Showing posts with label civilization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label civilization. Show all posts
Sunday, January 17, 2016
Monday, October 12, 2015
Investing In The Humanities' Material Future
Tonight I attended the Commonwealth Club's program "Living in the Material World: The Future of the Humanities" to see how the experts from California Humanities and Joint Venture Silicon Valley plan to save the liberal arts. I am intrigued with how data and technology now allow starving artists to prosper.
The humanities have always needed champions. Rich families like the Medicis were legendary for their patronage of the arts. The catch is that it took huge piles of wealth to sponsor a significant amount of art. The Commonwealth Club's panelists noted the gradual slide of the humanities in university life from a common language of civic engagement in the Middle Ages to an afterthought today. Turning the tide means advocates need evidence that the humanities matter in a modern economy.
The evidence for the humanities' commercial viability abounds. The AAC+U and NCHEMS released a report in January 2014 documenting the long-term viability of liberal arts degrees in the job market. Our Club panelists noted anecdotal evidence that senior business leaders hire liberal arts grads for the broad-minded soft skills that aren't taught in business schools. Check out the Council of Independent Colleges' Power of Liberal Arts for confirmation that the humanities add value in business. It looks like English majors offer way more than a punch line for sketches on Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion.
One comment about successfully marketing museum visits to families was notable for what it implied about business. The tactic is viable because a live experience with loved ones is immediately shareable with what sociologists call an affinity group. Social media enables individuals to share their atomized experiences, but a photo of several family members allows sharing to instantly cross two or more affinity networks. Hey folks, that's the kind of business insight a non-humanities major like me brings to the table.
I am a fairly recent convert to the conversion of STEM education to STEAM, inclusive of the "A" for arts. I first noticed this change underway when I attended the Maker Faire Bay Area in 2013 and I was skeptical of its intent. I had gone from skepticism to acceptance at DesignCon 2014 because STEAM can prompt engineers to be more than linear thinkers. Technical domain experts increasingly realize that the STEAM paradigm incorporates the added value of the humanities.
There is enough room in the digital age for potentially unlimited attention to the humanities. The panel's Silicon Valley executive who performs commercially viable music after hours brings the quality focus and businesslike work ethic that the rest of the arts community should absorb. People working hybrid careers are the bridges between all of these worlds.
I still think some traditional academics will be very frustrated as MOOCs push traditional classroom education into obsolescence, regardless of whether Common Core's Socratic methods catch fire in classrooms. I'm pretty sure an AI avatar on a tablet can machine-learn its way through enough online interactions to make a simulacrum of Socratic instruction viable in MOOC curricula. I look forward to the first AI-driven MOOC platform that goes IPO. The humanities can finally enable money-making 21st Century enterprises.
The humanities have always needed champions. Rich families like the Medicis were legendary for their patronage of the arts. The catch is that it took huge piles of wealth to sponsor a significant amount of art. The Commonwealth Club's panelists noted the gradual slide of the humanities in university life from a common language of civic engagement in the Middle Ages to an afterthought today. Turning the tide means advocates need evidence that the humanities matter in a modern economy.
The evidence for the humanities' commercial viability abounds. The AAC+U and NCHEMS released a report in January 2014 documenting the long-term viability of liberal arts degrees in the job market. Our Club panelists noted anecdotal evidence that senior business leaders hire liberal arts grads for the broad-minded soft skills that aren't taught in business schools. Check out the Council of Independent Colleges' Power of Liberal Arts for confirmation that the humanities add value in business. It looks like English majors offer way more than a punch line for sketches on Garrison Keillor's A Prairie Home Companion.
One comment about successfully marketing museum visits to families was notable for what it implied about business. The tactic is viable because a live experience with loved ones is immediately shareable with what sociologists call an affinity group. Social media enables individuals to share their atomized experiences, but a photo of several family members allows sharing to instantly cross two or more affinity networks. Hey folks, that's the kind of business insight a non-humanities major like me brings to the table.
I am a fairly recent convert to the conversion of STEM education to STEAM, inclusive of the "A" for arts. I first noticed this change underway when I attended the Maker Faire Bay Area in 2013 and I was skeptical of its intent. I had gone from skepticism to acceptance at DesignCon 2014 because STEAM can prompt engineers to be more than linear thinkers. Technical domain experts increasingly realize that the STEAM paradigm incorporates the added value of the humanities.
There is enough room in the digital age for potentially unlimited attention to the humanities. The panel's Silicon Valley executive who performs commercially viable music after hours brings the quality focus and businesslike work ethic that the rest of the arts community should absorb. People working hybrid careers are the bridges between all of these worlds.
I still think some traditional academics will be very frustrated as MOOCs push traditional classroom education into obsolescence, regardless of whether Common Core's Socratic methods catch fire in classrooms. I'm pretty sure an AI avatar on a tablet can machine-learn its way through enough online interactions to make a simulacrum of Socratic instruction viable in MOOC curricula. I look forward to the first AI-driven MOOC platform that goes IPO. The humanities can finally enable money-making 21st Century enterprises.
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Liberty And Engaged Citizens
Prosperity and liberty go together well in cultures that tolerate experimentation and respect for the individual. Writing about investment theories and market action is probably not enough to galvanize support for the enabling culture of economic prosperity. Two writers who may be able to help have recently crossed my radar. Charles Murray, author of By the People, and Larry Gerston, author of Reviving Citizen Engagement, recently spoke at the Commonwealth Club about how to re-energize Americans' concern for public life. I will offer my own thoughts below.
Mr. Murray approaches freedom from the conservative / libertarian right. Curtailing the intrusive power of government regulation would indeed be a boon to the US economy. I suggest he put his ideas to the free market test and crowdfund his proposed legal defense fund. I am generally not fond of those who thumb their noses at the rule of law, but Dr. Martin Luther King elevated it to a moral necessity in the face of unjust laws. Funding his legal defense while he contemplated action in Birmingham's jail would clearly have been a morally correct action. I must also caution those who think human history is an unbroken line of progress to higher states of maturity, freedom, and organization. Things do collapse sometimes despite the best efforts of well-meaning leaders.
Mr. Gerston arrives from the progressive left to critique Americans' disengagement. I agree with him that corporate tax loopholes and the erosion of economic security for workers are bad for prosperity and freedom. I would add that they are just as bad as over-regulation. I am totally on board with his idea for mandatory national service. A couple of years in the US military or a community service program would teach many otherwise entitled Americans that their rights come with civic obligations. Tax reform would work if it dramatically simplified the tax code but I doubt Mr. Gerston's proposed tax increase would pay for the unfunded GAAP liabilities of our entitlement programs. He would benefit from reading David Stockman's critiques of income inequality before he offers solutions emphasizing wealth redistribution.
I recently blogged about what a just society means. Real solutions throughout American history have come from both the right and the left at various times. Diagnosing social problems and working for solutions requires a citizenry engaged in guarding its own liberty. I would very much like to see my fellow citizens assume the task.
Mr. Murray approaches freedom from the conservative / libertarian right. Curtailing the intrusive power of government regulation would indeed be a boon to the US economy. I suggest he put his ideas to the free market test and crowdfund his proposed legal defense fund. I am generally not fond of those who thumb their noses at the rule of law, but Dr. Martin Luther King elevated it to a moral necessity in the face of unjust laws. Funding his legal defense while he contemplated action in Birmingham's jail would clearly have been a morally correct action. I must also caution those who think human history is an unbroken line of progress to higher states of maturity, freedom, and organization. Things do collapse sometimes despite the best efforts of well-meaning leaders.
Mr. Gerston arrives from the progressive left to critique Americans' disengagement. I agree with him that corporate tax loopholes and the erosion of economic security for workers are bad for prosperity and freedom. I would add that they are just as bad as over-regulation. I am totally on board with his idea for mandatory national service. A couple of years in the US military or a community service program would teach many otherwise entitled Americans that their rights come with civic obligations. Tax reform would work if it dramatically simplified the tax code but I doubt Mr. Gerston's proposed tax increase would pay for the unfunded GAAP liabilities of our entitlement programs. He would benefit from reading David Stockman's critiques of income inequality before he offers solutions emphasizing wealth redistribution.
I recently blogged about what a just society means. Real solutions throughout American history have come from both the right and the left at various times. Diagnosing social problems and working for solutions requires a citizenry engaged in guarding its own liberty. I would very much like to see my fellow citizens assume the task.
Tuesday, July 21, 2015
Brief Thoughts On A Just Society
I attended a lively philosophical discussion last night at the Commonwealth Club under the auspices of its Socrates Cafe. We discussed what a just society meant, and many highly intelligent people weighed in on fairness, equality, and love. I threw my own thoughts into the mix a few times. I want to note a couple of things here that may benefit others who aren't privy to such discussions.
I believe John Rawls' A Theory Of Justice clarifies how modern societies can be fair to all of their members. His two major principles address political liberties and socioeconomic opportunities separately. The implied task for American citizens is to build a society that maximizes these two principles for as many of our fellow citizens as possible. Building a just society along these lines requires metrics that show us what success will look like. I believe the application of Big Data in a globalized economy can now bring the just society within reach.
My longtime readers know that I use widely regarded development indexes to evaluate country-specific investment risks. The best are Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index and the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom. I believe Transparency's index corresponds well with Rawls' first principle for political liberties and the Heritage index works for his second principle on economics. In other words, these Big Data repositories enable Americans to benchmark their society's fairness against other countries.
We don't have to stop with two measuring tools. The World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index supports stronger jurisprudence in countries with weak legal traditions. The National Center for Access to Justice publishes a Justice Index for states within the US. Our Constitution promises every state a republican form of government, implying a strong rule of law and a fair legal system. Every American deserves to live in a society that delivers as much justice as is humanly possible. Fixing our systems means first measuring them to see where they need repair.
I believe John Rawls' A Theory Of Justice clarifies how modern societies can be fair to all of their members. His two major principles address political liberties and socioeconomic opportunities separately. The implied task for American citizens is to build a society that maximizes these two principles for as many of our fellow citizens as possible. Building a just society along these lines requires metrics that show us what success will look like. I believe the application of Big Data in a globalized economy can now bring the just society within reach.
My longtime readers know that I use widely regarded development indexes to evaluate country-specific investment risks. The best are Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index and the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom. I believe Transparency's index corresponds well with Rawls' first principle for political liberties and the Heritage index works for his second principle on economics. In other words, these Big Data repositories enable Americans to benchmark their society's fairness against other countries.
We don't have to stop with two measuring tools. The World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index supports stronger jurisprudence in countries with weak legal traditions. The National Center for Access to Justice publishes a Justice Index for states within the US. Our Constitution promises every state a republican form of government, implying a strong rule of law and a fair legal system. Every American deserves to live in a society that delivers as much justice as is humanly possible. Fixing our systems means first measuring them to see where they need repair.
Saturday, July 04, 2015
Epigenetic Elitism In The Near Future
Civilizations are never trapped in amber. They change as their ruling classes change priorities and tastes. Two recent news items point the way to our civilization's next incarnation.
First, Stanford will grant free tuition to some capable middle-class students. The ruling elite's noblesse oblige sensibility has been dormant for at least a generation, so this may be an attempted restoration. The policy is less useful as a marketing ploy for low-income social groups whose children lack Stanford's prerequisites. Second, significant life experiences cause epigenetic changes in brain chemistry that subsequent generations inherit. Good experiences like occupational achievement, successful romantic conquests, and wealth-enhancing choices thus increase genetic quality. Bad experiences for less fortunate people (like stress from child abuse or abandonment) decrease inclusive fitness.
The connection between the two items deserves explanation. Upper-class citizens tend to have above average life experiences. They obtain high-quality social goods like education, jobs, and romantic relationships with greater ease and frequency than lower-class people. These kinds of people comprise the vast majority of the student body at Stanford and other top schools that won't need a tuition waiver. They will not willingly associate with anyone from the free-riding minority who do not inherit robust epigenetic markers.
The children from rich families who have to pay for college usually refuse to socialize with anyone getting a free education. I have experienced this phenomenon personally at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Economically disadvantaged students cannot fully benefit from a Stanford education if elite students shun them from their networks. Children of rich families at elite schools query each other's backgrounds all the time. They also consider visual markers like brand-name clothing and cars. It is easy for them to pick out the lower-class students and label them as undesirable. Their parents raised them to behave that way to preserve their family's way of life.
Elite families have long obsessed over perpetuating their bloodlines. Science now has proof that humans can self-select for genetic quality. Good epigenetic effects among the elite class will keep them well-suited for handling the stresses of high-powered occupations. Success begets success, and successful people will mate with each other to perpetuate ruling class solidarity. Wealthy people can afford trichostatin A treatments to wipe their mental slates clean and raise the epigenetic responses they will pass to their progeny. The poor may not have such an option; I can see the Affordable Care Act's controls ruling trichostatin A an elective treatment not covered by the generous taxpayer. University tuition waivers for the poor will probably not include hormone treatments to wipe away bad genetics.
Stanford and other schools can afford to throw table scraps to the lower classes while the Federal Reserve inflates asset markets. That luxury will evaporate with the next market crash. University endowment growth after the 2008 financial crisis is entirely a function of central bank monetary stimulus. The American variant of Western civilization will still have the Horatio Alger legend and other such useful myths in its future. It will have less interaction between social classes as the epigenetically fit offspring of elite families avoid their less fit fellow students at top universities.
First, Stanford will grant free tuition to some capable middle-class students. The ruling elite's noblesse oblige sensibility has been dormant for at least a generation, so this may be an attempted restoration. The policy is less useful as a marketing ploy for low-income social groups whose children lack Stanford's prerequisites. Second, significant life experiences cause epigenetic changes in brain chemistry that subsequent generations inherit. Good experiences like occupational achievement, successful romantic conquests, and wealth-enhancing choices thus increase genetic quality. Bad experiences for less fortunate people (like stress from child abuse or abandonment) decrease inclusive fitness.
The connection between the two items deserves explanation. Upper-class citizens tend to have above average life experiences. They obtain high-quality social goods like education, jobs, and romantic relationships with greater ease and frequency than lower-class people. These kinds of people comprise the vast majority of the student body at Stanford and other top schools that won't need a tuition waiver. They will not willingly associate with anyone from the free-riding minority who do not inherit robust epigenetic markers.
The children from rich families who have to pay for college usually refuse to socialize with anyone getting a free education. I have experienced this phenomenon personally at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Economically disadvantaged students cannot fully benefit from a Stanford education if elite students shun them from their networks. Children of rich families at elite schools query each other's backgrounds all the time. They also consider visual markers like brand-name clothing and cars. It is easy for them to pick out the lower-class students and label them as undesirable. Their parents raised them to behave that way to preserve their family's way of life.
Elite families have long obsessed over perpetuating their bloodlines. Science now has proof that humans can self-select for genetic quality. Good epigenetic effects among the elite class will keep them well-suited for handling the stresses of high-powered occupations. Success begets success, and successful people will mate with each other to perpetuate ruling class solidarity. Wealthy people can afford trichostatin A treatments to wipe their mental slates clean and raise the epigenetic responses they will pass to their progeny. The poor may not have such an option; I can see the Affordable Care Act's controls ruling trichostatin A an elective treatment not covered by the generous taxpayer. University tuition waivers for the poor will probably not include hormone treatments to wipe away bad genetics.
Stanford and other schools can afford to throw table scraps to the lower classes while the Federal Reserve inflates asset markets. That luxury will evaporate with the next market crash. University endowment growth after the 2008 financial crisis is entirely a function of central bank monetary stimulus. The American variant of Western civilization will still have the Horatio Alger legend and other such useful myths in its future. It will have less interaction between social classes as the epigenetically fit offspring of elite families avoid their less fit fellow students at top universities.
Monday, February 23, 2015
San Francisco Needs A 21st-Century International Exposition
Tonight I attended a panel discussion at the Commonwealth Club commemorating the 100th year after the Panama-Pacific International Exposition. All that I have read about that particular World's Fair makes me wish I had been alive in 1915 to attend it. San Franciscans hunger for a recreation of their glorious past. The obvious answer is to stage a new World's Fair that takes the PPIE spirit to a whole new level for the 21st Century.
The commemorations of this event began last Saturday with our Mayor and some historical reenactors at the Palace of Fine Arts. I missed the fun and I'm pretty sure only a few thousand people could have attended. Contrast that with the multitudes who came from around the United States to attend the PPIE in 1915. The Commonwealth Club's panel of historians noted that the PPIE sponsors planned ahead to build hotels and railroad connections that facilitated the transit of tourists with money to spend. The natural economic stimulus multiplied San Francisco's post-earthquake rebuilding effort.
One of the panel's final observations was to consider whether convening another fair like the PPIE would be feasible today. The attraction of commercial conventions like CES in Las Vegas is obvious. People today still like to travel to conclaves where they can personally witness technology exhibits, just as they did when the PPIE displayed that era's mechanical and electrical marvels. The difference today is the prevalence of virtualization as a substitute for a physical presence. Virtual reality interfaces like Oculus Rift promise to make the remote manipulation of physical objects an everyday activity. Convening a future World's Fair here in the Bay Area must take this into account.
Here's my modest proposal for a Virtual San Francisco World's Fair. The "virtual" part needs enough online activities to entice a Web audience to participate. Publishing some addictive freemium games online, with instant machine language translation for non-English speakers, solves the problem of generating interest in developing countries whose people cannot come to a physical World's Fair. Linking the virtual stuff to geolocated events in San Francisco closes the circle for tourists with the money and means to travel here.
The panelists mentioned that World's Fairs and other mass events tend to be tied to a local redevelopment effort. The most obvious candidate neighborhood for redevelopment in San Francisco is the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard. It has plenty of space for the local component of a virtual World's Fair. A few tens of millions to clean up some industrial waste is all it takes to make a pristine fairground.
World's Fairs continue today with little attention in mass media. They lack attention because they have become sterile corporate blah-fests that do not capture the spirit of the times. Notable World's Fairs like the PPIE, the 1939 New York World's Fair, and the 1939 Golden Gate International Exposition succeeded because they captured the zeitgeist of their respective eras. The PPIE heralded the end of the Belle Epoque, the Victorian Era, and the Gilded Age. World War One brought the modern era into being and the PPIE's organizers were wise not to postpone their fair as war clouds gathered.
When San Francisco decides to hold its next International Exposition, it must be timed to match the Fourth Turning general dynamics that drive history. The Strauss-Howe generational saeculum has entered a crisis period in most of the Anglo-West. The crisis will not be resolved without a world-shattering cataclysm, with Indian and Chinese demographic confrontations over the food-water-energy security nexus as the most likely trigger. San Francisco should plan its Expo for a date when that future crisis has passed. Hunter's Point will be derelict for years to come. It will be vacant and ready for the world's technology exhibits in a post-crisis cultural high. San Francisco will then reclaim its role as America's Pacific Rim gateway, and a postwar Pacific Rim will look to America for ways to rebuild.
The commemorations of this event began last Saturday with our Mayor and some historical reenactors at the Palace of Fine Arts. I missed the fun and I'm pretty sure only a few thousand people could have attended. Contrast that with the multitudes who came from around the United States to attend the PPIE in 1915. The Commonwealth Club's panel of historians noted that the PPIE sponsors planned ahead to build hotels and railroad connections that facilitated the transit of tourists with money to spend. The natural economic stimulus multiplied San Francisco's post-earthquake rebuilding effort.
One of the panel's final observations was to consider whether convening another fair like the PPIE would be feasible today. The attraction of commercial conventions like CES in Las Vegas is obvious. People today still like to travel to conclaves where they can personally witness technology exhibits, just as they did when the PPIE displayed that era's mechanical and electrical marvels. The difference today is the prevalence of virtualization as a substitute for a physical presence. Virtual reality interfaces like Oculus Rift promise to make the remote manipulation of physical objects an everyday activity. Convening a future World's Fair here in the Bay Area must take this into account.
Here's my modest proposal for a Virtual San Francisco World's Fair. The "virtual" part needs enough online activities to entice a Web audience to participate. Publishing some addictive freemium games online, with instant machine language translation for non-English speakers, solves the problem of generating interest in developing countries whose people cannot come to a physical World's Fair. Linking the virtual stuff to geolocated events in San Francisco closes the circle for tourists with the money and means to travel here.
The panelists mentioned that World's Fairs and other mass events tend to be tied to a local redevelopment effort. The most obvious candidate neighborhood for redevelopment in San Francisco is the Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard. It has plenty of space for the local component of a virtual World's Fair. A few tens of millions to clean up some industrial waste is all it takes to make a pristine fairground.
World's Fairs continue today with little attention in mass media. They lack attention because they have become sterile corporate blah-fests that do not capture the spirit of the times. Notable World's Fairs like the PPIE, the 1939 New York World's Fair, and the 1939 Golden Gate International Exposition succeeded because they captured the zeitgeist of their respective eras. The PPIE heralded the end of the Belle Epoque, the Victorian Era, and the Gilded Age. World War One brought the modern era into being and the PPIE's organizers were wise not to postpone their fair as war clouds gathered.
When San Francisco decides to hold its next International Exposition, it must be timed to match the Fourth Turning general dynamics that drive history. The Strauss-Howe generational saeculum has entered a crisis period in most of the Anglo-West. The crisis will not be resolved without a world-shattering cataclysm, with Indian and Chinese demographic confrontations over the food-water-energy security nexus as the most likely trigger. San Francisco should plan its Expo for a date when that future crisis has passed. Hunter's Point will be derelict for years to come. It will be vacant and ready for the world's technology exhibits in a post-crisis cultural high. San Francisco will then reclaim its role as America's Pacific Rim gateway, and a postwar Pacific Rim will look to America for ways to rebuild.
Friday, February 13, 2015
The Haiku of Finance for 02/13/15
Tech culture power
Attracting the finest minds
Move the world forward
Attracting the finest minds
Move the world forward
Bay Area Reinvention And Risk For History's Next Long Boom
Peter Leyden from Reinventors spoke today at the Commonwealth Club about how the San Francisco Bay Area is the origin of the next wave of multifaceted rejuvenation that's about to sweep the planet. It's a good sales pitch that makes me want to dive deeper into a lot of what drives this area's economic and cultural vigor.
It's easy to point to San Francisco's lifestyle diversity and the high valuations of our tech companies. Those are always highly visible because people with lots of money continually promote those things. It's harder to see what truly enables the area's innovative spirit. Mr. Leyden is correct to identify the region's cultural diversity as an enabler for collaboration and sharing ideas. I would also identify the region's strong research laboratories at Stanford and UC Berkeley, its record high density of advanced academic degrees per square mile, and history of strong government funding for technology development. Money flows to places where it gets the most work done.
We should also ask why the Silicon Valley ecosystem is replicated in other parts of the US like Boston-Cambridge and Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, but not in other countries. The key is the strength of the rule of law in the US. We lose some of that strength with every forced automobile bailout and mandatory health insurance plan.
Mr. Leyden liked to note several bonanza periods in American history as precursors for the next "long boom" the Bay Area is supposed to lead. Okay, but let's remember that world history always moves in cycles and sometimes major socioeconomic disruptions force progress off its tracks. Nothing in history moves in a linear fashion. Wars, pandemics, and forced migrations often appear when long economic booms run out of steam.
Acknowledging generational differences was one notable part of Mr. Leyden's talk that I found encouraging. I don't know whether he's read Strauss and Howe's The Fourth Turning but some of his discussion covered intergenerational psychology. I had to leave his talk early due to a schedule conflict, so perhaps he has elaborated on generational cycles elsewhere in his body of work. Analysts who are serious about generational interaction acknowledge the recurrence of crisis periods that destroy progress and force drastic social changes.
I would not go down the path of trumpeting Bay Area tech leadership based on the valuations of a select group of publicly traded tech companies. The insane valuations of Twitter, Facebook, and Tesla Motors are probably fleeting. They have more to do with the Federal Reserve's monetary stimulus than any added value they offer. The same goes for the putative valuations of Uber and Airbnb; their freelance contractors are in for a rude awakening once they start paying for the insurance they'll have to carry. Building a valuation based on outsourcing all costs and liabilities is a free lunch that eventually turns into a banquet of consequences.
I also would not go down the path of touting Moore's Law as a predictor of unlimited capacity growth in everything forever. The most serious minds in the enterprise computing sector have been debating the potential end of Moore's Law for years. Any advance in quantum computing that will put power laws back on track for unlimited growth has still not jumped from laboratories to real products. Waiting for another Moore's Law in other sectors very dependent on material science, such as electric battery storage capacity, requires a similar quantum advance. Bring on those quantum dots and nanoscale manufacturers, because we need them to manifest ASAP.
I like hearing tech evangelists go on cheerleading benders for the Bay Area. I do it myself once in a while. Nobody does it better than the Global Business Network (GBN). They just need to acknowledge severe risks given humanity's penchant for messing things up. The difference between me and other local gurus is that I study a lot more of the downside than anyone else. I drink from a half-empty glass, fed by San Francisco's tasty Hetch Hetchy water system.
It's easy to point to San Francisco's lifestyle diversity and the high valuations of our tech companies. Those are always highly visible because people with lots of money continually promote those things. It's harder to see what truly enables the area's innovative spirit. Mr. Leyden is correct to identify the region's cultural diversity as an enabler for collaboration and sharing ideas. I would also identify the region's strong research laboratories at Stanford and UC Berkeley, its record high density of advanced academic degrees per square mile, and history of strong government funding for technology development. Money flows to places where it gets the most work done.
We should also ask why the Silicon Valley ecosystem is replicated in other parts of the US like Boston-Cambridge and Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, but not in other countries. The key is the strength of the rule of law in the US. We lose some of that strength with every forced automobile bailout and mandatory health insurance plan.
Mr. Leyden liked to note several bonanza periods in American history as precursors for the next "long boom" the Bay Area is supposed to lead. Okay, but let's remember that world history always moves in cycles and sometimes major socioeconomic disruptions force progress off its tracks. Nothing in history moves in a linear fashion. Wars, pandemics, and forced migrations often appear when long economic booms run out of steam.
Acknowledging generational differences was one notable part of Mr. Leyden's talk that I found encouraging. I don't know whether he's read Strauss and Howe's The Fourth Turning but some of his discussion covered intergenerational psychology. I had to leave his talk early due to a schedule conflict, so perhaps he has elaborated on generational cycles elsewhere in his body of work. Analysts who are serious about generational interaction acknowledge the recurrence of crisis periods that destroy progress and force drastic social changes.
I would not go down the path of trumpeting Bay Area tech leadership based on the valuations of a select group of publicly traded tech companies. The insane valuations of Twitter, Facebook, and Tesla Motors are probably fleeting. They have more to do with the Federal Reserve's monetary stimulus than any added value they offer. The same goes for the putative valuations of Uber and Airbnb; their freelance contractors are in for a rude awakening once they start paying for the insurance they'll have to carry. Building a valuation based on outsourcing all costs and liabilities is a free lunch that eventually turns into a banquet of consequences.
I also would not go down the path of touting Moore's Law as a predictor of unlimited capacity growth in everything forever. The most serious minds in the enterprise computing sector have been debating the potential end of Moore's Law for years. Any advance in quantum computing that will put power laws back on track for unlimited growth has still not jumped from laboratories to real products. Waiting for another Moore's Law in other sectors very dependent on material science, such as electric battery storage capacity, requires a similar quantum advance. Bring on those quantum dots and nanoscale manufacturers, because we need them to manifest ASAP.
I like hearing tech evangelists go on cheerleading benders for the Bay Area. I do it myself once in a while. Nobody does it better than the Global Business Network (GBN). They just need to acknowledge severe risks given humanity's penchant for messing things up. The difference between me and other local gurus is that I study a lot more of the downside than anyone else. I drink from a half-empty glass, fed by San Francisco's tasty Hetch Hetchy water system.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Making Climate Change Relevant
I was part of a focus group tonight for the Commonwealth Club's Climate One initiative. My biggest takeaway was that those of us who attended the focus group and the rest of the Climate One talks are not thought leaders on the subject of climate change. This program is well-regarded and ought to have national attention, but many attendees (including me) may come away without clear calls to action. I can only wonder how a national audience reacts to the subject. Remember that this is America, land of the provincial and home of the naive.
Albert Einstein is often quoted as saying that if he had one hour to save the world, he would spend almost all of that hour defining the problem and whatever remaining time finding the solution. Some versions of that quote can't agree on how many minutes Einstein would commit to each phase. Maybe that's why Harvard Business School says we shouldn't use Einstein's pithy sayings to guide innovation. Let's instead start with first principles. What problem do humans solve by exploring climate change? If periodic climate change is a normal part of this planet's biosphere, then humans must adjust to it as they did during the Medieval Warm Period. If human activity is measurably accelerating climate change, then humans must either reverse such activity or manage the consequences. Either direction requires major changes in consumption patterns, lifestyle expectations, development incentives, and the resulting physical infrastructure humans erect on this planet's surface.
Most humans are incapable of acting on a problem unless they believe they will personally experience the consequences of inaction. The logic of Pascal's Wager is relevant to framing this problem. Acting to please a posited supreme being was Blaise Pascal's insurance policy in case such a being exists. The teleological price to pay for mitigating climate change is moderate inconvenience for most people if climate change turns out to be overblown. This is a small price to pay compared to the cost of being wrong and failing to prepare at all. Scientific arguments do not resonate with pre-scientific thinkers, like those troglodytic Americans who prefer creationist cosmologies. Religious arguments like Pascal's Wager will close the sale with them instead. The role of elite classes in civilization is to instruct the masses in moderate behavior, with nods to Leo Strauss and Carroll Quigley. Elites must get the climate change message out to the masses using religious imagery if that is what it takes. The Alliance of Religions and Conservation and the Cornwall Alliance are appropriate vehicles for crafting a message. The World Bank published a report on faiths and the environment, with helpful links to more marketing channels (ahem, faith-based organizations).
Environmental damage intersects economic development and technological progress. The Rocky Mountain Institute thinks we can have it all and I totally agree. This does not mean humans will have unlimited options. Our choices are constrained by existing infrastructure, much of which is automobile-centric and crumbling from overuse by humans who believe easy motoring is a birthright. Technocratic elites floated trial balloons this past decade of the hydrogen economy and the glucose economy, neither of which have materialized due to the high switching costs of existing petrochemical infrastructure. Those two approaches may yet have boutique applications but they are not perfect replacements by themselves for a portfolio of approaches civilization will need.
Climate scientists need to clean up their own act to maintain credibility with a gullible public. The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report was marred by errors that made climate change an easy target for skeptics. The Fifth Assessment Report at Climate Change 2013 is in progress and the scientific conclusions do not give rise to alarmists' doomsday scenarios. Radicals on either side plot their next move. Scientists make room for uncertainty but a non-scientific audience does not think probabilistically. This is why scientists need help from marketers in creating a salable product, namely a report that policymakers can use to form reasonable calls to action.
I maintain that the participation of the finance sector is indispensable to addressing climate change. There's money to be made. Investors like to buy Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs). Wall Street likes to sell municipal bonds that back infrastructure projects, and soon renewable energy projects will be bundled in REITs. I've mentored entrepreneurs in the Cleantech Open who are ready to get rich while they save the planet. Once again, the enthusiasm of thought leaders in finance and business doesn't translate to the lumpen Americans who tremble when things change. Elites must find ways to explain to ordinary Americans that renewable portfolio standards (RPS) will indeed raise the cost of new housing in exchange for enhancing the lifespan and resale value of the housing stock. There is no easy way to explain carbon sequestration or emissions trading regimes unless Americans understand how much money they can make personally by participating in those markets. Regulation does add costs to the economy but Americans must be told that it also opens up value-added jobs and makes room for entrepreneurial disruption.
It's very easy for enlightened San Franciscans to overlook the difficulty that car-fixated Californians will have in adjusting to climate change mitigation. I don't think the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) subsidies for low-income households are financially sustainable in this state, even with the ARB's cap-and-trade revenue. That revenue will inevitably end up in the general fund as state politicians are tempted to close our persistent budget deficits. It would be nice if it went to subsidize clean tech R&D but I won't hold my breath. Low-income Californians will simply have to reduce consumption and live where they work, which will limit many families' upward mobility. Energy use and automobile ownership may very well become upper class status symbols and California will become a test bed for this sea change in American culture.
I've said throughout this piece, in various ways, that climate change and its consequences for the ordering of human civilization must be explained to the low-information proletariat in terms they understand. Most people won't lower their expectations in life voluntarily. Messages that use fear and religion will work best in reaching the masses. I believe Climate One can test drive those messages and find willing messengers.
Albert Einstein is often quoted as saying that if he had one hour to save the world, he would spend almost all of that hour defining the problem and whatever remaining time finding the solution. Some versions of that quote can't agree on how many minutes Einstein would commit to each phase. Maybe that's why Harvard Business School says we shouldn't use Einstein's pithy sayings to guide innovation. Let's instead start with first principles. What problem do humans solve by exploring climate change? If periodic climate change is a normal part of this planet's biosphere, then humans must adjust to it as they did during the Medieval Warm Period. If human activity is measurably accelerating climate change, then humans must either reverse such activity or manage the consequences. Either direction requires major changes in consumption patterns, lifestyle expectations, development incentives, and the resulting physical infrastructure humans erect on this planet's surface.
Most humans are incapable of acting on a problem unless they believe they will personally experience the consequences of inaction. The logic of Pascal's Wager is relevant to framing this problem. Acting to please a posited supreme being was Blaise Pascal's insurance policy in case such a being exists. The teleological price to pay for mitigating climate change is moderate inconvenience for most people if climate change turns out to be overblown. This is a small price to pay compared to the cost of being wrong and failing to prepare at all. Scientific arguments do not resonate with pre-scientific thinkers, like those troglodytic Americans who prefer creationist cosmologies. Religious arguments like Pascal's Wager will close the sale with them instead. The role of elite classes in civilization is to instruct the masses in moderate behavior, with nods to Leo Strauss and Carroll Quigley. Elites must get the climate change message out to the masses using religious imagery if that is what it takes. The Alliance of Religions and Conservation and the Cornwall Alliance are appropriate vehicles for crafting a message. The World Bank published a report on faiths and the environment, with helpful links to more marketing channels (ahem, faith-based organizations).
Environmental damage intersects economic development and technological progress. The Rocky Mountain Institute thinks we can have it all and I totally agree. This does not mean humans will have unlimited options. Our choices are constrained by existing infrastructure, much of which is automobile-centric and crumbling from overuse by humans who believe easy motoring is a birthright. Technocratic elites floated trial balloons this past decade of the hydrogen economy and the glucose economy, neither of which have materialized due to the high switching costs of existing petrochemical infrastructure. Those two approaches may yet have boutique applications but they are not perfect replacements by themselves for a portfolio of approaches civilization will need.
Climate scientists need to clean up their own act to maintain credibility with a gullible public. The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report was marred by errors that made climate change an easy target for skeptics. The Fifth Assessment Report at Climate Change 2013 is in progress and the scientific conclusions do not give rise to alarmists' doomsday scenarios. Radicals on either side plot their next move. Scientists make room for uncertainty but a non-scientific audience does not think probabilistically. This is why scientists need help from marketers in creating a salable product, namely a report that policymakers can use to form reasonable calls to action.
I maintain that the participation of the finance sector is indispensable to addressing climate change. There's money to be made. Investors like to buy Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs). Wall Street likes to sell municipal bonds that back infrastructure projects, and soon renewable energy projects will be bundled in REITs. I've mentored entrepreneurs in the Cleantech Open who are ready to get rich while they save the planet. Once again, the enthusiasm of thought leaders in finance and business doesn't translate to the lumpen Americans who tremble when things change. Elites must find ways to explain to ordinary Americans that renewable portfolio standards (RPS) will indeed raise the cost of new housing in exchange for enhancing the lifespan and resale value of the housing stock. There is no easy way to explain carbon sequestration or emissions trading regimes unless Americans understand how much money they can make personally by participating in those markets. Regulation does add costs to the economy but Americans must be told that it also opens up value-added jobs and makes room for entrepreneurial disruption.
It's very easy for enlightened San Franciscans to overlook the difficulty that car-fixated Californians will have in adjusting to climate change mitigation. I don't think the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) subsidies for low-income households are financially sustainable in this state, even with the ARB's cap-and-trade revenue. That revenue will inevitably end up in the general fund as state politicians are tempted to close our persistent budget deficits. It would be nice if it went to subsidize clean tech R&D but I won't hold my breath. Low-income Californians will simply have to reduce consumption and live where they work, which will limit many families' upward mobility. Energy use and automobile ownership may very well become upper class status symbols and California will become a test bed for this sea change in American culture.
I've said throughout this piece, in various ways, that climate change and its consequences for the ordering of human civilization must be explained to the low-information proletariat in terms they understand. Most people won't lower their expectations in life voluntarily. Messages that use fear and religion will work best in reaching the masses. I believe Climate One can test drive those messages and find willing messengers.
Friday, December 06, 2013
Getting In Touch With My Inner Plutocrat
This week I attended a reception at one of San Francisco's exclusive membership clubs. I won't say the club's name and I can't even prove I attended because photography is discouraged inside. No matter. You can trust me. The finance types who invited me were absorbed in their banter about families, sports, and alumni gatherings. I made minimal niceties and paid close attention to my larger surroundings.
The club members in attendance were well-dressed, well-coiffed, and well-heeled. They were almost all over fifty years old but they still looked very attractive for their ages. The men had chiseled jawlines and the women had firm derrieres. They were at the pinnacle of their earning years and professional reputations. That's why they could afford membership in this club. They can also afford the healthy diets and advanced medical care that will maintain their physical attributes. Attractiveness is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Nothing succeeds like success.
The interactive relationship between physical attractiveness, social status, and innate characteristics is undeniable. The social sciences have substantiated that outward physical indicators of good health - high cheekbones, clearly defined jawlines, symmetrical faces - correlate with specific biochemical markers for longevity and fecundity. Handsome people produce more testosterone, which by itself is a major determinant of athletic performance and resilience under stress. Those things are enough to do well in life and accumulate the trappings of success. Tribes want their best warriors in the hunt. Humans look up to their betters and reward them with status.
The reward mechanism has now generated its own permanent feedback loop. The hunt's winners now have a multi-generational advantage thanks to intermarriage and inheritance. They are permanent residents on Mount Olympus and I was allowed to visit them for one evening. They are quite a spectacle to behold.
I have spent years studying their ways to understand how I can replicate their patterns of behavior and thus achieve comparable success. I have discovered that behavior has nothing to do with success. Any combination of persistence, education, and demonstrated competence is only so much cargo-cult thinking because it cannot replicate the true source of intergenerational success. That source is the bloodline. Hereditary elites evaluate each other as business partners and soul mates using the same criteria they use to evaluate the polo horses in their stables and the hunting dogs in their kennels. No entry to these circles is possible with a proper introduction from the household majordomo. The lords tolerate guests long enough to compare themselves favorably to their lessers. One does not enter the noble household by marriage unless one has a household of one's own, coat of arms and all.
This understanding confirms my own social standing. Whatever wealth or status I earn on my own is a mere flyspeck in the eyes of those who have been raised to preserve several hundred years of family privilege. Such privilege is not shared lightly. Interlopers must explain themselves when summoned or vacate the premises immediately. The lucky few commoners may ascend to majordomo status once they prove capable of protecting the precious bloodline.
The path to power for the powerless runs through the most transparent of fault lines. I have passed a few tests and more remain. Penetrating the plutocracy means becoming one with the moral imperative to maintain the social order. Healthy civilizations require control mechanisms and course corrections. Skilled navigators are in demand among those who can afford to fund exploration. The Mayor of the Palace often ends up running things when the absent-minded owner becomes too derelict from inbreeding to care about results. The Anglo-West's plutocracy needs me more than they know. They also know where to reach me.
The club members in attendance were well-dressed, well-coiffed, and well-heeled. They were almost all over fifty years old but they still looked very attractive for their ages. The men had chiseled jawlines and the women had firm derrieres. They were at the pinnacle of their earning years and professional reputations. That's why they could afford membership in this club. They can also afford the healthy diets and advanced medical care that will maintain their physical attributes. Attractiveness is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Nothing succeeds like success.
The interactive relationship between physical attractiveness, social status, and innate characteristics is undeniable. The social sciences have substantiated that outward physical indicators of good health - high cheekbones, clearly defined jawlines, symmetrical faces - correlate with specific biochemical markers for longevity and fecundity. Handsome people produce more testosterone, which by itself is a major determinant of athletic performance and resilience under stress. Those things are enough to do well in life and accumulate the trappings of success. Tribes want their best warriors in the hunt. Humans look up to their betters and reward them with status.
The reward mechanism has now generated its own permanent feedback loop. The hunt's winners now have a multi-generational advantage thanks to intermarriage and inheritance. They are permanent residents on Mount Olympus and I was allowed to visit them for one evening. They are quite a spectacle to behold.
I have spent years studying their ways to understand how I can replicate their patterns of behavior and thus achieve comparable success. I have discovered that behavior has nothing to do with success. Any combination of persistence, education, and demonstrated competence is only so much cargo-cult thinking because it cannot replicate the true source of intergenerational success. That source is the bloodline. Hereditary elites evaluate each other as business partners and soul mates using the same criteria they use to evaluate the polo horses in their stables and the hunting dogs in their kennels. No entry to these circles is possible with a proper introduction from the household majordomo. The lords tolerate guests long enough to compare themselves favorably to their lessers. One does not enter the noble household by marriage unless one has a household of one's own, coat of arms and all.
This understanding confirms my own social standing. Whatever wealth or status I earn on my own is a mere flyspeck in the eyes of those who have been raised to preserve several hundred years of family privilege. Such privilege is not shared lightly. Interlopers must explain themselves when summoned or vacate the premises immediately. The lucky few commoners may ascend to majordomo status once they prove capable of protecting the precious bloodline.
The path to power for the powerless runs through the most transparent of fault lines. I have passed a few tests and more remain. Penetrating the plutocracy means becoming one with the moral imperative to maintain the social order. Healthy civilizations require control mechanisms and course corrections. Skilled navigators are in demand among those who can afford to fund exploration. The Mayor of the Palace often ends up running things when the absent-minded owner becomes too derelict from inbreeding to care about results. The Anglo-West's plutocracy needs me more than they know. They also know where to reach me.
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Top Earners' Income Slices Social Stability
The top 1% are collecting a larger slice of the nation's total income than ever, or at least since just before the Great Depression. This is only good news for celebrity journalists and high-end retailers who cater to the rich and famous. The rest of us have cause for concern.
The Cato Institute once entertained an endorsement of income inequality, with the caveat that it may lead to social instability. I get the argument that enormous talent deserves enormous rewards. It does not necessarily follow that lesser talents deserve no compensatory training whatsoever. Not every profession has the winner-take-all income distribution of professional sports or pop music.
Researchers in the late 2000s first started noticing degradations in the quality of health care as income inequality increased. The ideal policy solution should have included curbs on litigation and drug development monopolies. These would have made health care more affordable for the lowest earners. Instead policymakers opted for the Affordable Care Act's protection of high-cost health care monopolies. This is the expected outcome of a captive policy elite. Income inequality supports plutocratic public policy that generates further income inequality.
Middle Eastern countries with income inequality became unstable in 2011 when price inflation put food staples out of the reach of the poor. Dr. Nouriel Roubini nailed the causes and symptoms of income inequality in a sweeping 2011 assessment of the developed world's economic models. The Fed's unlimited quantitative easing since then places food security at risk for millions of Americans if a run on the dollar leads to immediate hyperinflation.
Nature tends to correct imbalances. An income distribution skewed this far from historical norms does not last forever. The distribution of income towards the top of society only continues if every other socioeconomic indicator resides at a historic norm. Americans are not living in normal times.
The Cato Institute once entertained an endorsement of income inequality, with the caveat that it may lead to social instability. I get the argument that enormous talent deserves enormous rewards. It does not necessarily follow that lesser talents deserve no compensatory training whatsoever. Not every profession has the winner-take-all income distribution of professional sports or pop music.
Researchers in the late 2000s first started noticing degradations in the quality of health care as income inequality increased. The ideal policy solution should have included curbs on litigation and drug development monopolies. These would have made health care more affordable for the lowest earners. Instead policymakers opted for the Affordable Care Act's protection of high-cost health care monopolies. This is the expected outcome of a captive policy elite. Income inequality supports plutocratic public policy that generates further income inequality.
Middle Eastern countries with income inequality became unstable in 2011 when price inflation put food staples out of the reach of the poor. Dr. Nouriel Roubini nailed the causes and symptoms of income inequality in a sweeping 2011 assessment of the developed world's economic models. The Fed's unlimited quantitative easing since then places food security at risk for millions of Americans if a run on the dollar leads to immediate hyperinflation.
Nature tends to correct imbalances. An income distribution skewed this far from historical norms does not last forever. The distribution of income towards the top of society only continues if every other socioeconomic indicator resides at a historic norm. Americans are not living in normal times.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
NYC Cleared of OccupyWS Detritus, Hopefully SF Next
Public authorities have fulfilled their responsibilities by finally clearing the trash from Zuccotti Park in New York City. They took the tents and plywood away too, after the real trash (bums and rapists masquerading as protesters) departed. Seriously, this enforcement of public health codes was long overdue. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech and assembly but it does not provide for the "right" to create a public health hazard. Protesters are welcome to speak their minds provided they obey laws, don't obstruct traffic or commerce, and respect the rights of other citizens. The Occupy Wall Street movement is unable to conduct itself in accord with American norms.
My first-hand observations of the OccupySF encampment here in The City have confirmed that this movement has zero chance of solving financial corruption or relieving stress on the middle class. The movement as presently constituted has attracted all stripes of civilization's malcontents. No way are America's entrepreneurs and educated professionals going to find common cause with the Marxists, anarchists, and professional vagrants presently encamped at Justin Herman Plaza.
OccupySF, you've had your fun. I got your message loud and clear: You don't like money, capitalism, clean running water, working for a living, personal responsibility, or the comforts of modern civilization. Now please pack up and go home before you attract more disease to San Francisco. Wall Street's problems will be solved in the free market, with entrepreneurs launching new banks and customers moving business away from systemically unstable institutions.
My first-hand observations of the OccupySF encampment here in The City have confirmed that this movement has zero chance of solving financial corruption or relieving stress on the middle class. The movement as presently constituted has attracted all stripes of civilization's malcontents. No way are America's entrepreneurs and educated professionals going to find common cause with the Marxists, anarchists, and professional vagrants presently encamped at Justin Herman Plaza.
OccupySF, you've had your fun. I got your message loud and clear: You don't like money, capitalism, clean running water, working for a living, personal responsibility, or the comforts of modern civilization. Now please pack up and go home before you attract more disease to San Francisco. Wall Street's problems will be solved in the free market, with entrepreneurs launching new banks and customers moving business away from systemically unstable institutions.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Contraction In Financial Careers Long Overdue
I can get pretty darn ornery when the subject of careers in finance makes the news. BofA's plan for throwing away a big chunk of its workforce gives rise to a whole bunch of discussion on how far it will go. That article makes me giggle when I read that "anybody who could walk and talk" could have landed a job in the middle of the last decade. Folks, I had an MBA from a pretty good school and I had to settle for entry-level jobs that paid next to nothing, and I went completely without job offers for several years after getting that now-worthless MBA. Add "family pedigree" to the walking and talking criteria and you've got a viable MBA job candidate.
The article is generally correct that hiring in finance has been overdone for years and will now permanently contract to a more sustainable level. That also means that MBA enrollments should contract, since the workforce won't need so many MBA-certified people to replace existing employees. The MBA degree will eventually revert to what it was decades ago, when the top 20 programs were a rite of passage for blue-bloods destined to keep publicly held companies under the control of private families.
Let this be a warning to anyone considering an MBA as a prerequisite for a career change. Don't do it, people. You don't need it to get the entry-level jobs of the future that will be available in farming, recycling, and suburban deconstruction.
The article is generally correct that hiring in finance has been overdone for years and will now permanently contract to a more sustainable level. That also means that MBA enrollments should contract, since the workforce won't need so many MBA-certified people to replace existing employees. The MBA degree will eventually revert to what it was decades ago, when the top 20 programs were a rite of passage for blue-bloods destined to keep publicly held companies under the control of private families.
Let this be a warning to anyone considering an MBA as a prerequisite for a career change. Don't do it, people. You don't need it to get the entry-level jobs of the future that will be available in farming, recycling, and suburban deconstruction.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Initial Design Photo Of Seasteading City Demands Ridicule
Two days ago I posted some mild criticisms of the Seasteading Institute's floating city plan. Now I'm adding more fuel to my fire. This article displays a concept model of this artificial island for billionaires. I'll republish the photo below.
Do you see something wrong here? Check this out. That's a container ship parked next to an offshore platform. The offshore platform has no cranes, no piers, no material handling equipment, or anything else that is absolutely required to make an economically viable effort at getting those containerized goods off the ship and into the hands of the platform's wealthy denizens. Seasteaders need a crash course in supply chain management. They should hire me as a consultant. I'll raise my rates just for them so they can brag about paying top dollar for advice.
I'll offer yet another item to my litany of nonviability. This city-state has no way to feed itself. You can't live without food no matter how many billions you have in your Swiss account or how fast your satellite broadband connection zips around the world. Are they going to have dedicated fishing fleets prowling local waters? A steady diet of nothing but cod, tuna, and king crab will bore these urban transplants to death in no time. Most American city supermarkets require replenishment every few days, depending on inventory turnover and spoilage. How many supermarkets can fit on a floating platform? I'm guessing just one, and it will be about the size of a typical Trader Joe's in San Francisco. How will it be supplied? Remember, there are no plans yet for the cranes and dock space necessary to make any trade in goods, let alone food imports, physically possible. Maybe Whole Foods can deliver risotto by airdrop (*snicker*).
I've figured out the mentality behind this effort. It's a stab at creating a gated community to reflect the exclusive status the creators of this stupidity feel they deserve. The thing about gated communities on land is that they're already connected to the infrastructure for energy, water, waste disposal, and transport that makes them livable. There won't be enough space on an ocean-going platform to make all of that possible. Check out the cramped quarters on an aircraft carrier for the only existing model of how thousands of people can live at sea. Note that the carrier needs to replenish its nuclear reactor's fuel every few years (in drydock, on land, which will negate our seasteaders sovereignty!) and is never self-sufficient in food or material goods. The carrier's residents have little personal space, let alone enough space for a hundred billionaire condos. The mentality of rich folks who expect Jeeves to rush into the parlor with a cocktail every time they ring a silver bell from Tiffany's doesn't transplant to a cramped offshore platform. Some rich people apparently aren't satisfied with seceding from society; they want to secede from reality as well.
Have at it, seasteaders. You'll never get off dry land. Oh, if you need some more material for future designs, look no further than fiction.
Here's a final bit of free advice. Focus these platforms on fulfilling an unmet need for energy production from waves, tides, and offshore windfarms and you'll have an excuse to park them within sight of the shore. Proximity to shore means you can build causeways wide enough for trucks or trams and not worry about the lack of space for containerized trade I mentioned above. Get them approved as special economic development zones and you'll have reason to build things into them that would otherwise raise NIMBY objections. There may even be enough room for a dozen or so billionaire bachelor pads if they can stand the noise from all of the energy-generating infrastructure. Once they're profitable, maybe the residents can install a country club on the side of the platform facing the ocean. That will give them the illusion of turning their back on landbound commoners and seceding from reality, which is what they obviously want anyway. I'd love to see these things operating near San Francisco, as the backers intend, but I'll help them keep the endgame in mind. Hire me now before my rates go up again.
Full disclosure: I think this whole idea is stupid.
Do you see something wrong here? Check this out. That's a container ship parked next to an offshore platform. The offshore platform has no cranes, no piers, no material handling equipment, or anything else that is absolutely required to make an economically viable effort at getting those containerized goods off the ship and into the hands of the platform's wealthy denizens. Seasteaders need a crash course in supply chain management. They should hire me as a consultant. I'll raise my rates just for them so they can brag about paying top dollar for advice.
I'll offer yet another item to my litany of nonviability. This city-state has no way to feed itself. You can't live without food no matter how many billions you have in your Swiss account or how fast your satellite broadband connection zips around the world. Are they going to have dedicated fishing fleets prowling local waters? A steady diet of nothing but cod, tuna, and king crab will bore these urban transplants to death in no time. Most American city supermarkets require replenishment every few days, depending on inventory turnover and spoilage. How many supermarkets can fit on a floating platform? I'm guessing just one, and it will be about the size of a typical Trader Joe's in San Francisco. How will it be supplied? Remember, there are no plans yet for the cranes and dock space necessary to make any trade in goods, let alone food imports, physically possible. Maybe Whole Foods can deliver risotto by airdrop (*snicker*).
I've figured out the mentality behind this effort. It's a stab at creating a gated community to reflect the exclusive status the creators of this stupidity feel they deserve. The thing about gated communities on land is that they're already connected to the infrastructure for energy, water, waste disposal, and transport that makes them livable. There won't be enough space on an ocean-going platform to make all of that possible. Check out the cramped quarters on an aircraft carrier for the only existing model of how thousands of people can live at sea. Note that the carrier needs to replenish its nuclear reactor's fuel every few years (in drydock, on land, which will negate our seasteaders sovereignty!) and is never self-sufficient in food or material goods. The carrier's residents have little personal space, let alone enough space for a hundred billionaire condos. The mentality of rich folks who expect Jeeves to rush into the parlor with a cocktail every time they ring a silver bell from Tiffany's doesn't transplant to a cramped offshore platform. Some rich people apparently aren't satisfied with seceding from society; they want to secede from reality as well.
Have at it, seasteaders. You'll never get off dry land. Oh, if you need some more material for future designs, look no further than fiction.
Here's a final bit of free advice. Focus these platforms on fulfilling an unmet need for energy production from waves, tides, and offshore windfarms and you'll have an excuse to park them within sight of the shore. Proximity to shore means you can build causeways wide enough for trucks or trams and not worry about the lack of space for containerized trade I mentioned above. Get them approved as special economic development zones and you'll have reason to build things into them that would otherwise raise NIMBY objections. There may even be enough room for a dozen or so billionaire bachelor pads if they can stand the noise from all of the energy-generating infrastructure. Once they're profitable, maybe the residents can install a country club on the side of the platform facing the ocean. That will give them the illusion of turning their back on landbound commoners and seceding from reality, which is what they obviously want anyway. I'd love to see these things operating near San Francisco, as the backers intend, but I'll help them keep the endgame in mind. Hire me now before my rates go up again.
Full disclosure: I think this whole idea is stupid.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Floating Civilization Adrift On An Ocean Of Dreams
Ask any seagoing folk - career sailors, merchant mariners, professional yachtspersons - about life on the ocean and they'll tell you it's grand. Out at sea, you can commune with nature on a daily basis and fantasize about chasing Moby Dick or exploring Davy Jones' locker. You can also live as a permanent expatriate in exotic ports of call, with adventures in Polynesia and the Mediterranean beckoning.
You can also fantasize about creating your own civilization from scratch, if you have lots of time and money on your hands. Serial entrepreneurs with libertarian ideals have those resources in spades. Some of them are willing to take a stab at creating a floating nation. New business models always need to be tested against the real world and this is no less important than for a new model of nationhood. The folks at the Seasteading Institute should consider how the following topics affect their plans.
Economic viability. A floating colony of a few hundred people will not have a diverse economy. The types of people who are attracted to this lifestyle and can afford it are knowledge workers. Hedge fund managers and media consultants can probably afford to buy a plugged-in condo on a twenty-story semi-submersible platform. They will also be uniquely vulnerable to the kind of downward pressure on compensation from global wage arbitrage that is offshoring white-collar intellectual work to China and Southeast Asia. Speaking of Southeast Asia, Singapore and Hong Kong are densely packed urban centers with vibrant knowledge economies, just like our imaginary seaborne civilization. They also have world-class port facilities and plenty of infrastructure for high-tech manufacturing. Putting any of that infrastructure onto a floating platform on the scale needed to make a viable economy is probably impossible. It will also require a whole bunch of workers with skill sets completely alien to our effete urban wannabe platform dwellers.
Sovereignty. Here's a sticky subject. Floating platforms periodically need maintenance to remain functional. The entire "city" will probably have to be towed to the nearest shipyard dry-dock every few years for months of maintenance. Your precious homestead will be jacked out of the water for hull inspections, barnacle scraping, systems retrofitting, and all kinds of upgrades and services that are absolutely necessary to ensure the enterprise does not sink while it's on the water. This raises a very important point besides the livability of the platform while it's in drydock. A platform parked on land is subject to the laws and regulations of the nation where it's parked. That means the enterprise's sovereignty will most likely be erased when it pulls into port. The platform's residents will have to vacate their homes while the superstructure is undergoing maintenance, so once they're on land they are fair game for the local government. The libertarian fantasy of permanent life at sea bumps into the hard reality of periodic maintenance.
Physical security and safety. Building a whole town on the same superstructure as a semi-submersible drilling rig exposes the residents to the kinds of risks oil workers have taken for decades and adds some new ones. Will the structure have enough lifeboats moored in case something happens to render the thing unstable? What happens to one of these floating communities if a hurricane or tsunami comes its way? Today's oil drilling platforms have to be towed to shore upon notice of inbound hurricanes, as in the Katrina disaster. A tsunami would leave even less time to evacuate, so the rig would be stuck while residents scramble into lifeboats that will then be carried away by the tsunami's force. Ask yourself if you're in for the ride of your life. "All aboard the tsunami express - woooooo!" Daisy-chaining a few dozen platforms together to make an archipelago holds the entire civilization hostage to a structural failure on one platform. Think about that one: You look out your twentieth floor window and watch one of your neighboring platforms sinking, knowing your platform is chained to it by permanent infrastructure. Your twentieth floor view will be an underwater view in about five minutes. Ask anyone who's ever evacuated a sinking ship or drilling rig - like the Deepwater Horizon after it blew out in April 2010 - just how difficult it is to get into a lifeboat in a pitching sea. The people who survive those things are tough, trained marine technology experts; one disaster rehearsal with a bunch of transplanted urbanites will convince quite a few of them that ocean life isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Self-defense. This is closely related to the above paragraph on safety during structural failures. Security against natural disasters is hard enough without throwing malice and international intrigue into the mix. A floating rig full of rich, influential Westerners is a tempting target for blackmail by a rogue state. Think Somali pirates are tough? Try deterring a whole flotilla from a starving country hostile to the West without the protective umbrella of your own military. The aggressor wouldn't even need a WMD. They could just park an autonomous underwater vehicle loaded with high explosives under one of the platform's submerged pontoons. The floating city-state's mayor would then get the following call on his satellite phone: "Hello, this is Kim Jong Il, the Dear Leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. You will wire $US100mm to my account in Zurich or I will blow your city out of the water. Cast your eyes out two miles at 15 degrees north latitude for a demonstration explosion. (BOOM!) See that spray cloud? That's you if I don't get your money. My hackers have already identified your account numbers so all you have to do is hand it over. You have one hour to complete the transaction or you sleep with the fishies. Thank you in advance for your business." Laugh all you want at the James Bond-type brinkmanship. Dictators are amoral psychopaths who will salivate at the target presented by a bunch of wealthy idealists aimlessly riding the waves. Try calling the nearest U.S. Navy carrier battle group if you need help in a pinch.
There's nothing wrong with testing the viability of permanent, autonomous floating communities. Private investors are welcome to do anything they like with their money. Nothing in the concept mandates that the communities be ocean-going. I suspect that the most viable application of this concept is a series of connected platforms moored very close to shore, no more than a mile or two out. They could hold a kind of special economic status (like Hong Kong, or other countries' designated high-tech zones for foreign direct investment) that would incentivize investment and give residents plenty of autonomy short of full independence. Tethering them to shore makes connecting infrastructure for energy input, waste output, and movement of people and goods much easier.
The genesis of the concept makes me wonder about people who wander outside their circle of competence (hat tip to Warren Buffett). Launching and managing a business model that focuses on shooting electrons between e-commerce portals like EBay and PayPal requires advanced skills in computing and electrical engineering. Those skill sets are not identical to those required to move and sustain physical structures in the chaotic real world where human life and property must be safeguarded from accidents and malice. Please tell Thomas Friedman that the world is not flat.
Nota bene: I have no desire to start my own brand new civilization offshore. I'm busy trying to save the one that's onshore.
You can also fantasize about creating your own civilization from scratch, if you have lots of time and money on your hands. Serial entrepreneurs with libertarian ideals have those resources in spades. Some of them are willing to take a stab at creating a floating nation. New business models always need to be tested against the real world and this is no less important than for a new model of nationhood. The folks at the Seasteading Institute should consider how the following topics affect their plans.
Economic viability. A floating colony of a few hundred people will not have a diverse economy. The types of people who are attracted to this lifestyle and can afford it are knowledge workers. Hedge fund managers and media consultants can probably afford to buy a plugged-in condo on a twenty-story semi-submersible platform. They will also be uniquely vulnerable to the kind of downward pressure on compensation from global wage arbitrage that is offshoring white-collar intellectual work to China and Southeast Asia. Speaking of Southeast Asia, Singapore and Hong Kong are densely packed urban centers with vibrant knowledge economies, just like our imaginary seaborne civilization. They also have world-class port facilities and plenty of infrastructure for high-tech manufacturing. Putting any of that infrastructure onto a floating platform on the scale needed to make a viable economy is probably impossible. It will also require a whole bunch of workers with skill sets completely alien to our effete urban wannabe platform dwellers.
Sovereignty. Here's a sticky subject. Floating platforms periodically need maintenance to remain functional. The entire "city" will probably have to be towed to the nearest shipyard dry-dock every few years for months of maintenance. Your precious homestead will be jacked out of the water for hull inspections, barnacle scraping, systems retrofitting, and all kinds of upgrades and services that are absolutely necessary to ensure the enterprise does not sink while it's on the water. This raises a very important point besides the livability of the platform while it's in drydock. A platform parked on land is subject to the laws and regulations of the nation where it's parked. That means the enterprise's sovereignty will most likely be erased when it pulls into port. The platform's residents will have to vacate their homes while the superstructure is undergoing maintenance, so once they're on land they are fair game for the local government. The libertarian fantasy of permanent life at sea bumps into the hard reality of periodic maintenance.
Physical security and safety. Building a whole town on the same superstructure as a semi-submersible drilling rig exposes the residents to the kinds of risks oil workers have taken for decades and adds some new ones. Will the structure have enough lifeboats moored in case something happens to render the thing unstable? What happens to one of these floating communities if a hurricane or tsunami comes its way? Today's oil drilling platforms have to be towed to shore upon notice of inbound hurricanes, as in the Katrina disaster. A tsunami would leave even less time to evacuate, so the rig would be stuck while residents scramble into lifeboats that will then be carried away by the tsunami's force. Ask yourself if you're in for the ride of your life. "All aboard the tsunami express - woooooo!" Daisy-chaining a few dozen platforms together to make an archipelago holds the entire civilization hostage to a structural failure on one platform. Think about that one: You look out your twentieth floor window and watch one of your neighboring platforms sinking, knowing your platform is chained to it by permanent infrastructure. Your twentieth floor view will be an underwater view in about five minutes. Ask anyone who's ever evacuated a sinking ship or drilling rig - like the Deepwater Horizon after it blew out in April 2010 - just how difficult it is to get into a lifeboat in a pitching sea. The people who survive those things are tough, trained marine technology experts; one disaster rehearsal with a bunch of transplanted urbanites will convince quite a few of them that ocean life isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Self-defense. This is closely related to the above paragraph on safety during structural failures. Security against natural disasters is hard enough without throwing malice and international intrigue into the mix. A floating rig full of rich, influential Westerners is a tempting target for blackmail by a rogue state. Think Somali pirates are tough? Try deterring a whole flotilla from a starving country hostile to the West without the protective umbrella of your own military. The aggressor wouldn't even need a WMD. They could just park an autonomous underwater vehicle loaded with high explosives under one of the platform's submerged pontoons. The floating city-state's mayor would then get the following call on his satellite phone: "Hello, this is Kim Jong Il, the Dear Leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. You will wire $US100mm to my account in Zurich or I will blow your city out of the water. Cast your eyes out two miles at 15 degrees north latitude for a demonstration explosion. (BOOM!) See that spray cloud? That's you if I don't get your money. My hackers have already identified your account numbers so all you have to do is hand it over. You have one hour to complete the transaction or you sleep with the fishies. Thank you in advance for your business." Laugh all you want at the James Bond-type brinkmanship. Dictators are amoral psychopaths who will salivate at the target presented by a bunch of wealthy idealists aimlessly riding the waves. Try calling the nearest U.S. Navy carrier battle group if you need help in a pinch.
There's nothing wrong with testing the viability of permanent, autonomous floating communities. Private investors are welcome to do anything they like with their money. Nothing in the concept mandates that the communities be ocean-going. I suspect that the most viable application of this concept is a series of connected platforms moored very close to shore, no more than a mile or two out. They could hold a kind of special economic status (like Hong Kong, or other countries' designated high-tech zones for foreign direct investment) that would incentivize investment and give residents plenty of autonomy short of full independence. Tethering them to shore makes connecting infrastructure for energy input, waste output, and movement of people and goods much easier.
The genesis of the concept makes me wonder about people who wander outside their circle of competence (hat tip to Warren Buffett). Launching and managing a business model that focuses on shooting electrons between e-commerce portals like EBay and PayPal requires advanced skills in computing and electrical engineering. Those skill sets are not identical to those required to move and sustain physical structures in the chaotic real world where human life and property must be safeguarded from accidents and malice. Please tell Thomas Friedman that the world is not flat.
Nota bene: I have no desire to start my own brand new civilization offshore. I'm busy trying to save the one that's onshore.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Ancient GPS And Imperial Power Projection
Last week I attended a thought-provoking lecture at the War Memorial Veterans Building in San Francisco. Jarom Vahai is a local military veteran who has done pioneering academic work on ancient civilizations and their technologies for terrestrial navigation. Check out his presentation yourself (here's another version); readers can comment on his work at this blog. The thumbnail summary of his argument is that ancient civilizations built giant structures to serve as navigational aids aligned with the Earth's curvature and astronomical markers. These are not just showy tombs for royals. Travelers setting off on global journeys could use pyramids and monoliths as waypoints in the same way we use global positioning system technology today.
This got me thinking about how and why the ancients would build such things. It takes a lot of capital to build something like Stonehenge or the Pyramids at Giza. Such public works projects are only available to societies that are already commercially successful. Building infrastructure that is useful in launching global expeditions implies that a powerful civilization wants to go somewhere far away, on military expeditions or trade missions. Interestingly enough, Mr. Vahai's research indicates that the alignment of an ancient civilization's pyramids correlates with whether it was primarily a commercial power or a military power. His research also implies that some pyramids may have doubled as public works projects that could pump water (pending confirmation with more research). That is potentially a breakthrough observation, and it actually makes sense that a civilization good at building things to enable global expansion would find multiple uses for these structures.
A civilization that can project power beyond its borders is a global power and a force for changing human civilization. The U.S. military uses GPS to coordinate air strikes and photo reconnaissance missions far from its shores. Knowing where you are and where you're going is indispensable for success. The ancients figured that out long before we came along. It took the rest of us thousands of years to catch up.
This got me thinking about how and why the ancients would build such things. It takes a lot of capital to build something like Stonehenge or the Pyramids at Giza. Such public works projects are only available to societies that are already commercially successful. Building infrastructure that is useful in launching global expeditions implies that a powerful civilization wants to go somewhere far away, on military expeditions or trade missions. Interestingly enough, Mr. Vahai's research indicates that the alignment of an ancient civilization's pyramids correlates with whether it was primarily a commercial power or a military power. His research also implies that some pyramids may have doubled as public works projects that could pump water (pending confirmation with more research). That is potentially a breakthrough observation, and it actually makes sense that a civilization good at building things to enable global expansion would find multiple uses for these structures.
A civilization that can project power beyond its borders is a global power and a force for changing human civilization. The U.S. military uses GPS to coordinate air strikes and photo reconnaissance missions far from its shores. Knowing where you are and where you're going is indispensable for success. The ancients figured that out long before we came along. It took the rest of us thousands of years to catch up.
Sunday, November 07, 2010
Pentagon's Plan For Rare Earth Shortages
The U.S. Department of Defense is preparing to release a study of rare earth metals and their importance to national security. This study comes in the wake of findings from the GAO and other sources highlighting the critical role that rare earths and other “technology metals” play in U.S. national security. Media reports indicate that the DOD report will downplay the impact of rare earth shortages on US military applications.
On Oct. 8, 2010, the DLA Strategic Materials section released its implementation plan for the transformation of the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) into the Strategic Material Security Program (SMSP). It discusses process, milestones, and program criteria but does not mention rare earth metals as an acquisition objective. The DLA Strategic and Critical Materials Report for FY 2009 lists the materials stockpiled in DLA’s inventory on page 57. The inventory does not contain any rare earth metals.
The coming DOD study apparently contradicts the GAO study from April 2010, which clearly indicated that major defense contractors were canvassing their supply chains for assurances of rare earth metal supplies, and that the Hellfire missile in particular is dependent on a special chemical available only from China at present. The National Defense Stockpile has been shrinking since the mid-1990s as policymakers have authorized the sale of resources no longer deemed critical to national security. Washington allowed this to happen without considering how strategic competitors could affect the availability of resources. America's potential peer competitors are not so short-sighted. China is considering the creation of its own strategic metals reserve.
The private sector is not waiting to seize the opportunity posed by latent demand for rare earth metals. Goldman Sachs helped finance the reactivation of the Mountain Pass mine in California, formerly a leading producer of rare earth metals. It now forms part of Molycorp (MCP). Another company, Rare Earth Elements (REE) has seen a massive increase in its share price this year due to investor excitement (panic?). Most other rare earth miners and refiners, like Great Western Minerals Group (GWG.V), tend to be small and unpublicized. That may change very quickly if the U.S. government is serious about addressing its potential rare earth supply problems.
Full disclosure: No positions in any stocks mentioned.
On Oct. 8, 2010, the DLA Strategic Materials section released its implementation plan for the transformation of the National Defense Stockpile (NDS) into the Strategic Material Security Program (SMSP). It discusses process, milestones, and program criteria but does not mention rare earth metals as an acquisition objective. The DLA Strategic and Critical Materials Report for FY 2009 lists the materials stockpiled in DLA’s inventory on page 57. The inventory does not contain any rare earth metals.
The coming DOD study apparently contradicts the GAO study from April 2010, which clearly indicated that major defense contractors were canvassing their supply chains for assurances of rare earth metal supplies, and that the Hellfire missile in particular is dependent on a special chemical available only from China at present. The National Defense Stockpile has been shrinking since the mid-1990s as policymakers have authorized the sale of resources no longer deemed critical to national security. Washington allowed this to happen without considering how strategic competitors could affect the availability of resources. America's potential peer competitors are not so short-sighted. China is considering the creation of its own strategic metals reserve.
The private sector is not waiting to seize the opportunity posed by latent demand for rare earth metals. Goldman Sachs helped finance the reactivation of the Mountain Pass mine in California, formerly a leading producer of rare earth metals. It now forms part of Molycorp (MCP). Another company, Rare Earth Elements (REE) has seen a massive increase in its share price this year due to investor excitement (panic?). Most other rare earth miners and refiners, like Great Western Minerals Group (GWG.V), tend to be small and unpublicized. That may change very quickly if the U.S. government is serious about addressing its potential rare earth supply problems.
Full disclosure: No positions in any stocks mentioned.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Global Governorate Makes Play To Strengthen EU
The global ruling class is betting that the EU $1T bailout plan will work at least long enough to convert the EU into a truly federal government. Their next step is to put firm legal structures in place to prevent defaults from tearing up the union:
This is a healthy step towards a true United States of Europe. I have no idea whether it will work, as it does not come with an enforcement mechanism. If the EU falls apart, our rulers will need another 20 years or so to erect a replacement.
I'm agnostic on the question of whether the world needs a formal global command structure to manage its political and economic affairs. The system we've had for the past three centuries or so seems to work just fine, with aristocratic houses (Rothschild, et al.) working covertly for stability, fun, and profit. Carroll Quigley anticipated an endgame in his opus Tragedy and Hope as the problems of a technologically complex Western Civilization grew too intractable for anything but a formal governance structure to handle. The trouble with a formal structure is that those who haven't yet bought in to the concept - primarily nationalist politicians - will foul things up if they don't go along with the program.
European Union finance ministers pledged to stiffen sanctions on high-deficit countries and ruled out setting up a mechanism to manage state defaults, saying no euro country will be allowed to renege on its debts.
This is a healthy step towards a true United States of Europe. I have no idea whether it will work, as it does not come with an enforcement mechanism. If the EU falls apart, our rulers will need another 20 years or so to erect a replacement.
I'm agnostic on the question of whether the world needs a formal global command structure to manage its political and economic affairs. The system we've had for the past three centuries or so seems to work just fine, with aristocratic houses (Rothschild, et al.) working covertly for stability, fun, and profit. Carroll Quigley anticipated an endgame in his opus Tragedy and Hope as the problems of a technologically complex Western Civilization grew too intractable for anything but a formal governance structure to handle. The trouble with a formal structure is that those who haven't yet bought in to the concept - primarily nationalist politicians - will foul things up if they don't go along with the program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)