tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.comments2011-04-11T14:20:46.917-07:00The Pareto ProjectJohnson Moorehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17697936170713520510noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-39997779887697524582011-04-11T14:20:46.917-07:002011-04-11T14:20:46.917-07:00So I agree. It is better than it seems. But I have...So I agree. It is better than it seems. But I have not yet adapted to using checklists more. I think it is a habit - one worth developing, though I wonder if my mind is the type that gravitates to this sort of thinking. I suspect not.Johnson Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17697936170713520510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-21402733429844997692011-04-03T19:51:32.947-07:002011-04-03T19:51:32.947-07:00The entire point of a non-fiction book is to commu...The entire point of a non-fiction book is to communicate an idea or concept to the reader, isn't it? If the author hasn't gotten to the main idea fairly early as you describe, then I skim ahead to find it and then decide if I want to continue reading the book line by line or not. Some books are just as good skimmed as read page by page. From such books I can get the gist of the argument by reading the intro, the summaries at the end of each chapter, maybe one critical chapter in the entire book, and the usually the last chapter. <br /><br />I listened to the Checklist manefesto on CD in my car and found it repetitious. But in the car I could let my mind wander and return to the book if I heard something interesting. The take away from the book for me was, "People are fallible and checklists help us focus on important items that we may forget in the heat of the moment, or be too lazy to follow when we are tired or distracted." <br /><br />I have always used a variety of checklists in my personal life (a vacation checklist, and a writing/editing checklist, to name two), and the book has motivated me to use checklists in other areas that I had not before. So I guess the book did it's job afterall.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-79723632238948620132011-02-15T12:18:12.686-08:002011-02-15T12:18:12.686-08:00David - Wow. First, I am a big fan of Csíkszentmi...David - Wow. First, I am a big fan of Csíkszentmihályi and have 3 of his books right above my computer work station. I must say, though, apart from the concept of Flow and a few basic points, I haven't gotten a lot more from his books. That said, Flow is a great concept. <br />Meditation is also a topical topic for me. I did Tai Chi for many years and I think it helped me tremendously controlling my "gray" periods. I stopped doing it a year or so ago (i should restart). I have recently started relooking at zen mediation, and as you probably have noticed, I have an interest in Buddhist ideas - in fact, I may have originally taken the phrase monkey brain from a Buddhist discussion. <br /><br />All this aside, concentration is an important topic for me. And I probably don't mean single minded focus, but the ability to direct thoughts into a particular arena, while limiting non-useful monkey-brain thoughts. I do believe that some inner chatter is necessary and in general, I am more interested in insight than what is called purely rational thought. <br /><br />Sigh - good topic. We should have a beer and discuss. Oh right - a few thousand miles are in between.Johnson Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17697936170713520510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-20939813558632903122011-02-06T12:41:05.310-08:002011-02-06T12:41:05.310-08:00This is not so weird. Or perhaps I just have simil...This is not so weird. Or perhaps I just have similar weird thoughts. I see the future as an infinite array of possiblities of which I choose from from moment to moment. Am I creating a new reality? Or am I just following one string of a multitude of realities that have already been defined? Who knows? I don't think I will never know the truth while in this body. Will I ever know the truth, perhaps after death? I hope so because it would be so interesting, but again, who knows? Nobody. That's who. All we can do is live our lives the best we can and enjoy the speculation about things that humans apparently cannot know while encased in this reality of bone and flesh.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-2315715311860289772011-01-30T17:43:17.128-08:002011-01-30T17:43:17.128-08:00How long a person can concentrate depends on how y...How long a person can concentrate depends on how you define concentration. Thinking about one thing and one thing only is very hard and can only be done for a few seconds, perhaps a minute or more if you are thoroughly trained. The goal of many types of meditations is to learn to concentrate on one thing for a period of time – but it actually becomes an exercise in watching our thoughts to see how our brains keep from concentrating on one thing. Our unconscious minds are very, very good at avoiding and distracting us from what our conscious brains want to do. <br /> <br />While one-point focus is almost impossible for the average person, concentrating on a larger task that involves more than just one facet is possible for longer periods of time. The concept of ‘Flow’ as described by Mihály Csíkszentmihályi is a good description of this type of concentration. We all have experienced a period time when we were totally in the moment and the passing of time was irrelevant. I’ve experienced Flow when reading a good book, studying an enjoyable subject, writing, playing chess, solving programming-related problems, and when running or hiking. (Not to mention the flow experience during sex!) <br /> <br />There is no doubt that the ability to focus and concentrate can be improved with practice. There are concentration techniques to follow that have been around for thousands of years. I also have no doubt that the ability to focus is transferable from one activity to another. <br />Eliminating extracurricular activities such as band, art, and sports has been called short-sighted because it is through these enjoyable activities that students learn to concentrate. Watch a child try to concentrate on homework they don’t want to do versus watching the child voluntarily concentrate intently for an hour on a drawing or on solving an enjoyable puzzle. Perhaps the purpose of band, art, and other extracurricular activities is not in performing the activity itself, but to teach the ability to concentrate in an enjoyable environment. Once students have learned to concentrate in enjoyable areas, perhaps students can use those experiences in other areas that are not as enjoyable for them. <br /> <br />My ability to concentrate at one sitting has now been exhausted, so I will end this little essay now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-56724210448695639342011-01-03T15:47:35.727-08:002011-01-03T15:47:35.727-08:00I will grant that crashes are natural and inevitab...I will grant that crashes are natural and inevitable byproduct of dynamic systems. But so is the backlash. And a backlash denied causes Anger, and that anger has to have somewhere to go or it will fester in the populace for years and perhaps even generations. <br /><br />It should be natural and normal for leaders to expect to be punished when something goes wrong on their watch. Leaders are rewarded when things go right and they are punished when things go wrong -- and they are not entirely responsible for either situation. That is part of the job description for a leader and the responsibility they accept when they take the job. <br /><br />But, I wonder, how many times would a specific banker have to preside over their bank going under and being bailed out by the taxpayers before they could be fired? One time is apparently not the answer. Two times? Three? Ten times? Or do bankers have jobs and bonuses for life? Are they NEVER the villain? Apparently Wall Street bankers are a protected class of worker. Very interesting -- and disturbing. <br /><br />[ As an aside, I was in North Carolina over Christmas and heard two different groups of people in restaurants saying that the bankers responsible "should be taken out and shot." I quote because they seemed to be serious about this ultimate penalty (maybe it is a southern thing). They went on to say that that type of consequence is the only way to keep them and the next group of bankers from keeping their eye on their annual bonuses rather than the on the long-term benefit of the business. ] <br /><br />It seems to me we should not be concerned for the welfare and jobs of the individual bankers who presided over this mess. I certainly don’t advocate shooting the bankers, or stringing them up, but I do think they should have been fired and removed from their positions of power – preferably with security guards escorting them out of the building and the footage shown on the nightly news and YouTube. Symbolism counts. A few hundred firings would have gone a long way to mitigating the Anger people feel. The healing could begin. As it is now, the Anger festers and mutates in ways that we have not seen the results of yet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-77519016153406709812010-12-16T17:18:15.634-08:002010-12-16T17:18:15.634-08:00I wonder too how Pareto's 80/20 rule can be st...I wonder too how Pareto's 80/20 rule can be static in the face of so many different policies and economic structures. I find that one of the fascinating puzzles here - though I suspect there was academic wizardry going on. My biggest issue is how to measure wealth. That has got to be pretty subjective.<br />I note that the 1%/50% figure you quote is very consistent with a 80/20 Pareto distribution. Of the 80%, 80% of that is controlled by 20% of the 20%. Do that one more time and you get a number very very close to 1% control 50%.<br /><br />The 80/20 rule really just reflects one set of parameters for the distribution - and the 80/20 rule we quote today that is attributed to Pareto is simply an interpretation of his work. And the Pareto distribution is just one type of power law. Its not so much the exact parameters of the distribution that interests me. It is the shape of the distributions - the fact that they can be so different form the traditional normal distribution- and their tendency to reflect situations that can shift from being very boring to extreme volatility.Johnson Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17697936170713520510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-24722850738443399862010-12-15T20:54:12.150-08:002010-12-15T20:54:12.150-08:00There is no doubt the public benefited financially...There is no doubt the public benefited financially from the bailout in the ways you describe. But don’t expect people to be happy about it. <br /> <br />And I think most people asking questions about the bailout are missing the point. The issue is psychological, not financial. Of course we the people benefited from the bailout. But the people who were in charge of the banks are still in charge. The people who allowed this crisis to occur are still in positions of responsibility. The people who took the nation and all of civilization to the brink of collapse are receiving huge bonuses and are laughing all the way to their own bank every day. This is galling to many Americans. <br /> <br />People may say they are angry about the bailout, but perhaps they are really angry that nobody was punished for causing the crisis. Most people in this country live every day under the threat of being fired if they so much as say the wrong thing at the wrong time. People are fired for arriving late to work, or leaving early. Steal a dollar or some office supplies and you’re out the door. Make consistently poor management decisions and you’re replaced. This is the real world outside of Wall Street. <br /> <br />In this latest economic crisis nobody important was fired for their managerial incompetence. There were little to no consequences for the bad actors who were supposed to be managing the risk their companies were taking on. If this crisis was not enough to fire someone, what would have to happen before a Bank CEO is canned? How incompetent do they have to be?! <br /> <br />I think this is where the anger and frustration about the bailout comes from. Sometimes the owner of a sports team has to fire the entire coaching staff just to show the public they mean business about turning around the team. This was one of those times when the catharsis of a mass public firing was needed. It is not entirely rational, but the public needed to be shown that there are consequences for bad actions not just for the ‘little people’, but also for bankers in Goldman Sachs. Ronald Reagan fired the air traffic controllers. Obama should have fired the bankers. <br /> <br />Instead, it is business as usual on Wall Street. And the public is rightfully angry about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-70748690464470275522010-12-15T20:45:07.563-08:002010-12-15T20:45:07.563-08:00I enjoy reading your blog. Your ideas definitely m...I enjoy reading your blog. Your ideas definitely make me think! <br /><br />In the 2010 December 15 New York Times (page A23), Ray D. Madoff, a professor at Boston College Law School, wrote that in 1916 the richest 1 percent of Americans controlled 50 percent of the wealth of the country. He went on to assert that through the estate tax and other progressive policies over the next 60 years the percentage of wealth controlled by the richest 1 percent of Americans was reduced to only 20 percent. He then noted that in the last 35 years the tax policies have reversed that trend with the richest 1 percent now owning more than 33% of the wealth of the country and is trending up. <br /> <br />My point being that the distribution of wealth in this case is not static, but changes with the tax policy and laws of the land. The percentage of wealth controlled by the richest 1 percent , the richest 20 percent, or whatever other percentage of Americans you want to use, changes over time. And at times the difference in wealth will be the Pareto Distribution of 80/20. But the distribution will also sometimes be 70/30. <br /> <br />So, if the percentage of wealth owned by the richest x percent of Americans can be influenced through government policies, the question is, “How much wealth of the country should be owned by the richest 1 or 2 or 20 percent of Americans? What percent should a democratic government with a capitalism-based economy aim for?” America as an economic entity did quite well when the wealth of the richest 1 percent of Americans trended down from 50 percent to 20 percent. <br /> <br />I suspect the American public would say the country is on the right track when more and more Americans are getting a bigger slice of the pie. And most people would say the country is not on the right track when fewer and fewer people are getting a bigger slice of the pie. There is probably a study about this somewhere...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-45464537002275399002010-08-11T14:22:05.036-07:002010-08-11T14:22:05.036-07:00Thanks Christopher. Awesome site. I had not seen i...Thanks Christopher. Awesome site. I had not seen it before.Johnson Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17697936170713520510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3500863169014823956.post-36419886218244239522010-08-03T10:20:12.655-07:002010-08-03T10:20:12.655-07:00johnson, nice find! academic earth has a similar ...johnson, nice find! academic earth has a similar mission - it's been called "the hulu of education" - it aggregates video lectures from top universities all in one place. www.academicearth.orgChristopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17060315933481862829noreply@blogger.com