The wife's up in SF for a couple of days, so me and the HB are doing the bachelor thing. So, as is our tradition, we stopped at the store to get some seafood (shrimp) for dinner. Strangely, he asked if we could watch baseball (sorry, Rockies fans) or football. Not sure if he really has an interest in either or just wanted to watch TV while we ate. Either way, even though I'm watching the game now on DVR, it's nice to actually watch MNF for a change. I just haven't been that dialed into the NFL this year...just too busy (and my fantasy team is suffering for it). Speaking of MNF, what's with the parade of celebs in the booth. Yuck...this is why I watch the games with the sound off.
Back to baseball, I am SO sick of the Red Sox now. They were the best team in the playoffs and probably in the league (after watching the Rockies, Cleveland fans must be sick to their stomachs for blowing that 3-1 lead). But, and as much as Sox fans don't want to admit it, they are the Yankees with a less publicly obnoxious owner. They'll cement that reputation if they sign A-Rod who didn't resign with the Yankees.
Christ, how long is this game going to last...there have been 20 penalties and there is still 9 minutes left to go.
While we're in football mode, I can't get over the Tennessee-South Carolina game. One one hand, had they lost, after blowing a 21-0 lead at home, the drumbeats for the head coaches head would have gotten louder (and Fulmer seems to have overstayed his welcome). But, thanks to some clutch field goals, not only do they pull the game out, but now they control their own destiny for the SEC championship game (no matter that they would get eviscerated by either LSU or Auburn). It's just been a weird season.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Friday, October 26, 2007
Halloween Weekend
We are totally gearing up for pre-Halloween weekend. Here's what's on the menu this weekend:
Some neighborhood kids and other friends over for pizza, candy apples and Tim Burton movies tonight.
Saturday, Halloween bowling in the dark (with florescent balls and in costume) with the Rotary Club (my nephew's going to join us and sleep over).
Sunday, hopefully a hike with Indian Guides up to Skull Rock. But, this may not be possible given the horrible air quality from the fires. It's foggy this morning, so maybe the low clouds will take some of the gunk out of the air. But, I think we'll have to come up with Plan B (probably something indoor, like ice skating).
I can't wait for next Wednesday....
Some neighborhood kids and other friends over for pizza, candy apples and Tim Burton movies tonight.
Saturday, Halloween bowling in the dark (with florescent balls and in costume) with the Rotary Club (my nephew's going to join us and sleep over).
Sunday, hopefully a hike with Indian Guides up to Skull Rock. But, this may not be possible given the horrible air quality from the fires. It's foggy this morning, so maybe the low clouds will take some of the gunk out of the air. But, I think we'll have to come up with Plan B (probably something indoor, like ice skating).
I can't wait for next Wednesday....
Thursday, October 25, 2007
No, No and Hell No
During the same week that Bush & company start beating the war drums to go into Iran, the president asks Congress for a ton of green to keep the war going in Iraq. As usual, he couches it in emotional (political) blackmail terms of, "Well, you can disagree with the war, but we have to support the troops and this money is the only way to do it." What a bunch of shit.
This is the direct result of Congress being such a bunch of pussies earlier in the year. Remember, that's when they said they would cut back on war funding, W threatened a veto and then Congress said, "Just kidding, here's your money." Had they persisted and shoved a reduction in funding down Bush's throat by attaching it to general budget bill, we would have had a change in war strategy by now. But they didn't and we don't.
If Bush's request is granted, we are guaranteed that the next president will be faced with exactly the same situation we have now. Better to force Bush to clean up his own mess now and give the next president a chance to implement his/her own policy in Iraq.
This is the direct result of Congress being such a bunch of pussies earlier in the year. Remember, that's when they said they would cut back on war funding, W threatened a veto and then Congress said, "Just kidding, here's your money." Had they persisted and shoved a reduction in funding down Bush's throat by attaching it to general budget bill, we would have had a change in war strategy by now. But they didn't and we don't.
If Bush's request is granted, we are guaranteed that the next president will be faced with exactly the same situation we have now. Better to force Bush to clean up his own mess now and give the next president a chance to implement his/her own policy in Iraq.
WW #44
Courtesy of Lola who is CLEARLY hard up.
1. when was the last time you were pussy-pissed/blue balled? what brought you to that state?
Things are kinda rough now...the wife's been sick and the air quality is so bad here from the fires that she's not getting better.
2. when was the last time you were interrupted sexually, and you could not finish? what happened?
Wasn't me, but was once with a paramour in Vegas. I was going down on her when the housekeeper walked in. After the housekeeper left, my lady friend said, "Damn...and I was working on a GOOD one." We got back to it and she came, but we'll never know if it was as good as the original.
3. who was the last person you encountered that the flirting or convo left you WANTING MORE? what did you do about it?
In the past I had many convos with Lynn like that.
1. when was the last time you were pussy-pissed/blue balled? what brought you to that state?
Things are kinda rough now...the wife's been sick and the air quality is so bad here from the fires that she's not getting better.
2. when was the last time you were interrupted sexually, and you could not finish? what happened?
Wasn't me, but was once with a paramour in Vegas. I was going down on her when the housekeeper walked in. After the housekeeper left, my lady friend said, "Damn...and I was working on a GOOD one." We got back to it and she came, but we'll never know if it was as good as the original.
3. who was the last person you encountered that the flirting or convo left you WANTING MORE? what did you do about it?
In the past I had many convos with Lynn like that.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Sat 8: Jobs (I'm soooo late on this)
1. what was your worst job? why?
Doing early am prep at a restaurant. The owners were assholes.
2. what was your best job? why?
Besides the one I have now? The summer between my junior and senior year in college I drove deliveries. Not UPS, but documents, etc. I got to listen to music in my car all day, go see my friends during breaks, and learned LA like the back of my hand. Plus, now I can parallel park like nobody's business.
3. are you looking for a new job now?
Some more work, yes. New job, no.
4. when did you get the job you have now? if you're unemployed, how long have you been without a job?
A little more than two years ago when I left my previous firm.
5. have you ever been fired from a job? what happened?
Nope, but I have been fired by clients when things haven't gone as they had expected (not too often). I think I've fired as many clients as clients have fired me.
6. have you ever had a horrible, back-stabbing colleague?
No.
7. have you heard of or ever been involved in a an office scandal at your work?
No--I work for myself so I don't have to deal with that drama.
8. what's your dream job?
What I have now, with less selling.
Doing early am prep at a restaurant. The owners were assholes.
2. what was your best job? why?
Besides the one I have now? The summer between my junior and senior year in college I drove deliveries. Not UPS, but documents, etc. I got to listen to music in my car all day, go see my friends during breaks, and learned LA like the back of my hand. Plus, now I can parallel park like nobody's business.
3. are you looking for a new job now?
Some more work, yes. New job, no.
4. when did you get the job you have now? if you're unemployed, how long have you been without a job?
A little more than two years ago when I left my previous firm.
5. have you ever been fired from a job? what happened?
Nope, but I have been fired by clients when things haven't gone as they had expected (not too often). I think I've fired as many clients as clients have fired me.
6. have you ever had a horrible, back-stabbing colleague?
No.
7. have you heard of or ever been involved in a an office scandal at your work?
No--I work for myself so I don't have to deal with that drama.
8. what's your dream job?
What I have now, with less selling.
Los Angeles is Burning
Yes, my friends, it's that time again when Los Angeles burns. Technically, none of the fires are within the city limits. But, there are several in the burbs to the north and in Malibu. San Diego is joining in the fun as well. The HB and I were camping west of Malibu (yes, I know that sounds weird directionally, but the coastline runs east-west there), but left before the fires started. The fires won't make it my house. If they did, it would make the great Chicago and San Francisco fires look like weenie roasts.
While LA itself is not hilly (with the exception of the Hollywood Hills and some ocean bluffs), there is a ring of mountains around it. This gives us spectacular views, some very cool places to live and traps the smog. LA is not a desert, but it is arid. So, a lot of brush grows in these hills/mountains and when there's a drought and the dry winds blow off of the desert instead of the ocean, the hills burn. Some of the areas in Malibu which are burning now have burned before and will burn again. However, unlike places in the midwest that flood a lot, people here have insurance to rebuild, instead of soaking other taxpayers for it.
I'm afraid that these fires are going to last a while. It's been too dry for too long and with so many to fight the resources (people, ground equipment and water dropping aircraft) are stretched very thin.
While LA itself is not hilly (with the exception of the Hollywood Hills and some ocean bluffs), there is a ring of mountains around it. This gives us spectacular views, some very cool places to live and traps the smog. LA is not a desert, but it is arid. So, a lot of brush grows in these hills/mountains and when there's a drought and the dry winds blow off of the desert instead of the ocean, the hills burn. Some of the areas in Malibu which are burning now have burned before and will burn again. However, unlike places in the midwest that flood a lot, people here have insurance to rebuild, instead of soaking other taxpayers for it.
I'm afraid that these fires are going to last a while. It's been too dry for too long and with so many to fight the resources (people, ground equipment and water dropping aircraft) are stretched very thin.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Now This is Clarity I Can Appreciate
Earlier in the week I commented on Bush's opposition to a declaration of Turkish genocide. So, it was great interest that I noted that today he presented a congressional award to the Dalai Lama and kinda rubbed it in China's face. W said that he had told the Chinese that religious freedom was important and that they should welcome the Dalai Lama in China. Fair enough.
What this tells me is that the administration thinks that fighting terrorism is a more worthy strategic goal than out economic relationship with China. In the grand scheme of international politics, China is (and will be) a much bigger player than Turkey. Yet, Bush goes out of his way to placate the country from which our military planes take off and kicks sand in the face of a country with whom we have a huge trade deficit and has nuclear weapons.
Don't get me wrong. Bush should welcome the Dalai Lama and criticize China's human rights record. It's just interesting that he's OK with that, but not good with acknowledging a historical fact about actions taken by a government which is unrelated to the current one in Turkey.
Clearly, Bush thinks the war on terror is going to be with us longer than trade with China.
What this tells me is that the administration thinks that fighting terrorism is a more worthy strategic goal than out economic relationship with China. In the grand scheme of international politics, China is (and will be) a much bigger player than Turkey. Yet, Bush goes out of his way to placate the country from which our military planes take off and kicks sand in the face of a country with whom we have a huge trade deficit and has nuclear weapons.
Don't get me wrong. Bush should welcome the Dalai Lama and criticize China's human rights record. It's just interesting that he's OK with that, but not good with acknowledging a historical fact about actions taken by a government which is unrelated to the current one in Turkey.
Clearly, Bush thinks the war on terror is going to be with us longer than trade with China.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Sat 8: Gadgets
do you have any of the following gadgets, and what kind? when did you get them?
1. cellphone?
Yes...lemme see...1997.
2. digital camera?
Yes, 1999.
3. video camera?
Yes, 1999.
4. video game console?
Yes, it was a gift for the HB. I'm going to say 2004.
5. TiVo/DVR?
Oh HELL YES. 2000.
6. mp3 player/iPod?
Yup (mp3). 2002 was my first.
7. laptop computer?
Can't live without it....1995 or so.
8. any widget or app on your phone or computer to makes your life easier (commute time calculator, on-time flight alert, zocdoc, etc.)?
None that I can think of...I'm not a big extra app person.
1. cellphone?
Yes...lemme see...1997.
2. digital camera?
Yes, 1999.
3. video camera?
Yes, 1999.
4. video game console?
Yes, it was a gift for the HB. I'm going to say 2004.
5. TiVo/DVR?
Oh HELL YES. 2000.
6. mp3 player/iPod?
Yup (mp3). 2002 was my first.
7. laptop computer?
Can't live without it....1995 or so.
8. any widget or app on your phone or computer to makes your life easier (commute time calculator, on-time flight alert, zocdoc, etc.)?
None that I can think of...I'm not a big extra app person.
Truth vs. Friends
This week the House of Representatives approved a measure that would require our government to acknowledge that the Turkish government committed genocide against Armenians between 1915 and 1923. In this instance, genocide has a very specific definition and it's not just killing a lot of people during a war.
The president, who wants to tell the truth, except when it's inconvenient, is asking the Senate to not approve the legislation. Is this because due to his deep historical research he doesn't believe that what happened is truly genocide? Umb...no. It's because he doesn't want to upset the Turkish government and potentially jeopardize the military's ability to fly materiel into Iraq. And there are several other former diplomats who are against the measure. Again, not because it's historically inaccurate, but because they think we should sweep away the truth to make nice with Turkey.
First off, Turkey might get into a huff about this, but they aren't going to do anything extreme. Why? Because they want to get into NATO and most of the other European countries think their actions were genocide as well. They won't look kindly on such a denial of what they believe to be the truth.
Second, since when is it good policy for our government to ignore the truth? We don't go around doing that with Japan and Germany of their behavior in WWII. It's not as if the resolution says that the current Turkish government is responsible for it. I also think it's important to let Turkey know that the international community is watching them so they don't pull any more shit with the Kurds in Turkey and northern Iraq.
So, while Congress is gutless regarding Iraq, it can redeem itself by passing this legislation.
The president, who wants to tell the truth, except when it's inconvenient, is asking the Senate to not approve the legislation. Is this because due to his deep historical research he doesn't believe that what happened is truly genocide? Umb...no. It's because he doesn't want to upset the Turkish government and potentially jeopardize the military's ability to fly materiel into Iraq. And there are several other former diplomats who are against the measure. Again, not because it's historically inaccurate, but because they think we should sweep away the truth to make nice with Turkey.
First off, Turkey might get into a huff about this, but they aren't going to do anything extreme. Why? Because they want to get into NATO and most of the other European countries think their actions were genocide as well. They won't look kindly on such a denial of what they believe to be the truth.
Second, since when is it good policy for our government to ignore the truth? We don't go around doing that with Japan and Germany of their behavior in WWII. It's not as if the resolution says that the current Turkish government is responsible for it. I also think it's important to let Turkey know that the international community is watching them so they don't pull any more shit with the Kurds in Turkey and northern Iraq.
So, while Congress is gutless regarding Iraq, it can redeem itself by passing this legislation.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Circle to Nowhere
In my business there's a technique for "developing" managers called 360 degree or multi-rater feedback. This is where you, your boss, your peers, and your subordinates rate your on different work behaviors (Chat is a good team player; Chat communicates clearly, etc). If you're a middle manager or above in a reasonably sized company you've probably gone through one of these.
There's a tiny little problem with this kind of process--there's no research data that shows that it works. Put another way, people who go through this and get the results don't necessarily improve their performance. In fact, if the data suggests anything it's that people who are already good performers take advantage of the feedback (which is probably how they became good performers in the first place) and the people who have the most to gain from it don't improve, or get worse (they see this as another thing management's doing to make them look bad).
Occasionally I get involved in these projects. Given the above, why is a reasonable question. One answer, quite frankly, is that it's usually easy money. The second is a little more complicated. The best analogy I can think of is think of the kind of guy who goes into a strip club to "save" one of the girls. Yes, he's well intentioned. He thinks that what HE has to offer will take her away from this sordid existence and she'll live a happier, better existence away from the club. I look at this process and think, "Wow, a lot of this is crap. I can make it a better product and process that people will find really valuable." It's only later that I realize that the purchasers aren't really interested in something better and we're back watching single moms with stretch marks shaking their tits.
I again allowed myself to get seduced into one of these projects. The consultant who brought me in is dialed into a lot of good companies and at this point she's more interested in developing and selling product. That works for me in that I do derive a good amount of revenue from products I sell. So, I tell her what I think the product and process should look like, she agrees and we go into together to develop something for this client that we would then market to others.
Well, midway through it became apparent to me that this other consultant is far more interested in selling anything rather than selling anything good. I had to scratch and scream to get at least some creative elements to it. She kept saying, "That stuff is just too far beyond the USA Today crowd." What became apparent is that she's the one who is unwilling to make the intellectual stretch to do something different.
So, I busted my ass on this for a few weeks and we finally delivered today. I'm ambivalent about her going out and selling it. On one hand, I would like to get at least some coin back for my investment (I got paid some, but not nearly enough). Then again, I don't need to be the guy spinning another version of Pour Some Sugar On Me.
There's a tiny little problem with this kind of process--there's no research data that shows that it works. Put another way, people who go through this and get the results don't necessarily improve their performance. In fact, if the data suggests anything it's that people who are already good performers take advantage of the feedback (which is probably how they became good performers in the first place) and the people who have the most to gain from it don't improve, or get worse (they see this as another thing management's doing to make them look bad).
Occasionally I get involved in these projects. Given the above, why is a reasonable question. One answer, quite frankly, is that it's usually easy money. The second is a little more complicated. The best analogy I can think of is think of the kind of guy who goes into a strip club to "save" one of the girls. Yes, he's well intentioned. He thinks that what HE has to offer will take her away from this sordid existence and she'll live a happier, better existence away from the club. I look at this process and think, "Wow, a lot of this is crap. I can make it a better product and process that people will find really valuable." It's only later that I realize that the purchasers aren't really interested in something better and we're back watching single moms with stretch marks shaking their tits.
I again allowed myself to get seduced into one of these projects. The consultant who brought me in is dialed into a lot of good companies and at this point she's more interested in developing and selling product. That works for me in that I do derive a good amount of revenue from products I sell. So, I tell her what I think the product and process should look like, she agrees and we go into together to develop something for this client that we would then market to others.
Well, midway through it became apparent to me that this other consultant is far more interested in selling anything rather than selling anything good. I had to scratch and scream to get at least some creative elements to it. She kept saying, "That stuff is just too far beyond the USA Today crowd." What became apparent is that she's the one who is unwilling to make the intellectual stretch to do something different.
So, I busted my ass on this for a few weeks and we finally delivered today. I'm ambivalent about her going out and selling it. On one hand, I would like to get at least some coin back for my investment (I got paid some, but not nearly enough). Then again, I don't need to be the guy spinning another version of Pour Some Sugar On Me.
WW #43--Visual Aids
Yeah, I know...I've been a poor blogger of late. But, the reason for it (a big project) has now passed (that'll be my next entry). So, only a couple of days late, are my WW responses
1. are you into erotic or pornographic film? why or why not?
Into it? Not really. Occasionally check it out? Yes. Besides the immediate reaction, it doesn't do a lot for me. It's either extremely fake or very goofy, which makes it more entertaining, but less erotic.
2. are you sexually stimulated visually by the gender you are attracted to (or both, if you are bisexual), or do you need something more cerebral to make you hot for them?
In the short term, looks will do it. More than that, there has to be some substance.
3. are you sexually turned on by a member of the gender you are NOT genetically attracted to? for our bisexual participants, what turns you on most about both sexes?
No, but I can appreciate why (some) women go ga-ga over George Clooney, Brad Pitt, etc.
1. are you into erotic or pornographic film? why or why not?
Into it? Not really. Occasionally check it out? Yes. Besides the immediate reaction, it doesn't do a lot for me. It's either extremely fake or very goofy, which makes it more entertaining, but less erotic.
2. are you sexually stimulated visually by the gender you are attracted to (or both, if you are bisexual), or do you need something more cerebral to make you hot for them?
In the short term, looks will do it. More than that, there has to be some substance.
3. are you sexually turned on by a member of the gender you are NOT genetically attracted to? for our bisexual participants, what turns you on most about both sexes?
No, but I can appreciate why (some) women go ga-ga over George Clooney, Brad Pitt, etc.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Sat 8: Mail
Courtesy of my most loyal reader, and wonderful friend, Lola.
when was the last time:
1. you got money in the mail?
Last week. Since I run my biz out of my house, this is a fairly frequent occurrence.
2. you sent a letter?
I'm assuming this means a written letter to a person, as opposed to mailing a contract, etc. So, that would be in November of last year when I sent one to Lynn.
3. you received a package?
Today...a Pokemon watch for the HB.
4. you purchased stamps?
About three weeks ago.
5. you had to wait in line at the post office?
Three weeks ago...I needed something postmarked that day (quarterly taxes).
6. you talked to your mail carrier?
I said hello to him the other day...does that count?
7. you didn't get your mail because somebody blocked your mailbox, you missed a mail/package delivery, your mail was delivered to the wrong place, etc.
Never.
8. you gave your mail carrier a gift? what was it?
Not that I recall.
when was the last time:
1. you got money in the mail?
Last week. Since I run my biz out of my house, this is a fairly frequent occurrence.
2. you sent a letter?
I'm assuming this means a written letter to a person, as opposed to mailing a contract, etc. So, that would be in November of last year when I sent one to Lynn.
3. you received a package?
Today...a Pokemon watch for the HB.
4. you purchased stamps?
About three weeks ago.
5. you had to wait in line at the post office?
Three weeks ago...I needed something postmarked that day (quarterly taxes).
6. you talked to your mail carrier?
I said hello to him the other day...does that count?
7. you didn't get your mail because somebody blocked your mailbox, you missed a mail/package delivery, your mail was delivered to the wrong place, etc.
Never.
8. you gave your mail carrier a gift? what was it?
Not that I recall.
Cheating, In Track and Field? I'm Shocked!
So, Marion Jones, who lived with two known cheaters and had a trainer who was a known cheater was forced to admit that she's, well, a cheater. Like Capt. Renault, I'm shocked. Of course, it was the feds who brought her down on a money laundering scheme (with her cheater and baby daddy ex) that brought all of this out, not the myriad of alphabet soup anti-doping agencies.
The same thing will (eventually) happen to Bonds. He'll be caught lying to the feds (like Ms. Jones was) and the grand jury, and that's what will get him sent away.
With the money at stake in all sports (that Olympic amateur ideal is way far gone) there will always be cheaters. The stakes are too high. And, like in all sophisticated criminal endeavors, the best cheaters will always be ahead of the the tests/traps to catch them.
So, what's the solution? Early on, coaches and parents should teach kids that winning is not everything. Coaches should reinforce this by not trying to find loopholes in rule and getting over. Play fair, dammit.
Also, punishments for getting caught should be draconian. The current anti-doping proceedings in the "Olympic" sports are very anti-athlete, and that should be changed. However, if one if found guilty of cheating the Olympics/World Championship level, the punishment should be a lifetime ban. No ifs, ands, or buts. The slap on the wrist punishments in U.S. professional sports are a joke (note that in the NFL, the most recent defensive player of the year served a 4-game suspension for steroids). The players unions are far more interested in protecting their members than the sport, which is their prerogative. If they were serious about fair play, they would go for a system which delivers a more significant deterrent.
The same thing will (eventually) happen to Bonds. He'll be caught lying to the feds (like Ms. Jones was) and the grand jury, and that's what will get him sent away.
With the money at stake in all sports (that Olympic amateur ideal is way far gone) there will always be cheaters. The stakes are too high. And, like in all sophisticated criminal endeavors, the best cheaters will always be ahead of the the tests/traps to catch them.
So, what's the solution? Early on, coaches and parents should teach kids that winning is not everything. Coaches should reinforce this by not trying to find loopholes in rule and getting over. Play fair, dammit.
Also, punishments for getting caught should be draconian. The current anti-doping proceedings in the "Olympic" sports are very anti-athlete, and that should be changed. However, if one if found guilty of cheating the Olympics/World Championship level, the punishment should be a lifetime ban. No ifs, ands, or buts. The slap on the wrist punishments in U.S. professional sports are a joke (note that in the NFL, the most recent defensive player of the year served a 4-game suspension for steroids). The players unions are far more interested in protecting their members than the sport, which is their prerogative. If they were serious about fair play, they would go for a system which delivers a more significant deterrent.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Say Goodbye to Another Middleman
In essence, the web takes away the middleman (pardon my sexist language). You can purchase many products and services directly from the manufacturer as opposed to going through a distributor. In many cases you can read news and commentary from the source and from sources that don't go through mainstream media channels. In my mind, that's all good.
So, it's welcomed news that Radiohead is selling their new music online for a price that YOU name. It's sorta like the Priceline of music. I'm not a big Radiohead fan, but I am intrigued by the business model. Most bands start off working for tips, so they are just taking that one step further. Granted, it took many years of hard work (and payola from their former record label at the beginning) for them to get to a point where they could take this risk. But, imagine a music marketplace where unsigned bands could build a following (and maybe make a leeeetle money) selling their songs. Most wouldn't make a dime, but that's no different than the record biz right now. And you gotta believe that at least some would go viral.
Sure, the middleman (in this case, radio and record labels) provides a convenience. Imagine trying to sift through a gagillion bands to find one that you like. But, radio is SO homogenized (ah, another liberation via the web...internet radio of all stripes) that you hardly have a chance in hell in hearing a unique, new band anywhere right of the college stations.
So, here's to Radiohead. I hope that this experiment works and they make tons of money and get new fans. Perhaps this will be another way to get stuff from the source without having to pay an extra person for it.
So, it's welcomed news that Radiohead is selling their new music online for a price that YOU name. It's sorta like the Priceline of music. I'm not a big Radiohead fan, but I am intrigued by the business model. Most bands start off working for tips, so they are just taking that one step further. Granted, it took many years of hard work (and payola from their former record label at the beginning) for them to get to a point where they could take this risk. But, imagine a music marketplace where unsigned bands could build a following (and maybe make a leeeetle money) selling their songs. Most wouldn't make a dime, but that's no different than the record biz right now. And you gotta believe that at least some would go viral.
Sure, the middleman (in this case, radio and record labels) provides a convenience. Imagine trying to sift through a gagillion bands to find one that you like. But, radio is SO homogenized (ah, another liberation via the web...internet radio of all stripes) that you hardly have a chance in hell in hearing a unique, new band anywhere right of the college stations.
So, here's to Radiohead. I hope that this experiment works and they make tons of money and get new fans. Perhaps this will be another way to get stuff from the source without having to pay an extra person for it.
Blowing Through the Windy City
I had a quick (<36 hours) trip to Chicago on Sunday/Monday. It was my intention to blog on Sunday night, but the hotel didn't have reasonably priced internet access (phone line or wireless). Why is it that the cheapie hotels offer free internet and the moderately expensive ones don't. Sheesh.
The reason for the trip was a board meeting of a professional organization to which I belong. I figure if you're a member of a volunteer organization and they ask you to participate/lead it your fist instinct should be "Yes". Unfortunately, this group lacks a unifying purpose for existence (which is not to imply it's a waste of time, because it's not), so it makes the board meetings painful due to endless discussions of mission and strategy instead of getting things done.
One of the "laws" of psychology is that personality is stable. However, this trip reminds me of how I've changed. I used to love going to meetings and conferences to schmooze and network. Now, not so much. I don't know if it's because I learned that a little gets me as much as a lot in terms of making contacts or because I've become more of an introvert (feeling that being in large groups drains rather than energizes me). Regardless, due to the nature of the meeting and my lack of interest in schmoozing, I got on the first flight home yesterday, which had the added benefit of allowing me to go to my Rotary board meeting. At least there we actually get stuff done because we have clear mission.
I'll leave you with a great restaurant recommendation in Chicago: Yoshi's Cafe.
The reason for the trip was a board meeting of a professional organization to which I belong. I figure if you're a member of a volunteer organization and they ask you to participate/lead it your fist instinct should be "Yes". Unfortunately, this group lacks a unifying purpose for existence (which is not to imply it's a waste of time, because it's not), so it makes the board meetings painful due to endless discussions of mission and strategy instead of getting things done.
One of the "laws" of psychology is that personality is stable. However, this trip reminds me of how I've changed. I used to love going to meetings and conferences to schmooze and network. Now, not so much. I don't know if it's because I learned that a little gets me as much as a lot in terms of making contacts or because I've become more of an introvert (feeling that being in large groups drains rather than energizes me). Regardless, due to the nature of the meeting and my lack of interest in schmoozing, I got on the first flight home yesterday, which had the added benefit of allowing me to go to my Rotary board meeting. At least there we actually get stuff done because we have clear mission.
I'll leave you with a great restaurant recommendation in Chicago: Yoshi's Cafe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
