December 22nd, 2010 was one of the worst days of my life. I was more ill than I had almost ever been. If Michael Moore were still filming Sicko, he could have had me in it that day. Not that there are good cases of diarrhea, but this was a pretty bad case of it. The night before I threw up. I won't get too descriptive of what took place, but I'm sure you know that it wasn't pleasant. After taking some good medicine, I was fully relieved in a day or two. After a few moments of thought and wonder, I came to realize that what I went through on December 22nd was something that is quite common for a lot of people. They are called alcoholics.
I personally almost never drink. Not even one beer every now and then. And, when I do drink, I really don't understand what I was missing out on. Lately, I have been looking for work as an engineer, and one of my biggest criteria for a career is that I don't work for a company that makes alcoholic beverages. Now, if a company does make ethanol from corn or whatever for fuel, that is completely different. If you are reading this, you might be asking yourself, why is this such a priority for you Ryan? My response is a question for you.
Do alcoholic beverages do more harm than good?
People who are very fond of the booze will always try to squirm away from this question without providing an answer. They will respond with the fact that Jesus drank wine. That is correct. But, we are not capable of amounting to Jesus. We, as people, have temptations that become addictions. So, feel free to tell me that Jesus drank wine, it is an absurd comment. Also, people will comment that drinking alcohol in moderation causes people to live longer. Fair enough. But, how much longer? If, by not drinking I will die at age 83 instead of 91, I've had worse. I personally think that Prohibition should be brought back. People will respond that they themselves do not drink to excess, even if others do. They will declare that it's not fair that they get punished for other people's screwups. True, but I don't give a darn about what's fair. I care about what's right.
I do think that Prohibition would truly be better than worse for this country. People would break the law every day, and almost every second, but it will reduce the number of people who depend on it the way that robots depend on batteries. Every individual who works at Anheuser-Busch and Jose Cuervo, etc. have absolutely nothing to be proud of when the day is over. Chances are that you disagree. Maybe you think that alcohol really isn't as awful as I'm making it out to be. Why don't you say that to the family who used to live right next door to me. When they were living right next to me, the mother of the family, Laurie, was killed by a drunk driver. So I'd like to ask you again.
Do alcoholic beverages do more harm than good?
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
A Colossal Failure of Common Sense
During the month of October in 2008 I ran in the Des Moines Marathon. During about that same month, Bill O'Reilly had Congressman Barney Frank on his show. Here is the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bijtBkKQwY8
Some of you reading this may not be fans of Bill O'Reilly, but that's not the issue. When I saw this video during the same month that I did the Des Moines Marathon of 2008, the last words that Bill said really struck me. "....the biggest financial collapse in federal history." That was the very first sign that I saw that a metaphorical tidal wave was coming. I recall wondering what this means, if it's true. And less than two months after that I read online that Bank Of America announced that they will cut 35,000 jobs over the next three years. Also, my Uncle Gary who owns his own firm had to let three people go. And, of course, damn near every place of work was reducing the number of their staff, while simultaneously breaking a few hearts along the way. After realizing how serious this catastrophe was, there were two questions that needed to be answered:
1) How do we get out of this mess?
2) How did we get in it in the first place?
First of all, you must realize that the two questions are very different from each other. The first question asks for a cure, the second asks for prevention from this being repeated. This post that I'm writing is all about the second question. And a book that you should read immediately talks all about that. It's called A Collosal Failure of Common Sense by Lawrence McDonald. It's about the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Lawrence McDonald was actually a Vice President of Lehman Brothers. Before I started reading the book I was told by my Grandma Marilyn that she had lost $10,000 because of Lehman Brothers. I remember telling my friend that fact to which he responded, "Be glad that it was only $10,000." Like the book CHINDIA, a vital reason why I chose to read this was to become knowledgeable about something I was clueless about. I knew nothing about what Lehman Brothers did as a business. I also knew nothing about why they filed for bankruptcy.
The big thing that you need to know about Lehman Brothers is what a derivative is. No, I'm not talking about calculus, I'm talking about an agreement. If I go to a store and buy an apple, that is not a derivative because it's actually buying a product. But, if I call that store, ask them if they have any apples left, they then offer to hold onto that apple until I come to the store, that is a derivative. Also, if a farmer talks to a local grocery store and they agree to a certain price that the grocery store will buy the farmer's food, that agreement is a derivative. That agreement provides security to both the farmer and the local grocery store. That's because even if the market fluctuates the value of food, the price that the farmer and grocery store agreed to stays. Lehman Brothers was all about this business of derivatives because of people buying houses through mortgage loans. And those loans were transferred to about any person on planet Earth through Lehman Brothers. A Scandinavian living in Norway, Sweden or Finland could actually be the person who you yourself are paying with your mortgage payments.
This book is not a promotion or a slander on Democrats or Republicans. It tells us how this mess took place. Shortly after the Great Depression began, there was a bill passed in the Senate called the Glass-Steagall Act. It said that investment banks and commercial banks have to be separate. Essentially, it was intended to prevent banks from betting your house on the market. And the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed when Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act right before he left office. The signing of the bill gave the potential to cause this economy to be ruined. So a bill that was urged by Phil Gramm, Jim Leach and Thomas Bliley (all of whom were Republicans) was signed off by a President who was a Democrat. When Clinton signed the bill, Mr. McDonald actually thought it would be great because it would increase the flow of money. But it ended up blowing up in everyone's faces. And the icing on the cake was that before this bill was actually passed, the bank Citicorp was already engaged in both investment and commercial banking. Which, of course, was illegal.
Sometimes, when you read about something, there is so much technical jargon, it's practically nonsense. If you don't know what I mean and you'd like an example look no further than this wikipedia page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000
After reading this article, I feel that this does not help clarify what the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 actually did. In a Colossal Failure of Common Sense, I learned that people used to be able to buy "insurance" on for instance boats. Because of these "insurance" agreements, if that boat actually sinks to the bottom of the ocean the person who bought that insurance actually makes money. I'm not kidding!!! How stupid is that??? And for a while it was illegall, but our US Congress did legalize that kind of "insurance" in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. And I'm willing to bet that if you look at that wikipedia page, you won't realize that that's what it does.
In a previous post that I wrote, I talked about a tv series that I was very fond of called The Wire. There was an event that happened that I still remember today. The Mayor of Baltimore becomes aware of an absolutely absurd idea that a subordinate of his has taken into effect. The press gets a hold of the information, and Mayor Royce's chances of reelection is damaged. His response when he first hears that it happened was "I didn't know that it was going on." To that a character responds with "That's even worse." Basically, what I'm getting at is that the person in charge is the person in charge. When all hell broke loose at Lehman Brothers, former CEO Dick Fuld had a lot of eyes pointed at him, wondering what his explanation was. In a youtube video that I saw of him, he was in a courthouse presenting his side of the story. He stated "I take full responsibility for the decisions that I made, and the actions that I took." That tells me that he challenges every person to explain exactly why the collapse of Lehman Brothers is his fault. I won't tell you why, but A Colossal Failure of Common Sense meets that challenge very well.
Lawrence McDonald did a fantastic job of presenting his side of the story in this book. He talked about how he worked his way to landing his dream job at Lehman Brothers. Before getting hired at a firm, he actually pretended to be a pizza delivery guy coming to these firms. "I have an order for a double cheese, triple sausage pizza for Mr. (insert name of person who can help him get a job)." He mentions that this scheme didn't work very well. After a few failed attempts, he was finally given some advice about how to work his way to landing a job here. Sell something. Anything. I don't care what it is, but learn how to get people to buy your product. He tried that out by selling some kind of meat. Later on, he did get a job with Morgan Stanley, and then he got the job with Lehman Brothers. And right before the collapse, he was fired.
A Colossal Failure of Common Sense was as good of a read that it could have been. From start to finish, the book was extremely engaging, and only in my wildest dreams would I be able to do it justice in this post. Here's one last link that I'll let you click on, and if you do read this book, please remember this when you finish it.
http://virtualopinion.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/47_lehman_brothers.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bijtBkKQwY8
Some of you reading this may not be fans of Bill O'Reilly, but that's not the issue. When I saw this video during the same month that I did the Des Moines Marathon of 2008, the last words that Bill said really struck me. "....the biggest financial collapse in federal history." That was the very first sign that I saw that a metaphorical tidal wave was coming. I recall wondering what this means, if it's true. And less than two months after that I read online that Bank Of America announced that they will cut 35,000 jobs over the next three years. Also, my Uncle Gary who owns his own firm had to let three people go. And, of course, damn near every place of work was reducing the number of their staff, while simultaneously breaking a few hearts along the way. After realizing how serious this catastrophe was, there were two questions that needed to be answered:
1) How do we get out of this mess?
2) How did we get in it in the first place?
First of all, you must realize that the two questions are very different from each other. The first question asks for a cure, the second asks for prevention from this being repeated. This post that I'm writing is all about the second question. And a book that you should read immediately talks all about that. It's called A Collosal Failure of Common Sense by Lawrence McDonald. It's about the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Lawrence McDonald was actually a Vice President of Lehman Brothers. Before I started reading the book I was told by my Grandma Marilyn that she had lost $10,000 because of Lehman Brothers. I remember telling my friend that fact to which he responded, "Be glad that it was only $10,000." Like the book CHINDIA, a vital reason why I chose to read this was to become knowledgeable about something I was clueless about. I knew nothing about what Lehman Brothers did as a business. I also knew nothing about why they filed for bankruptcy.
The big thing that you need to know about Lehman Brothers is what a derivative is. No, I'm not talking about calculus, I'm talking about an agreement. If I go to a store and buy an apple, that is not a derivative because it's actually buying a product. But, if I call that store, ask them if they have any apples left, they then offer to hold onto that apple until I come to the store, that is a derivative. Also, if a farmer talks to a local grocery store and they agree to a certain price that the grocery store will buy the farmer's food, that agreement is a derivative. That agreement provides security to both the farmer and the local grocery store. That's because even if the market fluctuates the value of food, the price that the farmer and grocery store agreed to stays. Lehman Brothers was all about this business of derivatives because of people buying houses through mortgage loans. And those loans were transferred to about any person on planet Earth through Lehman Brothers. A Scandinavian living in Norway, Sweden or Finland could actually be the person who you yourself are paying with your mortgage payments.
This book is not a promotion or a slander on Democrats or Republicans. It tells us how this mess took place. Shortly after the Great Depression began, there was a bill passed in the Senate called the Glass-Steagall Act. It said that investment banks and commercial banks have to be separate. Essentially, it was intended to prevent banks from betting your house on the market. And the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed when Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act right before he left office. The signing of the bill gave the potential to cause this economy to be ruined. So a bill that was urged by Phil Gramm, Jim Leach and Thomas Bliley (all of whom were Republicans) was signed off by a President who was a Democrat. When Clinton signed the bill, Mr. McDonald actually thought it would be great because it would increase the flow of money. But it ended up blowing up in everyone's faces. And the icing on the cake was that before this bill was actually passed, the bank Citicorp was already engaged in both investment and commercial banking. Which, of course, was illegal.
Sometimes, when you read about something, there is so much technical jargon, it's practically nonsense. If you don't know what I mean and you'd like an example look no further than this wikipedia page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000
After reading this article, I feel that this does not help clarify what the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 actually did. In a Colossal Failure of Common Sense, I learned that people used to be able to buy "insurance" on for instance boats. Because of these "insurance" agreements, if that boat actually sinks to the bottom of the ocean the person who bought that insurance actually makes money. I'm not kidding!!! How stupid is that??? And for a while it was illegall, but our US Congress did legalize that kind of "insurance" in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. And I'm willing to bet that if you look at that wikipedia page, you won't realize that that's what it does.
In a previous post that I wrote, I talked about a tv series that I was very fond of called The Wire. There was an event that happened that I still remember today. The Mayor of Baltimore becomes aware of an absolutely absurd idea that a subordinate of his has taken into effect. The press gets a hold of the information, and Mayor Royce's chances of reelection is damaged. His response when he first hears that it happened was "I didn't know that it was going on." To that a character responds with "That's even worse." Basically, what I'm getting at is that the person in charge is the person in charge. When all hell broke loose at Lehman Brothers, former CEO Dick Fuld had a lot of eyes pointed at him, wondering what his explanation was. In a youtube video that I saw of him, he was in a courthouse presenting his side of the story. He stated "I take full responsibility for the decisions that I made, and the actions that I took." That tells me that he challenges every person to explain exactly why the collapse of Lehman Brothers is his fault. I won't tell you why, but A Colossal Failure of Common Sense meets that challenge very well.
Lawrence McDonald did a fantastic job of presenting his side of the story in this book. He talked about how he worked his way to landing his dream job at Lehman Brothers. Before getting hired at a firm, he actually pretended to be a pizza delivery guy coming to these firms. "I have an order for a double cheese, triple sausage pizza for Mr. (insert name of person who can help him get a job)." He mentions that this scheme didn't work very well. After a few failed attempts, he was finally given some advice about how to work his way to landing a job here. Sell something. Anything. I don't care what it is, but learn how to get people to buy your product. He tried that out by selling some kind of meat. Later on, he did get a job with Morgan Stanley, and then he got the job with Lehman Brothers. And right before the collapse, he was fired.
A Colossal Failure of Common Sense was as good of a read that it could have been. From start to finish, the book was extremely engaging, and only in my wildest dreams would I be able to do it justice in this post. Here's one last link that I'll let you click on, and if you do read this book, please remember this when you finish it.
http://virtualopinion.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/47_lehman_brothers.jpg
Sunday, June 13, 2010
The Shield
There are numerous forms of entertainment that we as an audience are exposed to. Movies, tv, music, etc. With them comes a vast amount of mature themes. Nudity, sex, violence, profanity, etc. I, as a member of the audience, can handle just about any amount of mature themes in entertainment. I was able to watch the whole movie Saving Private Ryan without once feeling squeamish. Despite the shocking moments of brutality, the film was not, IMHO, vile. It was one of the best films ever made and demonstrated how heroic those soldiers of the Allied forces really were. Likewise, when I was training for the Des Moines and Chicago Marathon, I listened to some music that did have some swearing. Till I Collapse and Lose Yourself (both by Eminem) were some of my favorite songs, and they really got me to bust my butt on my run. So if some form of entertainment has mature themes, maybe that's not the whole story. A tv show could be rated MA or a movie could be R, but as long as there is meaning to what makes it so, you can't necessarily say that it's wrong. However, I don't think that little children should be allowed to be exposed to this entertainment at all. Also, movies like Fight Club or a song by Eminem pretending to kill his ex-wife are just plain disgusting, and are little more than garbage.
This post today is about a show I watched called The Shield. It is my favorite television series of all time. After watching all seven seasons, it truly touched me and held my interest more than anything I could have imagined. The storylines were very well done and the acting was amazing. Vic Mackey, played by Michael Chiklis, is the heart and soul of the show as the lead character. No character, not even Tony Soprano, breathed as much life into a show as Vic Mackey did.
The Shield is a police drama that takes place in Los Angeles. The police department that they work at is called The Barn. In the show, the police are always busy given the rampant gang activity in LA. There is a significant amount of tension between the cops and the crooks. However, more than you might imagine, there is also a significant amount of tension between cops and fellow cops. There are times when more or less civil war takes place in The Barn. I previously made some comments about mature themes in entertainment. Well, this show is about as vicious as it gets. You will see PLENTY of people get killed. You will hear profanity like there is no tomorrow. Michael Chiklis, the main actor, in real life has a daughter who in the show plays his own daughter. And in real life she is not allowed by her own father to watch this show. But it's never in poor taste. If something happens, it happens for a reason. In the very first episode, you get a good glimpse of what the show is all about. There is a part when Vic Mackey wants a man to give up the location of a little girl. After some convincing "interrogation" the next scene shows the police rescuing this little girl from God knows what. Also, there is a scene of Vic doing an act that truly shows him to be a hero. But all of that is negated by something else that he does later on. And there is a reason why he does what he does. He does it because of the "cop" lifestyle that he has.
There is so much that happens in this show that if you skip an episode you will be confused as to what's going on. One alternate title of the show could have been Secrets and Lies. Constantly, the cast of characters are keeping secrets or lying to others. This is caused by the sins that they have commited and what they are willing to confess to. There is one point in the show when Captain Acevada declares "Vic Mackey isn't a cop. He's Al Capone with a badge." Whether I want to admit it or not, Acevada is completely correct. Vic Mackey was just as much a criminal as ANY criminal he ever put away. But don't be discouraged. When it's all said and done, I promise you that The Shield does not endorse this rogue cop attitude. Not one bit. Along with the barbaric nature of some of the police, there is truly one individual who you have to love. His name is Julien Lowe, and he uses his Christian faith as much as possible as his own compass.
There are many characters that made up The Shield, as there were many events. They were extremely memorable. The series finale was almost perfect, as was all the other shows that led up to it. For those of you who are not interested due to the mature themes of the show, fair enough. However, with that put aside, it couldn't have been any better.
This post today is about a show I watched called The Shield. It is my favorite television series of all time. After watching all seven seasons, it truly touched me and held my interest more than anything I could have imagined. The storylines were very well done and the acting was amazing. Vic Mackey, played by Michael Chiklis, is the heart and soul of the show as the lead character. No character, not even Tony Soprano, breathed as much life into a show as Vic Mackey did.
The Shield is a police drama that takes place in Los Angeles. The police department that they work at is called The Barn. In the show, the police are always busy given the rampant gang activity in LA. There is a significant amount of tension between the cops and the crooks. However, more than you might imagine, there is also a significant amount of tension between cops and fellow cops. There are times when more or less civil war takes place in The Barn. I previously made some comments about mature themes in entertainment. Well, this show is about as vicious as it gets. You will see PLENTY of people get killed. You will hear profanity like there is no tomorrow. Michael Chiklis, the main actor, in real life has a daughter who in the show plays his own daughter. And in real life she is not allowed by her own father to watch this show. But it's never in poor taste. If something happens, it happens for a reason. In the very first episode, you get a good glimpse of what the show is all about. There is a part when Vic Mackey wants a man to give up the location of a little girl. After some convincing "interrogation" the next scene shows the police rescuing this little girl from God knows what. Also, there is a scene of Vic doing an act that truly shows him to be a hero. But all of that is negated by something else that he does later on. And there is a reason why he does what he does. He does it because of the "cop" lifestyle that he has.
There is so much that happens in this show that if you skip an episode you will be confused as to what's going on. One alternate title of the show could have been Secrets and Lies. Constantly, the cast of characters are keeping secrets or lying to others. This is caused by the sins that they have commited and what they are willing to confess to. There is one point in the show when Captain Acevada declares "Vic Mackey isn't a cop. He's Al Capone with a badge." Whether I want to admit it or not, Acevada is completely correct. Vic Mackey was just as much a criminal as ANY criminal he ever put away. But don't be discouraged. When it's all said and done, I promise you that The Shield does not endorse this rogue cop attitude. Not one bit. Along with the barbaric nature of some of the police, there is truly one individual who you have to love. His name is Julien Lowe, and he uses his Christian faith as much as possible as his own compass.
There are many characters that made up The Shield, as there were many events. They were extremely memorable. The series finale was almost perfect, as was all the other shows that led up to it. For those of you who are not interested due to the mature themes of the show, fair enough. However, with that put aside, it couldn't have been any better.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
CHINDIA
This post that I'm writing today is about a book called CHINDIA How China and India Are Revolutionizing Global Business. When I saw this book at Barnes and Noble, with the trusty gift card that I had at the time, I realized here is a topic that I know absolutely nothing about. After reading the book, I have learned a lot, and it was more than just worth my time and money. Author Pete Engardio did more than just a good job. After reading the entire book, I have no idea if Mr. Engardio is a Democrat or Republican. I have to admit, I like that because his lack of a bias towards one or the other amounted to an excellent read. In fact, CHINDIA is light on opinions, but is overwhelming with facts. Mr. Engardio tells us how it is, and yes, from time to time he will make predictions.
So why China and India? Why wasn't this book called Frermany or Argentazil? It's because China and India compose roughly one third of the world's population, even though combined they compose less than ten percent of the total land area of the globe. Japan has made some great breakthroughs in their economy, however Japan's population isn't large enough to pack as much of a punch as China and India. You might have heard the saying "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the fight in the dog." Maybe that's not entirely true. China and India are like two siblings, both with their own strengths to be complementary to the other. Also, as two siblings, they resemble each other in many areas. China has the hardware, India has the software. China has all the resources that they need to trade products all around the world (which creates a large deficit here in the US) and India has some of the brightest minds on Planet Earth. If you have never seen a single item that you have bought that said MADE IN CHINA, I worry about you. Likewise, India has a college called the IIT (Indian Institutes of Technology), and it's possibly harder to get into than vet school. The IIT breeds the greatest minds that you can ask for. Also, India's technology services make it truly shine as a country. So, the way that I look at it is India has the brains and China has the brawn.
One issue that came up was a question of morality. China's labor costs are extremely low. When Chinese workers make a product and it is shipped here in the US, it still sells for less than products made here in the US! CHINDIA commented on the fact that Chinese vacuum cleaners have caused some employees of Hoover to lose their jobs. What is the best approach economically? What is the best approach morally? If we, as customers buy these cheaper Chinese vacuum cleaners, people at Hoover lose their jobs, and we validate the harsh conditions for Chinese workers. But, if we as customers boycott them then we are limiting global trade, and that should be done at a bare minimum. My feelings are that we should buy these Chinese products, but at the same time we should be aware of the fact that more than half a billion Chinese (that's more people than here in the US) live on less than two dollars a day. Also, simultaneously we should be willing to hire former employees of Hoover to work in another job.
Mr. Engardio does also comment on social issues. China's healthcare system is horrid, and SARS certainly did not help. Also, you've possibly heard of China's one child policy. Married couples can have only one child, and eventually that will increase the retiree/worker ratio which will be another difficulty for China. In India, kiosks are king. Kiosks is how business is going to flourish in India. Also, India's population is much younger than China's. One unfortunate similarity between India and China is their overwhelmingly poor standards of pollution control. For more information you can check out http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/0,28757,1661031,00.html
In the times of slavery here in the United States, cotton was king. Now, in China, coal is king.
After it's all said and done, Mr. Engardio predicts a winner in this battle between China and India. He predicts that India will win. With its youthful population, he thinks that India will become the ultimate force to be reckoned with.
This book helped me to be familiar with a subject I knew practically nothing about previously. The main theme is this. We, as people of other countries besides China and India, cannot ignore those two. The two combined will have colossal influence for decades to come on the global economy, and businesses must accept that, or even better, use it to their advantage.
So why China and India? Why wasn't this book called Frermany or Argentazil? It's because China and India compose roughly one third of the world's population, even though combined they compose less than ten percent of the total land area of the globe. Japan has made some great breakthroughs in their economy, however Japan's population isn't large enough to pack as much of a punch as China and India. You might have heard the saying "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the fight in the dog." Maybe that's not entirely true. China and India are like two siblings, both with their own strengths to be complementary to the other. Also, as two siblings, they resemble each other in many areas. China has the hardware, India has the software. China has all the resources that they need to trade products all around the world (which creates a large deficit here in the US) and India has some of the brightest minds on Planet Earth. If you have never seen a single item that you have bought that said MADE IN CHINA, I worry about you. Likewise, India has a college called the IIT (Indian Institutes of Technology), and it's possibly harder to get into than vet school. The IIT breeds the greatest minds that you can ask for. Also, India's technology services make it truly shine as a country. So, the way that I look at it is India has the brains and China has the brawn.
One issue that came up was a question of morality. China's labor costs are extremely low. When Chinese workers make a product and it is shipped here in the US, it still sells for less than products made here in the US! CHINDIA commented on the fact that Chinese vacuum cleaners have caused some employees of Hoover to lose their jobs. What is the best approach economically? What is the best approach morally? If we, as customers buy these cheaper Chinese vacuum cleaners, people at Hoover lose their jobs, and we validate the harsh conditions for Chinese workers. But, if we as customers boycott them then we are limiting global trade, and that should be done at a bare minimum. My feelings are that we should buy these Chinese products, but at the same time we should be aware of the fact that more than half a billion Chinese (that's more people than here in the US) live on less than two dollars a day. Also, simultaneously we should be willing to hire former employees of Hoover to work in another job.
Mr. Engardio does also comment on social issues. China's healthcare system is horrid, and SARS certainly did not help. Also, you've possibly heard of China's one child policy. Married couples can have only one child, and eventually that will increase the retiree/worker ratio which will be another difficulty for China. In India, kiosks are king. Kiosks is how business is going to flourish in India. Also, India's population is much younger than China's. One unfortunate similarity between India and China is their overwhelmingly poor standards of pollution control. For more information you can check out http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/0,28757,1661031,00.html
In the times of slavery here in the United States, cotton was king. Now, in China, coal is king.
After it's all said and done, Mr. Engardio predicts a winner in this battle between China and India. He predicts that India will win. With its youthful population, he thinks that India will become the ultimate force to be reckoned with.
This book helped me to be familiar with a subject I knew practically nothing about previously. The main theme is this. We, as people of other countries besides China and India, cannot ignore those two. The two combined will have colossal influence for decades to come on the global economy, and businesses must accept that, or even better, use it to their advantage.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Theoretical Physics
On a previous post that I put about Asperger's Syndrome, I mentioned that I am very fond of a fair number of individuals who possibly have AS. One of those individuals is a man named Stephen Hawking. He is a theoretical physicist, mathematician, professor, etc. I read a book that he wrote called The Universe in a Nutshell. I got it from my Uncle Al for Christmas, and except for my Ipod, it's possibly the most memorable Christmas present I have ever received. It was the beginning of my interest in theoretical physics. So, what is theoretical physics? Well, that can be tough to define, but I would say that it's physics that explains or suggests answers and solutions to the realm in which we are not familiar with. Nobody has ever been inside a black hole, as far as I know. Nobody was around during the big bang. There is a vast amount to learn on this topic that encompasses how the universe manages to exist as it is. In this post, I might say a few things that will go over your head and not understand. I'll do my best to speak english.
One important subject is the four known forces of the universe; the strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force and lastly the gravitational force, aka gravity. The strong force is the force that holds an atom together, with its protons neutrons, etc. The weak force is the force that repels atoms from each other. The electromagnetic force is, you guessed it, electricity and magnetism working together. Lastly, gravity is a force between every single pair of bodies in the universe. It would seem that the weak force would be the weakest force of all four right? Well, actually gravity is the weakest of them all. The force of gravity is affected by the multiplication of the two masses of bodies. Because Planet Earth weighs far more than Jay Leno, I'm not attracted to Jay Leno as much as I am to Earth. So how does gravity's weakness in force play out in real life? When something falls here on Planet Earth, no matter how fast Earth's gravity was pulling it, the atoms will always repel each other when the object lands, due to the weak force. How is gravity a weaker force than the electromagnetic force? Go to your refrigerator right now. Do you see any magnets on your refrigerator? If you do, then you see that despite the VAST mass of planet earth, the force of gravity pulling the magnet downwards is easily offset by the electromagnetic force keeping the magnet on the refrigerator. Lastly, how is gravity weaker than the strong force? When one manages to break an atom, and release the energy, it can become catastrophic. It's one of the reasons why we have all heard of E equals m c squared. When a mass is multiplied by the square of the speed of light, that right there packs a punch. And that is exactly why Hiroshima was completely obliterated on August 6, 1945. That should be a sign that the strong force is more powerful than gravity.
Another important concept of theoretical physics is that there is the macroscopic and the microscopic understanding that govern everything. The microscopic deals with atoms and particles while the macroscopic deals with the much larger view.
Quantum Mechanics is the study part of theoretical physics of the very small, and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is the cornerstone of the Microscopic world. It states that no matter what, we always will have an uncertainty in the exact position and the exact velocity of every and any object. The mass of the object times the uncertainty of the position times the uncertainty of the velocity is at least .00000000000000000000000000000000626 Js. This value is known as Max Planck's Constant. This might seem to be a miniscule and very irrelevant fact, but note this. Classical physics suggests that if we know the exact position and the exact velocity of every particle in the universe (not just most particles, ALL OF THEM) then we would be able to declare everything that has happened in the past and everything that will happen in the future. We would know for a fact how the dinosaurs died out. We would know how much longer Earth will remain inhabitable. But, The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says that will never happen. Now, I am not as knowledgeable about this stuff as some of these guys, so I have no clue how the value was determined. But Hawking declared in his book that even GOD himself is limited by this value as well. I feel that it's very naive to declare the limits of God's capabilities. Another concept that plays into this issue is black holes. You have probably heard of black holes. They are stars that have collapsed upon themselves and suck in everything (yes, including light) due to its immense gravitational field. That is very ironic because it was thought that gravity only sucks in objects with mass. Think of a black hole as a large sink in the universe. The gravitational force for all objects is stronger for objects as they get closer to each other. If an astronaut were falling through a black hole, his body would become ripped open because the black hole's pull would be stronger on his legs than his head. Anyways, Hawking declares that any object sucked into a black hole has information that will be completely lost forever. If he's right, that is yet another reason why we will not determine how the dinosaurs died or how long Earth will exist.
On the opposite side of theoretical physics is a phenomenon called relativity. Relativity was an idea created by Albert Einstein while he was working in a Swiss Patent Office. During the time that he was working on this concept he was getting roughly ten hours of sleep a night! In other words, get your sleep! Relativity covers both General Relativity and Special Relativity. General Relativity starts with the letter G, and so does the word gravity. Special Relativity deals with light. General Relativity talks about how a large mass, such as a planet, will cause objects to curve as they pass nearby due to the gravitational field that it creates. It explains why spacetime is "curved." Spacetime is the concept that there are four known dimensions: three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. Right now I'm typing this at a seat in the library, but many times before other people were typing in this exact same seat in this same three dimensional space. Likewise, as time carries on, I have been to many other places besides this seat. This theory demonstrated that Sir Isaac Newton was wrong about his concept of absolute time. He declared that there was no beginning and there will be no end. Imagine a train that goes on in infinity and never really had a starting point. Well, relativity showed that theory to be false. On the other side of the coin is special relativity involving light. No matter where you go, no matter what you do, special relativity says that the speed of light is always 186,000 miles per second (aka c). If I can throw a ball 30 mph, and then throw a ball while in a car going 60 mph, I can throw the ball 90 mph, right? Well, no matter how fast or slow your car is going, when you turn your headlights on, that light will travel c. Here's something else. If I'm in a locomotive going 30,000 mps and I shine a light from the ceiling to the floor, I will record data to see how fast it moved. Let's say a bystander outside of the train watches the exact same thing. From my perspective, the light shined in a straight line. From the other person's perspective, the light shined at an angle because it was moving in a train. So, therefore, because the other person saw it differently, doesn't that mean that we'll have differing values for the speed of light? Actually, no, and that's because since I was in a very fast moving vehicle, time slowed down for me to the exact amount in which when I do the math and when the other person does the math, we will both calculate the speed of light to be c. In fact, if you were on a plane for the rest of your life, that would add roughly one second to your life span.
So, we have Quantum Mechanics and Relativity. One focuses on the small, the other on the not so small. Currently in the physics community, the task now is to create one theory that explains both. This challenge is still ongoing, but one proposed theory is something called string theory. It states that all atoms are made of oscillating strings. String theory still is not considered a breakthrough, and one of the reasons why is that there are five different possible string theories that physicists have. In his book The Elegant Universe, Brian Greene comments that when one has five different theories for the same thing, he/she is looked upon as unknowledgeable on the concept. Let's face it. He's right. Another fact about string theory is that if it's correct there are ELEVEN dimensions in the universe. Ten spatial and one time dimension. We obviously have found three spatial dimensions, but what about the other seven? With that, physicists go on and on about their theories, but in the end, this concept is really, really in its infancy.
This is just the basics of the realm of theoretical physics that I have fallen in love with. There are many books that discuss this in much better detail than I can here. And since I'm too simple-minded, I may not be able to comment and understand this beautiful universe as well as I'd like. But, it's still fascinating, IMHO.
One important subject is the four known forces of the universe; the strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force and lastly the gravitational force, aka gravity. The strong force is the force that holds an atom together, with its protons neutrons, etc. The weak force is the force that repels atoms from each other. The electromagnetic force is, you guessed it, electricity and magnetism working together. Lastly, gravity is a force between every single pair of bodies in the universe. It would seem that the weak force would be the weakest force of all four right? Well, actually gravity is the weakest of them all. The force of gravity is affected by the multiplication of the two masses of bodies. Because Planet Earth weighs far more than Jay Leno, I'm not attracted to Jay Leno as much as I am to Earth. So how does gravity's weakness in force play out in real life? When something falls here on Planet Earth, no matter how fast Earth's gravity was pulling it, the atoms will always repel each other when the object lands, due to the weak force. How is gravity a weaker force than the electromagnetic force? Go to your refrigerator right now. Do you see any magnets on your refrigerator? If you do, then you see that despite the VAST mass of planet earth, the force of gravity pulling the magnet downwards is easily offset by the electromagnetic force keeping the magnet on the refrigerator. Lastly, how is gravity weaker than the strong force? When one manages to break an atom, and release the energy, it can become catastrophic. It's one of the reasons why we have all heard of E equals m c squared. When a mass is multiplied by the square of the speed of light, that right there packs a punch. And that is exactly why Hiroshima was completely obliterated on August 6, 1945. That should be a sign that the strong force is more powerful than gravity.
Another important concept of theoretical physics is that there is the macroscopic and the microscopic understanding that govern everything. The microscopic deals with atoms and particles while the macroscopic deals with the much larger view.
Quantum Mechanics is the study part of theoretical physics of the very small, and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is the cornerstone of the Microscopic world. It states that no matter what, we always will have an uncertainty in the exact position and the exact velocity of every and any object. The mass of the object times the uncertainty of the position times the uncertainty of the velocity is at least .00000000000000000000000000000000626 Js. This value is known as Max Planck's Constant. This might seem to be a miniscule and very irrelevant fact, but note this. Classical physics suggests that if we know the exact position and the exact velocity of every particle in the universe (not just most particles, ALL OF THEM) then we would be able to declare everything that has happened in the past and everything that will happen in the future. We would know for a fact how the dinosaurs died out. We would know how much longer Earth will remain inhabitable. But, The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says that will never happen. Now, I am not as knowledgeable about this stuff as some of these guys, so I have no clue how the value was determined. But Hawking declared in his book that even GOD himself is limited by this value as well. I feel that it's very naive to declare the limits of God's capabilities. Another concept that plays into this issue is black holes. You have probably heard of black holes. They are stars that have collapsed upon themselves and suck in everything (yes, including light) due to its immense gravitational field. That is very ironic because it was thought that gravity only sucks in objects with mass. Think of a black hole as a large sink in the universe. The gravitational force for all objects is stronger for objects as they get closer to each other. If an astronaut were falling through a black hole, his body would become ripped open because the black hole's pull would be stronger on his legs than his head. Anyways, Hawking declares that any object sucked into a black hole has information that will be completely lost forever. If he's right, that is yet another reason why we will not determine how the dinosaurs died or how long Earth will exist.
On the opposite side of theoretical physics is a phenomenon called relativity. Relativity was an idea created by Albert Einstein while he was working in a Swiss Patent Office. During the time that he was working on this concept he was getting roughly ten hours of sleep a night! In other words, get your sleep! Relativity covers both General Relativity and Special Relativity. General Relativity starts with the letter G, and so does the word gravity. Special Relativity deals with light. General Relativity talks about how a large mass, such as a planet, will cause objects to curve as they pass nearby due to the gravitational field that it creates. It explains why spacetime is "curved." Spacetime is the concept that there are four known dimensions: three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. Right now I'm typing this at a seat in the library, but many times before other people were typing in this exact same seat in this same three dimensional space. Likewise, as time carries on, I have been to many other places besides this seat. This theory demonstrated that Sir Isaac Newton was wrong about his concept of absolute time. He declared that there was no beginning and there will be no end. Imagine a train that goes on in infinity and never really had a starting point. Well, relativity showed that theory to be false. On the other side of the coin is special relativity involving light. No matter where you go, no matter what you do, special relativity says that the speed of light is always 186,000 miles per second (aka c). If I can throw a ball 30 mph, and then throw a ball while in a car going 60 mph, I can throw the ball 90 mph, right? Well, no matter how fast or slow your car is going, when you turn your headlights on, that light will travel c. Here's something else. If I'm in a locomotive going 30,000 mps and I shine a light from the ceiling to the floor, I will record data to see how fast it moved. Let's say a bystander outside of the train watches the exact same thing. From my perspective, the light shined in a straight line. From the other person's perspective, the light shined at an angle because it was moving in a train. So, therefore, because the other person saw it differently, doesn't that mean that we'll have differing values for the speed of light? Actually, no, and that's because since I was in a very fast moving vehicle, time slowed down for me to the exact amount in which when I do the math and when the other person does the math, we will both calculate the speed of light to be c. In fact, if you were on a plane for the rest of your life, that would add roughly one second to your life span.
So, we have Quantum Mechanics and Relativity. One focuses on the small, the other on the not so small. Currently in the physics community, the task now is to create one theory that explains both. This challenge is still ongoing, but one proposed theory is something called string theory. It states that all atoms are made of oscillating strings. String theory still is not considered a breakthrough, and one of the reasons why is that there are five different possible string theories that physicists have. In his book The Elegant Universe, Brian Greene comments that when one has five different theories for the same thing, he/she is looked upon as unknowledgeable on the concept. Let's face it. He's right. Another fact about string theory is that if it's correct there are ELEVEN dimensions in the universe. Ten spatial and one time dimension. We obviously have found three spatial dimensions, but what about the other seven? With that, physicists go on and on about their theories, but in the end, this concept is really, really in its infancy.
This is just the basics of the realm of theoretical physics that I have fallen in love with. There are many books that discuss this in much better detail than I can here. And since I'm too simple-minded, I may not be able to comment and understand this beautiful universe as well as I'd like. But, it's still fascinating, IMHO.
Monday, March 29, 2010
The Albertson Ladies vs. Marc Rudov and all of those clowns put together vs. me
From reading the title of this post you undoubtedly have no idea what this post is all about. Well, it's mostly about sexist thoughts, feelings and attitudes. Some are blatant, some not as much so. There are many women and many men who are sexist. They have labels, stereotypes, etc. for the other gender. If I'm in a bar and I see a woman drinking a bottle of beer, it would be immoral for me to think that she should be drinking a wine cooler instead. If I am watching football on tv, and a woman is a commentator for how the game is going to turn out, it is wrong for me to think that she doesn't know what she's talking about. That's why I don't do it. Are there differences between men and women? Sure there are!! In my Bible Study Group, some of the best cooks that we have are women. But there are guys who are excellent cooks too. Also, guys do tend to fart more than girls. Considering the fact that I grew up with three brothers, I know what I'm talking about. But I have heard women fart too. Despite some differences between males and females, I do my best to not stereotype, to judge, etc. But that can't be said for everybody.
My Mother has three sisters and a brother. My Grandma Roseva deserves an Olympic Gold Medal for having successfully raised these five individuals to become the adults (ahem) that they are. There are four women (my Mother and her three sisters) and one man. I have obviously gotten to know these four women very well. The Albertson Ladies are all strong supporters of women's rights. Guess what? I am too. But I prefer to be known as a supporter for people's rights. Now I love all four of these women as much as any son or nephew should. But, whether I like it or not, sometimes they have said or done something that suggests that they are sexist. My favorite example of this comes from the youngest of the family. I was having dinner with her and her kids and a conversation broke out between her and me.
Her: Oh yes, I believe that Bill Clinton is one of the best presidents that we have ever had.
Me: Do you think that it is a good thing for a man to cheat on his wife?
Her: Well, Ryan that's the thing. That's a very common thing for men to do.
Me: What do you have to base that off of?
Her: (Pausing for a moment)....Statistics.
(without her mentioning a single statistic I then spoke.)
Me: So, for instance, you're telling me that George W. Bush has cheated on his wife because he's a guy?
Her: I'm sure he has.
I still am very puzzled by this. Now look, this isn't about Democrats vs. Republicans. This is about one of the Albertson Ladies not just accusing, but KNOWING, that George W. has commited adultery. During that brief moment, she was the judge, the jury, the prosecution, and the defense all rolled into one for the case of whether or not George W. Bush has cheated on his wife. According to her, he's guilty until proven innocent. If that's not sexist, then I don't know what is.
I have known my mother for a long time. There are good things about her that are not taken for granted, as she already knows that. But, the truth is that she has proven from time to time that she is on the side of women more than men. Growing up, we would watch a few tv shows of her choosing. Some noteworthy ones are Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman, Star Trek Voyager, Medium, The Closer, etc. After enough thought it is clearly obvious that my Mom prefers a show in which a woman is in a leadership role. She admitted that once, explaining why she liked Cagney and Lacey so much. However, one exception is that she is a diehard fan of NYPD BLUE. When I choose a tv show to watch, the gender of the lead character is not a decision maker or breaker by any means. My favorite show of all time is The Shield, and during half of the series, a woman is the Captain of the Barn. I am also a big fan of The Closer. One time I was having dinner at home with the family. It was about this time when Obama was beating Hillary in the primaries and caucuses. My Mom then made a comment that a woman as president would not send us to war as likely as a man would. Whatever way you look at it, that is a sexist comment. That is a statement that only somebody with a mild grudge against men would make. If I made a comment that a man as president would not be as tardy to a formal speech because he spent too much time polishing his nails and putting on lipstick, I would look like a buffoon as well. Why does my Mother have this attitude? Part of it is because she's still vehement about Title IX. As a student at Ames High School, she had no opportunity to compete in sports. Literally forty years later, she still complains about it. What somebody is supposed to do in this situation, is move on and realize that even though life sucked, and it was unfair sometime ago, that was then and this is now.
On the complete opposite side of the spectrum, is a man named Marc Rudov. To be honest, I feel kind of sorry for Marc. He is a man who is clearly sexist. The radio talk show host does clearly have a grudge against women. Some of you might think that I should have replaced his name in the title of this post with Rush Limbaugh. You might say that Rush is a much more well known person who has said mean things about women, particularly calling some of them feminazis. Here's the reason why Rush is not the guy who I'm going to go after. If you turn the radio on to listen to him the next time that he's on, I guarantee you, I bet you every buck I have, he is not going to harp that much, if at all, about women. What really gets his blood boiling is the Democratic Party. I personally almost never listen to Rush, but I know what I'm talking about. Marc Rudov has a radio show and he has been on television a number of times. Every time that he argues something, he argues in favor of men instead of women. Now, I'm going to show a few of his opinions, some more ridiculous than others, and give my 2 cents about them.
1) Actor Wesley Snipes is being punished more harshly for tax evasion than if he were a woman.
Okay Marc, listen. Where exactly in the judicial system would he have been treated more mercifully if he were a woman? Would the jury vote for a less severe punishment? Would the prosecution be more lenient? Marc Rudov then says that Martha Stewart commited a far worse offense than Mr. Snipes, and so did Dionne Warwick. I am not convinced by Marc Rudov's claim, but his accusation isn't necessarily outrageous.
2) Men should boycott Valentine's Day.
This one is where Mr. Rudov really shines. He gives a statistic that men spend twice as much money as women do on Valentine's Day, so therefore men should boycott Valentine's Day. Now, I think that if he gives out that statistic and says that he feels that that ratio 2 to 1 should not be that high, fair enough. That is a fair and reasonable opinion. But boycotting Valentine's Day because of it is not. For the very humorous debate about that subject, please click on the following Youtube link. One of the arguments that his opponent makes is that when a man buys his girlfriend/wife a piece of lingerie, that is a gift for him as well. GOOD POINT!! Thank God for Victoria's Secret! But on a more serious note, any man who would even consider boycotting Valentine's Day does not know what falling in love with a woman is all about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgFNqkO-jmY
3) Hillary Clinton was in Las Vegas giving a speech, and a man asks her for help. The man tells her that his wife is an illegal alien. Hillary then responds with saying "No woman is an illegal." That's not right.
I agree with Mr. Rudov on this one. "No woman is an illegal?" Hillary made a sexist comment, it was degrading to men, and it's unethical. If you are an illegal, you are an illegal. One might argue that a nut like Rudov is someone you should never agree with, but I say that broken clocks are right twice a day.
I once had an English Teacher who mentioned how we should avoid sexist comments in our papers/speeches. For example,
"The man who is unwilling to take a risk will accomplish nothing in life." WRONG!!
"The person who is unwilling to take a risk will accomplish nothing in life." BETTER!!
There is a show that I watched a long time ago with my brother called street smarts. It was a dumb show about how two contestants could guess whether or not these people on the streets would know the anwer to a stated question. 100% of all the episodes that I saw pitted, yes you guessed it, a guy against a girl. Why? The show's abysmal ratings had to be lifted somehow by forcing you to root for whichever gender you belonged too.
There are many differences between men and women, as we all know. Not just accepting the opposite gender, but also admiring the opposite gender just as much as our own is a difficulty for too many. It is a chore for the Albertson Ladies and it is a chore for Marc Rudov. Hopefully it's not a chore for you.
My Mother has three sisters and a brother. My Grandma Roseva deserves an Olympic Gold Medal for having successfully raised these five individuals to become the adults (ahem) that they are. There are four women (my Mother and her three sisters) and one man. I have obviously gotten to know these four women very well. The Albertson Ladies are all strong supporters of women's rights. Guess what? I am too. But I prefer to be known as a supporter for people's rights. Now I love all four of these women as much as any son or nephew should. But, whether I like it or not, sometimes they have said or done something that suggests that they are sexist. My favorite example of this comes from the youngest of the family. I was having dinner with her and her kids and a conversation broke out between her and me.
Her: Oh yes, I believe that Bill Clinton is one of the best presidents that we have ever had.
Me: Do you think that it is a good thing for a man to cheat on his wife?
Her: Well, Ryan that's the thing. That's a very common thing for men to do.
Me: What do you have to base that off of?
Her: (Pausing for a moment)....Statistics.
(without her mentioning a single statistic I then spoke.)
Me: So, for instance, you're telling me that George W. Bush has cheated on his wife because he's a guy?
Her: I'm sure he has.
I still am very puzzled by this. Now look, this isn't about Democrats vs. Republicans. This is about one of the Albertson Ladies not just accusing, but KNOWING, that George W. has commited adultery. During that brief moment, she was the judge, the jury, the prosecution, and the defense all rolled into one for the case of whether or not George W. Bush has cheated on his wife. According to her, he's guilty until proven innocent. If that's not sexist, then I don't know what is.
I have known my mother for a long time. There are good things about her that are not taken for granted, as she already knows that. But, the truth is that she has proven from time to time that she is on the side of women more than men. Growing up, we would watch a few tv shows of her choosing. Some noteworthy ones are Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman, Star Trek Voyager, Medium, The Closer, etc. After enough thought it is clearly obvious that my Mom prefers a show in which a woman is in a leadership role. She admitted that once, explaining why she liked Cagney and Lacey so much. However, one exception is that she is a diehard fan of NYPD BLUE. When I choose a tv show to watch, the gender of the lead character is not a decision maker or breaker by any means. My favorite show of all time is The Shield, and during half of the series, a woman is the Captain of the Barn. I am also a big fan of The Closer. One time I was having dinner at home with the family. It was about this time when Obama was beating Hillary in the primaries and caucuses. My Mom then made a comment that a woman as president would not send us to war as likely as a man would. Whatever way you look at it, that is a sexist comment. That is a statement that only somebody with a mild grudge against men would make. If I made a comment that a man as president would not be as tardy to a formal speech because he spent too much time polishing his nails and putting on lipstick, I would look like a buffoon as well. Why does my Mother have this attitude? Part of it is because she's still vehement about Title IX. As a student at Ames High School, she had no opportunity to compete in sports. Literally forty years later, she still complains about it. What somebody is supposed to do in this situation, is move on and realize that even though life sucked, and it was unfair sometime ago, that was then and this is now.
On the complete opposite side of the spectrum, is a man named Marc Rudov. To be honest, I feel kind of sorry for Marc. He is a man who is clearly sexist. The radio talk show host does clearly have a grudge against women. Some of you might think that I should have replaced his name in the title of this post with Rush Limbaugh. You might say that Rush is a much more well known person who has said mean things about women, particularly calling some of them feminazis. Here's the reason why Rush is not the guy who I'm going to go after. If you turn the radio on to listen to him the next time that he's on, I guarantee you, I bet you every buck I have, he is not going to harp that much, if at all, about women. What really gets his blood boiling is the Democratic Party. I personally almost never listen to Rush, but I know what I'm talking about. Marc Rudov has a radio show and he has been on television a number of times. Every time that he argues something, he argues in favor of men instead of women. Now, I'm going to show a few of his opinions, some more ridiculous than others, and give my 2 cents about them.
1) Actor Wesley Snipes is being punished more harshly for tax evasion than if he were a woman.
Okay Marc, listen. Where exactly in the judicial system would he have been treated more mercifully if he were a woman? Would the jury vote for a less severe punishment? Would the prosecution be more lenient? Marc Rudov then says that Martha Stewart commited a far worse offense than Mr. Snipes, and so did Dionne Warwick. I am not convinced by Marc Rudov's claim, but his accusation isn't necessarily outrageous.
2) Men should boycott Valentine's Day.
This one is where Mr. Rudov really shines. He gives a statistic that men spend twice as much money as women do on Valentine's Day, so therefore men should boycott Valentine's Day. Now, I think that if he gives out that statistic and says that he feels that that ratio 2 to 1 should not be that high, fair enough. That is a fair and reasonable opinion. But boycotting Valentine's Day because of it is not. For the very humorous debate about that subject, please click on the following Youtube link. One of the arguments that his opponent makes is that when a man buys his girlfriend/wife a piece of lingerie, that is a gift for him as well. GOOD POINT!! Thank God for Victoria's Secret! But on a more serious note, any man who would even consider boycotting Valentine's Day does not know what falling in love with a woman is all about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgFNqkO-jmY
3) Hillary Clinton was in Las Vegas giving a speech, and a man asks her for help. The man tells her that his wife is an illegal alien. Hillary then responds with saying "No woman is an illegal." That's not right.
I agree with Mr. Rudov on this one. "No woman is an illegal?" Hillary made a sexist comment, it was degrading to men, and it's unethical. If you are an illegal, you are an illegal. One might argue that a nut like Rudov is someone you should never agree with, but I say that broken clocks are right twice a day.
I once had an English Teacher who mentioned how we should avoid sexist comments in our papers/speeches. For example,
"The man who is unwilling to take a risk will accomplish nothing in life." WRONG!!
"The person who is unwilling to take a risk will accomplish nothing in life." BETTER!!
There is a show that I watched a long time ago with my brother called street smarts. It was a dumb show about how two contestants could guess whether or not these people on the streets would know the anwer to a stated question. 100% of all the episodes that I saw pitted, yes you guessed it, a guy against a girl. Why? The show's abysmal ratings had to be lifted somehow by forcing you to root for whichever gender you belonged too.
There are many differences between men and women, as we all know. Not just accepting the opposite gender, but also admiring the opposite gender just as much as our own is a difficulty for too many. It is a chore for the Albertson Ladies and it is a chore for Marc Rudov. Hopefully it's not a chore for you.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
The Wire
One of my favorite tv shows that I have ever watched is a show called The Wire. This show was on HBO and it almost broke my heart when the credits came on for the final episode of the series. There was more originality in The Wire than you might be able to imagine. Even though it's a police drama, you have never seen a police drama like this.
This tv series takes place in Baltimore. Almost every single second of every episode is filmed in Baltimore. There are five seasons of the show, and each season focused on a different part of Baltimore. The first season concentrates on the Projects. The police try to reduce drug trafficking by focusing on the ghetto area where drug dealing takes place. The second season explores the ports. The shipping industry is big in Baltimore, and like most major cities is the reason why it became a major city. The third season focuses on the bureaucracy, government, whatever you want to call it. The fourth season deals with the school system, and how it becomes involved with crime. Lastly, the fifth season is centered upon the media, or more specifically the Baltimore Sun. The creator of the show, David Simon, actually worked for the Baltimore Sun in real life. Also, it is called The Wire because the police try to bring down the bad boys through some sort of way of infiltrating their communication.
Because of the numerous facets of Baltimore that The Wire shows, the amount of characters is almost unfathomable. Let's compare The Wire to a show that you're probably familiar with. In the show Seinfeld, there are four major characters; obviously Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer. IMHO Newman is the most recognizable minor character. So, the most well known sitcom of all time has only five characters that really stand out. Yes, there were others, but just not as memorable. Well, let me list off all of the characters that I can off of the top of my head in The Wire. I promise that I'm not looking at a list as I type this up:
Jimmy McNulty, Shakima "Kima" Greggs, Carver, Lester Freamon, Bunk Moreland, Herc, Cedric Daniels, Bodie, Poot, D'Angelo Barksdale, Wee-Bey Brice, Namond Brice, Avon Barksdale, Frank, Nick and Ziggy Sobotdka, The Greek, "Bunny" Colvin, Carcetti, Mayor Royce, Clay Davis (my least favorite), Cheese Wagstaff, Brother Mouzone, Omar Little, Slim Charles, Stringer Bell, Marlo Stanfield, Chris Partlow, Snoops Pearson (my favorite), Bubbles, Michael, Cutty, "Dukie" Duquan, Randy, Prezbylewski, Scott, Commissioner Burrell, Little Kevin, Prop Joe, etc.
Now why is this? The Wire unapologetically has so many areas to cover and so many people that even the main characters are more like supporting roles than lead roles. But, trust me, all of these individuals truly have some very defining moments, which is why I remember so many of their names. Along with showing police business, there is a large amount of "criminal business." The Wire focuses extensively on the work that the criminals themselves do. It's like NYPD BLUE and The Sopranos combined together.
One fact about Baltimore is the very high percentage of blacks. The city's population is roughly 65% African-American. Are there some white people in The Wire? Sure there are. But the show is composed mostly of black people. Because of this, this show is sometimes featured on the tv channel BET. This fact might give you the wrong impression. This show really has nothing to do with racism. It's not about blacks hating whites, or whites hating blacks. It's about people living and working in the city of Baltimore.
When I watch a show or a movie, sometimes, I think back to a situation that I find particularly interesting. In The Wire, there are a number of unique incidents that are thought provoking and require our keen intellect to understand. **SPOILER WARNING** One example was when a bunch of drunken fools went to the projects and stirred up some trouble. One of these fools punched a kid and cost him his eye. The next morning, Cedric Daniels then scolds these men, and demands a confession as to who did it. When you watch what happened, you just feel in your bones the necessity for the guilty one to confess. It might be hard to understand this, all the more reason to watch it, but man it does mean something. When the human heart and the human mind combine to cause everything that we do, especially in unfamiliar situations, that is intelligence at work. **SPOILER WARNING** Another very interesting (and kind of funny) moment was how the police apprehended the one and only Wee-Bey Brice. There is something that they do to lure him into a trap, and the great thing is they knew exactly how he would react to their trap.
The amount of content, creativity and so on put forth in creating The Wire is unlike almost anything. Every episode starts with a meaningful quote that you will hear in the episode. It also shows what person will say it to help learn the characters' names. My favorite quote that I ever saw was
"Deserve ain't got nothin to do with it." -Snoops Pearson
Also, to symbolize the fact that each season is very different from the others, each season's opening song is a different style from each other. The words and lyrics are exactly alike, but the musicians, the instruments, the tempo, etc. are all different. Also, The Wire is Barack Obama's favorite show of all time. His favorite character is Omar Little. I will choose to not give my opinion of Obama, and his opinion isn't necessarily relevant as to whether or not you should check The Wire out. The real reason why The Wire might be worth your time is how great it really is.
The Wire both bent and broke the rules that television shows had. From the complete shift in each season's focus, to the vast cast of characters, The Wire was solid gold, or even platinum, and will always be one of my favorites.
This tv series takes place in Baltimore. Almost every single second of every episode is filmed in Baltimore. There are five seasons of the show, and each season focused on a different part of Baltimore. The first season concentrates on the Projects. The police try to reduce drug trafficking by focusing on the ghetto area where drug dealing takes place. The second season explores the ports. The shipping industry is big in Baltimore, and like most major cities is the reason why it became a major city. The third season focuses on the bureaucracy, government, whatever you want to call it. The fourth season deals with the school system, and how it becomes involved with crime. Lastly, the fifth season is centered upon the media, or more specifically the Baltimore Sun. The creator of the show, David Simon, actually worked for the Baltimore Sun in real life. Also, it is called The Wire because the police try to bring down the bad boys through some sort of way of infiltrating their communication.
Because of the numerous facets of Baltimore that The Wire shows, the amount of characters is almost unfathomable. Let's compare The Wire to a show that you're probably familiar with. In the show Seinfeld, there are four major characters; obviously Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer. IMHO Newman is the most recognizable minor character. So, the most well known sitcom of all time has only five characters that really stand out. Yes, there were others, but just not as memorable. Well, let me list off all of the characters that I can off of the top of my head in The Wire. I promise that I'm not looking at a list as I type this up:
Jimmy McNulty, Shakima "Kima" Greggs, Carver, Lester Freamon, Bunk Moreland, Herc, Cedric Daniels, Bodie, Poot, D'Angelo Barksdale, Wee-Bey Brice, Namond Brice, Avon Barksdale, Frank, Nick and Ziggy Sobotdka, The Greek, "Bunny" Colvin, Carcetti, Mayor Royce, Clay Davis (my least favorite), Cheese Wagstaff, Brother Mouzone, Omar Little, Slim Charles, Stringer Bell, Marlo Stanfield, Chris Partlow, Snoops Pearson (my favorite), Bubbles, Michael, Cutty, "Dukie" Duquan, Randy, Prezbylewski, Scott, Commissioner Burrell, Little Kevin, Prop Joe, etc.
Now why is this? The Wire unapologetically has so many areas to cover and so many people that even the main characters are more like supporting roles than lead roles. But, trust me, all of these individuals truly have some very defining moments, which is why I remember so many of their names. Along with showing police business, there is a large amount of "criminal business." The Wire focuses extensively on the work that the criminals themselves do. It's like NYPD BLUE and The Sopranos combined together.
One fact about Baltimore is the very high percentage of blacks. The city's population is roughly 65% African-American. Are there some white people in The Wire? Sure there are. But the show is composed mostly of black people. Because of this, this show is sometimes featured on the tv channel BET. This fact might give you the wrong impression. This show really has nothing to do with racism. It's not about blacks hating whites, or whites hating blacks. It's about people living and working in the city of Baltimore.
When I watch a show or a movie, sometimes, I think back to a situation that I find particularly interesting. In The Wire, there are a number of unique incidents that are thought provoking and require our keen intellect to understand. **SPOILER WARNING** One example was when a bunch of drunken fools went to the projects and stirred up some trouble. One of these fools punched a kid and cost him his eye. The next morning, Cedric Daniels then scolds these men, and demands a confession as to who did it. When you watch what happened, you just feel in your bones the necessity for the guilty one to confess. It might be hard to understand this, all the more reason to watch it, but man it does mean something. When the human heart and the human mind combine to cause everything that we do, especially in unfamiliar situations, that is intelligence at work. **SPOILER WARNING** Another very interesting (and kind of funny) moment was how the police apprehended the one and only Wee-Bey Brice. There is something that they do to lure him into a trap, and the great thing is they knew exactly how he would react to their trap.
The amount of content, creativity and so on put forth in creating The Wire is unlike almost anything. Every episode starts with a meaningful quote that you will hear in the episode. It also shows what person will say it to help learn the characters' names. My favorite quote that I ever saw was
"Deserve ain't got nothin to do with it." -Snoops Pearson
Also, to symbolize the fact that each season is very different from the others, each season's opening song is a different style from each other. The words and lyrics are exactly alike, but the musicians, the instruments, the tempo, etc. are all different. Also, The Wire is Barack Obama's favorite show of all time. His favorite character is Omar Little. I will choose to not give my opinion of Obama, and his opinion isn't necessarily relevant as to whether or not you should check The Wire out. The real reason why The Wire might be worth your time is how great it really is.
The Wire both bent and broke the rules that television shows had. From the complete shift in each season's focus, to the vast cast of characters, The Wire was solid gold, or even platinum, and will always be one of my favorites.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Beyond Fear
There is an old story about the wind and the sun. The wind claims superiority over the sun in every way possible. The sun then says "Okay, I challenge you to a contest. You have to make that man you see over there take off his coat." The wind accepts this challenge and proceeds to blow wind on the man to make him remove his coat. But it only causes the man to pull his coat more tightly around his body. The wind sees this, and then just starts blowing wind much harder on the man. The sun then sighs (you know how suns are sometimes) and shines as brightly as possible. The man, feeling much warmth then decides it is time to remove his coat. The moral of the story is that understanding what you are up against is the real problem solver. The amount of effort, although also important, will accomplish nothing if headed in the wrong direction. This is a very important lesson among many others in one of the best books that I have ever read called Beyond Fear.
Beyond Fear is a book written by Bruce Schneier. Basically, it's all about security. It gives facts about what is the best form of security and how to obtain it. In this post 9/11 world, this is a very important topic. Unfortunately, we fail to understand how best to obtain good security, and yes, sometimes we are the wind. Schneier comments that the two major priorities are that we must be safe, but that also we must feel safe. These two do not work together completely, sometimes they don't work together at all. Sometimes you may feel safe but all the while are not safe at all. If you want an example look at all of the quite humorous footage of people doing the "duck and cover" method to avoid death from a nuclear attack. Also, sometimes you may feel unsafe but all the while you are very safe from whatever you are afraid of. I would give an example but I can't think of one besides global warming. So, this is something that every employee of the CIA, FBI, DHS, etc. should understand very well, right? Well, isn't this something that even you should understand too? Because, regardless of the fact that your name isn't Jack Bauer, this still is a concept that you should be very familiar with. So how can one know whether a proposed security initiative is worth it? For that answer, I have the five questions that must be asked in order to decide. Here they are.
1. What are you trying to protect?
2. What are the risks to what you are trying to protect?
3. How does this "solution" mitigate those risks?
4. Does this "solution" cause any more risks?
5. What are the trade-offs to this "solution"?
An example of this may be in order. As I just mentioned, this is a concept that everyone should understand. To an extent, you probably have already asked yourself these five questions. EVEN TODAY!!!! Take for instance, brushing your teeth (hopefully a daily experience for you).
1. What are you trying to protect?
protection of teeth and gums. Maybe even protection against bad breath.
2. What are the risks to what you are trying to protect?
Gingivitis, plaque, tartar, teeth just simply falling out, etc.
3. How does this "solution" mitigate those risks?
Very well, actually. I doubt you'll soon find any dentist who disagrees.
4. Does this "solution" cause any more risks?
Well, the truth is that many people do brush too hard, which isn't good. Besides that, nothing serious as far as I know.
5. What are the trade-offs to this "solution"?
The cost is minimal, and so is the time it takes.
After looking at each answer to the proposal of brushing teeth, it should be obvious that brushing teeth is very much worth it. After looking at these five questions, one should be able to have a clear understanding of the best form of security for any security initiative. When I was growing up in Ankeny, IA (a suburb of Des Moines) we did fire drills and tornado drills in school. In other parts of the country, earthquake drills are more appropriate.
Beyond Fear asks us to use our head, not our heart. It demands us to act on what we know to be afraid of instead of what our instinct tells us to be afraid of. So, what was the best way to handle the aftermath of 9/11? Was it to close down all flights for a certain period of time? In this country, 40,000 people die every year due to automobile accidents. Many others have severe injuries. By all accounts, it is much safer to fly than to drive. However, who wanted to fly? I didn't. Likewise, during the sniper crisis in the D.C. area people were afraid of being shot instead of being killed in a car accident. Another interesting fact is that more people have been killed by pigs than by sharks. Who would have ever guessed that we, as humans, should be more afraid of pigs than sharks?
This society that we live in demands security on a daily (or even hourly) basis. The biggest reason for this is that technology has vastly expanded our lifestyle. For instance, let's say there's a store owner in Philadelphia in the 1600's. This fictional store owner is the only person who works in the store. This store owner has to worry about robbers coming into his or her store and stealing his or her stuff. The owner also should worry about the store being burned down. Lastly, the owner has to worry about selling enough goods and services to stay in business. Call me crazy, but that seems to be the limit of the store owner's concerns. Now let's fast-forward to Wal-Mart, Target, Safeway whatever you want. Along with what the store owner has to deal with, these businesses have to worry about embezzlement, credit and debit card fraud, bad checks, counterfeit products, etc. Since these are chains, these shopping locations' problems are increased drastically. Not to mention the Internet! These chains also provide the opportunity to buy from the Internet, without ever leaving the home. What all of this means is that these companies have many more targets with a bullseye attached to themselves than the lone store owner ever had. But, remember, the most secure solutions are not always the best. Customers who go to buy something get mad when credit or debit is not accepted, and that's not good for business. However, they do like to see video cameras making sure that shoplifters have another obstacle to get through.
One way to resolve this problem is to have multiple obstacles for one to breach security. An example that Schneier makes is in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. In order to get the Sorcerer's Stone, the Three-headed dog named Fluffy, the chessmatch, the riddle to make the potion, and the desire to have the stone but not use it were all obstacles to having the Sorcerer's Stone. Likewise, some safes have both a combination and a keyhole that must be used.
As mentioned before, the CIA, FBI, DHS, and many others are forced to know and understand this concept inside and out. There is however, one other group of people who may understand this even better than anyone else. You can find them in Las Vegas and they make sure that when the day is done, their casino has as much money left over as possible. You may have heard about the six MIT students who went to Vegas and left with $3 million because they knew how to play the game blackjack. Because of what they did, they will never be able to be in a casino ever again. A person's walk is as identifiable as a fingerprint, a person's reaction to winning big is completely evaluated by "the eyes in the sky" to see if it's a genuine win, or if it's staged, and these people in charge of security in a casino know how to keep the cash flowing their way.
When it's all said and done, this is a fantastic book. Anyone unaware of the concept should read this ASAP. As with almost anything, there is however one criticism worth mentioning. In the beginning of the book, Schneier talks about 9/11. I don't remember what he says exactly, but he almost speaks about the day in a positive light. More or less, he tells us that it showed us fantastically that security was sub par that day. It's just that he used the wrong wording in my opinion.
Does this mean that if we understand everything to this, that will solve all our problems? Of course not. Sin is as constant as gravity. There will continue to be murders, thefts, and so on. In fact, with this increasingly complicated world, it may only get worse. But this book encompasses the vast subject of security and how best to obtain it. And because of this book, among many other reasons, I am so bright that my parents call me sun. That was funny wasn't it?
Beyond Fear is a book written by Bruce Schneier. Basically, it's all about security. It gives facts about what is the best form of security and how to obtain it. In this post 9/11 world, this is a very important topic. Unfortunately, we fail to understand how best to obtain good security, and yes, sometimes we are the wind. Schneier comments that the two major priorities are that we must be safe, but that also we must feel safe. These two do not work together completely, sometimes they don't work together at all. Sometimes you may feel safe but all the while are not safe at all. If you want an example look at all of the quite humorous footage of people doing the "duck and cover" method to avoid death from a nuclear attack. Also, sometimes you may feel unsafe but all the while you are very safe from whatever you are afraid of. I would give an example but I can't think of one besides global warming. So, this is something that every employee of the CIA, FBI, DHS, etc. should understand very well, right? Well, isn't this something that even you should understand too? Because, regardless of the fact that your name isn't Jack Bauer, this still is a concept that you should be very familiar with. So how can one know whether a proposed security initiative is worth it? For that answer, I have the five questions that must be asked in order to decide. Here they are.
1. What are you trying to protect?
2. What are the risks to what you are trying to protect?
3. How does this "solution" mitigate those risks?
4. Does this "solution" cause any more risks?
5. What are the trade-offs to this "solution"?
An example of this may be in order. As I just mentioned, this is a concept that everyone should understand. To an extent, you probably have already asked yourself these five questions. EVEN TODAY!!!! Take for instance, brushing your teeth (hopefully a daily experience for you).
1. What are you trying to protect?
protection of teeth and gums. Maybe even protection against bad breath.
2. What are the risks to what you are trying to protect?
Gingivitis, plaque, tartar, teeth just simply falling out, etc.
3. How does this "solution" mitigate those risks?
Very well, actually. I doubt you'll soon find any dentist who disagrees.
4. Does this "solution" cause any more risks?
Well, the truth is that many people do brush too hard, which isn't good. Besides that, nothing serious as far as I know.
5. What are the trade-offs to this "solution"?
The cost is minimal, and so is the time it takes.
After looking at each answer to the proposal of brushing teeth, it should be obvious that brushing teeth is very much worth it. After looking at these five questions, one should be able to have a clear understanding of the best form of security for any security initiative. When I was growing up in Ankeny, IA (a suburb of Des Moines) we did fire drills and tornado drills in school. In other parts of the country, earthquake drills are more appropriate.
Beyond Fear asks us to use our head, not our heart. It demands us to act on what we know to be afraid of instead of what our instinct tells us to be afraid of. So, what was the best way to handle the aftermath of 9/11? Was it to close down all flights for a certain period of time? In this country, 40,000 people die every year due to automobile accidents. Many others have severe injuries. By all accounts, it is much safer to fly than to drive. However, who wanted to fly? I didn't. Likewise, during the sniper crisis in the D.C. area people were afraid of being shot instead of being killed in a car accident. Another interesting fact is that more people have been killed by pigs than by sharks. Who would have ever guessed that we, as humans, should be more afraid of pigs than sharks?
This society that we live in demands security on a daily (or even hourly) basis. The biggest reason for this is that technology has vastly expanded our lifestyle. For instance, let's say there's a store owner in Philadelphia in the 1600's. This fictional store owner is the only person who works in the store. This store owner has to worry about robbers coming into his or her store and stealing his or her stuff. The owner also should worry about the store being burned down. Lastly, the owner has to worry about selling enough goods and services to stay in business. Call me crazy, but that seems to be the limit of the store owner's concerns. Now let's fast-forward to Wal-Mart, Target, Safeway whatever you want. Along with what the store owner has to deal with, these businesses have to worry about embezzlement, credit and debit card fraud, bad checks, counterfeit products, etc. Since these are chains, these shopping locations' problems are increased drastically. Not to mention the Internet! These chains also provide the opportunity to buy from the Internet, without ever leaving the home. What all of this means is that these companies have many more targets with a bullseye attached to themselves than the lone store owner ever had. But, remember, the most secure solutions are not always the best. Customers who go to buy something get mad when credit or debit is not accepted, and that's not good for business. However, they do like to see video cameras making sure that shoplifters have another obstacle to get through.
One way to resolve this problem is to have multiple obstacles for one to breach security. An example that Schneier makes is in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. In order to get the Sorcerer's Stone, the Three-headed dog named Fluffy, the chessmatch, the riddle to make the potion, and the desire to have the stone but not use it were all obstacles to having the Sorcerer's Stone. Likewise, some safes have both a combination and a keyhole that must be used.
As mentioned before, the CIA, FBI, DHS, and many others are forced to know and understand this concept inside and out. There is however, one other group of people who may understand this even better than anyone else. You can find them in Las Vegas and they make sure that when the day is done, their casino has as much money left over as possible. You may have heard about the six MIT students who went to Vegas and left with $3 million because they knew how to play the game blackjack. Because of what they did, they will never be able to be in a casino ever again. A person's walk is as identifiable as a fingerprint, a person's reaction to winning big is completely evaluated by "the eyes in the sky" to see if it's a genuine win, or if it's staged, and these people in charge of security in a casino know how to keep the cash flowing their way.
When it's all said and done, this is a fantastic book. Anyone unaware of the concept should read this ASAP. As with almost anything, there is however one criticism worth mentioning. In the beginning of the book, Schneier talks about 9/11. I don't remember what he says exactly, but he almost speaks about the day in a positive light. More or less, he tells us that it showed us fantastically that security was sub par that day. It's just that he used the wrong wording in my opinion.
Does this mean that if we understand everything to this, that will solve all our problems? Of course not. Sin is as constant as gravity. There will continue to be murders, thefts, and so on. In fact, with this increasingly complicated world, it may only get worse. But this book encompasses the vast subject of security and how best to obtain it. And because of this book, among many other reasons, I am so bright that my parents call me sun. That was funny wasn't it?
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Asperger's Syndrome
"You're a wizard Harry."
-Rubeus Hagrid
"Ryan, you have Asperger's Syndrome."
-Dr. Lelwica
So, as you can see, this is another post about Asperger's Syndrome (AS). What is so great about having AS? What is not so great about having AS? Everything. When I fully realized my condition, I found it comparable to when Harry Potter finds out that he's a wizard. Over the course of his life, he discovered some bizarre, inexplicable events, such as a disappearing glass wall, a snake that speaks to him, etc. For the most part, he brushes these absurdities off, having no clue why they happened. Then, things become clear when Rubeus tells him that Harry is a wizard. Likewise, when I was growing up, there were vast differences between myself and EVERYONE else. Something strange would take place, and I had no clue how to explain it. One of my all-time memories was Mr. Hey, our Chemistry Teacher asked us what the speed of light is. I think that he wanted us to say "It 's how fast light travels." But, I told him it was 186,000 miles per second. After he confirmed that I was right, I had a lot of weird glances in my direction. I just considered it something impressive, certainly not a result from some disorder. Another moment was my Math Teacher Mr. Mashek asked us to solve a math problem. I told him how I would do it and he looked at me and smiled. I asked him if that work, and he responded yes. And he told me in his entire 30 years of teaching no student of his has ever said that. Again, I just considered it something impressive about me. So those two events in my life were my own "glass wall disappearing" and "snake speaking" memories. Later on in life I started seeing a therapist named Dr. Mike Lelwica. After taking numerous tests, he diagnosed me with Asperger's Syndrome. Eventually, I realized that that was my own event when Rubeus Hagrid plopped down on the couch and told me that I'm a wizard. That I am different.
There is much about this subject, much of which will not be discussed in this post. One thing is that communication with neurotypical people can be difficult. I used to be very poor at making eye contact, but that is a problem of the past. Also, I don't understand very well what people's own opinion is of me. Of course, if they tell me, then that's very helpful, but besides that, things can get extremely ambiguous. These differences in me are as real as anything. Some people do not believe so. I'm not offended by that because I know that they are wrong. One of my favorite tv shows is Rescue Me starring Denis Leary. In a book he wrote, he said some harsh things about autism. This is what he said.
"There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-ass kids can't compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks... to get back diagnoses that help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons. I don't (care) what these crackerjack whack jobs tell you — your kid is not autistic. He's just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."
After some people cried foul, Leary apologized to any parents with autistic children. Whether he meant it is a different story. It is possible that Leary has a point, that autism is overdiagnosed and that often the real solution is to not diagnose autism. The reason why I'm not offended by what he said is because I know that my diagnosis of AS was not caused by an inattentive mother, a competitive dad (whatever that means), stupidity or laziness. My diagnosis was caused by the fact that I have AS.
Speaking of tv shows, one "relief" that I have for autism is to watch television. One thing that I really love is to analyze people's own personalities on tv, see what they are like, and then I understand people better. "SPOILER WARNING" Another great tv show I watch is The Office. One thing I have noticed about the great Michael Scott is that he has too much wishful thinking sometimes. He was completely dead-set that he would get the job replacing Jan, and that blew up in his face. Then, when Jan brought her newborn baby to work, beforehand Michael declared "This is going to be the happiest day of my life." It really wasn't. Those two events demonstrate that Michael's incompetence results in wishful thinking at times. The writers for this show, just like the writers for all shows completely get it. I also use this in my real life too. I can measure somewhat accurately, a person's sense of humor or lackthereof. I can anticipate a person's reaction to something, and it greatly helps.
Another symptom of AS that is common is the lack of "initial success." We don't do a good job of getting things right the first time we try something, whether it's something simple to do on a computer, driving, etc. At first this seems to be something that neurotypical people have as well, and that's partly true. But, Dr. Lars Perner has stated that he had to change his entire career plans because of this one silly thing. At first, he wanted to become a lawyer, and as a lawyer in the courtroom you have to know exactly how to respond in the courtroom no matter what takes place. That's not the job for Dr. Perner, or myself.
On the other hand, one of the greatest benefits of AS is an amazingly good memory. For those of you who know me, if you ever ask me to show you how many places of pi I have memorized, you will not believe what I can do. I can remember when I first met almost any and every person I know, except for my parents of course. Likewise, this helps when I watch television and see how storylines develop. It's because of this that I believe people with AS have brains that work like computers much more than neurotypical people. People with AS have a very large hard drive to store data because of their good memory. Because of our lack of "initial success" we also need to be "programmed" to do things right.
There are however, some symptoms of AS that have been stated that I do not possess. Dr. Perner mentions that he is incapable of teamwork, because of his poor communication skills. This is a problem that I used to have, but when there is proper communication in a team, I think that I am very capable of fitting in. When I did sports in high school, I only did sports that did not require "team communication." Cross country, wrestling and track are all accomplished by the individual, not the team. When I was competing, I NEVER communicated with my own teammates . However, I think that that's not the reason why I did the sports that I did. I can't sprint fast, so basketball is out of the question. I was influenced by my older brother to be in CC, so I didn't do football, and baseball is for people who are lazy. And I don't necessarily have a good excuse for soccer except that I didn't like it when I was too young. I know I ran on a tangent, sorry. Another symtom of AS is the fact that I can hide my condition. People with AS tend to have poor communication, poor speech, etc. I think that I have a healthy enough social life to seem neurotypical, which is very good.
All my life I have found certain individuals fascinating. Sometimes I read books about famous people, living or dead, just because I'm a fan. Now I didn't find out that I have AS until I was 21 years old. By that time, I had grown very fond of some well-known people. Not coincidentally, they very much fit the type of people who have AS. Let me name a few. Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Stephen Spielberg, Bill Gates, and Sir Isaac Newton are just a few. Ironically at first, one might suggest that I was only choosing rich people. Let it be known that I have never been that interested in Warren Buffett. I'm sure that he's worth admiring, it's just that I find the aforementioned men more interesting. I hope that none of you are offended that all of the people I have stated are men. If I recall, AS people are roughly 80% men and 20% women. There is another man who fits into this category. So much so that I have read his book. He is both an interesting and simultaneously a despicable individual. His name was Adolph Hitler. Hitler wanted to be a painter when he was younger. From what I have seen and heard, he could have become a great artist. People with AS are very visual (some claim Andy Warhol had AS.) Hitler was also a daydreamer. I read his book Mein Kampf sometime ago, and when I put everything together, I do truly think that he may have had AS. The truth is that he was the most evil SOB that this world has ever seen. Why did this man who certainly had some sort of mental difficulty become a monster? More than anything, I believe it was caused due to the atrocities that he went through during his time as a soldier in World War I. It completely overwhelmed him mentally and you know what happened after that. So there have been many well-known figures who I have been interested in, and I truly do believe that they fit the type of person who had AS. Albert Einstein was able to do things with his mind that no one else could. Does that come from a mind that works just like everyone else's or from a mind that nobody understands? You make the call.
In conclusion, I would be lying if I told you that my condition of AS is no big deal. But I would also be lying if I told you that I haven't become better over time, and that I don't continue to make improvements of myself. If I had the choice to be neurotypical, I would choose to stay the way that I am. After all, no neurotypical brain will ever stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Einstein.
-Rubeus Hagrid
"Ryan, you have Asperger's Syndrome."
-Dr. Lelwica
So, as you can see, this is another post about Asperger's Syndrome (AS). What is so great about having AS? What is not so great about having AS? Everything. When I fully realized my condition, I found it comparable to when Harry Potter finds out that he's a wizard. Over the course of his life, he discovered some bizarre, inexplicable events, such as a disappearing glass wall, a snake that speaks to him, etc. For the most part, he brushes these absurdities off, having no clue why they happened. Then, things become clear when Rubeus tells him that Harry is a wizard. Likewise, when I was growing up, there were vast differences between myself and EVERYONE else. Something strange would take place, and I had no clue how to explain it. One of my all-time memories was Mr. Hey, our Chemistry Teacher asked us what the speed of light is. I think that he wanted us to say "It 's how fast light travels." But, I told him it was 186,000 miles per second. After he confirmed that I was right, I had a lot of weird glances in my direction. I just considered it something impressive, certainly not a result from some disorder. Another moment was my Math Teacher Mr. Mashek asked us to solve a math problem. I told him how I would do it and he looked at me and smiled. I asked him if that work, and he responded yes. And he told me in his entire 30 years of teaching no student of his has ever said that. Again, I just considered it something impressive about me. So those two events in my life were my own "glass wall disappearing" and "snake speaking" memories. Later on in life I started seeing a therapist named Dr. Mike Lelwica. After taking numerous tests, he diagnosed me with Asperger's Syndrome. Eventually, I realized that that was my own event when Rubeus Hagrid plopped down on the couch and told me that I'm a wizard. That I am different.
There is much about this subject, much of which will not be discussed in this post. One thing is that communication with neurotypical people can be difficult. I used to be very poor at making eye contact, but that is a problem of the past. Also, I don't understand very well what people's own opinion is of me. Of course, if they tell me, then that's very helpful, but besides that, things can get extremely ambiguous. These differences in me are as real as anything. Some people do not believe so. I'm not offended by that because I know that they are wrong. One of my favorite tv shows is Rescue Me starring Denis Leary. In a book he wrote, he said some harsh things about autism. This is what he said.
"There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-ass kids can't compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks... to get back diagnoses that help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons. I don't (care) what these crackerjack whack jobs tell you — your kid is not autistic. He's just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."
After some people cried foul, Leary apologized to any parents with autistic children. Whether he meant it is a different story. It is possible that Leary has a point, that autism is overdiagnosed and that often the real solution is to not diagnose autism. The reason why I'm not offended by what he said is because I know that my diagnosis of AS was not caused by an inattentive mother, a competitive dad (whatever that means), stupidity or laziness. My diagnosis was caused by the fact that I have AS.
Speaking of tv shows, one "relief" that I have for autism is to watch television. One thing that I really love is to analyze people's own personalities on tv, see what they are like, and then I understand people better. "SPOILER WARNING" Another great tv show I watch is The Office. One thing I have noticed about the great Michael Scott is that he has too much wishful thinking sometimes. He was completely dead-set that he would get the job replacing Jan, and that blew up in his face. Then, when Jan brought her newborn baby to work, beforehand Michael declared "This is going to be the happiest day of my life." It really wasn't. Those two events demonstrate that Michael's incompetence results in wishful thinking at times. The writers for this show, just like the writers for all shows completely get it. I also use this in my real life too. I can measure somewhat accurately, a person's sense of humor or lackthereof. I can anticipate a person's reaction to something, and it greatly helps.
Another symptom of AS that is common is the lack of "initial success." We don't do a good job of getting things right the first time we try something, whether it's something simple to do on a computer, driving, etc. At first this seems to be something that neurotypical people have as well, and that's partly true. But, Dr. Lars Perner has stated that he had to change his entire career plans because of this one silly thing. At first, he wanted to become a lawyer, and as a lawyer in the courtroom you have to know exactly how to respond in the courtroom no matter what takes place. That's not the job for Dr. Perner, or myself.
On the other hand, one of the greatest benefits of AS is an amazingly good memory. For those of you who know me, if you ever ask me to show you how many places of pi I have memorized, you will not believe what I can do. I can remember when I first met almost any and every person I know, except for my parents of course. Likewise, this helps when I watch television and see how storylines develop. It's because of this that I believe people with AS have brains that work like computers much more than neurotypical people. People with AS have a very large hard drive to store data because of their good memory. Because of our lack of "initial success" we also need to be "programmed" to do things right.
There are however, some symptoms of AS that have been stated that I do not possess. Dr. Perner mentions that he is incapable of teamwork, because of his poor communication skills. This is a problem that I used to have, but when there is proper communication in a team, I think that I am very capable of fitting in. When I did sports in high school, I only did sports that did not require "team communication." Cross country, wrestling and track are all accomplished by the individual, not the team. When I was competing, I NEVER communicated with my own teammates . However, I think that that's not the reason why I did the sports that I did. I can't sprint fast, so basketball is out of the question. I was influenced by my older brother to be in CC, so I didn't do football, and baseball is for people who are lazy. And I don't necessarily have a good excuse for soccer except that I didn't like it when I was too young. I know I ran on a tangent, sorry. Another symtom of AS is the fact that I can hide my condition. People with AS tend to have poor communication, poor speech, etc. I think that I have a healthy enough social life to seem neurotypical, which is very good.
All my life I have found certain individuals fascinating. Sometimes I read books about famous people, living or dead, just because I'm a fan. Now I didn't find out that I have AS until I was 21 years old. By that time, I had grown very fond of some well-known people. Not coincidentally, they very much fit the type of people who have AS. Let me name a few. Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Stephen Spielberg, Bill Gates, and Sir Isaac Newton are just a few. Ironically at first, one might suggest that I was only choosing rich people. Let it be known that I have never been that interested in Warren Buffett. I'm sure that he's worth admiring, it's just that I find the aforementioned men more interesting. I hope that none of you are offended that all of the people I have stated are men. If I recall, AS people are roughly 80% men and 20% women. There is another man who fits into this category. So much so that I have read his book. He is both an interesting and simultaneously a despicable individual. His name was Adolph Hitler. Hitler wanted to be a painter when he was younger. From what I have seen and heard, he could have become a great artist. People with AS are very visual (some claim Andy Warhol had AS.) Hitler was also a daydreamer. I read his book Mein Kampf sometime ago, and when I put everything together, I do truly think that he may have had AS. The truth is that he was the most evil SOB that this world has ever seen. Why did this man who certainly had some sort of mental difficulty become a monster? More than anything, I believe it was caused due to the atrocities that he went through during his time as a soldier in World War I. It completely overwhelmed him mentally and you know what happened after that. So there have been many well-known figures who I have been interested in, and I truly do believe that they fit the type of person who had AS. Albert Einstein was able to do things with his mind that no one else could. Does that come from a mind that works just like everyone else's or from a mind that nobody understands? You make the call.
In conclusion, I would be lying if I told you that my condition of AS is no big deal. But I would also be lying if I told you that I haven't become better over time, and that I don't continue to make improvements of myself. If I had the choice to be neurotypical, I would choose to stay the way that I am. After all, no neurotypical brain will ever stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Einstein.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)