid”?

Q: By the way, what IS Climate Aid anyway?

A: Let’s answer this with another question: if you have a project for solar pumps to irrigate farms to grow crops for export, is this (a) climate aid, (b) agriculture aid, or (c) aid for trade? Does the answer depend on which type of aid is currently most popular?

How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room | Mark Lynas | Environment | The Guardian

How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room | Mark Lynas | Environment | The
Guardian

Now we know what happened behind the closed doors. Surprise? Hardly so.

It is interesting to notice that the deniers in both USA and China think that "climate change" is a conspiracy against their own country. Now it is CHINA that wrecked the negotiation, so will Chinese government be a friend to those climate change deniers in USA? What will be their reactions? Hail the wisdom of Chinese? I won't bet on it.

My take from the article:

The "democratic" leaders more inclined to bend to short-term political calculations, not the long term national interest, than leaders from China, who pay little attention to "voters" sentiment. At the same time, Chinese leaders not really ready to take the burden of being a world leader / empire.

Above all, Obama needed to be able to demonstrate to the Senate that he could deliver China in any global climate regulation framework, so conservative senators could not argue that US carbon cuts would further advantage Chinese industry. With midterm elections looming, Obama and his staff also knew that Copenhagen would be probably their only opportunity to go to climate change talks with a strong mandate. This further strengthened China's negotiating hand, ...

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Distilling famous thinkers

Should we approach famous thinkers by digesting distilled versions, or should we study them in the original?

I sided with  Tyler Cowen on this. Especially point 3 and 4.
3. The errors of top thinkers are often more interesting and instructive than their successes.  Distillers have a hard time capturing these errors and their fruitfulness.

4. We often read great thinkers not to learn what they understood but also to set our minds racing and to find interesting new questions.  Great thinkers are usually better at supplying this service than are their distillers.
Reading books is like a conversation with the authors. Surely I want to talk to those great thinkers. 

Monday, December 14, 2009

Freeze you burnt hard-drive

It works.

I found out that my hard drive failed after returned from vacation. Probably due to the unsuccessful shut-down before I left. The system cannot recognize the hard drive, or when it can recognize it, the hard drive reads very slowly, and then, disappeared.

A quick google gave me stories of people "freeze" the hard drive in the freezer to buy some time back up the important data.

No matter what the mechanism, it works on my hard drive. I got about 10g copy each time I freeze the hard drive. Enough to copy the personal data. I will keep doing this to see how much I can get off it before I send it back for warranty replacement.

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Career Path

Sadly, it is true.



When top levels guys look down, they see only shit.

When bottom levels guys look up, they see only assholes.

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Who will be loser of the price war between Walmart and Amazon

Answer: Every one else. According to James Surowiecki
Wal-Mart and Amazon have figured out how to fight a price war and win: make sure someone else takes the blows.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Droid is coming

I kinda want to ditch my Iphone after reading about the new android navigation


.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Iphone Killer! Again?

Droid from Moto might be latest potential iphone killer. MG Siegler at TechCrunch thinks otherwise.
Android is trying to kill Windows Mobile, not the iPhone.
I like the analogy between IPhone vs. Android and  Mac vs. PC. It makes sense. I won't be surprised to see an Android boom, and won't be bothered by the failure of windows mobile.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

How to Win Friends and Influence People

Tried to read the famous book, but reading became skimping in few minutes, and came to a full stop not after long.
How can you "Win Friends and Influence People" by stating the obvious over and over again and throwing out big names and quotes without context?


There are some fair points, summarized nicely in Wikipedia. A little better than common sense.
Fundamental Techniques in Handling People
  1. Don't criticize, condemn or complain.
  2. Give honest and sincere appreciation.
  3. Arouse in the other person an eager want....
Six Ways to Make People Like You
  1. Become genuinely interested in other people.
  2. Smile.
  3. Remember that a man's Name is to him the sweetest and most important sound in any language.
  4. Be a good listener. Encourage others to talk about themselves.
  5. Talk in the terms of the other man's interest.
  6. Make the other person feel important and do it sincerely.
Twelve Ways to Win People to Your Way of Thinking
  1. Avoid arguments.
  2. Show respect for the other person's opinions. Never tell someone they are wrong.
  3. If you're wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically.
  4. Begin in a friendly way.
  5. Start with questions the other person will answer yes to.
  6. Let the other person do the talking.
  7. Let the other person feel the idea is his/hers.
  8. Try honestly to see things from the other person's point of view.
  9. Sympathize with the other person.
  10. Appeal to noble motives.
  11. Dramatize your ideas.
  12. Throw down a challenge.
Be a Leader: How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment
  1. Begin with praise and honest appreciation.
  2. Call attention to other people's mistakes indirectly.
  3. Talk about your own mistakes first.
  4. Ask questions instead of directly giving orders.
  5. Let the other person save face.
  6. Praise every improvement.
  7. Give them a fine reputation to live up to.
  8. Encourage them by making their faults seem easy to correct.
  9. Make the other person happy about doing what you suggest.

Prelude to divorce?

From the divorce counselor, Niall Ferguson:

Wake Up Washington! China Is Already Dumping the Dollar, Niall Ferguson Says

Posted Oct 20, 2009 11:52am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers, Commodities

Just as U.S. policymakers are too sanguine about China's military power, Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson says Washington D.C. is too complacent about China's ability to wean itself off the dollar. With about 1.7 trillion of dollar-denominated assets (mainly Treasuries) in its foreign currency reserves, conventional wisdom goes something like this: If China were to diversify away from the dollar or merely allow the renminbi to float, much less dump its greenbacks wholesale, they would be shooting themselves in the proverbial foot. That's both as investors and because further dollar weakness would put a damper on their biggest export market. (A weaker dollar makes foreign goods more expensive for Americans, meaning Chinese imports would become less "cheap.")
This view is "slightly naive," according to Ferguson, author of The Ascent of Money.
"The idea they don't have anywhere else to go or would shoot themselves in the foot if there were a steep decline in the dollar or appreciation of their currency reassures many people in Washington ‘we can relax'," he says. "An appreciation of the renminbi may reduce value of their international reserves but increases the value of every other asset the Chinese own," most notably the commodity assets they have been buying all over the world.
China's "current strategy is to diversify out of dollars and into commodities," Ferguson says. Furthermore, China's recent pact with Brazil to conduct trade in their local currencies is a "sign of the times."
Perhaps most importantly, China's massive stimulus program is helping to generate internal consumption in the People's Republic, meaning local manufacturers are less dependent on exports. Because of the "rapid growth" of Chinese domestic consumption, Ferguson predicts China's international trade surplus could be gone by next year.
"People in Washington rather assume because the U.S. consumer was so dominant there really isn't a substitute," Ferguson says. But China's trade surplus stood at $12.9 billion in September, down about 56% from a year earlier, according to MarketWatch.com.
From 1998-2007, China engaged in a form of vendor financing, lending money to the U.S. so the U.S. would buy Chinese goods, Ferguson explains. "I think that model has basically broken. They know it and have a new one in which we play a much less important role."

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

TARP is good, but ...

Via Reuters.

US watchdog says TARP helped stabilize system,


Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:57am EDT

WASHINGTON, Oct 21 (Reuters) - The U.S. government's $700 billion financial rescue program has helped to stabilize the system, but may be creating systemic problems by fueling a belief banks will always be bailed out, a watchdog for the program said on Wednesday.

"Compared to where we were last October there is no question that the system if far more stable. We were on the precipice and I think the (Troubled Asset Relief Program) contributed with the other programs to pull us back," Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the program, told CNBC.

"But I do think because of the moral hazard, because of some systemic risks that are associated with making these institutions bigger and bigger ... systemically we may be in a more dangerous place even then we were a year ago," he said. (Reporting by Tim Ahmann, Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

Elsewhere at NPR's Marketplace: 

TARP unlikely to bring taxpayer returns


... [Neil Barofsky] said that out of the $700 billion bailout, there's about $317 billion left. He says we will not get all the money back. Mainly because of AIG and the auto companies, which took some of that TARP money. And he said this this morning on CNBC. After saying that the TARP was successful in rescuing the banks, he did have this caveat.

Niall Ferguson on the coming divorce of Chimerica.

Via yahoo

Niall Ferguson: U.S. Empire in Decline, on Collision Course with China

Posted Oct 20, 2009 07:30am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers
The U.S. is an empire in decline, according to Niall Ferguson, Harvard professor and author of The Ascent of Money."People have predicted the end of America in the past and been wrong," Ferguson concedes. "But let's face it: If you're trying to borrow $9 trillion to save your financial system...and already half your public debt held by foreigners, it's not really the conduct of rising empires, is it?"
Given its massive deficits and overseas military adventures, America today is similar to the Spanish Empire in the 17th century and Britain's in the 20th, he says. "Excessive debt is usually a predictor of subsequent trouble."
Putting a finer point on it, Ferguson says America today is comparable to Britain circa 1900: a dominant empire underestimating the rise of a new power. In Britain's case back then it was Germany; in America's case today, it's China.
"When China's economy is equal in size to that of the U.S., which could come as early as 2027...it means China becomes not only a major economic competitor - it's that already, it then becomes a diplomatic competitor and a military competitor," the history professor declares.
The most obvious sign of this is China's major naval construction program, featuring next generation submarines and up to three aircraft carriers, Ferguson says. "There's no other way of interpreting this than as a challenge to the hegemony of the U.S. in the Asia-Pacific region."
As to analysts like Stratfor's George Friedman, who downplay China's naval ambitions, Ferguson notes British experts - including Winston Churchill - were similarly complacent about Germany at the dawn of the 20th century.
"I'm not predicting World War III but we have to recognize...China is becoming more assertive, a rival not a partner," he says, adding that China's navy doesn't have to be as large as America's to pose a problem. "They don't have to have an equally large navy, just big enough to pose a strategic threat [and] cause trouble" for the U.S. Navy.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Divorce? !

Niall Ferguson predicted a divorce of Chimerica.

Paul Krugman interprets the speech of Bernanke as part of the argument between the couples.

Of course, there are no lack of complaints from the Chinese side.

So probably the question is not whether there will be a divorce. It's gonna happen. The question is when, and whether it will be peaceful one.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

A look beneath the WASPish veneer

Via NPR
Tad Friend, who wrote a New Yorker column about how his WASP parents lived without the money and prestige they'd once known, has written a book on the history of his family. It's called "Cheerful Money." He discusses it with Kai Ryssdal.
Also New Yorker 

Tad Friend's article about his mother.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Dow at 10,000

Via The Big Picture
With the DJIA approaching 10,000 again, let’s reminisce about 1999, the year it first passed that magic level on March 29th. Millennium by the Backstreet Boys was the best selling album, American Beauty won the Academy Award, the Euro was established, SpongeBob SquarePants aired for the first time, Hugo Chavez was elected President of Venezuela, Karl Malone, Pudge, Chipper Jones, Jagr and Kurt Warner won MVP awards and the average price of a gallon of gasoline at the pump was about $1.20. US nominal GDP ended at $9.6b vs $14.1 as of Q2 ‘09. Also, on March 29th 1999, the DXY was at 100.36 (now 75.60), the CRB was at 192.40 (now 269.15), gold was at $280 (now $1,060), oil was $16.44 (now $74.80), corn was $2.32 (now $3.85), copper was $.62 (now $2.83), the 10 yr yield was 5.19% (now 3.38%), and the fed funds rate was at 4.75% (now 0-.25%). Oh, how time flies.

Monday, October 12, 2009


Morgan Downey wonders whether natural gas is the new oil.

What is certain is that the industry is in a state of flux which could turn the oil and gas industry upside down over the next 10 years.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Proposed Costco fuel settlement: $0 for class, $10M for attorneys.

What a wonderful world. Attorneys got paid and the "clients" got what?

http://centerforclassactionfairness.blogspot.com/2009/09/costco-fuel-settlement.html
Costco, along with other fuel retailers, has been sued over the way it measures gallons of fuel in some states. The putative class plaintiffs have settled the case--for zero dollars for the class, and ten million dollars for the attorneys.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

The lost Symbol

Just finished reading The Lost Symbol. If you want to kill some time, pick it up. If you want to spend time do some reading skip it. To quote others from www.goodreads.com
  • "A collection of ideas is not a plot."
  • formulaic
  • he wrote a book designed to hit you with made-up facts to support a made-up philosophy. 
  • His story-lines are choked with forced dialogue and contrived situations. His characters are one-dimensional caricatures who spend most of their time monologuing to explain to the dimmest of readers about what is happening and why. His formulaic and predictable plots are tiresome. 
Interestingly, New York Times did not hesitate to throw out all kinds comments that publisher would love to print on the jacket. 

    Friday, September 11, 2009

    Last Days of Lehman Brothers

    BBC release its version of the last days of Lehman brothers. More versions are available all over the world, as we approaching the anniversary of the collapse. One year already? It is only one year?

    Tuesday, September 08, 2009

    Leaked? Beatles on iTune, 9/9/09

    Rumors only so far. Let's wait another few hours.

    http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/08/did-yoko-ono-and-sky-news-just-ruin-apples-beatles-surprise/
    he story kicked off with the headline:
    “The whole of the Beatles back catalogue will be made available to buy on iTunes, Yoko Ono has told Sky News.”
    But almost immediately after publishing the story Sky News killed it, leaving nothing but a blank page in its wake. Google News had a cache of it for a brief time, but that too has apparently disappeared in record time. 9to5mac spotted the article and reached Sky News for more information, only to be told that the news organization was unable to comment.

    Friday, September 04, 2009

    History?

    An artist spend 16 years to paint the Nanking, 9:00 September 9th 1945 to reflect the Surrender of Japanese Forces.

    Compare this to the photo taken then:

    My question is who bowed to who?

    Why Good Managers Make Bad Decisions

    Excerpt from an WSJ Interview of Sydney Finkelstein.
    • Leaders tend to rely on past experience that seems useful, but is actually sometimes dangerous.  
    •  A second reason has to do with self-interest. Most people don't realize self-interest operates at a subconscious level. 
    •  The third one is what we call prejudgments. Leaders make prejudgments about their businesses that sometimes turn out to be wrong. 
    •  The fourth one is what we call attachments -- attachments to people or places or things. 
    And on  "What are some of the ways leaders can avoid making bad decisions?"
    People need to recognize that we are biased in every single situation. There's no such thing as objectivity.

    The first thing leaders should do to reduce their odds of making bad decisions is walk into an important decision situation saying, "Ok, I know that we are potentially biased in a variety of ways. Let's try to identify what those are."

    Second is to avoid the "yes man" trap. You have to bring different people and different data sources to the table. You want to add a "no team" to argue against the proposal, and put some teeth behind that no team.

    Positive thinking

    Seth posted his thoughts on positive thinking.

    [I]t's been shown over and over again that it improves performance over negative thinking.

    Key question then: why do smart people engage in negative thinking? ...
    The reason, I think, is that negative thinking feels good. In its own way, we believe that negative thinking works. Negative thinking feels realistic, or soothes our pain, or eases our embarrassment. Negative thinking protects us and lowers expectations.
    In many ways, negative thinking is a lot more fun than positive thinking. So we do it.
    If positive thinking was easy, we'd do it all the time. Compounding this difficulty is our belief that the easy thing (negative thinking) is actually appropriate, it actually works for us. The data is irrelevant. We're the exception, so we say.
    Positive thinking is hard. Worth it, though.
    I am not so sure that positive thinking is hard. An example would be the Endowment Effect. Sometimes, negative thinking is hard, when you have it, or already started it. Positive thinking is hard, when you don't have it yet, have not started it yet.

    Both are valuable. The million-dollar question is how to strike the balance.

    Thursday, August 27, 2009

    Test

    Blogging using email.

    Leadership

    An excerpt form Seth's book Tribes:

    Leadership is scarce because few people are willing to go through the discomfort required to lead.

    The scarcity makes leadership valuable. If everyone tries to lead all the time, not much happens. It’s discomfort that creates the leverage that makes leadership worthwhile.

    In other words, if everyone could do it, they would, and it wouldn’t be worth much.

    It’s uncomfortable to stand up in front of strangers.
    It’s uncomfortable to propose an idea that might fail.
    It’s uncomfortable to challenge the status quo.
    It’s uncomfortable to resist the urge to settle.

    When you identify the discomfort, you’ve found the place where a leader is needed.

    If you’re not uncomfortable in your work as a leader, it’s almost certain you’re not reaching your potential as a leader.
    Here is another excerpt from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.
    She[Dagny] took positions of responsibility because there was no one else to take them. There were a few rare men of talent around her, but they were becoming rarer every year. Her superiors, who held the authority, seemed afraid to exercise it, they spent their time avoiding decisions, so she told people what to do and they did it.

    At every step of her rise, she did the work long before she was granted the title. It was like advancing through empty rooms. Nobody opposed her, yet nobody approved of her progress.

    Tuesday, August 25, 2009

    Dan Pink on the surprising science of motivation | Video on TED.com

    Dan Pink on the surprising science of motivation | Video on TED.com

    Surprising? Maybe not. The "science" known to general public is handpicked by the privileged few for their benefit.

    Is it gonna change? Probably.

    Watch this with the book "Free".

    Tuesday, August 11, 2009

    read to confirm?

    Sentences to ponder via Seth:

    Some people read business books looking for confirmation. I read them in search of disquiet. Confirmation is cheap, easy and ineffective. Restlessness and the scientific method, on the other hand, create a culture of testing and inquiry that can't help but push you forward.

    Thursday, August 06, 2009

    Niall Ferguson - A Bit of Blather with Bookworms then it’s off for a Wild Swim

    Sentences to ponder:

    The fatal flaw of Versailles, we concurred, was the attempt by Woodrow Wilson to draw the map of Europe on the principle of self-determination, whereby states and peoples would be one and the same.
    This overlooked the fact that eastern Europe was a heterogeneous patchwork of ethnic, linguistic and religious groups. It also created a contradiction, since applying self-determination consistently would have made Germany bigger than it had been before the first world war.
    You only have to spend a little time in the Welsh Marches to see the dangers of idealising the homogeneous nation-state. People move and mingle; you can’t pin blood and soil together.


    Niall Ferguson - A Bit of Blather with Bookworms then it’s off for a Wild Swim

    Thursday, July 30, 2009

    Google voice on iphone

    Google Voice provides a lot attractive service, and it is expanding its users though more extensive "invitation".

    But, the iphone apps are blocked, both google official app and the third party GV Mobile. A lot of noises were generated during last days. It seems ATT denied the resposibility for this. Well, Apple does not any incentive to do this other than to please the carrier, ATT. The rhetorics from ATT might be a sign, we might be able to see it in apple store some time. If it does not happen, I will simply jailbreak the iphone.

    The 2-year contracts with ATT sucks, but I can live with it. It is another thing if ATT/Apple continue to block good apps, and jailbreak is just one click button away anyway.

    Monday, July 27, 2009

    The Great American Bubble Machine?

    In Rolling Stone Issue 1082-83, Matt Taibbi takes on "the Wall Street Bubble Mafia" — investment bank Goldman Sachs. Finally, it is online.

    Wednesday, July 15, 2009

    Keep a baby photo in your wallet

    so that, you will have a larger chance to get it back once you lose it according a research.

    When faced with the photograph of the baby people were far more likely to send the wallet back, the study found. In fact, only one in ten were hard-hearted enough not to do so. With no picture to tug at the emotions, just one in seven were sent back.

    iphone app (again)

    Happy with my iphone so far. Apps store provides plenty of free apps. Actually, the price is not bad, say, Sims 3 for 10. So far, I limit myself to free apps only.

    Nimbuzz has push as an IM client.
    Fstream provides online radio
    Stanza has some Chinese catalog. It kills a lot of my time.
    WebMD is nice to have.
    Lyrical displays lyric while playing with iPod.
    Textplus+ sends free text sms.

    Monday, June 29, 2009

    A what-man

    I've never had a walkman, not the cassette player, not the disc player, nor the Sony-Ericson cell phone. I had an Aiwa digital portable cassette player, which is definitely a luxary for a high-school and later college student. It is heavy, which means quality is good, in the old days. That is, it is not made from cheap plastics, but real metal.
    What would today's teeangers say about the Walkman? BBC has the answer.

    Giving up my iPod for a Walkman

    When the Sony Walkman was launched, 30 years ago this week, it started a revolution in portable music. But how does it compare with its digital successors? The Magazine invited 13-year-old Scott Campbell to swap his iPod for a Walkman for a week.

    My dad had told me it was the iPod of its day.

    He had told me it was big, but I hadn't realised he meant THAT big. It was the size of a small book.

    When I saw it for the first time, its colour also struck me. Nowadays gadgets come in a rainbow of colours but this was only one shade - a bland grey.

    LISTEN UP TEENAGERS... THE CLASSIC WALKMAN EXPLAINED
  • 1: Clunky buttons
  • 2: Switch to metal (that's a type of cassette, not heavy rock music)
  • 3: Battery light - usually found flickering in its death throes
  • 4: Double headphone jack (not to be found on an iPod)
  • 5: Door ejects - watch out for flying tapes and eye injuries
  • So it's not exactly the most aesthetically pleasing choice of music player. If I was browsing in a shop maybe I would have chosen something else.

    From a practical point of view, the Walkman is rather cumbersome, and it is certainly not pocket-sized, unless you have large pockets. It comes with a handy belt clip screwed on to the back, yet the weight of the unit is enough to haul down a low-slung pair of combats.

    When I wore it walking down the street or going into shops, I got strange looks, a mixture of surprise and curiosity, that made me a little embarrassed.

    As I boarded the school bus, where I live in Aberdeenshire, I was greeted with laughter. One boy said: "No-one uses them any more." Another said: "Groovy." Yet another one quipped: "That would be hard to lose."

    My friends couldn't imagine their parents using this monstrous box, but there was interest in what the thing was and how it worked.

    In some classes in school they let me listen to music and one teacher recognised it and got nostalgic.

    It took me three days to figure out that there was another side to the tape. That was not the only naive mistake that I made; I mistook the metal/normal switch on the Walkman for a genre-specific equaliser, but later I discovered that it was in fact used to switch between two different types of cassette.

    I managed to create an impromptu shuffle feature simply by holding down 'rewind' and releasing it randomly

    Another notable feature that the iPod has and the Walkman doesn't is "shuffle", where the player selects random tracks to play. Its a function that, on the face of it, the Walkman lacks. But I managed to create an impromptu shuffle feature simply by holding down "rewind" and releasing it randomly - effective, if a little laboured.

    I told my dad about my clever idea. His words of warning brought home the difference between the portable music players of today, which don't have moving parts, and the mechanical playback of old. In his words, "Walkmans eat tapes". So my clumsy clicking could have ended up ruining my favourite tape, leaving me music-less for the rest of the day.

    Digital relief

    Throughout my week using the Walkman, I came to realise that I have very little knowledge of technology from the past. I made a number of naive mistakes, but I also learned a lot about the grandfather of the MP3 Player.

    You can almost imagine the excitement about the Walkman coming out 30 years ago, as it was the newest piece of technology at the time.

    Perhaps that kind of anticipation and excitement has been somewhat lost in the flood of new products which now hit our shelves on a regular basis.

    Personally, I'm relieved I live in the digital age, with bigger choice, more functions and smaller devices. I'm relieved that the majority of technological advancement happened before I was born, as I can't imagine having to use such basic equipment every day.

    Having said all that, portable music is better than no music.

    Now, for technically curious readers, I've directly compared the portable cassette player with its latter-day successor. Here are the main cons, and even a pro, I found with this piece of antique technology.

    SOUND

    This is the function that matters most. To make the music play, you push the large play button. It engages with a satisfying clunk, unlike the finger tip tap for the iPod.

    When playing, it is clearly evident that the music sounds significantly different than when played on an MP3 player, mainly because of the hissy backtrack and odd warbly noises on the Walkman.

    The warbling is probably because of the horrifically short battery life; it is nearly completely dead within three hours of firing it up. Not long after the music warbled into life, it abruptly ended.

    CONVENIENCE

    With the plethora of MP3 players available on the market nowadays, each boasting bigger and better features than its predecessor, it is hard to imagine the prospect of purchasing and using a bulky cassette player instead of a digital device.

    Furthermore, there were a number of buttons protruding from the top and sides of this device to provide functions such as "rewinding" and "fast-forwarding" (remember those?), which added even more bulk.

    As well as this, the need for changing tapes is bothersome in itself. The tapes which I had could only hold around 12 tracks each, a fraction of the capacity of the smallest iPod.

    Did my dad, Alan, really ever think this was a credible piece of technology?

    "I remembered it fondly as a way to enjoy what music I liked, where I liked," he said. "But when I see it now, I wonder how I carried it!"

    WALKMAN 1, MP3 PLAYER 0

    But it's not all a one-way street when you line up a Walkman against an iPod. The Walkman actually has two headphone sockets, labelled A and B, meaning the little music that I have, I can share with friends. To plug two pairs of headphones in to an iPod, you have to buy a special adapter.

    Another useful feature is the power socket on the side, so that you can plug the Walkman into the wall when you're not on the move. But given the dreadful battery life, I guess this was an outright necessity rather than an extra function.

    Ahhh - the good ol' days, before MP3 players... This was state of the art when I was growing up (in the mid 80s), and my original Walkman is still going strong. It was the one with the metal case, and survived more than one drop off the desk. The only drawback was the fact that I had to have the "rubber bands" replaced on a regular basis - but at least you could repair it, unlike the successors. Ok - the battery life wasn't great, but you could overcome that by using the mains adaptor when you were hiding in your room. Karen, Leamington Spa

    I've got really fond memories of my Walkman from 1999 - my boyfriend had a CD player (bulky) and minted mates had MiniDiscs (too expensive) but I loved making mixtapes for friends and personalising the labels. It wasn't anywhere near as big as the one in this story - then again, thank God flares were in fashion and we all had such massive pockets! Maggie Stuart, London, UK

    Oh - how I laughed when I read Scott's account: it's all true! It's so hard now to see how excited we were to have these - but looking back, not only were they bulky, but if you wanted to listen to more than one album you had to carry pockets-full of tapes. If you waved them back and forward the sound also went warbly and I can vividly remember the great advancement for the '2nd generation': auto change direction which meant you didn't have to turn the tape over when you got to the end!! Rob, Dalkeith

    I've had several mp3 players, the batteries last for random times as I can never find a USB cable with a silly connector, mp3 players also do not switch off they just go until they're flat. They work randomly as the software which thrown together in a sweat shop is utter rubbish. The headphones invariably last a period measured in days if you don't lose them in the first place, I also had to put a carabiner on my player that makes a nonsense of its minute size, otherwise I just lose it for weeks on end. Being a control freak, I can't stand the "shuffle" function and I lose patience about having to fire up a PC and faff with deleting and copying files. I had a walkman, for years and years, with one set of headphones, it worked Jeff, Glos

    I remember some young people going out wearing these as a sort of status symbol, even if they had no batteries!

    However they still have a role; I got one from eBay for my partially sighted dad so he can play his audio books. Troy, Basildon, Essex

    I remember my first few Walkmen - I say few, as I must have had at least three or four of them during my adolescence due to death by seaside, breakfast food, motor exhaustion, melting, etc. They were a source of both great joy and incredible frustration, as you either had to deliberately break up any journey to buy batteries, or carry a pack with you, everywhere you went. They also chewed up and spat out tapes, especially mix tapes of great sentimental value with alarming regularity, and as battery juice ran out, the motor would slow, risking stretching the tape to a sound that DJs would love, but that drove everyone else crazy! Katherine, London

    Ahhhhh, I was never rich enough to own a Walkman. I had two or three "other" manufacturer versions in latter years. I do remember I had a rich friend who got one the week they came out. I was absolutely astounded with the sound quality. It was a brilliant piece of technology for its day and I recall that its launch was as hyped as that for the iPod. Andy, MIlton Keynes, UK

    Interesting that Scott thinks that "the majority of technological advancement happened before I was born". Don't you think that's what we all thought, all those years ago? I've every expectation that in 25 years time Scott's children will be looking with horror at the iPods of old and Scott will be scratching his head and trying to keep up with the latest developments. Anne-Marie, London

    I remember listening to the Walkman for the first time on a school picnic in 1985. I was 11 years old then. We were in the school bus and this classmate of mine proudly started flaunting his Walkman that one of his uncles' had got him from the US. I had absolutely no idea what it was until he asked me to put on the headphones. With me in anticipation he then pressed "Play". I swear I can never forget what my first song on the Walkman sounded like. The song was Michael Jackson's "Wanna be starting something" and the way I could appreciate different sounds in spatial, 3D clarity was amazing. I begged my classmate to let me listen to one more song but he was a shrewd businessman. Before he hit the play button again I had to pay a fee for the liberty of listening to his prized possession! Dr Maajed J. Wani, Srinagar, Kashmir, India

    I use both, however my Walkman is a (what was state of the art) Sony WM-DD3 direct drive (no warbling) Dolby Noise reduction (no hiss). Although the latter obviously is physically larger and far inferior in terms of track capacity to an iPod or equivalent, what it does do is beat my digital device hands down when it comes to dynamic range, sound quality and richness. Secondly, since a cassette is typically no longer than 45 minutes in length, I am thankfully limited to my oblivion of the world around me and the annoyance to others especially on public transport. Quality not quantity Paul, Beeston Notts

    The Sony Walkman was fairly pricey and a lot of us had to make do with cheaper versions. Many of these personal stereos (as they were called in the UK) lacked a 'rewind' function which meant the listener had to repeatedly flip the cassette over, 'fast-forward' a while, then flip the tape back! The double headphone socket was another feature lacking in the cheaper makes but a further social-friendly feature on later models of the Walkman was the big orange 'hotline' button. If someone wanted to say something to the listener, they could hold this down and it would mute the music so they could be heard. Rechargeable batteries and an 'anti-roll' mechanism were essential if you truly wanted to enjoy music on the move in those days. Lee Morgan, Isle of Wight

    Wednesday, June 24, 2009

    My iphone apps

    • Tweetdeck
    • LinkedIn
    • IM+ (not able to work background)
    • Zillow
    • Yelp
    • Pandora
    • Stanza
    • WebMD
    • Starry Night (web application)
    • Zoho
    • TED (broken in OS 3.0)

    Wanted List:
    • Podcast client
    • Painter (finger drawing)
    Not Available yet
    • Fidelity client apps

    Friday, June 19, 2009

    Detriot as Next Bangalore?

    Chris Yeh propsed to make detroit an outsourcing center.

    Intriguing idea. As I know there are many talented people working for the auto industry, and are now probably looking for jobs. I was told by a friend coming from there that there is a billboard in Detriot saying "The last one leaving, please turn off the light." A lot already moved out, but many still staying. It would be a waste of talent to let those experenced engineers and professionals doing nothing except for collecting UI checks.

    However, I doubt how likely we can see Detroit booming again. Probably the best are the ones leaving earliest and the education is not doing well either. With declining talent pool, instead of of fast-growing one as in India or China, how could it compete?

    Thursday, June 18, 2009

    134.5 Billion?

    Treasury officials says they are fake. Supposedly this will bring an end to the Tom Clancy type of story that two Japaneses tried to smuggle 134.5 billions worth of U.S. bonds from Italy to Switzerland. That is 249 Federal Reserve bonds worth $500 million each, ten so-called “Kennedy” bonds and other U.S. government securities worth a billion dollars each. Italy must have wished they are authentic, so that they can fine 40% of the sum. A nice pay day, it would have been.

    Interestingly, last year. The Dallas Morning News reported:

    Federal authorities charged a Dallas woman in connection with a scam to sell billions of dollars in fraudulent Federal Reserve notes, including some with a face value of $500 million.

    . . . "You would think the half billion dollar denomination would be a dead giveaway that these notes are fake, but people are nevertheless taken in," Jennifer Silliman, special agent in charge for ICE's office of investigations in Los Angeles, said in a written statement.
    An coincidence, issued date in both cases, 1934.

    I have some questions till wanting answers. Did any one bought the bonds? If yes, who and for how much? And for what?

    Open source Risk Rating

    Via Kevin Lan, Risk Rating Goes to Open Source. Please check their website, www.freerisk.org

    The notorious rating game needs an end. Open source might be the answer. Or not, if the statistical models are obscure, the data source are scattered, being open source does not imply being clear and understandable. Interesting one of the co-founders is also founder of Certainty Labs, which promises to: "make models and projections easier and bring transparency to the risks your project". That sounds like to be the quality we want to be brought into the rating games.

    The website also states that other co-founder is deemed a “Person of Exceptional Ability” by the USCIS. What does USCIS(immigration) have to say about a techonology startup? Probably it is a EB-2 Green Card. Handshake.

    Wednesday, June 17, 2009

    Stark warnings to China Bulls

    Albert Edwards warned the coming bear trigger by the China disappointment. He has a good track record. He was previously vilified then praised for calling the 1997 Asian Bubble, and called for a imminent Equity Market Meltdown last Semptember.

    Qutoed from FT.com

    View of the Day: China bulls will be let down

    By Albert Edwards

    Published: June 17 2009 15:09 | Last updated: June 17 2009 15:09


    The wholehearted belief in China’s economic recovery could turn out to be the biggest disappointment yet for investors, warns Albert Edwards, global strategist at Société Générale.

    “The ongoing enthusiasm for all things China reminds me of the way investors were almost totally blind to the fact the US growth miracle was built on sand,” he says.

    “We saw this same investor mania 13 years ago with the Asian Bubble, which the consensus thought was a growth miracle.”

    At the heart of Mr Edwards’ scepticism lies doubts about the accuracy of official data releases.

    “The Chinese data is derided by economic commentators,” he notes. “Many have highlighted that GDP growth seems inconsistent with other data, such as electricity output. Yet few dare to point out that the emperors’ clothes might be absent – and when they do, they are met with robust official rebuttals.”

    “That is not to say that the fiscal stimulus has not had a beneficial effect on Chinese activity this year. What I question is the quaint notion that the Chinese economy can grow at a respectable rate when the rest of the world is in a deep recession.

    “I believe the bullish group-think on China is just as vulnerable to massive disappointment as any other extreme of bubble nonsense I have seen over the last two decades.

    “The fall to earth will be equally as shocking.”

    Wednesday, June 10, 2009

    Business plot

    Via Business pundit, the business plot is something worth investigating.
    In the summer of 1933, shortly after Roosevelt's "First 100 Days," America's richest businessmen were in a panic. It was clear that Roosevelt intended to conduct a massive redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Roosevelt had to be stopped at all costs. ...
    I also found the story pertinent because the government is engaged in its biggest economic rescue since FDR. If high-powered politicians and businessman were able to band together in an attempted coup then, what’s stopping them now? Better surveillance, perhaps? A more centralized government?
    Does it ring a bell?


    Hard Books

    Via Chronicle of higher education, Peter Dougherty at Princeton University Press argues that there is a special place for scholarly publishing, or the university presses like the one he works for.
    Hard ideas define a culture — that of serious reading, an institution vital to democracy itself. In a recent article, Stephen L. Carter, Yale law professor and novelist, underscores "the importance of reading books that are difficult. Long books. Hard books. Books with which we have to struggle. The hard work of serious reading mirrors the hard work of serious governing — and, in a democracy, governing is a responsibility all citizens share." The challenge for university presses is to better turn our penchant for hard ideas to greater purpose.
    It is true, but I think he missed the point. He begins the essay with Shannon's influential book The Mathematical Theory of Communication and points to numerous other influential books published by university presses. It does not help either. If the society has no patience for anything longer than twitter's 140 character, there is no place for books, let alone hard books. It is not presses, but it is the readers. Newspapers only carry yesterday's news. Books become out-dated even before they hit the press machine, with exception to the Twilight series. Maybe not even the twilight, I don't mind waiting for the DVDs with oversized poster of Robert Pattinson.

    There were no educated mass 100 years ago, so why worry if only a handful of people would like to read books and the so called educated no longer read seriously?

    By the way, I think Shannon's theory of commucation has little, if anything, to do with destroying the press. It is not the hard form, paper or digital, makes the difference. It is the contents. A book in the form of PDF, html or KINDLE is still a book.

    iphone 3gs

    Just pre-ordered iphone 3gs from ATT.com with 35% bing cashback. It is a nice deal. But remember to disable the adblock if you are using firefox.

    Just "bing" att wireless, and the att store will show up as a sponsor link with 35% bing cashback.

    Unfortunately, upgrade not eligible for bing cashback, and only one iphone per address from online. The phone will be shipped after 6/19.

    Monday, June 08, 2009

    What can money buy? Search engine version

    Via TechCruch, Bing overtook yahoo's #2, but only for one day.



    Maybe it is not the best way to spend millions of dollars. It is not too difficult to buy hype, but much more difficult to buy loyalty. Even though BING is good, but it is not great yet. It is just another but-its-not-google search engine. We would like to keep it around so that google will not sleep on their technology front, and we can use it as an alternative from time to time.

    Wednesday, June 03, 2009

    Seth explains Bing

    Seth made two important points. First, there is need out there for next google, because google is not broken. $100M could be much better spent (to change the world) instead of buying a brand.

    The next Google

    Microsoft, home of the Zune, has just announced that they're going to launch Bing, a rebranding and reformatting of their search engine. So far, they've earmarked $100 million just for the marketing.

    Bing, of course, stands for But It's Not Google. The problem, as far as I can tell, is that it is trying to be the next Google. And the challenge for Microsoft is that there already is a next Google. It's called Google.

    Google is not seen as broken by many people, and a hundred million dollars trying to persuade us that it is, is money poorly spent. In times of change, the rule is this:

    Don't try to be the 'next'. Instead, try to be the other, the changer, the new.

    If Microsoft adds a few features and they prove popular, how long precisely will it take Google to mirror or even leapfrog those features?

    With $100 million, you could build (or even buy) something remarkable. Something that spread online without benefit of a lot of yelling and shouting. Something that changes the game in a fundamental way. The internet works best when you build a network, not when you buy a brand. In fact, I can't think of one successful online brand that was built with cash.

    [For an answer to the popular question: "The next Seth Godin" and a few more pithy Q&A, click here]

    [For a preview of the real next Google, check out this presentation of Google Wave. As a presentation geek, I need to point out that the intro (the first 2 minutes) is a fantastic example of how someone (you?) can stand up in front of 4,000 people with no slides and make a significant introduction with no hesitation and no apologies.]