Groundhog Day…

Groundhog Day

Some days are just like another save for tomorrow which is just like today...

This morning I awoke to the sound of my Black Berry’s alarm going off as it does every morning (yes 7 days a week I set my alarm) and from their stumbled downstairs and made some coffee then it was off to check what catastrophes awaited me in the land of e-mail hell.  However this morning when my peepers popped open, it hit me like a ton of bricks!  Yes Groundhog Day, you know that [1993] movie with Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell where he (Bill ) is a TV reporter and goes out to cover the Groundhog Day event and the then days just keep repeating over and over again?

When I first saw the movie almost two decades ago, I didn’t appreciate Danny Rubin’s (the author) story that much however over the interceding 20 years I’ve come to respect it.  As this morning when the Black Berry went off and the eyes popped open in the still predawn morning, the first thing in my head was “Groundhog Day”! It wasn’t the movie either as it was the fact that life is nothing more than reenactment of itself and only may venues change, yet actions typically don’t.   As if you follow this blog you know I get around a bit, around the world that is and no matter how far or long I go it’s all the same.  While minor pieces change, I still awake to my Black Berry, still look for a cup of coffee and especially still live at the mercy of e-mail hell.

At first it (the idea this morning that life is so much like ground hog day) brought a measure of sadness as like Murray’s character in the movie, Phil Connors who after realizing life is nothing more than a continuous rinse and repeat cycle becomes depressed.  However while laying there staring at the ceiling [wishing my e-mail away] also remembered how “Phil” after overcoming the rote realization of his destiny started to have fun with things as remember the armor car money and the “screamer”?  As I recall he even went on to learn the piano too, all again “within” the context of a “rinse and repeat” life style which gave me hope.

As there is no question that this movie [as many are] was a simple metaphor for life and Rubin had hit a little too close for me anyway as it became too obvious to quickly for my liking.  Yet after almost 20 years its had time to set in much like Alice’s Restaurant [again metaphorically].   Moving forward in time (after pressing the snooze button), as the sleep departed my eyes even more and the ceiling came into better focus, so did this and fact we all live in this repeating loop and the goal is not so much to make advantage of the macro, yet master the micro as if you watch the pennies the dollars will follow…

Chopped…

Have you ever noticed there are more losers then there are winners?

So I’ve been home for the holidays a bit and the TV has been on  in the background in the evening and I’ve across an interesting show on the “Food Network”. As the later alone is interesting in that there is enough social effluence for a “food” channel in a country which is suffering from obesity however that’s for another day.  So back to “Chopped” the show as for those who aren’t aware of the show, it’s pretty simple as there is a host (Ted) with three judges who gang up on four competing chefs.

Each of these Chef’s are typically “Executive” Chefs which mean they don’t work for the Golden Arch’s if you know what I mean as the challenge is to cook a three course meal (appetizer, main course and dessert) with surprise ingredients.  Yet what struck me is after sitting through one of these in the background is by the time we got to the second (it was a holiday marathon), the question became why?

So your saying to yourself because “if” you win there is a huge (bragging rights and employment upside) and you’re right again [only] “if” you win. However what I noticed is you won’t well let’s put it this way three (3) of the four wont.  So this became an epiphany as well as good business analogy about losing as the show is more about creating “losers” then “winners”.   So let’s start with the basics and I will try to keep the math down to a low roar.

As first off, with four (4) contestants there is a 1:4 chance of winning, while a 3:4 change of losing so if someone came to you with those odds of investing your money would you take them up as its all or nothing.  Well let’s hope not, then second is  the social axiom “there is always someone out there better then you”, so since the show down is 1:2, means the odds of the next person being better then you is 50% therefore the 1:4 chance (which un-weighed statistically) is more like 1:8 (in round numbers) as we now have to “weigh” our chances of success. So the majority of the people will lose.

Alright your sitting back and saying, no kidding Campbell that the idea is people will “lose” and to this I say bingo your starting to get it as in these types of competition we don’t watch for the winner we really watch for the losers!  Now there is this whole thing of the psychology of the underdog we could get into, however don’t have the time right now as the point is why you should always avoid these types of things in life.

As in general the “losers” have further to “falls” then the winners do to climb as can you see a restaurant advertising they have a head chef who was “Chopped”?  Not me baby, that means these folks [on average]  will be stuck in a “B” class existence the rest of their careers (again we are speaking in averages).  Yet you may be saying what about athletes, as they compete and lose yet compete another day.

Well it’s the later which is the first key, as again on average an athlete get multiple chances to compete whereas these chefs do not, so there is a huge change in the distribution of risk as the number of opportunities for success change the weighting, and the second is they are not competing in their field of [end] employment which is the big catch here if you will.  So if you’re a budding chef [or business person], just something to think about…

And Go Daddy Bends…

Never make the mistake to think your your more then your customer base as you are your customer...

Ok for those that have been living under a rock, supporting SOPA, the “Stop Online Piracy Act” currently working its way through the U.S. Congress.   As basically this is a group of stodgy old timers who can’t get with a new thing and want us to live in the past.  Now as I’ve waxed before stealing intellectual property is still stealing, however as we’ve discussed on these pages in the past its time for a new modus operandi if you will as change is good, however one ISP found out the hard way and there are two lessons to be learned here.

Go Daddy is no longer supporting SOPA, the “Stop Online Piracy Act” as its been under significant pressure from an Internet-wide boycott which has convinced the  domain registrar to give the open Internet movement an early Christmas present [as I’m writing this on Xmass day] by dropping its support for the Stop Online Piracy Act.  In a released statement the ISP giant said the following:

“Fighting online piracy is of the utmost importance, which is why Go Daddy has been working to help craft revisions to this legislation—but we can clearly do better,” Warren Adelman, Go Daddy’s newly appointed CEO, said. “It’s very important that all Internet stakeholders work together on this. Getting it right is worth the wait. Go Daddy will support it when and if the Internet community supports it.”

However least you think that GoDaddy’s [embarrassing] retreat was all on its own, as it had a little help with a boycott which started on last Thursday and rapidly spread to the broader Internet. Even GoDaddy’s competitors got in on it by offering special deals with promo codes like “SopaSucks” to entice the willing to swap out GoDaddy. As Initially, GoDaddy had their head stuck in the sand [mistake number 1 in denial]  as they said they got a few emails which appeared to come from the boycott prompt, yet they didn’t see any impact to their business (yet)”

However this was their second mistake this POed their user base and drove the increased impact on their business which began to be more obvious [dollar wise] on Friday as people started to vote with their feet.

So why did GoDaddy  do this in the first place, well they say “In changing its position, Go Daddy remains steadfast in its promise to support security and stability of the Internet,” the company’s Friday statement reads. GoDaddy says it has removed past postings expressing support for the legislation from its website.”

So has GoDaddy really changed their colors, or is it just pandering to it user base as can a (GoDaddy or any other) fundamentally change as remember when you were a kid and your mom told you to say you where sorry, but you really weren’t, ya remember that don’t you…

Zero Sum Fat, If There Is Such A Thing…

There are somethings, then there is a stolen smile...

Before going down this road as you’ve had a day to get over the gasps and groans over how could say such a blasphemist thing after all right? However lets look at what “zero sum” as its Christmas and the world is full of holiday cheer right?  Well Zero-Sum is a simple concept, as no matter whatever you do the answer is zero, pretty simple stuff right?  So if your do some [perceived] good there will be a similar amount of “bad” (assuming there is such a thing as good and bad).  As let’s take a minute to  look at the concepts of good and bad, so let’s play a game if you will.

I have $100 to give to you or your neighbor, so I pick your neighbor and not you, so “good” for them and “bad” for you right?  If we reverse it, then “good” for you and “bad” for them, however change up the game and I give you both $50 instead.  So now it’s both [in equal parts] “good” and “bad” for both of you as you both could have had more and less so your winners and losers.  Believe you get the idea, however another change up, what if your neighbor didn’t know they lost the opportunity for $100 and I gave it to you, would it still be “bad”.  As the saying goes, “one man’s meat is another mans poison”.

However the biggest zero-sum game I know is in fact mortality, as we leave the world with no more then we came into it with.  Now some of you smarty pants our there might get the bright idea that we leave behind “information” however you would be wrong as since law of conservation of energy says matter cannot be created nor destroyed only, so what has existed will exist  as it has existed.

If one was a really good debater, they may say we then leave behind order, however the retort would be order is lost to entropy so check and mate.  However, the greater concept of Zero-Sum is not the argument today its more so the application as there is a loop in our argument as if you know your living in a dream then are you really dreaming?  Here understanding that the game is zero-sum simply means there are new rules as the goal is to optimize the loop to the goal.  For example there is no way to stop global warming, so the next best thing is fit the goal to the loop [zero-sum works in both directions] so we need to figure out how to make the most in moment.

Now many will take this and say its exploitation and that’s so we should just go back to pillaging and robbing right?  Well not so, as if I pick a flower and hand it to my lovely wife [who I love more than the world] and make her smile, the equation says someone lost a flower, yet I’ve stolen a smile and feeling in my heart which is irreplaceable.  So which is worth more…

And We Just Keep Getting Fatter…

Its interesting to understand how the body handles sugars...

Obesity fascinates me as it carries with it a ton of social “tells” if you will about how things work within that “society” as in general “obesity” is not a [in general] a natural act. Yes you read that correctly as in nature how many “obese” animals do you see where man hasn’t lent a hand? Case in point is my back yard, as a couple months ago we had several [White tail] deer come in so the wife started feeding them. After she started so did then neighbors and so on, so now you guessed it we have chubby deer and not only a fact of the number of people feeding them, it’s more so “what” we are feeding them. As prior to dinning at the Campbell household, their staple food was “grass” which was low in caloric value and high in fiber [meaning it moved quickly through the gut further reducing caloric absorption], yet we have altered their diet feeding them shelled corn. Yes, we have introduced them to a high caloric low fiber diet which is costly so what have we also done? Well of course, tossed in a good round of carbohydrates too in the form of deer kibble further raising the caloric count!

Yet more so back to my main point as what got me on this was an Economist article titled “Fat is bad but beautiful” which discusses the rapid growth of obesity in South Africa. As even though the goes that 40% of its 50m people live off less than $2 a day, South Africa has become one of the world’s fattest countries. As an amazing Six out of ten (60% majority) South Africans are now clinically overweight or obese. Additionally a quarter of teenagers and one in six children under nine are too as the story starts out to tell us of the death of 250lb nine year old boy of heart failure. So how can a society which lives on $2 a day be obese you ask?

Well that in itself is the answer as the poor here are damned if they do and the same if they don’t. As yes fast food (including processed) is booming there because it is cheap and it is empty. What do I mean by empty, well in short nutritional value as what we’ve figured out how to do is chain together long form sugar to create carbohydrates which carry no “nutritional value”. So the question is why do this, simple its cheap in fact very cheap and that is one of the reasons the poor pay if you will as its either no food or well obesity. As the human body was not designed to take in the levels of [man made] carbohydrates which we provide to it today on top of we are far less active then our forefathers where so again as a whole society needs less calories today than in the past, yet today we have far more calories available to us than any time in our past. As its this shift in affluence and what it means to society that we will tackle tomorrow as we are what we eat, like it or not…

Who’s In Charge Anyway…

Free Will? Fact or Fiction, Something you will have to decide...

There has been a long standing debate that man is not of free will, which says the universe is predefined in a way which makes us more akin to a roll-a-coaster who is tied to the tracks set to run a given route no matter what the throws of gravity and motion wish.  In turn this logic also says that “man” then is not accountable as if he decides upon an action, it isn’t his decision after all as its all predefined any way and its only his “thinking” it’s his that makes it such.

As its here that neuroscientist  Michael Gazzaniga, at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has put forward  that “we are personally responsible agents and are to be held accountable for our actions, even though we live in a determined universe.”  As the driver of this paradox if you will has come to general interest since the medical imaging of the brain became so common place starting back some 30 years ago now. As work in this area makes apparent the clash between the “mechanical” nature of the mind and the impression that people can will their own thoughts and actions separate of that.

As Gazzaniga points to animal studies to create the argument that the brain is in fact “shaped” by the tasks put before it.  As he points out that as the body is a biochemical system, what happens in the mind is in fact “mechanically” determined by the physical brain.  What becomes scary is Gazzaniga points to cases where the mechanics of the physical brain are “damaged” such as in cases where surgery is performed to separate the hemispheres of the brains and the patients “moral” reasoning is then disrupted as if we where to look at this rationally one could argue.  If ones “consciousness” and contained independently then what happens to the physical structure should not matter.

Ok, this might be a little confusing so let’s analogize for simplicity, if your “consciousness” where wine, your (physical) brain would be the wine “bottle”.  So no matter the shape or form of bottle you used, the “wine” stored in the bottle would be the same “wine” and remain unchanged.  No question this is something to think about as note Gazzaniga above relates this to “moral” questions and not computational ones which could/would more closely linked to physical structures.

Yet  Gazzaniga attempts to offer a resolution to the paradox by locating the origin of personal responsibility outside the brain.  He attempts to build the argument that the consequence of a social contract created with two or more persons occurs outside of the brain. As here he neatly removes the physical basis for good or bad behavior however yet leaves the door open to say.  If this is the case, then isn’t it in the “end” built upon the same “combined” physical structures of those engaged, so the argument is also flawed as we are still back to the roll-a-coaster scenario where it is plying the tracks not knowing it is in fact bound…

Basic Ontology without the Rubber Gloves…

Being smart isn't always enough, as its achievement that puts lunch on the table...

Welcome back, and as promised we will continue on as to why even as you’re lost, you still are right and how all existing things total up to infinity.  Whoa, that’s a lot isn’t it so we should just jump in and tackle these head on as some of you might be reading this over three 3G while your lost hoping to find a way out of that recursive nagging your significant other is providing you right now.

As let’s go back to Buzz Light Years favorite saying of “Infinity and beyond” as how did I get to 1: infinity any way you ask?  Well its easy, you have “all existing stuff” as a starting point right?  That’s “1” then when you start to break it down where do you stop?  Maybe at “class” as in “car” or maker, color and so on to the point where we are talking about atoms and quarks and so on as in fact just as a number system runs into infinity, so does basically every system (as since they can be represented by a “number system” this would make sense).

Since this is the holiday season, let us say you’re going to Grandma’s house and she has moved and your lazy behind was too busy to help her “move” so you’re not quite sure where she lives, however your craving some of that great poppy seed bread she make so you and your spouse set off on a road trip.  So we can say:

Home —>Grandma’s

Is the task at hand, however as you get 30 min’s into the journey only to find you’ve left your GPS in the other car and your cell phone is dead, you decide you have no clue where you’re at.  However are you wrong? Well not, your simply just not as right as you wanted to be since the proof above is part of an “infinite set”, it also contains:

Home —> Anywhere but Home

In as much as you’ve walked out the door you have achieved a level of rightness in the transaction; however you’re simply not as “right” as you hoped to be to at that given point  in time.  Ah yes, time that nasty dimensional thing Einstein brought to life per say which adds [yet] another measure to things making life just that much more difficult.

See this is where life becomes interesting as probabilistically all things are part of a “set” and our goals are based upon these “sets” and there it becomes a measure of “resolution” which defines our true level of rightness if you will in action.  As if your having brain surgery, and the surgeon shows up then that’s half the battle right?

So Campbell my spouse is POed at me, I still can’t find Grandma’s and now you’re telling me it’s all in the resolution so  what the hell here (on top of it I’m hungry too so I’m a little grumpy). Well the point is, if you understand a “system” you have better chance at being “righter” as over the years I’ve seen to many people draw things in shades of absolutes rather than achievements. Ok, ok I get it. Well lets put it this way to explain better.

For those that are old enough to remember Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner this one is for you (if not, find a copy and watch just one episode and you will get the idea). As what you will remember (or see if this is your first time watching) is that Wile E. (the coyote) comes up with a good idea to catch his prey the road runner, yet fails.  After, this set back if you will he devise’s yet another [different] way to attempt to corner the bird for lunch rather than altering (note, I avoided the word correcting) his prior effort.  As in short, “Wile’s” system wasn’t “wrong”, It simply wasn’t right enough.

Understanding this is of critical importance as how many times in life is something made up of just one iteration of “something”?  Even in our daily jobs we do the something “just different” each day therefore understanding  the ontological underpinnings of the “system” is critical as the morphological adaption’s (unlike Wile E.’s) is what makes for success…

If I’m so Right, Then Why Do I Feel So Wrong…

The world in fact operates in shades of gray....

Well as after waxing on Dickens’s quote from “Tail of Two Cities”, I had promised to re-wax (yes, can just hear the Karate Kid wise cracks out there; wax On, Wax Off) on the topic of “rightness”, what it means and why along with a bit more. Yesterday we explored the “yin & yang” of Charles words and I have to say “words” themselves are amazing things as they have so much power especially when assembled into a “collective” which  calls out a reflective, yet recursive idea which spins into infinity.

Yet you still have to ask about what got me here, well it is a good question as while in the Netherlands a few days back, a colleague and I headed out from Den Haag for the manufacturing city of Eindhoven for a business meeting.  To get there the colleague fired up his new fangled GPS and we were off, however why do I call this a “new fangled device” as while I have one [GPS], it’s about 4 years old and we all know what that means technologically right?

As my older unit does a good job of getting me from point “A” to “B” which is the right answer as I’m “somewhere” and the goal is to get somewhere “else” and the orange line appears and I follow the nagging voice.  Yet in the end, if I’ve selected all the right “stuff” then at the conclusion of the journey I will be at or, at least near the intended destination.  So in essence the GPS was right, as it got me there however was it really right?  As how many times have you used a GPS on your home turf per-say and noticed it took you way out of the way, or routed you though an unsafe area and so on?  So the question is, while it was “right”, how right in fact was it?

This is where the colleagues GPS struck me as interesting as it provided three options, based on the data it had been given such as traffic (remember it was a new fangled one), stops and road speed.  In short it could present a “righter” answer then my age worn battle axe of a unit could.  So both units would be “right”, however his unit has a chance at being “righter” about the answer which is a basic “proof” that “rightness” is in actuality subjective and not objective.

Whoa you say what does all this mean then?  Well (guys) when you head out and get lost and the wife is nagging at you for not asking directions, because you forgot the GPS in the other car, you can now with a straight face tell her you in fact are still right.  Alright let me explain, as we call upon “Ontology” to save us in this debate as this calls forward the concept of can we categorize things so if we were to take all “existing things” and sort them into categories how many would we have?

So pause the tape here for a minute and get your pencil and paper (no calculators please) out and figure the answer on your own, when done please restart the tape.

Ok, welcome back and what answer did you arrive at?  If it was 1: infinity then your right as the 1 is the group of “all existing things” and the “infinity” is the resolution.  What you say, well you will have to check back tomorrow and I will explain…

It’s Been a “Dickens” of a Year…

Duality's run in two's...

One of my fascinations has been “what is right” as we’ve waxed together here in the past on the topic and I’m working on a follow up too.  However today figured since the holiday season is here it’s worth sharing a quote from Dickens “A Tale of Two Cities” which supports this concept by saying:

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.”

As here Charles points out those things can be both the best and worst at the same time as well as one of “it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness” which to me is profound.  As to me Dickens is saying in fact “everything is everything”.  Therefore to say something is foolish is also to say it possesses some form of “wisdom” and therefore is “neither” as well as “both”.  As here he claims that all of these are simply represented in “superlative degree of comparison only” as each existed within each other with a special duality.  Wow, hope you’re not reading this before your first cup of coffee (or other caffeinated beverage).

Additionally its, worth noting that Dickens also tells us that “we were all going direct to heaven, we were all going direct the other way” as man and person is both good and evil as evil can be good and good intentions can be evil.  In short Dickens shows us that our existence should not or maybe cannot be defined in black and white terms, yet instead must be colored in unlimited shades of gray as one man’s meat is another man’s poison…

Who Says Space Isn’t Important…

There was once a day we soared to the heavens, we commanded the sky! Yet today, our wings clipped we stand on Terra Firma and watch as the world passes us by...

There is a race going and we are not part of it and we all know if you’re not in a race, you can’t be a winner and that is on many fronts.  As Asia’s current space race could also turn into an arms race akin to what we saw in the days of the Cold War.  Well that is I guess according to James Clay Moltz, who is a professor in the Department of National Security Affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School.

As he writes that the major Asian nations, namely China, Japan, India, and South Korea, are all investing monies to expand their space programs [are we? No] with little-to-no cooperation. While these efforts appear to be driven by want of national prestige there also exist geopolitical rivalries, similar to the ones faced by the US and Soviet’s in the space race of the 1960s. The thing is and what most westerners forget is that during the period of the “space race” it stimulated technological advancements which made us who we are today [and thus missing out on for the future].

While competing agendas in Asia are leading to a duplication of work and mistrust among the countries involved.  Where is also the waste of resources while even worse [for us], is this “competition” if you will is also undermining recent cooperation which has been built up between the US, Russia, and Europe.

As unlike here in the west, Asia doesn’t have any type of regional security organization such as NATO.  So when you add this fact with the long-standing feuds seen between  nations such as China & India, India & Pakistan, to of course  North Korea & South Korea, and on and on and on, well you get the idea as cant we all just get along? Means a civilian space race could turn into an arms race as what other good use of could there be for a big rocket, let see [insert thinking time here].  Aah yes, an ICBM and guess what, yes a big rocket makes for bad bomb building techniques.  As thermo nuclear bombs are easy to build, however it’s hard to make them small, so the issue has been one of “delivery”, whereas have big [rocket] then can deliver.

On the other front, each of these nations has performed separate lunar-mapping missions since 2007, with planned follow ups which will include the deployment of rovers, landers, and lunar bases.  Again without any cooperation, even though a lot of the work will be redundant.   Even our friends in Japan are climbing fast with the most human spaceflight experience in the region.  As with 15 manned flights since 1992 along with a paid membership in the International Space Station.  However it has always had to  hitchhike a ride with either us or Russia.

Here China on the other hand as launched its first astronaut in only 2003  along with many follow-up flights since.  To its most recent accomplishment of launching a Tiangong-1 orbital test module for a planned 2020 space station all on its own!  While not to be out done, India who feels a little earth bound has announced  a planned manned flight to take place in 2016. Have to wonder if they are interested in buying a fleet of slightly used space shuttles?

Worth noting is they don’t also plan to stop with manned  spaceflight efforts either, as the three major nations also have plans to deploy their own solutions to the US-maintained Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite network.  In fact, China has already deployed over one third of its planned 35-satellite “BeiDou” network in orbit  Note worthy too is ours are old, theirs are new.

The long story short is we the west are being left behind, we have retired our only good manned way to space and depend now upon others for rides aloft.  We have forgotten how to go to the moon as well as “this that and the other thing”, god speed John Glenn…

Thank You for Smoking…

A personal liberty is only that which is granted by the group...

Today’s post is based upon a 2005 satirical comedy which follows the machinations of “Big Tobacco’s” chief lobbyist, Nick Naylor, whose job was to spin on behalf of cigarettes while trying to remain a role model for his twelve-year-old son.  As what has me on this today, well its “smoking” and yea this one might hit a nerve with a few people, however that’s life.

As when I come to Houston which I do a lot, my home away from home is a Marriot in the “Medical District” of Houston and it (the District not the hotel) is huge!  Now the Marriot is a NO SMOKING hotel, so if you want to light up its outside you go and trust me there are plenty out there.  So again what’s the big deal Campbell, yea so people are standing outside smoking your point here?

Simple, the people for the most are here for health reasons, mostly cancer yet they continue to light up and smoke their life away!  So here you are having a part of your body cut off and injected with poison to make you deathly ill (chemo) and you have to light up?  Please, ok now many of you (assumingly smokers) are saying “hey wait a minute its my right to smoke”!  Ok, same thing for the motorcyclist who doesn’t want to wear a helmet as it may dampen their manhood as a “rain coat” would and thus the point of today’s post is born.

As we could wax for days what is a personal “liberty” however I don’t have that long and I doubt you do either so let’s cut to the chase.   Personal liberties break down when we join a social order as in these cases we must forego a portion of these applied liberties for the betterment of the whole and if we fail to this we may be asked to leave.  What am I getting at here, simple these people who have a portion of their body removed and are standing out in the cold (yes its rather chilly here today) have insurance.

Ok, so you say they paid into it [insurance] so stop complaining, however so did you, as well as I and isn’t the idea of insurance that the “whole” will protect the few?  However what happens if the whole decide they want to do something which the “whole” cannot afford to pay for?  This is where “social loops” break down because as with most things “personal” liberties are only a manifestation of social constructs.  Much as we’ve wax about “personal” privacy being a fallacy having once been regulated by [high] cost is now open to all with a computer and a little internet savvy.

Here the idea [rhetoric proof if you will] of liberties being falsehoods is the fact they are not universal as you can go to Amsterdam and smoke a little weed.  Yet should you do this in many Asian or Middle Eastern countries you might find yourself forfeiting your life for this “liberty” which you took in Amsterdam.  Therefore the logic which creates this “economy” is a false one as society decides your liberties and not you.  Just something to think about the next time you light up…

Producers and Consumers…

What happens when consumers become producers?

One of the reasons for writing on this blog has been my fascination with the interaction of various “things” with each other.  As all of this is based upon the concept of “System Thinking” where we see various “loops” which interact with each other and the speed of which drive the loops to a point where they (may) eventually become “viral”.  Hence the name “The Viral Loop” where for the sake of discussion I’ve broken things down into three basic “interacting” loops being, “Life” which takes us to “Leadership” and drives the “Economics” which takes us back to yes “Life”.

However the idea today isn’t to wax about the name of this blog, however wanted to talk about the idea of “Producers” and “Consumers”, as what has me thinking about this?  Well I was listening to a podcast where the hosts were driving their audience to be frugal “Producers” which struck me as problematic.  As without “consumers”, why should we have “producers” as there will be no one to “consume”.  As yes, yes I get the idea that everyone who is a consumer must be at some level also be a producer to earn income in order to consume.

Yet this is the reason for waxing in the first paragraph about loops as I want to keep this high level (rather than go into all the internal recursive supporting loops as the end game would be the same anyway) as this will help us understand the basics of what we are dealing with.

As think about it this way, if everyone were to go to college, graduated with a degree and got a white collared job, who would then pick up your trash?  If your trash isn’t collected, what will happen next within the loop?  In short you get the idea as we need all the pieces to make things work, and therefore we need hard lines between [the roles of] producers and consumers to keep the system running.  However what happens when this breaks down?

As in the past we’ve waxed on the topic of the pro-summer movement where people want to “produce” as well as “consume”, however this is an act of dilution.  As here your no longer buying “complete” [product], therefore you are no longer being paid in “complete” terms either as you’ve now traded off “value”.  For example if you were to sew your own clothes, then someone would not be paid to sew them for you and in turn you somewhere down the way would earn less as someone would take from you also.

With this said, what will this mean for us who have set historical ideas of how the world works as the lines between hobby and profession blur?  As it’s here where I wonder where the bottom is or if there is even a bottom to this or is this a paradigm which is set to stay and the effects of erosion upon social effluence are simply part of our new world order as with the “greening” of Greenland which is something we simply will accept…