First Day of the Program at Unistar

Camp Unistar August 12-19
Harry Potter and Philosophy

Sunday Day One: The Sorting: Introduction, what is character?

Started off with a reading from one of the books regarding an interaction between HP and Dumbledore about the Mirror of Arasid, which shows you your greatest wish, “The happiest man on earth would be able to look into the mirror and see his reflection”.

Other introductory info provided about how the week will go.

Provided hand out titled “Is Ambition a Virtue? Why Slytherin Belongs at Hogwarts” from the book Harry Potter and Philosophy. http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?z=y&ean=9780812694550&displayonly=TOC

What is your favorite thing about the books, favorite book, etc? For me it is the relationship between Voldomort/Death Eaters and Harry, Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoneix. They both need each other to define themselves. I think this translates to the world we live in.

The questions of
“What is evil?”

“How do people define evil for themselves?”

“Why is there apparent universal agreement that Voldomort and the Death Eaters are evil?”

The last 150 pages of book 6 were my favorite part. I’m not sure why yet but will re-read this week to see what jumps out. I think it has to do with the role of Snape and trying to figure out which side he is on. Is he really still loyal to Voldomort or is he a double agent and Dumbledore and Snape conspired to provide Dumbledore a way to go underground?

Everyone in the group shared their own answer to this question and the answers were a unique as the people in the group. Not one response was the same as the others. These introductions were a great way to build a group dynamic and set the tone for the discussion.

Three Harry Potter trivia questions:
What is quidditch? A game that the magical world plays played on brooms and a Snitch?
What are the names of the three balls? Quaffle, Snitch and Bluddger?

The name of the captain of the Holy Head Harpies? Gwenog Jones

What does the word Philosophy mena? Love of knowledge or wisdom.

Name a philosopher from one of these periods? Ancitnet, Midevil, Modern, 20th Century.

What does Epistemology mean? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Craig Provided a brief description of western philosophy. I missed most of this but here is a link to wikipedia about this topic that provides a lot of the same content. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Philosophy

Someone asked what deconstructionist means. Here is wikipedia’s definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction

Metaphysics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics

Ontology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology

Next we performed our sorting. based on a series of questions on the back of one of the hand outs. Here were my answers highlighted in yellow:

1. I prefer making decisions: A after finding out what others think B without consulting others.
2. I prefer being called A Imaginative or intuitive B factual and accurate.
3. I prefer making decisions A about people based on facts and data B about people based on empathy and feelings
4. I prefer commitments A to occur if others want to make them B to be definite and to ensure they are made
5. I prefer A quiet, thoughtful time alone B Active, energetic time with people.
6. I prefer to A Use methods I know well to get the job done B think of new methods fordoing tasks.
7. I prefer drawing conclusions A based on logic and step by step analysis B based on what I feel from past experiences
8. I prefer A avoiding making deadlines B setting a schedule and sticking to it
9. I prefer talking A a while then thinking to myself B freely for an extended period, thinking later
10. I prefer A thinking about possibilities B dealing with actualities
11. I prefer being thought of A as a thinking person B as a feeling person
12. I prefer A considering all possibilities before making a decision B making quick decisions abased on the info at hand
13. I prefer A inner thoughts and feelings others cannot see B activities involving others
14. I prefer A the abstract or theoretical B the concrete or real
15. I prefer helping others A explore their feelings B make logical decisions
16. I prefer A change and keeping options open B predictability and knowing in advance
17. I prefer communicating A little of my inner thinking and feelings B freely my inner thinking and feelings
18. I prefer A possible views of the whole B the factual details available
19. I prefer using A common sense to make decisions B dada, analysis and reason to make decisions
20. I prefer planning A ahead based on projections B as necessities arise
21. I prefer A meeting new people B being alone, or with one person I know well
22. I prefer A ideas B facts
23. I prefer A convictions B verifiable conclusions
24. I prefer A using appointment books as much as possible B using appointment books as little as possible
25. I prefer A discussing new issues at length in a group B puzzling out ideas in my mind, and then sharing
26. I prefer A carrying out plans with precision B designing plans, not necessarily carrying them out
27. I prefer A logical people B feeling people
28. I prefer A being free to do things spur of the moment B knowing in advance what I’m expected to do
29. I prefer being A the center of attention B in the background
30. I prefer A imagining the nonexistent B examining details of the actual
31. I prefer A experiencing emotional situations B using my ability to analyze situations
32. I prefer starting meetings A at a prearranged time B when all are comfortable or ready

The results of this gives us a Myers Briggs types that can be mapped to houses

(Here is an example of one of the quizes online - http://quizilla.com/users/ReaderRavenclaw/quizzes/Hogwarts%20Sorting%20Hat%3A%20Based%20on%20Myers-Briggs%20Personality%20Typing)

I’m an INTJ

Last three letters of type
STJ = Hufflepuff
SFJ = Hufflepuff
NTP = Ravenclaw
NFP = Ravenclaw
NTJ = Ravenclaw
STP = Girffendore
SFP = Griffendore
NFP = Griffendore
NTP = Slytherin
NTJ = Slytherin

Here is more info about Myers Briggs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers_Briggs

Management Styles and the Impact on Motivation

After re-reading this post I decided that the message I was trying to express got lost somewhere along the way. The core insight that Joel's posts provided for me was realizing how important intrinsic motivation is for me to be able to sustain my enthusiasm for a job, a hobby or anything else that I put my time and energy into. The post seemed to drift much more toward my feelings about the other management styles and that isn't where I wanted to go.

I'm going to try to rework this post and re-publish in the next couple of days. At times it can be helpful for me to see my own writing to realize that I didn't quite express myself the way I was intending. Sorry for going off track a bit.

Al Gore - "What you can do"

This video of Al Gore is from TED 2006 and was a special request by the organizers as a follow up to his regular slide show. In this one he talks more about the things we can do about climate change. In his regular slide show he is focused more on "what is happening" and "why you should care". I think you'll find it interesting.

http://tedblog.typepad.com/tedblog/2006/06/al_gore_on_tedt.html

Salsa Performance This Friday

The Salsa Performance Team (we still need to come up with a name) that I've been practicing with for the last month has our first performance this coming Friday (8/4/06). It will be during Club Salsero at Cinema Ballroom in St Paul. Our performance will be sometime between 10 and 11 PM. We're also planning to perform around 10 or 10:15 next Tuesday (8/8/06) at Trocaderos Night Club in Minneapolis.

I'll try to post a link to the YouTube video sometime next week.

Should be fun! Feel free to come by to see for yourself.

Here is the "So You Think You Can Dance" video on YouTube
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JO5eGcZOSOU

Also, it looks like Trocaderos is no longer having Tuesday night salsa so our performance there has been cancelled.

Twins Territory

I went to the Twins game that started at 12:15 PM. I met a couple friends there and happened to have my laptop with me. The Twins were loosing bigtime and it was getting a little boring so I decided to see if there was a wireless network in the stadium. Turns out there is! It's called "Twins Territory" and appears to be an open high speed network. Very Cool!

I can imagine going to other games as a place to work. You can get a Cheap Seats (outfield upper deck GA) ticket for $6 and it's a pretty nice atmosphere. Certianly different than sitting at the desk.

If you're interested in joining me for a game let me know!

Two Questions and One Long Answer

I recently received an email that included the following two questions.

“What are your thoughts on how your IT skills might be transferred to the renewable energy field?”

“Are you thinking of the business side or the non-profit side more?”

My response to these questions surprised me a little bit and helped me to frame what I’m doing. I wanted to post this response in this forum as well and see if anyone has any comments.

Good questions. My response has gotten a little long but both of your questions open up a lot of territory!

I’m open to working in a for-profit, non-profit, governmental or academic organization. I believe that it will be possible for me to utilize my skills, experience and enthusiasm to work on renewable energy from any of these perspectives. However, I do believe that it’s critical that renewable energy continue to develop in such a way that it is financially competitive (if not superior) to fossil fuel energy for both the producer and consumer. As long as people have to pay a premium renewables will remain alternative rather than go mainstream. I believe that all four types of organizations have a key role to play in creating a sustainable energy future. That said, my experience in IT has all been in for-profit companies and I’m quite happy working in that environment.

I believe that technology provides tools for people to solve problems and maximize the potential presented by opportunities. This is the spirit that I bring to my exploration of how I can use my background in the renewable energy field. I’m primarily interested in understanding the challenges the renewable energy industry is facing and then look for ways that I can apply my skill set to make a difference.

The digital world we live in requires software and IT systems in an amazingly diverse number of areas. The possibilities I see for how I can apply my IT/software background is equally diverse. Here are some of the ideas that have surfaced during my investigation:

• Consumer Education

o Carbon and other types of calculators (for example http://www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction/carboncalculator/). What is the next generation of calculator going to look like? How will efficiency opportunities be incorporated in the calculators?

o Web based marketing and education campaigns. Eyeballs are looking at the web around the world making this is a fantastic medium. One of my client groups at Target was On-line Marketing and I can see how a number of the things that Target did to build brand could be applied to renewable energy education and enrollment such as games, contests, and user submitted content (movies, stories, songs, art work, etc).

• Community Organizing

o Creating web based applications that allow neighbors to work together to change the energy choices in their community. Community owned solar or wind project. “Ask your neighbor” discussion forums. Offering ways for people to express their desire for sustainable energy options.

o Credit trading systems such as the Chicago Climate Exchange (http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/)

• Distributed Generation Management

o Creating/enhancing software to monitor distributed power generation and maximizes the financial reward (use immediately, store for the future or sell back to grid).

• Centralized Generation

o What systems are used to monitor and control turbines in wind farms?

o New approaches to solar (http://www.stirlingenergy.com/) may require specialized software and systems.

• Modeling – applies to both Distributed and Centralized Generation

o Refining models of wind speed and available energy

o Consumer Information about Solar – see http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17129&ch=biztech for bit about plan to create a web application that will provide consumers and builders information about wattage they can expect from integrated solar systems.

o Ocean wave and tidal energy.

• Marketing of renewable energy solutions

o Renewable energy carbon offset purchasing

o Providing online tools for people to see the financial and aesthetic impact of different energy system options.

• Holistic solution design

o Provide tools (wikis, discussion forums, VOIP conferences) for interdisciplinary and geographically disparate teams to work together on projects. Projects often require significant involvement from business, design and technical experts to be successful.

• Appliance manufacturing (i.e. solar photovoltaic panels and membranes, wind turbines, geothermal systems) companies have information management challenges. I could work directly for one of these organizations. For Example SunPower, SunTech or Evergreen Solar.

• Building construction and renovation

o Streamline the LEED certification and application process through on-line tools. I understand that USGBC has been working with Adobe to do this.

• Demand management

o Smart appliances that can monitor grid demand and operate a lowest cost or most efficient times.

o Feedback systems to allow people to see the complete cost of their energy consumption patterns. The interfaces for these systems could be built into cell phones, PDAs and other items that we keep close to us on regular basis. You could hit a button on your phone to see your carbon footprint for the day with a couple of simple suggestions for what you could do to change the pattern. Data could come from things as diverse as your car, your electric utility, your refrigerator, and your computer.

• Financial Modeling. Are there customized solutions needed to support the financial models used to argue for public policy, corporate policy and personal choices?

• Bio Fuels.

o Manufacturing facility monitoring and control. Are there any special needs of the bio fuel industry that are not currently being addressed?

o Research into cellulosic ethanol technology. My undergrad degree is in biochemistry. I imagine that these companies create mountains of data that has to be managed and presented in such a way as to be usable.

• Distribution and Grid management.

o Transmission capacity. Provide tools for a consumer/developer to be able to negotiate with the utility?

o Location, Location, Location. How do we get power produced in one location to a consumer in a different location? Are there “better” ways to manage this that require software to make real-time decisions and provide feedback?

As I mentioned in my initial email, I’m most interested in distributed generation. There are two reasons for this. First, I’m a strong believer in enabling people to participate. Distributed generation allows many more people to be contributors and consumers rather than just consumers. Second, more diversity in a system makes it more stable, flexible, reliable and secure. In IT this is called avoiding single points of failure. In natural ecosystems we call this biodiversity.

Stumbling on Happiness

I recently picked up a copy of "Stumbling on Happiness" by Daniel Gilbert. Great book! Fantastic information presented in an accessible and humorous way. This one is a gem.

I wanted to write a couple of notes about this book. As I started into this exercise I realized that I was actually going to have to quote pretty big chunks of the text in order to capture the ideas I'm interested in. If you find any of this fascinating I would suggest taking the time to read the whole book as I'm just skimming the surface of a couple of ideas.

I've highlighted my comments in blue throughout the text below. The italics in the text are transcribed from the book. The bold is my editorial emphasis.

Page 125
“I’ve been waiting a long, long time to show someone this cartoon (figure 12), which I clipped from a newspaper in 1983 and have kept tacked to one bulletin board or another ever since. It never fails to delight me. The sponge is being asked to imagine without limits-to envision what it might like to be if the entire universe of possibilities were open to it-and the most exotic thing it can imagine becoming is an arthropod. The cartoonist isn’t making fun of sponges, of course; he’s making fun of us. Each of us is trapped in a place, a time, and a circumstance, and our attempts to use our minds to transcend those boundaries are, more often than not, ineffective. Like the sponge, we think we are thinking outside the box only because we can’t see how big the box really is. Imagination cannot easily transcend the boundaries of the present, and one reason for this is that it must borrow machinery that is owned by perception. The fact that these two processes must run on the same platform means that we are sometimes confused about which one is running. We assume that what we feel as we imagine the future is what we’ll feel when we get there, but in fact, what we feel as we imagine the future is often a response to what’s happening in the present. The time-share arrangement between perception and imagination is one of the causes of presentism, but it is not the only one.”

This idea is the reason that I decided that it was not only a good idea but also necessary for me to leave my last job prior to accepting my next position - or even really exploring the possibilities to any great depth. While working in my previous position I couldn't see "how big the box really is" and I knew that. I didn't always have the words available to me to explain this concept.

Page 109
“Presentism defined: The tendency for current experience to influence one’s views of the past and the future.”

I wanted to include this definition because I believe this is an incredibly useful word and I couldn't seem to remember what it meant. Wirting it down helps!

Page 161
“The research I’ve described so far seems to suggest that human beings are hopelessly Panglossian; there are more ways to think about experience than there are experiences to think about, and human beings are unusually inventive when it comes to finding the best of all possible ways. And yet, if this is true, then why aren’t we all walking around with wide eyes and loopy grins, thanking God for the wonder of hemorrhoids and the miracle of in-laws? Because the mind may be gullible, but it ain’t no patsy. The world is this way, we wish the world were that way, and our experience of the world-how we see it, remember it, and imagine it-is a mixture of stark reality and comforting illusion. We can’t spare either. If we were to experience the world exactly as it is, we’d be too depressed to get out of bed in the morning, but if we were to experience the world exactly as we want it to be, we’d be too deluded to find our slippers. We may see the world through rose-colored glasses, but roes-colored glasses are neither opaque nor clear. They can’t be opaque because we need to see the world clearly enough to participate in it-to pilot helicopters, harvest corn, diaper babies, and all the other stuff that smart mammals need to do in order to survive and thrive. But they can’t be clear because we need their rosy tint to motivate us to design the helicopters (“I’m sure this thing will fly”), plant the corn (“This year will be a banner crop”), and tolerate the babies (“What a bundle of joy!”). We cannot do without reality and we cannot do without illusion. Each serves a purpose, each imposes a limit on the influence of the other, and our experience of the world is the artful compromise that these tough competitors negotiate.”

I love this concept that we have to live in a mix of illusion and reality. We each find out own place within this balance and it helps me to see how different people can have such different impressions of the same thing.

Page 163
“Most of us pot a lot of stock in what scientists tell us because we know that scientists reach their conclusions by gather and analyzing facts…Scientists are credible because they draw conclusions from observations, and ever since the empiricists trumped the dogmatists and because the kings of ancient Greek medicine, westerners have had a special reverence for conclusions that are based on things they can see. It isn’t surprising, then, that we consider our own views credible when they are based on observable facts but not when they are based on wishes, wants and fancies. We might like to believe that everyone loves us, that we will live forever, and that high-tech stocks are preparing to make a major comeback, and it would be awfully convenient if we could just push a little button at the base of our skulls and instantly believe as we wanted. But that’s not how believing works. Over the course of human evolution, the brain and the eye have developed a contractual relationship in which the brain has agreed to believe what the eye sees and not to believe what the eye denies. So if we are to believe something, then it must be supported by-or at least not blatantly contradicted by-the facts.

“If views are acceptable only when they are credible, and if they are credible only when they are based on facts, then how do we achieve positive views of ourselves and our experience? How do we manage to think of ourselves as great drivers, talented lovers, and brilliant chefs when the facts of our lives include a pathetic parade of dented cars, disappointed partners, and deflated soufflés? The answer is simple: We cook the facts. There are many different techniques for collecting, interpreting and analyzing facts, and different techniques often lead to different conclusions, which is why scientists disagree about the dangers of global warming, the benefits of supply-side economics, and the wisdom of low carbohydrate diets. Good scientists deal with this complication by choosing the techniques they consider most appropriate and then accepting the conclusions that these techniques produce, regardless of what those conclusions might be. But bad scientists take advantage of this complication by choosing techniques that are especially likely to produce the conclusions they favor, thus allowing them to reach favored conclusions by way of supportive facts. Decades of research suggests that when it comes to collecting and analyzing facts about ourselves and our experiences, most of us have the equivalent of an advanced degree in Really Bad Science.”

We seem to be able to maintain beliefs even when the facts don't support our conclusion. They just don't blatantly disagree! Come to think of it I'm selecting the sections of this book that support my prefered conclusion and emphasizing them. It's a cruel joke and I admit that I have this universal degree in Really Bad Science.

Page 214-222
“Super-replicators

“The philosopher Bertrand Russell once claimed that believing is “the most mental thing we do.” Perhaps, but it is also the most social thing we do. Just as we pass along our genes in an effort to create people whose faces look like ours, so too do we pass along our beliefs in an effort to create people whose minds think like our. Almost any time we tell anyone anything, we are attempting to change the way their brains operate-attempting to change the way they see the world so that their view of it more closely resembles our own. Just about every assertion-from the sublime (“God has a plan for you”) to the mundane (“Turn left a the light, go two miles, and you’ll see the Dunkin’ Donuts on your right”)-is meant to bring the listener’s beliefs about the world into harmony with the speaker’s. Sometimes these attempts succeed and sometimes they fail. So what determines whether a belief will be successfully transmitted from one mind to another?

“The principles that explain why some genes are transmitted more successfully than others also explain why some beliefs are transmitted more successfully than others. Evolutionary biology teaches us that any gene that promotes its own “means of transmission” will be represented in increasing proportions in the population over time…Genes tend to be transmitted when they make us do the things that transmit genes. What’s more, even bad genes-those that make us prone to cancer or heart disease-can become super-replicators if they compensate for these costs by promoting their own means of transmission…

“The same logic can explain the transmission of beliefs. If a particular belief has some property that facilitates its own transmission, then that belief tends to be held by an increasing number of minds. As it turns out, there are several such properties that increase a belief’s transmissional success, the most obvious of which is accuracy. When someone tells us where to find a parking space downtown or how to bake a cake at high altitude, we adopt that belief and pass it along because it helps us and our friends do the things we want to do, such as parking and baking. As one philosopher noted, “The faculty of communication would not gain ground in evolution unless it was by and large the faculty of transmitting true beliefs.” Accurate beliefs give us power, which makes it easy to understand why they are so readily transmitted from one mind to another.

“It is a bit more difficult to understand why inaccurate beliefs are so readily transmitted from one mind to another-but they are. False beliefs, like bad genes, can and do become super-replicators…

“False beliefs that happen to promote stable societies tend to propagate because people who hold these beliefs tend to live in stable societies, which provide the means by which false beliefs propagate.

“Some of our cultural wisdom about happiness looks suspiciously like a super-replicating false belief. Consider money. If you’ve ever tried to sell anything, then you probably tried to sell it for as much as you possibly could, and other people probably tried to buy it for as little as they possibly could. All the parties involved in the transaction assumed that they would be better off if they ended up with more money rather than less, and this assumption is the bedrock of our economic behavior. Yet, it has far fewer scientific facts to substantiate it than you might expect. Economists and psychologists have spent decades studying the relation between wealth and happiness, and they have generally concluded that wealth increases human happiness when it lifts people out of abject poverty and into the middle class but that it does little to increase happiness thereafter…Economists explain that wealth has “declining marginal utility,” which is a fancy way of saying that it hurts to be hungry, cold, sick, tired, and scared, but once you’ve bought your way out of these burdens, the rest of your money is an increasingly useless pile of paper.

“So once we’ve earned as much money as we can actually enjoy, we quit working and enjoy in, right? Wrong. People in wealthy countries generally work long and hard to earn more money than they can ever derive pleasure from. This fact puzzles us less than it should…Once we’ve eaten our fill of pancakes, more pancakes are not rewarding, hence we stop trying to procure and consume them. But not so, it seems, with money. As Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, wrote in 1776: “The desire for food is limited in every man by the narrow capacity of the human stomach; but the desire of the conveniences and ornaments of building, dress, equipage, and household furniture, seems to have no limit or certain boundary.”

“If food and money both stop pleasing us once we’ve had enough of them, then why do we continue to stuff our pockets when we would not continue to stuff our faces? Adam Smith had an answer. He began by acknowledging what most of us suspect anyway, which is that the production of wealth is not necessarily a source of personal happiness.

• “In what constitutes the real happiness of human life, [the poor] are in no respect inferior to those who would seem so much above them. In ease of body and peace of mind, all the different ranks of life are nearly upon a level, and the beggar, who suns himself by the side of the highway, possesses that security which kings are fighting for.”

That sounds lovely, but if it’s true, then we’re all in big trouble. If rich kings are no happier than poor beggars, then why should poor beggars stop sunning themselves by the roadside and work to become rich kings? If no one wants to be rich, then we have a significant economic problem, because flourishing economies require that people continually procure and consume one another’s good and services. Market economies require that we all have an insatiable hunger for stuff, and if everyone were content with the stuff they had, then the economy would grind to a halt. But if this is a significant economic problem, it is not a significant personal problem. The chair of the Federal Reserve may wake up every morning with a desire to do what the economy wants, but most of us get up with a desire to do what we want, which is to say that the fundamental needs of a vibrant economy and the fundamental needs of a happy individual are not necessarily the same. So what motivates people to work hard every day to do things that will satisfy the economy’s needs but not their own? Like so many thinkers, Smith believed that people want just one thing-happiness-hence economies can blossom and grow only if people are deluded into believing that the production of wealth will make them happy. If and only if people hold this false belief will they do enough producing, procuring, and consuming to sustain their economies…

“In short, the production of wealth does not necessarily make individuals happy, but it does serve the needs of an economy, which serves the needs of a stable society, which serves as a network for the propagation of delusional beliefs about happiness and wealth. Economies thrive when individuals strive, but because individuals will only strive for their own happiness, it is essential that they mistakenly believe that producing and consuming are routes to personal well-being…This particular false belief is a super-replicator because holding it causes us to engage in the very activities that perpetuate it.

“The belief-transmission game explains why we believe some things about happiness that simply aren’t true. The joy of money is one example. The joy of children is another that for most of us hits a bit closer to home. Every human culture tells its members that having children will make them happy. When people think about their offspring-either imagining future offspring or thinking about their current ones-they tend to conjure up images of cooing babies smiling from their bassinets, adorable toddlers running higgledy-piggledy across the lawn, handsome boys and gorgeous girls playing trumpets and tubas in the school marching band, successful college students going on to have beautiful weddings, satisfying careers, and flawless grandchildren whose affections can be purchased with candy. Prospective parents know that diapers will need changing, that homework will need doing, and that orthodontists will go to Aruba on their life savings, but by and large, they think quite happily about parenthood, which is why most of them eventually leap into it. When parents look back on parenthood, they remember feeling what those who are looking forward to it expect to feel. Few of us are immune to these cheery contemplations. I have a twenty-nine year-old son, and I’m absolutely convinced that he is and always has been one of the greatest sources of joy in my life, having only recently been eclipsed by my two-year-ld granddaughter, who is equally adorable but who has not yet asked me to walk behind her and pretend we’re unrelated. When people are asked to identify their sources of joy, they do just what I do: They point to their kids.

“Yet if we measure the actual satisfaction of people who have children, a very different story emerges. As figure 23 shows, couples generally start out quite happy in their marriages and then become progressively less satisfied over the course of their lies together, getting close to their original levels of satisfaction only when their children leave home. Despite what we read in the popular press the only know symptom of “empty nest syndrome” is increased smiling. Interestingly, this pattern of satisfaction over the life cycle describes women (who are usually the primary caretakers of children) better than men. Careful studies of how women feel as they go about their daily activities show that they are less happy when taking care of their children than when eating, exercising, shopping, napping, or watching television. Indeed, looking after the kids appears to be only slightly more pleasant than doing housework.

“None of this should surprise us. Every parent knows that children are a lot of work-a lot of really hard work-and although parenting has many rewarding moments, the vast majority of its moments involve dull and selfless service to people who will take decades to become even begrudgingly grateful for what we are doing. If parenting is such difficult business, then why do we have such a rosy view of it? One reason is that we have been talking on the phone all day with society’s stockholders-our moms and uncles and personal trainers-who have been transmitting to us an idea that they believe to be true but whose accuracy is not the cause of its successful transmission. “Children bring happiness” is a super-replicator. The belief-transmission network of which we are a part cannot operate without a continuously replenished supply of people to do the transmitting, thus the belief that children are a source of happiness becomes a part of our cultural wisdom simply because the opposite belief unravels the fabric of any society that holds it. Indeed, people who believed that children bring misery and despair-and who thus stopped having them-would put the belief-transmission network out of business in around fifty years, hence terminating the belief that terminated them. The Shakers were a utopian farming community that arose in the 1800s and at one time number about six thousand. They approved of children, but the did not approve of the natural act that creates them. Over the years, their strict belief in the importance of celibacy caused the network to contract, and today they are just a few elderly Shakers left, transmitting their doomsday belief to no one but themselves.

“The belief-transmission game is rigged so that we must believe that children and money bring happiness, regardless of whether such beliefs are true. This doesn’t mean that we should all now quit our jobs and abandon our families. Rather, it means that while we believe we are raising children and earning paychecks to increase our share of happiness, we are actually doing these things for reasons beyond our ken. We are nodes in a social network that arises and falls by a logic of its own, which is why we continue to toil, continue to mate, and continue to be surprised when we do not experience all the joy we so gullibly anticipated.”

This helps me understand why I'm no longer driven by $. I got to the point in my last position where increases in pay didn't make much difference. Sure, the provided more disposable income which was fun, but it didn't generate more happiness. Now that I'm unemployed the balance has shifted again and I would expect that the first paycheck from my next job will produce a very different emotional response.

Regarding children and how they bring us happiness. I'm one of the few people that don't buy into the notion that children bring happiness. Sometimes I feel like a humbug for this feeling but reading this section of the book helps me to see how I came to this belief. I don't know what I'm going to do with this as I'm not sure I accept the idea of sharing the fate of the Shakers. But this helps me to see why I often feel at odds with the rest of society when it comes to my feelings about children.

Senator Stevens and Net Neutrality

Senator Stevens from Alaska has unleashed a flury of creativity on the internet - opps, I mean seires of tubes. Here are a few of my favorites:

• Wired Blog - Senator Stevens Internet Forensics
• DJ Ted Stevens Techno Remix: "A Series of Tubes"
• john mccain on ted stevens on the daily show
• John Stewart's take
• John Hodgman - Net Neutrality Act
• Net Neutrality and Internet Freedom Report

Have fun!

This Project is Spot On The Type of Thing I Want To Do

This article in MIT Technology Review describes just the type of project I want to get involved with. I'm specifically interested in how they hope "to use the data to build a computer program and database with, among other things, average flat-surface solar radiation readings for neighborhoods across the United States (as measured by the weather service at the nearest airport). Punch in the performance characteristics of the roofing product you want to use, plus your location, roof orientation and slope, and other data, and -- bingo -- you'll know what kind of wattage you can expect from your roof."

This is a great example of software applications and systems facilitating the development, competitiveness and adoption of clean and renewable energy sources and energy conservation opportunities. Which if you weren't already aware is my newly defined mission!

Lake Harriet 1 Mile Swim

Now I'm 2 for 2 this year. I competed in my second race of the season this morning. This time it was a 1 mile open water swim at Lake Harriet in Minneapolis. This race is a bit different as it attracts some very good swimmers. I'm a pretty good swimmer when compared to other triathletes but when I go up against real swimmers I tend to fall into the middle of the pack. That happened again today (I think I got about 20 place out of about 35) but as luck would have it I ended up winning my age group! Here are a couple of photos of my trophy ;-

I'll have to put this up next to my crushed pingpong ball trophy from a few years ago.

Fear or Love

This post by Pam Slim about choosing fear or love is a great follow on to the presentation at PUSH about the philosophy slam. In the philosophy slam the question was "which is more powerful, hope or fear?"

Pam's reasoning is similar to most of the audience at PUSH in that they leaned toward hope. I'm still surprised that the kids seemed to be 50-50 split between hope and fear.

Domain Names

I'm trying to figure out what domain name to use for a web site/blog that will be dedicated to exploring the relationship between clean/renewable energy and software/IT. This is the niche I'm interested in and based on my research no one is already doing this.

So far I've come up with the following ideas. These listed below are ones that are available.

CLEANENERGYSOFTWARE.COM
CLEANENERGYIT.COM
RENEWABLEENERGYSOFTWARE.COM
SOFTWAREANDENERGY.COM
RENEWABLEENERGYIT.COM

You can see the trend in my thinking. I generally don't like the "IT" in the domain as it seems like the word 'it'. At this point the first one is my favorite as it's actually readable and I believe it's memorable. I'm looking for radical ideas. Anything way out there to get the brainstorming going. What domain would make you think of this? Please leave any ideas in a comment so that everyone can see.

Thanks!

Update - I really like Don's suggestion of renew-it.com. Problem is that this one is not available. renewable-it.com is available and I think is a pretty good alternative. cleanenergy-it.com is also available.

There is a theme building

"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things will happen: There will be something solid to stand on ,or you will be taught how to fly. "
Barbara J. Winter--

So far I haven't found either the solid ground or the wings, but I still have faith that one or both will be there to support me.

Consider this...

My Mom sent this quote to me almost two years ago. I've been hanging onto the email since then trying to figure out how to apply this to my life. The decision to launch into a new phase of my career and my attendence at PUSH the last couple of days has reinforced this message as well as given me a chance to live it. I think you'll like this.

"Consider this,

"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate, but rather that we are powerful beyond measure. It is the attention to our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us. We ask ourselves: "Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Who am I to stand out? Is it safe to let my gifts show? Will others attack me out of jealousy?"

"Actually, who are you not to be? You are a creation of the divine force like all other creatures.

"Your playing small doesn't serve the world. There's nothing enlightened about shrinking to reassure other people with your lack of expression in order to make them feel secure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of the creation that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we're liberated from our own fear, our presence liberates others. Our positive energy releases manifestation in others.

"Therefore, seek not to conceal your own light, but let it shine affirmatively so that its beam may lead others to sharing their own brilliance and talents."

Nelson Mandela

Male Life Course

About two years ago I decided to do a self-guided version of a Men's Studies course. I did a fair amount of reading about men's lives with an emphasis on work, marriage and fatherhood. This wasn't an exhaustive review but included the things I could find (there's not a whole lot out there) and had time for. Here is a sampling of my reading list:

1. Committed : Men Tell Stories of Love, Commitment, and Marriage by Chris Knutsen, David Kuhn
2. The Package Deal: Marriage, Work, and Fatherhood in Men's Lives by Nicholas W. Townsend
3. Why Men Marry: Insights from Men About What Makes Them Ready for Marriage by A. T. Langford
4. Chicken Soup for the Father's Soul, 101 Stories to Open the Hearts and Rekindle the Spirits of Fathers by Jack Canfield, Mark Victor Hansen, Jeff Aubery, Mark Donnelly, Chrissy Donnelly

This might be controversial but one of the conclusions I came to is that the basic ordering of life events in the American culturally approved life course for a man is

• to complete an education
  
• to get a job
  
• to move out of his parents' home and live independently
  
• to date a number of women
  
• to meet the woman he wants to marry
  
• to spend time as a couple
  
• to marry
  
• to buy a house
  
• to set up a home together
  
• and to have children

This is the model that young men are taught by American culture but it seems less and less common that men actually follow this path. Or maybe we're just hearing more about men that don't follow this path. In fact, I would suggest that many men actively rebel against this model, myself included. Each has his own reasons.

This is a topic that still interests me. If it strikes a chord for you let me know and we can dig a little deeper.

Bono on Faith

"To have faith in a time of religious fervor is a worry. And, you know, I do have faith, and I'm worried about even the subject because of the sort of fanaticism that is the next-door neighbor of faith. The trick in the next few years will be not to decry the religious instinct, but to accept that this is a hugely important part of people's lives. And at the same time to be very wary of people who believe that theirs is the only way. Unilateralism before God is dangerous."
-Bono

This is a quote that I first saw over a year ago. Bono's words resonate for me the day after PUSH in two ways. First, as it relates to Lawrence M. Krauss' lecture that touched on Intelligent Design and religious faith. Second, I believe that it takes faith from everyone that attends an event like PUSH to let go of our internal critic and be open to new ideas and possibilities.

PUSH - David Allen Part 2

David Allen

David provided a few closing words for the conference. I have to admit that I was getting a bit tired by this point in the day but here is what I caught during his closing remarks.

After the conference (he called them the "Best Questions")
a. Clearing – put things in the “in box”.
b. Clarifying - what does this mean to you? If no, trash. If maybe, then when. File with items to check on that time line. What am I committed to? Look into? Do?
c. Organize. Crisis is usually the thing that gets us going. Find ways to take action without crisis. Personal sustainability.
d. Reflecting. Look at it from all the levels that you need to examine.
e. Engaging. You have to get personally and emotionally involved.

See my notes from his opening remarks in this post.

PUSH - Two Day Summary

"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago."
Chinese Proverb

The best way I know to summarize the two day is with this proverb. We have been both harvesting the fruit of ideas that were planted many years ago as well as planting new seeds that will only show their fruit many years from now.

PUSH - Walker Off Center

If you'd like to see more about the PUSH conference check out the Walker Off Center blog. Paul, thanks for the link. It's been a fantastic two days!

PUSH - Ze Frank

Ze Frank

Justifying his existence in 30 minutes. Impossible to describe but fantastic. Check out his web site for a sample.

Get other people to do all the work and take credit for it. Some people call this web 2.0.

You’ve got to see the “Doodle Analysis” tool.

Crapucopia - “There is so much more crap to consume” or is it that “there is so much more crap being made.”

The audience is learning your language, and they want to start a conversation. Choices.
• Ignore them. If you do this they will talk behind your back or go around you.
• Resist. Top down Control. Conversations resist this. Broadcast model worked for this but the participation model this breaks down.

Conversations are flexible. The context is malleable. You have to allow people to express themselves otherwise you’ll end up ignoring them or resisting them.

Friendster did it wrong. MySpace did it right.

People will show you what is interesting. YouTube.

Haikus for a newly neutered dog.

The Long Tail. Wired Magazine article by Chris Anderson. What about the production side of this equation? What is the value in the tail in the production side? We’re just starting to tap this resource. Businesses are just starting to figure out how to leverage this side of things. Create architectures that encourage participation and conversation.

Technology is moving faster than people’s emotional and intellectual capacity is able to keep up. Ze calls this web 0.2. Most people don’t even know why they’re there. But people are starting to feel a home online. This is starting to tap into deep emotions. This is shifting from a technology revolution to a social revolution.

The creative process is changing rapidly. People are putting more beta’s out and not trying to get it perfect. Tools for production are changing. Platforms for production are changing just as fast.

We laugh at the old people that got it wrong. We laugh because they should have known better. We aren’t in any better position to understand how our technology is really going to be used and what it’s going to lead to. We’ll be laughing at ourselves.

New designers are explorers.
How do you learn courage and resourcefulness?
Don’t respect the tools,
Don’t break old rules, find new one s to follow.
Don’t read the manual. It takes too long. By the time you read it the manual might be gone. Just dive in and use it like it’s throwaway garbage.
Become a perpetual hobbyist. Understand many different frames of reference.
You are the value proposition. A social revolution, not a technological one.

You can actually make money doing this.

Rules of punctuation is a great follow up from my recent post about emoticons.