Doctor Recommended
100% All Natural

It really should be called “sport” — there has been, and currently is an ongoing academic debate about the “s” at the end.

At any rate, Sports Illustrated has an interesting list of 10 faux pas’ that have rocked the sporting world.

You know they spend over a million bucks alone on bandwidth, right? And you know they generate almost no revenue too, right?

Here’s a great cartoon depicting their quagmire.

See also, YouMake YouTube.

As a kid you may have joked around with your friends as to what one modern contraption you could not live without if you were stranded on a desert island.

Being a history nerd, I played a slightly different game: the Marty McFly version. If I somehow ended up “Back in Time,” the one modern device I would bring with me is a digital camera with unlimited storage space.

While paintings and sketches are arguably superior visual aides to their oral and written alternatives, the Holy Grail sought after by plebe and patrician alike, was capturing the vibrant and dynamic memories - the Kodak Moments - on permanent film.

Modern day photography has its roots beginning in 1826. It sprang forth from the innovations of a Frenchman - Joseph Niepce - who ironically did not take a picture of himself (instead we have a mural).

The first color photograph was purportedly taken by the famous physicist James Maxwell, yet it was not until the early 20th century when the meticulous techniques involved were reliably refined.

Thus, thanks to some enterprising individuals of yore, you can now see some pretty cool color photos that were taken almost 100 years ago. And despite being a minute representation, a microcosm of the life and times of humanity, they serve as a window into a world that would have otherwise faded into the faceless words and wrinkles of written history:

- The Empire That Was Russia

- World War One Photos

Remember: everyone is a historian and every individual is their own biographer. So eat a balanced breakfast and take lots of pictures.

Via DamnInteresting.

Several months ago Paul Kedrosky lamented the fact that Google was merely a one-hit wonder, with all of its revenue eggs in one proverbial basket based on search-related queries. And the data still continues to be on his side.

He also mentioned that they should move towards releasing polished products instead of merely launching them as soon as they are created (or soon thereafter).

When Seth Godin visited the firm earlier this year, he specifically addressed this point (see the Q&A session). Godin suggested that rather than trying to be the “first mover” in every product category, that they should instead work on creating a stable, robust product that would be more than a flashy, whiz-bang ornament.

At this point I do not think the blame rests on one sole individual. However, based upon the way the firm is currently organized, I think that formally institutionalizing gatekeeper positions like Marissa Mayer actually works against them in the long-run.

The centralized nature of their product manager suffers from, among other things, asymmetrical information — a knowledge problem that curtails effective decision-making and stymies prompt execution.

To that point, last year, News.com put together a good overview contrasting the culture differences between Yahoo and Google. They noted that because Google was leaner, flatter and a more decentralized organization, they were more effective at rolling out creativer (sic) solutions.

However, based upon their recent history, might they become the very Yahoo they supplanted? Today, Steve Rubel posits the same question.

One solution could be a reorganization along the lines of several smaller, confederated start-ups. Example: delegating task-management and dispersing this vaunted focal authority into small cells of semi-autonomous, entrepreneurial units each responsible for their own P/L (see this facsimile of “Unbundling the Corporation”).

Deep Thoughts with Jack Handey

How big is too big? Do the leveraging abilities of traditional public firms (financial resources, clout, etc.) outweigh the long-term costs (e.g. salaries, pensions)?

In an age where you can reliably and securely contract any task to the ends of the earth at a fraction of the domestic cost, do web companies need to go public anymore… let alone receive venture capital? And do you really need to have people from Mensa working for you (see also the seminal works of Jim Collins; in BtL he suggests no)?

Remember that clip of Benny Hinn from a few days ago?

I just came across another preacher by the name of Harri Kiviniemi who has been remixed with music from a rock band called Dope.  I have no idea what country the guy is from, but his faux air guitar is pretty good.

I also bumped into a video starring the character “Borat” (aka Ali G) which illustrates why you might want to listen to the lyrics of a song before singing along.

Lastly, I bet you can’t do this on your DDR.

As a kid I recall watching on more than one occassion, a Disney-like movie that involved a unmanned combat aerial vehicle.

It was basically a miniaturized fighter jet that was operated via remote control and the events surrounding its deployment involved one boondoggle after another (so it’s nothing like Stealth).

I can’t seem to recall the name of the movie, but I did come across this interesting video of a made-at-home model airplane flying at 200 mph.

Guess what BusinessWeek discovered about State-backed monopolies? They don’t spend much on innovation.

This is not a terribly new discovery. There is little incentive for a firm that legally owns the entire market on a service, so why waste the money on more efficient or effective technologies when you have a legally guaranteed revenue stream? What is the incentive for a monopolist to invest in developing new widgets?

TechDirt suggests that these rent-seeking firms aren’t technology companies at all, but rather wealth-extractors. And AgainstMonopoly notes that their monopolistic actions speak louder than their superficial overtures.

You see, apparently despite bringing in revenues of over $40 billion last year, AT&T spent a mere $130 million on R&D. This is in contrast to the less-regulated market of computer chips, in which Intel alone spent over $5 billion on R&D.

So one question can be, what is that G-spot firms should spend on innovating?

Paul Kedrosky shows that sometimes more investments means less return in the long-run — just because you spent money on creating a product does not mean it will turn into a commercial success.

And this is a point that ArsTechnica misses in their op-ed on the matter. Throwing money at “basic research” without a comprehensive business model behind it is not a practical way of staying profitable in industries that do not receive subsidies or legal monopolies.

In fact, the main reason AT&T Bell Labs, Xerox and IBM all had the money to do what they did is because of one thing alone: State intervention.

They received tax-funded subsidies in the form of large government contracts. Their industries were protected from outside competition through patents and geographical monopolies. And while it is impossible to predict what free-markets would have created, a strong case could be made that different, more efficient patterns of capital allocation would have been made if this intervention never occurred.

In short, these firms did not have to deal with free-enterprise and its creative destruction. And unfortunately the only winners in the continual cycle of telecommunication reregulation has been the State monopolies which have once again consolidated into their original form.

And rather than making another long-winded polemical against State intervention, perhaps one of the solutions to innovation at large firms is already being discussed: Crowdsourcing.

What do these two sanitizing techniques have in common? For starters, they have both been demonized by not-so-friendly folks and have thus left the drawing board as practical uses to preventing the spread of harmful pathogens.

The FDA uses a good analogy to explain why irradiating food is not a bad thing:

Irradiation does not make foods radioactive, just as an airport luggage scanner does not make luggage radioactive. Nor does it cause harmful chemical changes. The process may cause a small loss of nutrients but no more so than with other processing methods such as cooking, canning, or heat pasteurization. Federal rules require irradiated foods to be labeled as such to distinguish them from non-irradiated foods.

The EPA notes that through this relatively safe and inexpensive process, bacteria and other microbes are killed off — thus preventing illness and food spoilage.

An interesting tie-in comes with recent research that indicates that “[v]accines made with bacteria killed with gamma irradiation” may be more effective than traditional accepted methods which use heat and chemical inactivation.

More on irradiation of food: 1 2 3 4
More on DDT: 1 2 3

Which is nuttier, playing a tongue twister game and being racked for incorrect answers.

Or.

Not speaking Japanese at all, as Chris Farley discovered.

This is perhaps the best segment Colbert has produced yet.  Even better than his grilling of the press.

Via Stephen Kinsella.  See also the antics of Ali G.

If you’ve grown tired of trying to organize your bookmarks at each computer you use, perhaps you might be interested in two handy services.

One is Deli.cio.us which is now operated by Yahoo.  The way it works is fairly simple.  You create an account and install a little utility that integrates with your browser.  Whenever you come across a site you that you want to bookmark, you simply click the “tag this” button and it instantly becomes immortalized in your ever growing cornucopia of links.  You can also look at what other people are bookmarking and build RSS feeds off of specific tags (e.g. technology, golf, base jumping). See mine.

The other popular one is Notebook from Google.  It operates in a similar manner, yet it is not only more substantive, but also influences the underlying ranking system of each site that is “noted.”

What do they have in common?

Somehow Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie managed to shut down the borders of Namibia, curtail the investigative efforts of the press and otherwise dictate what could and could not take place throughout parts of the country. This was done at the expense of the already down-trodden taxpayers.

And when George Bush visited Germany last week, the entire city was locked down and placed under a strict curfew with no visitation rights. Again, done at the expense of taxpayers and individuals who actually generate wealth (rather than consume or redistribute it).

This paristic use of State intervention in the affairs of productive people is perhaps best seen in this review on currency circulation in Zimbabwe. Instead of allowing free-enterprise to dictate price levels and exchange rates, the inflated fiat money is yet another blunder fueled by State regulation.

Yea, we beat every team handedly through the season, then get our legs kicked out from underneath us in the championship game… by a team comprised of old PhD candidates no less.

- This clip shows a German boy going berzerk. And someone coyly edited in segments of someone playing Mario Brothers.  Classic mashup.

- Apparently Johnny Carson single-handedly debunked Uri Geller, a psychic, on his show. Pretty entertaining and it would be great if it happened more often. Fortunately South Park has done this a couple times, see: 1 2

- “The other day Bush declared he would never let the Iraqi people down. And he will kill as many of them as necessary to make sure those left don’t feel let down.” - Gene Callahan — See this germane picture too.

Siberia claims to have the biggest man-made hole, in the world.  It’s a diamond mine near the town of Mirna.

The Kennecott Copper pit in Utah (outside of Salt Lake City) is the world largest and monetarily richest quarry.  More information and pictures of it.

Now arm-chair pundits get to fight it out over which one truly is the biggest man-made excavation.  I’d vote, but I’m biased towards this pit I dug back in elementary school… it was known to swallow plastic action-figures whole.

Ah, never underestimate the utility of empty coke bottles.

Not sure if I would want to dig up a queen though, that would involve lots of weeping and gnashing of teeth.

David Skarbek pointed me to this old video of investigative reporter John Stossel getting beaten up by an actor/entertainer/wrestler.

Skarbek suggested that it was the perfect illustration of Argumentum ad baculum.  I concure.

Not quite, but this video is pretty funny.

More on Westboro Baptist Church and Phelps, the guy that brought you the “God Hates Marbles” campaign.

Everyone and their cousin is reporting about a new device from Microsoft called “Zune” which supposedly is an iPod killer.

While I would not put it past them, if you watch the video reportedly uploaded for buzz-effect, you might have a sense of deja vu.

Going back to March 7th this year, there were reports of another project called “Alexandria” (this occurred hot on the heels of the Origami UMPC release). In fact, watch the Alexandria video and compare it to the “viral” Zune ad.

Notice that it is literally the same exact thing?

This is what happens when you play with tea leaves… you can come up with pretty much any kind of prophecy you want. At the same time, this is not to say that Alexandria is not Zune, it is just that the video is not new.

To their credit, Microsoft can get some really good RoI with that ad again in a few months by “leaking” information about new touch-sensitive floor surfaces they have developed (as seen in the intro). Remember the E3 Nintendo video showing off similar technology?

What tipped me off was around 1:15 when you see a bunch of “hip” Gen Y’ers standing around a couch. I knew I had seen those cliche stereotypes before (count them: token asian, token black guy and girl, punk rocker with a mullet, erudite intellectual with trendy glasses and cap, etc.).

Note: if you are interested here are some of the original teasers for Origami: 1 2

Digg it!

[Below is a real interview I recently had with polymath Gene Callahan regarding his new novel entitled PUCK. Read an excerpt: 1 2. Play the PUCK game. All transcription errors are mine. Void where prohibited.]

For those living in Lithuania and Micronesia, could you please tell us a little about your background and your whereabouts during the afternoon of November 22, 1963.

I was sitting in the motorcade car next to John Conally.

As a PhD student and a father of several children, how did you balance all these pursuits?

Kids? Crimminy, I knew I had forgotten something.

Did your kids help co-author the book? Did they design the cover?

In the sense that they had little to do with it, yes.

So what is PUCK anyways? An acronym? A cross-breed platypus-duck? A post-modern critique of Esperanto?

The Parallel Universal Consciousness Kompany. And whatever else you want it to be.

What was your inspiration for writing this?

Life, James Joyce, Homer, William Shakespeare, Henry James, J.R.R. Tolkien, Milan Kundera, Kurt Vonnegut, Albert Camus, Ken Kesey, Gustave Flaubert, F. Scott Fitzgberald, Hunter S. Thompson, Jack Kerouac, Franz Kafka, Jay McInnery, and Stu Morgenstern’s actions at college.

In 273 syllables or less, describe how you fused Norse mythology with science fiction.

Very well, indeed.

Of the three, who is closest to your intended audience and why: South Park Republicans, MySpace Mavens or Chuck Norris?

Chuck Norris. I write for individuals, not demographic groups.

Your writings typically deal with non-fictional issues surrounding the discipline of praxeology, or human action. How did this influence PUCK?

Not consciously at all, except in one brief passage. Unconsciously probably quite a bit.

Your previous book Economics for Real People was a primer on economics and government intervention along the lines of Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. Do any of the case-studies used in it serve as a backdrop for the plot in PUCK?

Sorry, no.

Is the departure from the realm of economics and history a sign of things to come, or have you planned on writing a fictional work for some time now? Do you plan on writing a sequel? If so, will there be a sing-along version?

PUCK was in progress 20 years before Economics for Real People. It is really my economic writing that has been a departure. I have three other novels in progress at present.

Are you going to take a cue from Ayn Rand and rename either yourself or any of your family members?

Oddly enough, I have renamed my pet gerbil Ayn Rand.

How did you develop the various characters such as Dr. Fitzmaurice? Personal experience? Random words drawn from a hat? Double-dare?

Strip Twister.

Is Morris a Yankees or Red Sox kind of guy? Boxers or briefs?

He likes the Mets. And he doesn’t wear underwear.

If existentialism was an inanimate object, how would it be discussed in PUCK?

It would be large, purple, and octagonal.

In the PUCK universe, is ethanol the fuel du jour?

No, methanol is.

If so, would an ethanol-powered train leaving Chicago at 3 AM Eastern time and traveling at 46 mph, still have a chance at beating afternoon rush-hour in St. Louis and meet EPA emission standards for its locomotive class?

The train will go off the rails thirty miles out of Chicago.

Do you have any plans of making this into a screen play?

I would love to.

Who would play Dr. Fitzmaurice?

Bill Murray.

Would Will Ferrell or Owen Wilson appear in it? Would anyone wear a mullet?

Owen Wilson would be cool. I ain’t so keen on Will Ferrell or mullets. What’s a mullet, anyway?

Are you working at bringing PUCK to the XBox 360 or any other gaming device?

When I’ve developed the full game version, yes.

Rumor has it that you are going on a book-promotion tour soon, where and when? Will the Ice Cream man or Weinermobile be involved?

My tour so far involves one stop at Freebird Books in Brooklyn, on August 13.

In the form of a Chinese Fortune cookie, what departing words of wisdom do you have? Lotto numbers?

3, 6, 10, 15, 21, 28. Read the book and you’ll see why.

Apparently piggybacking on top of human DNA is another set of blueprints that “specifies all the proteins that a cell makes.”

Obscured by the subtle intricacies along the ever-twisting strands of genetic matter, scientists hope that these plans will unveil how and why specific genes are turned on and off.

Be sure to also check out the Folding@Home project, which simulates the complex processes of protein folding.  See also Wired magazine’s article, People are Human-Bacteria Hybrid