Continue reading »]]>

I’m not the first person to suggest that we stop reading the mass media news stories each day. In fact, I personally got the idea from Mr. Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of The Black Swan. Current events on mass media websites, tv stations, and print publications are filth. Their only purpose in the world is to perpetuate the already wildly enormous amount of hate in the world. The stories are developed with profit in mind; the most terrible events draw the most eyes.

But it was not until this morning, when I saw a video on CNN.com so heinous that I refuse to put a link to it in this blog (if you are so inclined to search for it on CNN, be my guest). The video was about Yale student Anne Le’s murder, which we’ve heard about for weeks now…but this video was the last straw. I am by no means saying that this story is not an enormous tragedy in the utmost sense of the word, in fact it is one of the more brutal and senseless acts of violence I’ve personally ever heard of. Rather, I am saying that posting a 6 minute video about the gory details of how the suspect managed to fit a human body in a space no larger than a desktop computer screen, is beyond unnecessary. Not only is this video unnecessary, but I can’t imagine there are many parents of young children out there that would like their sons and daughters seeing this insanity on CNN.com’s homepage.

Thus, I am done watching, reading, or listening to any major news publication. Now I am not talking about legitimate, interesting, well-written articles about good things in this world, but just the filth found on major networks and media outlets. I like to cook, so I will continue reading food & wine articles. I like technology, so I will continue reading articles on sites by the likes of engadget.com. But that’s pretty much it.

Continue reading »]]>

The Planet Debate Explained

There has been much debate recently over whether or not Pluto is a planet. The debate began three years ago with the International Astronomical Union’s decision to officially call Pluto a ‘dwarf planet.’ What constitutes a planet, you may ask?

According to the IAU’s definition, it must orbit the sun, it must be big enough for gravity to crush it into a nearly round shape, and it must clear the neighborhood around its orbit. In other words, it must be dominant enough to clear away objects in its orbital space. This last point is what proved to be Pluto’s demise as a planet: There are other competing objects in its orbit (excerpt taken from CNN.com).

But there has been much backlash after that IAU decision:

• Earlier this year, the Illinois Senate adopted a resolution declaring that Pluto was “unfairly downgraded” and restoring “full planetary status” to the celestial body as it “passes overhead through Illinois’ night skies.” It also designated March 13, 2009, as “Pluto Day” in honor of the date that its discovery was announced in 1930. (In case you are wondering why the state is so passionate about Pluto: Clyde Tombaugh, who discovered the planet-now-dwarf-planet, was born in Illinois.)
• Meanwhile, New Mexico’s House of Representatives proclaimed February 18, 2009, as “Pluto is a Planet in New Mexico Day” and praised Tombaugh, who worked in the state for decades and died there in 1997.

Plu•to•phi•les

‘Plutophiles,’ as they’re fondly referred to, have been fighting for Pluto’s respect amongst the international astronomical community ever since the aforementioned Dwarf Planet Debacle of 2006. That’s right, thousands of ‘busy’ scientists and crazy asteroid enthusiasts have been and will continue to pour thousands of hours into carefully crafted arguments on one side of this debate or the other, only to see them go directly into the little green recycling bin at IAU headquarters. These time-wasting Plutophiles have even set up an online petition.

Why It Doesn’t Matter Anyways

Words are overused. Words just attempt to form and shape the world around us into neat, tidy little packages that can be tossed around with ease and are all-too-often overused in general. The IAU definition of ‘planet’ may or may not be the correct definition, and may or may not be any better than my personal definition: “A planet is anything really big and round in outerspace that just looks–I dunno-just looks like a planet?!?!” That said, it really doesn’t matter whether Pluto is considered to be a ‘Planet’ or not. It’s just a definition, pulled out of thin air by a bunch of inside-the-box-thinking scientists.

To the IAU I say, “stop trying to be the be all, end all authority in astronomical decisions, considering that the universe is the something all we Earthlings share equally.” And to the Plutophiles I say, “go use your enthusiasm and sticktuitiveness for something more productive than this pointless, futile, and almost hostile debate.”

Continue reading »]]>

Have you ever heard the story about the zero-gravity space pen NASA spent $11 Million developing in the during the 1950′s and 60′s Space Race with Russia? The story goes as follows:

Astronauts were having a difficult time writing in space because the ink in standard pens wasn’t flowing properly in zero-gravity situations. NASA responded by spending $11 million developing a zero-gravity capable pen (shown below). What did the Russians do in response? They used pencils.

Air France flight 477 has made major news headlines for the past 5 days, as it is certainly one of the biggest aviation tragedies in the history of flight.  But this particular crash has a unique sense of mystery attached to it. The airplane’s black box has yet to be found, and rough seas combined with a deep mountainous underwater terrain have officials doubtful as to the chances of ever finding it.

Time out. The ability for airplanes to receive Internet signal has been proven for nearly 8 years now. Why don’t black boxes just send real-time flight data and cockpit audio recordings to an FAA server on the ground? Then it wouldn’t matter whether the black box was ever found after a crash. All the data it stored will have been remotely backed up, allowing for faster crash analysis at significantly lower costs than it takes to send an entire naval squadron to the middle of the Atlantic Ocean for 30 days, searching for a 2 foot by 2 foot orange (not black) box in an unfathomably large area of choppy water.

I’m no IT master, by any stretch of the imagination, but I do have common sense. Enough common sense to know that the picture below is just $50 million in R&D (government sponsored) and 10-12 excellent engineers away from being a reality.

Ummm...DUH

My whole point is this: in both the NASA story and this black box example, the Government is guilty of stagnant research, leading to misallocation of funds, and all because of a simple lack of creativity and outside-the-box (no pun intended) thinking. Instead of spending years and millions of dollars trying to fix the pen, someone should have suggested that the answer may lie outside the realm of pens. Likewise, instead of spending billions (literally) of dollars developing black boxes that can resist 5,000 degree heat, impact of the highest magnitudes, and can send radio transponder signals from depths of 12,000 feet below sea level for up to 30 days, someone should have suggested the possibility of a solution that lies outside the black box.

Continue reading »]]>

BROOKLYN, NY — Hip Hop’s best and brightest were on hand as two of rap’s biggest names–Jay-Z and Lil’ Wayne–unveiled their ambitious plans to form the first-ever non-profit rap record label company, aimed directly at addressing the world’s environmental and energy crisis. In what will unquestionably become the largest environmentally-conscious effort to come out the rap industry, the pair of rapper/entrepreneurs plan to erect company headquarters (fully equipped with in-house recording studio) at a pricetag to the tune of $97.5 MILLION.

Lil' Wayne has ALWAYS been 'g(r)oing green' for years now

The duo worked alongside consultants and advisers for the past six months to find principal investors, who will also serve on the company’s board of advisers. The list of investors is nothing short of mesmerizing, a tribute to Jay-Z and Lil Wayne’s continued commitment to the project.

Finest Greenery, LLC Principal Investors (investment amount in parenthesis)

• Sean “Jay-Z” Carter, Co-Founder ($35 million)
• Dwayne “Lil Wayne” Carter, Co-Founder ($15 million)
• Sean “Puffy/Puff Daddy” Combs ($12.5 million)
• Kanye West ($12.5 million)
• Jay “Young Jeezy” Jenkins ($12 million)
• Clifford “TI” Harris ($10 million)
• DeAndre “Soulja Boy Tell ‘Em/Soulja Boy” Way ($500 K)

On April 22, 2010 (Earth Day), Growin’ Green Records, LLC will open its doors for business in Brooklyn’s notoriously dangerous neighborhood known as the ‘New Lots Avenue Projects’. The area’s run-down buildings and stores will surround the proposed  studio, LEED Platinum-rated company headquarters/recording studio. Project manager, Sean “Puffy” Combs, claims that 82% of the construction materials used will be biodegradable and the interior will boast strictly eco-friendly furnishings in every room.

Okay, so that newspaper article was clearly fake, but it drives at a real thought. Last week I bought some eco-friendly bulbs to replace the ones we had previously installed. A friend of mine saw the box of bulbs, stared at them with a look of deep confusion, and said mockingly, “Jesse, what are you going green now, too?” This is the problem: the only people telling us to go green are government officials. We, as citizens in general, respect the government, but rarely look for it to set trends to alter our purchasing habits and points of view. It’s common knowledge that in order to instill change amongst a group of people, you must get them to want to make a certain change, rather than just telling them they should.

Thus, my point is simple: if the satirical news article posed above were actually real, I think we’d see some big changes from come from the general population that currently doesn’t care much about the environment or its energy use. The government can influence corporations and perhaps some high net-worth individuals to make changes for a greener tomorrow. But it is celebrities like rap stars, actors and actresses, TV personalities that can have a direct impact on the common citizen, which is half the “green” battle.

Continue reading »]]>

It’s been just two years after Samuel Jackson’s tear-jerking, edge-of-your-seats exciting, and provocative oscar-winning drama Snakes on a Plane, but we could soon have another Blockbuster on the horizon: Birds on a Plane!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLaX8UvVUQw]

Just a few days ago, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced its plan to remove previously publicly disclosed data about bird-related incidents on commercial flights over the past several decades. This announcement certainly did not sit very well with freedom of the press advocates–which I believe every American ought to be. All this, just months after Barack Obama explicitly called for unprecedented transparency by the government in the way of publicly disclosed information.

The FAA says: …the information could mislead the public and its release could prompt some airports and others not to report incidents.

Translation: We, the FAA, believe that Americans are quite simply too stupid to view the data and understand what it means. We think you (the public) would probably make a huge deal about all of this, which would then require the FAA to spend time and money to proverbially hold your hand and tell you that everything is gonna be OK.

Well gee-whiz, what in tarnation is that s’posed to mean? We Americans aren’t that stoopid, are wee? Nope. At least not any American with a good enough brain to a) notice and b) care about this whole bird issue. Ok, ok, so the FAA is probably right to assume that the public may freak out a bit, and National Esquire covers may show images like the one below, with the caption: “Birds take over our planes!”

But guess what? That’s the way it is. We are a free country deserving of such information as this. If the FAA is concerned about Americans taking the data the wrong way, then it is the FAA’s job to educate us. They can make a big public advertising campaign all about the fact that birds do in fact strike aircraft from time to time, but it is nothing we need to increasingly worry about. How many bird-related crashes have you heard of? Probably only one. The same one we’ve all heard of, which, thanks to an amazing pilot and crew, did not result in a single fatality. So there’s probably nothing to concern ourselves with, anyway. What would someone recommend as a solution to this, kill all the birds? That’ll rest well with animal-rights groups.

I HAVE AN IDEA: WHY NOT JUST PUT SOME SORT OF A SCREEN, SIMILAR TO THE ONE YOUR WINDOWS, ON THE ENGINES? IT’D BE CHEAP, EASY, AND PREVENTATIVE.

Re-read that FAA quote above. The second part of the FAA’s concern is that releasing the data could lead to less reporting of such incidents. What do they mean? Well, the FAA relies on first-hand reports of all types from airports and individual pilots and flight crews, who are then given anonymity in exchange. For instance, let’s say a pilot makes a routine landing in Denver, CO and notices that several runway lights are out. There were enough working lights to land the plane, thankfully, but the pilot fears that if many more lights go out, landing may be difficult, thus posing an obvious safety hazard. The pilot would report this information to the FAA anonymously so as to avoid any negative relations with the Denver airport (whose air traffic controllers determine takeoff and landing positions, as well as many other potentially advantageous/disadvantageous details).

Bird and animal run-ins are included amongst the list of frequently reported incidents received by the FAA. As I just explained, it’s easy to see why these reports are made anonymously when the report-maker’s interests may be in jeapordy, but why would pilots be concerned about making bird-related reports? Are they worried that the birds will get mad at them and go after their families? Of course not. That’s why the FAA’s concern about this particular thing make no sense.

I think the data needs to be released. It’s a great opportunity for Barack to make a statement, and moreover, not releasing such information would set a terrible precedent for other government agencies moving forward.

Continue reading »]]>

When business experts talk about which companies have been able to create the strongest brands with the most loyal customers, we usually hear names like Apple, Starbucks, Nike, etc. But why don’t we ever hear about sports leagues? After all, MLB, NFL, NASCAR, NBA, NCAA, and NHL are companies. In fact, they are franchisors and teams are franchisees, in the most literal definitions of those words.

You want to talk about brand recognition? Show me an American citizen who couldn’t identify the Yankees logo. Show me someone below the Mason-Dixon line that doesn’t have a favorite driver and/or team. You want to talk about customer loyalty? Show me a Wisconsinite that wouldn’t pay $200 a ticket to go to any Packers home game. Show me a Fenway Park home game that doesn’t sell-out. Show me a college student of a division I team that wouldn’t wait on ridiculous lines and forgo that biology textbook in order to buy season tickets.

Just as fans won’t stop loving their teams and buying up tickets and apparel, teams won’t stop spending. Here is a list of the Yankees offseason moves in 2009: CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Mark Texiera, and Andy Pettite. Total Cost: $450 million. What recession? Barack Obama has openly criticized banks for their luxurious bonuses, but made no mention of anything about athlete’s contracts. Mind you, that $450 MM figure above does not take any other player revenue stream into consideration. You’ve got jersey sales, ticket sales, endorsements, appearances, etc. Shouldn’t we reexamine the sheer size of these player’s contracts and bonuses and endorsement deals? I’m not sure what the solution is, nor am I necesessarily arguing that these athlete’s don’t work hard, make tons of personal sacrifices, or don’t deserve this money, I just think it’s worth pondering…

Continue reading »]]>

When President Barack Obama filled out his ESPN.com bracket last week, the last reason he did it was to advertise for ESPN…but that’s EXACTLY what ended up happening. Not only did he fill out a bracket, but he has correctly identified 14 of 16 sweet 16 teams, and has all elite 8 teams remaining.

But this is not the first time Obama has unintentionally provided endorsements. First, there was Blackberry. Obama’s addiction to his Blackberry caught headlines across the country, but perhaps the better endorsement came after the security concerns arose. White house officials teamed up with security experts to make a several thousand dollar version of the Blackberry, which they claim is “spy-proof.” Can you think of a better marketing move for RIM? Not only does Mr. Obama prefer the Blackberry to competition such as IPhone, but also simultaneously associated their product with ultra-security.

Then, Jay Leno and Garth Brooks became the beneficiaries of Obama’s pop culture status. Last week when Obama became the first President to appear live on a late night tv show. Jay Leno’s ratings went through the roof. Garth Brooks–the other interview of the night–got the biggest and most attentive audience of his carreer.

So, what can we take from all these examples? Well, I think we’ve  identified a trend here: Obama is doing unprecedentedly “cool” and “mainstream” activities for a U.S. President. Imagine George W. Bush on his blackberry? Or filling out a bracket? Or playing basketball? Whatever Obama does becomes instant media hooplah. He will no doubt continue this trend, and companies stand to get the world’s best endorsement possible…and better yet, at NO COST. Who knows what it will be next, but I guarantee it happens. It might be Barack’s preference for Nike basketball shoes, or perhaps he’ll begin reading on Amazon’s Kindle device. Point is, it will happen, and it will happen more than once over the next 4 or 8 years, so company execs better start brainstorming ways to play it.

Continue reading »]]>

1. Stanky Leg

A dance in which one drops it while rotating one leg behind them.

Ex: Hey Look Juwan, Stacy is doin da stanky leg!

I barely need to say anything…just watch the first 2 minutes of the video below. This guy has made probably a million dollars in album sales, ringtone sales, and ancillary product sales. So, what can we all take from this? It’s less about how the general population views your product, and more about how your target market views it. Apparently there is a huge market for dumb songs as ringtones, and easy to follow dance moves.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mf2KL0sV98]