Sorry I've been MIA

Things have been pretty crazy. I was laid off today. Didn't come as a complete surprise to me really. I think one of the reasons that they didn't retain me was that I wasn't really able to articulate a clear desire for a specific job. It's something I've been struggling with lately. Finding a job or a genre of jobs that can maintain my interests. Everything I can think of is either unattainable due to my age or it's vaguely interesting but seems like it would get dull after a short time. Is this a problem that all smart people have? Do I need to just suck it up and do something that pays well but that bores me to tears? Any advice would be greatly appreciated :)

The case for war.

This is going to be long, and I think I'm going to manage to offend everyone but here goes...

The last two days have revealed to the world some startling revelations about our intelligence, what we knew, and when we knew it. The 9/11 commission report revealed that we were unprepared and that there was no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda (with regard to 9/11 but we'll get to that in a moment). Finally, we find out today that Russia has been informing us about Iraqi planned terrorist attacks.

First, I want you to read the 2nd link that goes to a USA Today article. It's hard to tell whether or not the author is colossally ignorant or whether he thinks we are. The story tries very to imply that the administration used 9/11 as a cause for going to war with Iraq.

Let's examine some facts first. For months we've been plastered with news of no WMD being found. When the case for war was originally being made we were inundated with the policy shift of using preemption vs. imminent threat. Now we're expected to believe that the administration claimed or implied some kind of Iraqi involvement in the 9/11 attacks. I want to be very clear about this. The fact that Iraq and Al-Qaeda had some kind of links in no way implies that they ever utilized those links to attack us (9/11 attacks or otherwise). However, there have been cited incidents of training and refuge being provided by Iraqi officials. There have been numerous incidents of contact being made at relatively high levels of both organizations (though there is no published knowledge of what occurred at those meetings). Finally, if you take nothing else away from this post realize this. If Bush and the administration had told us that Iraq was involved with 9/11 this would no longer have been a test of the doctrine of pre-emption. It would have been retaliatory in the same way that Afghanistan was retaliatory. Lost in all this is the contents of the rest of the report. A report which clearly outlines the many contacts between Iraq and Al-Qaeda. But all we're hearing about is the one line, "no credible evidence that Iraq and Al-Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

Moving on to the story about Putin and the terrorist plans they tipped us off to. I'm shocked to learn that the Russian President does not feel that planning attacks against another country is, at the very least, a contributor to a war declaration. While we're on the subject of media mis-representation let's focus on something else. Putin's actual quote (found here) was that Russian intelligence had unearthed "Information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing [emphasis mine] terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations." Yet the headlines read planning. I don't know about you but I find planning and preparing to be completely different things. We probably have plans to invade Russia. I'm sure somewhere there are actively updated plans for the attack of several countries. I wouldn't be suprised if there were plans that involved operations against "friendly" countries. But preparing, is an entirely different animal. Preparation is getting ready to do something. Preparation is what you do when you anticipate actually doing something. The notion that the preparation of an attack is not a cause for war is laughable. Let's send some armored battalions to the Russian border. We'll move a carrier fleet off the coast of Russia and start forming amphibious units in Japan. Let's see if Russia doesn't get a little antsy and start talking about war. And let's not kid ourselves. The only reason they wouldn't declare war is that they wouldn't win. Imagine Kazakhstan doing all of that. Do you think for a minute that the Russian army wouldn't pound them into the ground first?

Here's the facts as we now know them:

1) The world community at large was fairly confident that Saddam retained some WMD's.
2) The world community at large was fairly confident that Saddam was attempting to expand his WMD stockpiles.
3) Russia and the US knew of multiple instances in which Iraq had planned and prepared operations against the US (both military and civilian targets)
4) The prepared attacks never materialized for reasons unclear.
5) Iraq had a history of torture, genocide and WMD usage against its own populace
6) Iraq had kicked out UN arms inspectors on at least two occasions.
7) Iraq had a stockpile of non-WMD weapons that were forbidden by the terms of the cease-fire.
8) Iraq had a history of friendly relations with terrorist organizations. On some instances they provided logistical though never operational (as far as we know) aid to these organization.
9) Iraq and its established leadership had previously led an undeclared occupation attempt against Kuwait.

Now tell me honestly that you don't think we should have gone to war. What more do you need other then an actual attack? Should we only declare war in response to an actual attack? How many US deaths does it take for a war declaration to be needed then?

I submit to you that the world is a better place without a Saddam-led Iraq. I suggest to you that a government that is hostile in word and action, a government that supports others who are hostile in word and action, a government that kills, tortures and rapes its own people is a government that has no right to be in power.

Now for the Bush-bashing part of the post. I wish Bush would admit that it appears Iraq did not have WMDs. I wish he'd come out and say, "How could we have known that he would destroy everything but not have any kind of evidence that he complied." I wish the administration wouldn't continue to cling to the political hope that they find the WMDs and instead just say, "Look we were wrong, but we still believe the world and the US are better and safer without a Saddam led Iraq." I wish Kerry would say, "I believe that we should have gone to war based on what was known at the time and I still believe that. However, I believe that the administration has dropped the ball with regards to exiting in a safe and timely manner."

But it's an election year and you just can't tell the truth.

So I'm sitting at work the other day...

and this 35ish female co-worker comes up to me (someone whom I don't even know) and asks if I could bring a bottle of water downstairs to the machine (those big ones that you turn over and set into the machine to make little water coolers). I was floored. I work in a predominantly female industry at a company that seems to be more female oriented then most (at least in the middle management). I've gotten used to the whole, "Jeff, I'm not tall, can you get that thing up there?" or "Jeff, do you mind helping move this couch?" But to have a complete stranger stop at my desk and ask if I could move a water bottle for her. Well, to say the least I was a little perturbed.

This sort of "harmless" is, what I think, what causes alot of the more harmful sexism to occur. If I get used to being, "The big strong man" at the office. The one who lifts and carries things around. Then there's a certain amount of resentment that carries over. I respect people who do things for themselves. It's one of the (many) things I like about my wife. I can't begin to imagine her asking a coworker to carry something for her. So now, this lady whom I still don't know, has lost some of my respect. It probably doesn't matter to her as I am not nor will I probably ever be her boss but this is not the only time I see stuff like this happen.

I've seen loan officers get asked to do similar stuff by their subordinates. I've seen upper-management get asked to do stuff by secretaries. Is it any wonder then that those people get passed up when it comes time to look for promotions. There's a perception that doing something physically burdensome or awkward is in some ways "unseemly" for a woman. Frankly, I think it's only unseemly if you rely on sexism to get what you want but deny it and fight it the rest of the time.

It's funny that her manners were the thing that really touched me off. She was so curt and unfriendly that it was obvious that she looked for the nearest male and then asked that person (heedless of what they might actually be working on) to lift something that was just to heavy for her poor, weak little arms. Had she introduced herself and then actually asked politely with something resembling proper manners and friendliness I probably never would have written this post.

Ah, well. Such is life.

Esther, the Material Girl?

Just doesn't have the same ring to it. Apparently, Madonna wants to "attach myself to the energy of a different name." Madonna has been leading a pseudo-fadish new-age revolution of Kaballah. She's been one of the more notable practicioners and has converted several Hollywood notables. But now she's become mystical and philosophical, " mean everybody takes their clothes off now. And then what? You know? And -- and then what?" That's deep, deep stuff their Esther.

Hooray for Science...

Researchers have created technology that will allow electrodes places on the brain to be able to manipulate a computer. Apparently, placing electrodes ON the brain is SOP for epileptics. These researchers basically took four people with electrodes already present and taught them to play a game on the computer. The thing that really suprised me was the speed with which they learned to manipulate the cursor. After six minutes of training and no more then 24 minutes of practice the patients were able to manipulate the cursor accurately enough to fire upon some kind of target (the article doesn't go into specifics of the game but it sounds like some kind of simple, point and click, target shooting game). Accuracy ranged from 74 to 100%.

Think about that for a minute. These electrodes were not placed strategically nor were they even placed based on their importance to the experiment. Yet the human mind was able to establish control over what amounts to a new muscle within 30 minutes. Physical therapy generally takes months but it's a result of muscles being retaught and of having to deal with thousands and thousands of individual nerves and muscles. But the computer input can be distilled down into a very select group of inputs. Think about the typical computer. A mouse has only two input variables (vector and speed) plus 2-5 buttons, a keyboard has at most 100 characters and probably less once you simplify that. So you're talking about somewhere south of 100 input "channels" and that's selecting one for each character on the keyboard.

The article goes on to say that the use of brain based electrodes is highly impractical but that they believe there is a real possibility that the electrodes could be remote or at the very least that they could be permanent implants that then transmit to a receiver. The entire notion is kind of creepy but at the same time kind of exciting. One of the major drawbacks to computers right now is the lack of a highly versatile input device. The human brain is the highly complex and versatile device that they've been looking for. Think for a moment about the scene in Minority Report where Tom Cruise is sifting through images and poking into the air to rewind and zoom and what not. We're not that far away from that kind of visual imaging technology being available. The true hold up is the input device you'd need. Hands poking into the air and twisting and turning to make different shapes and signals is a nice science fiction dream but it's not very practical. Consider how exact an input a computer generally needs. For example, highlight some text on this page. Go ahead. Now, try to make the highlighting end after a word rather then after the space after a word. You have a very small margin of error. Now, imagine trying to do that with your hands while making complex gestures. Now you understand why touch screens haven't become all the rage. This kind of technology, however, has the potential to solve many of those problems.

We're still many years away from anything like those scenes in Minority Report (or Paycheck, which I saw the other day and was suprised by its lack of crappiness) but this new avenue of research has some potentially groundbreaking areas to explore.

Holy crap that's amazing...

Landon Donovan became the youngest American (22 years and 98 days) to reach 50 caps (international appearances) this past weekend. For those of you that aren't soccer fans I will try to put that into perspective. The US's all time leading caps leader is Cobi Jones with 160 appearences. Cobi Jones is also the youngest male player in soccer history to hit 100 caps (he did it at age 27)... Landon Donovan has been playing on the men's team for 3 years and 234 days and has already gotten to nearly a third of Cobi's all time number... If this pace continues (and his resiliency to injury and growing importance suggest that it will) he will hit 100 caps on February 4th 2008 (just shy of his 26th birthday) and will have 156 caps by his 30th birthday. Consider that Cobi Jones hit 160 when he was 33 and you realize how remarkably fast this all is. Conceivably he'd hit 200 just after his 33rd birthday.

It's even more striking when you consider all of this in context to the rest of the world. Consider that Paolo Maldini, perhaps the greatest defender in history has only 93 caps for Italy. Lothar Mathaus, the german legend, had only 120 caps. Even in women's soccer, where the player's play year round, Kristine Lilly has only amassed 250+ caps (couldn't find current data). No male soccer player has played in 200 international games in the history of the sport (no modern era distinction for us soccer players).

So for all the talk about Freddy Adu let's keep the eye on the ball here and focus on the guy with 50 caps and 15 goals (a pretty good strike rate for a guy in midfield) who's helping to lead the nats to another world cup (watch this sunday's game against grenada... should be exciting even if one sided)

Supreme Court cops out... news at eleven.

The supreme court issued a ruling today that can only be described as a cop out and a complete avoidance of answering the question. In an odd 5-3 (the "dissenters" actually voted in concurrence but for different reasons) vote the supreme court elected to reverse the lower court's decision, not because they disagreed with the decision but, rather, they disagreed with the father's legal authority to bring the suit. It was their judgement that the father lacked, "prudential standing to bring this suit in federal court."

This Supreme Court has consistently shown that they are unwilling to wade into what are essentially moral debates. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter for debate. After two years in court the child's mother filed a motion to intervene or dismiss. The court then latched onto this late development and essentially said that the father had no right to force his daughter (whom he does not have legal custody over) into the suit and therefore everything goes away.

What is unclear to me is how that leaves the Ninth Circuit Court. I'm sure Mike could tell us about some legal rule that applies (case gets ruled on but then gets thrown out on technicality... is a legal precedent established?) but as a practical matter it's now fairly obvious which way the Court will lean if someone else were to file a suit. As a result, someone will almost certainly file another suit, and as a result, the Supreme Court will almost certainly have to listen to an almost identical case 2 years from now. The difference is that that court will have 1-2 new judges AND will have the benefit of 2 years to see which way the public opinion winds blow.

So I ask you this. Why have that wording in the pledge at all? What purpose does it serve? Is it somehow intrinsic to the pledge's meaning or power?

I believe there are two things that have made this phrase so acceptable. First, the majority of Americans are nominally christian. If the pledge were to say "Under Allah" or "Under Yhvh" there would be open scorn and outrage. In fact, despite the similar religious origins of the 3 major religions, I bet that if a noted Muslim person were to lead the pledge and change "Under God" to "Under Allah" he would be treated like Roseanne Bar singing the pledge. The second thing is that the very word is ambiguous. The letters g-o-d only become the Christian God when you capitalize them. To the ear god and God are homonyms. Therefore, it is easy to justify that the pledge might not be interpreted to mean "One nation under [the Christian, monotheistic] God" but rather "One nation under [an unnamed and undeterminable] god".

Make no mistake. I am not an anti-religious nut. My wife happens to be very religious and despite my secular beliefs I will be happy to raise my children in a manner consistent with her beliefs. To me, religion and spirituality is so ephemeral that it will always remain divisive. It is quite difficult to change someone's religious attitudes. In my experience, the onset of old age is the only great spiritualizer. Our spiritualities come as a result of two things: a need to believe in a higher power and higher purpose and the resonance of some primal chord within us that makes us think, "this feels right to me."

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I fail to see how that sentence is any less powerful than the one said every morning by every child across America.

Reason #332 not to live in New Zealand

My sister-in-law will be remarrying soon and then she'll be off to live in New Zealand... I've tried to show her all the bad things about New Zealand in a (vain) attempt to get her to stay. Well, I've got one more thing to add to the list. In addition, to earthquakes and volcanic activity we can add meteorites to the list.

So, Gina, do you really want to live somewhere that you can't trust the ground OR the sky?

They always come in threes

Ronald Reagan died this weekend... Ray Charles died last night

Who will be the next great one to expire?

Orson Scott Card... The first great fantasy writer?

People have their preferences for sci-fi and fantasy writers. Terry Pratchett, Robert Jordan, Terry Brooks, Arthur C. Clark, Anne McCaffrey and the grand daddy of them all Tolkien. All of these authors are fantastic and they have created worlds and characters which many of us have loved like they were friends. But are any of them truly great writers?

I love Terry Pratchett and I find new forms of humour each time I read one of his novels but I can't call him a "great writer". Part of me wants to compare him to Jonathan Swift for his satire but I know that that is wishful thinking.

Terry Brooks and Robert Jordan have both written engaging stories set in engaging worlds with engaging characters. But doesn't a great writer put something more into it? Doesn't a great writer entice you to read a book 5, 6, 7 times and learn something new everytime? Elfstones and Wheel are fantastic fantasy novels but they've not fantastic novels.

Anne McCaffrey is more like a romance novelist with a unique setting. Arthur C. Clarke had an amazingly fertile imagination almost akin to Ray Bradbury but writing bizarre stories about the human psyche is not great writing either. Tolkien created a genre defining book but his writing and story are more engaging for their uniqueness then for any greatness in the prose. All of those people wrote novels that caused us to buy their books but in none of those books did I find myself marvelling at the actual writing or turning introspective as I learned a new truth about myself.

In Ender's Game I found myself doing both of those things. I've never met someone who read Ender's Game that didn't think it was one of the best books they'd ever read. I read the book with high expectations and somehow those expectations were vastly exceeded. In this day of commercial writing it's difficult to look at the landscape of the written word and find something that will have lasting value. It's hard to imagine the next Great Gatsby, Old Man and the Sea or Grapes of Wrath, let alone the next Shakespear. In Ender's Game I believe that there is finally a book worth grouping in with those.

I worried in reading his other novels that he would be a one hit wonder. Someone like Terry Brooks who would beat a setting into the ground for commercial success but really not contribute much more to the world or the genre. And then I read Seventh Son. In a new and unique way Orson Scott Card managed to rekindle the fire I felt after reading Ender's Game. Additionally, in Seventh Son, Orson Scott Card has managed to create a world nearly as unique as Tolkien's Middle Earth. Set in colonial America, Card merely adds magic and then shows us what happens. Sometimes the simplest of ideas create the most unique and profound experiences.

It's difficult to describe how much both of these books affected me. When I read great novels from great writers in high school I knew they were great and enjoyed them for what they were but I felt very little connection to them. They were typically set in worlds that I was separate from. They were about characters going through things that I could't imagine. They were members of genres which I did not enjoy. I hope every single one of you goes and buys Ender's Game and Seventh Son and reads them. You will not find two better books then these written today.

Followup on Affirmative Action

My wife pointed out to me this morning (in a cute, sleepy, grumpy kind of way) that the post about affirmative action seemed to suggest that preferential treatment should be given to the poor for college admissions but that I advocated a meritocracy. I do not see those as mutually exclusive. Much like baseball scouts have to look at the pitchers in a league when they evaluate the hitters, so too should schools have to examine the environment a student was in when they evaluate an application.

Three things are important for colleges that they try to glean from test scores, grades and applications. How smart is this individual, how driven is this individual, and how prepared is this individual. Drive can only be measured by essays and interviews but intelligence and preparation is largely guessed at by the test scores and grades. It's the school's duty to look at the scores and grades and apply some kind of formula to them so that the output is as accurate a guess as possible for the intelligence and preparation of the applicant. I do not view this kind of Affirmative Action as a hand out. You don't get in just because you're poor. You get in because people from your school district tend to be equivalent to people from another district that scored 50 points higher on the SAT. There is ample statistical data available from which to base these kinds of decisions.

However, let's look at the flip side. Preparation is a key component of college. A student that is very smart but horribly unprepared is probably not well served by jumping straight in to a university curriculum. Those types of student are the ones that will truly excel in a Community College type of environment.

There may or may not be one other factor in regards to admissions. When I went for my UNC interview the guy made a big deal about the value of diversity. I found myself thinking more and more on this issue as the days rolled on and I was eventually wait listed. There's a part of me that is bitter that I may not get in when I'm technically better qualified then some other applicants who did get in. I am a white male in banking from the Southeast though. I have to accept that I am pretty much their generic candidate. However, I believe that the first half of that diversity problem (white male) is something that would work itself out with fair admissions standards. The second part, however, is important. For any institution of higher learning it is critical that the environment does not become stagnant. There is academic danger in admitting classes full of similar people with similar experiences and backgrounds. Every student (ideally) should have a niche that they fill and a uniqueness that they bring to the school.

A word about homonyms

One of my worst qualities as a writer is that I write the way I hear it rather then the way I see it. So I tend to mix up their, there and they're and right and write (in fact I almost did it above). I used to think that it shouldn't matter as long as the content of the message was of a high enough quality but I realize now that these kind of homonyms distract even more then just an ordinary typo. I've tried to proofread these posts before I submit them and I'm largely successful but a couple mistakes have slipped through.

On a seperate note, if you have comment about one of the posts please feel free to post a reply. I have it set so that it will accept anonymous users so you shouldn't even need to sign up for anything.

It's all about the interest rates...

I've been saying for some time now that June would be the month that we'd see attitudes shifting. While I would normally have been happy to have seen my prediction come true in May or July I am ecstatic to see that I hit the nail on the head with this one. Economists don't know how much or how fast rates will rise but they are almost unanimous in their agreement that 25 points are coming on June 30th.

Contrast that with the beginning of the year when people were talking about how the Fed still had "ammo in the gun" in case they needed to spur the economy on even moor. The American economy is an amazing machine and it is now beginning to ramp up for another recovery.

I think some things are important to keep in mind:

1) While Greenspan has said that oil prices are, "troubling" I believe that they have no direct impact on fed policy. Consider also that any rate increase will generally strengthen the dollar after the hikes stabilize thus decreasing oil prices. People flock to the highest rate of return and the primary reason that the dollar has tanked so bad is that the European Union has (irrationally) kept their rates higher then ours (that's not to say they should move in lock step with us but when we're at 1% and they're at 2.5% and we're sharing in the same recession then you can only conclude they're being irrational).

2) More alarming for fed policy is the deficit. The deficit is financed by increased issuance of treasury securities. Flooding the securities market tends to spike rates all by itself (remember, price of treasuries moves opposite of rate). So the deficit is a brake on the economy. With the deficit rising so high see Chart VII on page 4 I would expect the Fed to back off rate increases a little sooner then they otherwise would.

3) "Slack Resources" is a term that the Fed has bandied about for almost 2 years now. Essentially, what they're saying is that American companies have untapped or underutilized resources that they can turn on in the event of rising demand. These aren't just raw resources either. We're talking about production lines, call centers and retail locations that are shutdown or understaffed. Furthermore, there's a flood of business investment occuring right now that won't have a tangible affect on the economy for 2-3 years. For example, look at Eckerd's Drug Store. They are in the process of changing their business model from being tenants in strip centers to being land lords of their own property. This shift is expensive up front but will reap millions of dollars in rewards as they pay 4% fixed rate mortgage loans instead of rent and in the future when they have equity to tap into to generate cash.

4) I don't know what internal metaphor the fed uses when they talk about interest rates. They talk about "priming the pump" but that is inadequate. The metaphor they should be using is that of a car with an accelerator and gas pedal. Their job is to keep the car going at some speed (4% GDP growth) and their primary tools are interest rates (they have a couple others but they don't generally use them). Many people think that a rate increase is a brake on the economy and a rate decrease is tapping the accelerator. Nothing can be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is that the fed could raise rates 200 points tomorrow and they'd still be pushing the accelerator. The way people really need to think about it is that somewhere between 3.5% and 4.25% (noone knows for sure) the car is coasting. Anything below that and the fed is pressing the accelerator and anything above it then they're leaning on the brakes. Using that allegory, you can see that the Fed has been REALLY mashing down on the accelerator. I think they'll be pretty quick to let up to 3.00% or so... then they'll be very slow and deliberate after that. People forget that a "measured" approach doesn't mean slow it means steady. They won't be spiking rates all at once but they will make as flat a line as they can. I would expect that whatever rate they begin raising rates at is what they'll stay at.

One last thing. Now that the recession is largely over you don't see alot of people asking this question but I think it's a very important question, "How close did we come?" It's fairly obvious that the economy didn't have a collapse like it could have had. Increased government spending and sound fed policy steered us clear. But how close were we?

Consider that we had year over year deflation in the PPI in 3 seperate months during this recession. Core CPI showed month over month deflation twice. The fed lowered rates as much as they could (as Japan proved there truly is a liquidity trap and you hit it somewhere just under 1.00%). Our deficit is about as high as it can be without having an abrupt braking affect on the economy (I always thought that one of the great ironies of fiscal policy is that deficits are short term stimulus long term restraining affects). The dollar is the weakest it's been in a long time. My perception is that we were on the brink of tipping over and that we were held back by some quick decision making and some luck. Only time will tell though.

Predicting rates 6 months out is a gamble at best but I'm going to say that they'll be 2.00% or 2.25% at the end of the year.

From the "Wuh-Huh" department installment #3

Apparently, Larry Bird thinks white athletes are strictly inferior to black athletes, at least in terms of basketball.

The headline is about Larry Bird and Magic Johnson stating that they think there needs to be more white stars in the NBA. He pretty much makes that an economic statemtent that you can find little fault with. The bigger bombshell is his revelation that he was insulted whenever a coach would assign a "white guy" to guard him.

"As far as playing, I didn't care who guarded me -- red, yellow, black. I just didn't want a white guy guarding me, because it's disrespect to my game."

I'm so dumbfounded by the ignorance of that statement that I'm shocked. He's essentially saying that, not only are whites inferior then blacks, but that he's the best white guy and no other white guy could ever be worthy of guarding him. Maybe Woody was right about Larry every time he made fun of him.

AdWare is the new evil

I spent all of last night trying to remove some AdWare that we managed to pick up on our computer. I'm still running Adaware, Spysweeper and CWShredder. I've rebooted five or six times and continue to get the adware replaced as soon as I reconnect to the net. I'm assuming there's one small piece that none of the software is finding that is running out and collecting all of it but I can't be certain (it could be some systemic vulnerability I suppose... )

I find it humourous that congress and the media are all upset over Spam when spam is nothing more then an annoyance. Adware is a vicious infection of your computer. Usually far worse then a virus because it infects your computer so pervasively that eliminating it is very very difficult (probably impossible without the help of dedicated software).

If anyone's got any suggestions on other software to try just let me know. If I can't purge everything this next time I try I'm going to throw another virus scanner on there and see if that isn't compounding the problem. God I love Windows XP and its security flaws.

Stocks to look at

This weekend a friend of mine asked what I thought were some good growth stocks that could be the next Wal-Mart or Cisco. Kinda like asking if I've seen the holy grail lately but it got me thinking.

Here are my suggestions:
Altair Nanotechnologies (ALTI): Tiny Nanotech company in Reno. Has cash reserves equivalent to about 11 quarters of operational expenses. Currently is in the process of ramping up its sales to match its rather high salaries. Intends to fund the growth of its intellectual portfolio through the current contracts. The company specializes in materials science and something called Titanium Dioxide Pigment Technology

Caterpillar (CAT): Caterpillar is not sexy but it is dependable. It is currently slightly depressed but given that we are headed into a recovery I would suggest that a company that makes construction equipment is ideal. It's 19.66 P/E and 1.92% Yield are just icing

Hancock Bank Holding Company (HBHC): Another not very sexy choice. Trades at 16.80 P/E with a 1.66 EPS and 1.79% yield. I would wait until a day or two after the rate hike in June before buying any bank stocks but I'm a firm believer that the markets act irrationally with regards to Bank stocks and rates. A Bank that is well structured will not suffere when rates rise.

Other areas that I like: Alternative Fuels, Nanotechnology, Aerospace Technology (though I would stay away from anyone who wants to explore, colonize or mine space for right now) and Artificial Intelligence research. I think those are the big growth industries for the next century. Find a couple companies with low priced stocks that you can take a risk on and spend some money and roll the dice.

Affirmative Action is dead... here comes the hype!

Apparently, black students at Berkeley are like a needle in a haystack but before I get in to that I want to make a note of the use of statistics in the article. I'm not certain if the author is regurgitating what he was told, an idiot with regards to statistical presentation or trying to sensationalize his story by lying. This quote in particular troubles me immensely, "As of late spring, 98 black students had registered for fall enrollment out of an expected class of 3,821." Why not compare black students currently registered for fall enrollment vs. all students currently registered for fall enrollment? Because you want the problem to appear worse then it is.

(Similarly, this article leads with the information that minority applications are down 21% at the University of Michigan but then later mentions that overall applications are down 18%. What really happened is that minority applications dropped from something like 15% of all applications received to something like 14.5% of all applications received... a difference of about 25 kids out of 5,545)

Let's address the meat of the article though. Affirmative Action took quite a blow when the Supreme Court ruled that the University of Michigan's policy was in error. While they stopped short of saying Affirmative Action is wrong they essentially said what most people have been saying for a long time. It's wrong to associate color with a "point bonus" for getting into school. How anyone can say that isn't racist is beyond me.

I am a firm believer in Affirmative Action but not as it's used today. Ever since I understood what Affirmative Action was I've felt it was wrong. The premise is that blacks are disadvantaged to start with and discriminated against to keep them down. I will grant the premise (despite any disagreements I may have with it) but I don't like the solution. Instead let's give preferential treatment to the poor. Let's put our weight behind inner city schools rather then suburban ones. Let's admit the B+ student in the Bronx rather then the A- student the Hamptons. And let's provide enough need based scholarships that anyone can go to school. Now the issue of race is irrelevant. Are we helping blacks as fast as we would be if we used Affirmative Action the old way? No. Are we ensuring that more people get into the school that is best for them? Absolutely! And if blacks do represent a larger then normal portion of the downtrodden and oppressed (and I only say 'if' because I don't have any statistics at my fingertips) then they'll receive a larger then normal portion of the help. It has become almost hackneyed to talk about the daughter of a rich black family from England vs. the son of a coal miner from Pennsylvania but it's true and it does happen.

So let's agree to try to do something better. Let's strive for fairness and let's pressure our universities to become egalitarian bastions of knowledge rather then haphazard melting pots of color for no other point then it's politically correct.

For the record I find it ironic that sports remains the great meritocracy in America. In no other arena are you judged so purely on your output on the field of play. I don't see the NAACP filing briefs about the paucity of blacks on the soccer fields of America nor Hispanics in the hockey rinks nor whites on the basketball courts. That's because a pure meritocracy works and produces the best product possible. But I also suspect that the NAACP views the big three sports as a way for minorities to pull themselves up and get money.

I think it's sad but race does play a part in many people's decisions. I hate that but it seems to be true. But fighting one evil with another evil is bad for the soul. It breeds contempt and resentment. Divisiveness and hate. And it's especially unwise when such an obvious and logical alternative is available.

The first great president of my lifetime dies...

Being only 26 there are only 3 Presidents who have died during my lifetime. It was sad when Gerald Ford died but he was a one term caretaker president who was mocked in life far more then he was praised in death. Richard Nixon's passing was similarly marred by his time in office and scandal. Ronald Reagan on the other hand was largely viewed as a great man. Most Republicans think he was the greatest President of this century. His death will probably revitalize the push to have him immortalized on some object of currency.

It's amazing to me how these once great men can once again affect us so profoundly in death. Ronald Reagan spent the last 10 years of his life in deep alzheimers but his death will touch all of us in some way or another. For my part I felt myself revisiting his successes and his failures.

The Iran Contra Scandal, The Laffer Curve, The Deficit, Star Wars. These failures are things that many of us equate with Ronald Reagan's Presidency. But there's also the good that was accomplished. Reagan largely laid the groundwork for the collapse of the Soviet Union. His targeted tax cuts for Research and Development would create the foundation for the largest increase in worker productivity and consequently longest peacetime recovery in America's history.

On NPR this morning I heard a quote from Ronald Reagan during his election campaign, "This man [Walter Mondale, his opponent] claims that he is the next Thomas Jefferson. Well, I knew Thomas Jefferson... " that was the kind of singularly disarming humour that would separate him from all of his competitors. Thank you for the memories Mr. President.

3rd Harry Potter movie...

Everyone who reads and loves a book hates to see the movie. The writer of a screenplay always has to give consideration to time and exposition that the writer of a novel doesn't usually need to worry about. This movie was no exception but it was still well done and reasonably well acted. A couple pet peeves I had:
There was never an explanation of the four friends and there was never an explanation of the nicknames (so if you watched the movie in a vacuum you'd never realize who the creator's of the marauder's map are).

I would like to have seen more from Gary Oldman but that'll have to wait until the next one I suppose. Usually, when I see something fantastic my interest is rekindled in that particular subject matter but I'm really no more excited about the 6th book today then I was yesterday.

For the record there's 217k hits for Emma Watson on google vs. 393k for Hillary Duff. Maybe I'll check again in a month and see if that changes.

City of Heroes

I've been playing alot of city of heroes lately (as I'm sure my wife will tell you). I was very leery at first because it seemed like another Shadowbane. Fantastic graphics and character flexibility at the expense of any kind of content. Well, I've got a lvl 15 character now and I don't anticipate stopping any time soon. The missions are fantastic and there's a great diversity of opponents to fight but the real drawing point is the story arcs.

Every character has a number of contacts that are different for each origin type (and differ based on some decisions you make during the game). Those contacts give you missions but the neat thing is that each of the missions has very detailed and interesting stories... On top of all that eventually you get arch enemies that track you down completely seperate from the missions... very cool... I'll be renewing my (brother's) subscription I think.

From the "Wuh-Huh" department installment #2

Church bikers versus nude cyclists

The title kind of says it all... Some questions arise though...
Are these people just breaking the law and hoping not to get caught?
If so then why? To advance the cause of nudity?
If they're not breaking the law is there some kind of weird, "I can be naked" permit they get?
Isn't a bicycle seat uncomfortable enough without being naked?

Sometimes the strangest things come from real life.

Hooray for Philly fans...

Apparently, the good citizens of the city of brotherly love can dish it out but they can't take it.

Philly fans have a long history of assholicness. Probably the most famous and spectacular occurred during an Eagles game. Michael Irvin was tackled and fell down on his head. He was lying on the ground not moving and while the paramedics were attending what could have been complete paralysis the fans were cheering.

So now the Philly fans feel like they have a god given (or more important, legal) right to heckle, harass, yell and taunt but those rights don't extend to the subjects of their abuse. Only in America.

Rates are goin' up...

Well, barring some kind of crazy economic weirdness, rates are going up in June. Friday's job growth number is almost certainly the final nail in the rates are going up coffin. Now the only question is 1/4 or 1/2 point. I would expect a quarter point bump for the first one and a 1/2 point bump for the second one and then they'll play it by ear.

Something that I want to point out that doesn't get alot of press. The Fed views rates as gas pedals for the economy. Lowering rates is hitting the accelerator and raising rates is slamming on the breaks. They carry this allegory through in almost everything they do and it's very valid and accurate. The common view is that the "neutral" interest rate is somewhere around 3.5-4.25%. That is the rate at which the economy would gravitate to over the long term. With that in mind it's important to realize that rates can rise considerably and we'll still be accelerating the economy. The Fed is not going to rush to above that neutral rate but I would expect a fairly quick progression up to around 3% or so and then .25% bumps every other month or so after that. There's even a school of thought that thinks that the economy will get a 1/4 or 1/8 point warning shot in June and then they'll just bump rates to 2.5% and be done with it for awhile... I think that's a bit extreme but it is certainly possible.

The bottom line for all this is that (largely due to necessity) the Fed has leaned on the accelerator for too long... Corporate America has become complacent and needs a reason to start borrowing now rather then waiting until the recovery is in full bloom. A strong signal from the Fed that they intend to raise rates over the next year should do that nicely...

Obligatory post about the wife

So if you're married you apparently shouldn't make six posts without mentioning the wifey (sorry hon :)

My wife was also concerned that the subject matter would make me look like a trollish super-geek who couldn't possibly have a wife (actually, what she was probably thinking was, "What kind of a wife would marry a geek like this... oh god he needs to clear things up"

For the record my wife is hot :)

There, hon, you're now immortalized in at least one web-based geek journal.

From the "wuh-huh" department...

I'm at a loss to understand the implications of this. Apparently, a game called "the simple life" has begun allowing the sale of online property and the prices are getting pretty high

Now, I've played Everquest, Shadowbane, Dark Age of Camelot and currently City of Heroes. I've never bought anything on EBay for my online characters and probably never will but I understand some of the motivation. Those games are based on leveling systems and sometimes you can shell out 15, 50 or 100 dollars to get an edge and level faster. As a result you can see new things quicker and experience more of the story. In fact, the online economy of Everquest is roughly equivalent to the 17th largest economy in the world.

But this story takes things to a whole new level. Maybe it's because I haven't played the "game" but I can't see how something that open ended could yield such high prices. People typically pay 20-60 dollars for a game. An MMORPG might tack on a $10-15 per month charge for the benefit of playing with other people but when you start talking about 100s of dollars in lump sums you're not talking about just playing a game anymore. There must be something else there. As an economist, I tend to believe that the market behaves (at least quasi) rationally. So I'm assuming there must be something behind this. I just don't understand what it could be.

I guess there's always things in life we don't understand... Maybe I'll go visit their website later and see what there is to see.

It's about damn time!

For those of you that haven't seen, George Tenet is "resigning". The man was a buffoon when Clinton was in office and he remained a buffoon for Bush. I'm not sure whether I admire Bush's loyalty to the man (presumably out of respect for the incredible difficulties inherent in that office) or whether I'm frightened by his blind devotion to someone who has overseen so many failures.

It'll be interesting to see who Bush taps to be the next Director. Traditionally, CIA, FBI and NSA positions have been filled with people that are not purely bureaucrats but have intelligence experience. Hopefully, that'll be the case here and the next Director will be someone we've never heard of.

I wonder if John Ashcroft will be the next one out the door... It's unlikely, but possible, that Bush is making an attempt to purge some of the more divisive individuals that could harm his reelection campaign. Certainly Tenet was a lightning rod for criticism from both sides of the aisle and now would be the right time to quietly ask for perhaps one or two other resignations. Only time will tell, but this seems like a step in the right direction.

I'm a math geek... sorry :)

Have you ever gotten obsessed with some problem or activity so intensely that you continue to return to it throughout your life even though you'll probably never figure it out or master it?

I'm stuck on these two math problems that have bugged me since high school. I used to sit in my college classes and work on the problems to pass the time (Some might say they contributed to my poor college grades but I would suggest that it was the boring classes in the first placed that caused my mind to wander...) Nevertheless, I've been obsessed with two problems for some 8 or 9 years now and have made very little progress on them...

here they are if anyone has any input
x^3+Ax^2+Bx+C = 0 can be rewritten as either:
(x + u)(x + v)(x + w) = 0 where the following are true:
u + v + w = A
uv + uw + vw = B
uvw = C
alternatively it can be rewritten like this
(x + g)(x + h + i)(x + h - i) = 0
g + 2h = A
2gh + h^2 - i^2 = B
gh^2 - gi^2 = C

I can actually get pretty far with the equation but I hit a dead end... What I really need is a "trick" (like completing the square in a binomial). But there is no such thing as "Completing the Cube". And before anyone suggests solving by radicals, I've looked at that and find the solution decidedly inelegant.

The other problem is the integral of the function sin x arcsin x = y
If you graph the function it looks deceptively like a semi-circle. In fact it's very close and identical (to 10+ digits) from about -pi/8 through pi/8 but then it diverges... It came up by accident in my high school math class and while it appears like it could be solvable the integrals become ridiculously complicated after you use parts a couple times... I'm sure there is a solution but it may not be algebraicly possible (one of my great mathmatical disillusionments was in discovering that some functions just don't have integrals that can be written because our language for math is so crappy... ah well).

I'm sure that was a frightening display of geekdom for some of you, and I apologize, but blogs are supposed to be about sharing your interests and obsessions and these are shaping up to be lifelong obsessions for me :(

Economics and Politics

My big pet peeve lately has been the way politicians blatantly lie about economics to get ahead. I understand that in some ways its the way of the world but I'm pretty naive and idealistic about some things (perfection may not be attainable but that doesn't mean you shouldn't strive for it). The thing that sparked hours of annoyance from me was the quote from John Kerry about Bush's policies having caused gas prices to go up $10-12 per barrel.

this quote in particular:
"Some of the top economists will tell you that the global instability created by President Bush's foreign policy -- the uncertainty about the Middle East -- is costing us a 10-to-12-dollar per-barrel premium today," he [Kerry] said during speech on energy issues in Portland, Oregon.

First, I defy you to find me one of these "top economists" who will say this. Second, it's just too much of a leap for me to think that gas prices are 33-50% higher today because of the Bush Administration. I'm no fan of the sitting President but I'm not about to start blaming everything in America on him. If anyone is curious about the reasons behind my thinking I'll be happy to post more but it's kinda long and I've already bored most of my friends with it.

I'm sure between now and election time there will be plenty of opportunities to debunk the crap that Bush and Kerry say about eachother... Hurray for elections! (/sarcasm)

Random Links that you can get to know me with...

I think that during the computer age we'll see a new class of "Get to know you questions". People used to ask, "What's the last movie you saw?" or "What are the last 3 books you've read". I think we'll start seeing, "What websites do you keep as favorites?". So with that thought in mind here's my list of often viewed websites.

fark.com
Paul Graham's website
ESPN
Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast website about Magic the Gathering
USA Today
My friend Andy's website
Chris Lo's weekly market comments
City of Heroes MMORPG fansite
Star City Games

That's about it... If I had to urge someone to visit one of those sites it would be paulgraham.com The man is a fascinating author and essayist and everyone should read his articles entitled, "Why nerds are unpopular" and "What you can't say".

For the record, I'm going to take flak from my friend Andy for not recommending his site (brogdon.org) to visit. PUT MORE CONTENT ON IT! You big dork...

If you're interested in magic the gathering you can read some of my articles on starcitygames.com (look for articles by Jeff Hall)

First Post! Woot!

Hrmm... I don't know if this will turn out to be interesting or just a random whim of mine but here goes. My friends (who will be laughing when they recieve the email with news of this) can skip the next paragraph.

My name is Jeff and welcome to my new Blog. I live in Florida and work in the banking industry. I've always wanted to write but since I suck at writing I have a problem to overcome so here I am. Hopefully, I can contribute something quasi useful to someone's life. I'll probably focus much of my discussions on politics, economics, science, sports and computer gaming but other topics are sure to pop up at random intervals.

For my friends, thanks for indulging me and you can feel free to chastise me publicly or in private now ;)