Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Gus Van Horn blog

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Gus Van Horn blog last won the day on February 7

Gus Van Horn blog had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Gus Van Horn blog

  • Rank

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Copyright

Recent Profile Visitors

10805 profile views
  1. Four Things I'm taking next week off from blogging. See you back here on the thirtieth. 1. Not only is the following a cool problem for someone to have... Back home, I have to unlock the door, climb like 20 steps -- it's plenty of time to connect to the wifi. Then I have to take off my headphones before my sweaty t-shirt, so it would be great to just switch the current song to the living room airplay system, so that there'd be no interruption. I couldn't do it, and don't understand why switching between bluetooth and wifi shouldn't just work.... it also made me smile as I remembered Weird Al's parodic "First World Problems," embedded below. 2. I never drink it, but the story of the surprisingly (to me) recent invention of Bailey's Irish Cream was a fun read: It was mid-November, dark, wet and cold. 1973. We collected the Baileys report from the market researcher alongside the Chiswick roundabout en route to Heathrow. We were cutting it fine for our big Dublin meeting. Tom drove and I leafed through the document in the car. It wasn't a comfortable read. "This isn't going to help our case," I said. "It's not all bad, but it isn't all good either." The bit about being a "girly drink" was in there and so was the comment likening it to Kaolin & Morphine. It was perfect ammunition for someone who wanted to kill the idea. The report contained nothing to reflect the earth-shattering idea we thought Baileys was now that we observed it in its full packaged glory. "Why don't we just put it away and not mention it?" I said. Tom immediately agreed and I stuck it in my briefcase and left it there. It stayed in my briefcase until 1984 when I unveiled it at the 10th anniversary party. It got a huge laugh. The "Kaolin & Morphine flavoured girly drink" had sold about four million cases (48 million bottles) that year.Those brothers mentioned on the label? A confabulation. 3. If you've ever wondered why Linux on smart phones hasn't exactly taken off, one writer makes a very good case that it's a solution looking for a problem to solve: In order for mobile Linux to really resonate with casual users, it needs to solve a problem. Right now, the biggest issue facing smart phones is planned obsolescence. This means when a device becomes too old and deemed no longer worth updating, smart phones then see their security and functionality updates stop.That noted, this Samsung owner hopes a new effort to bring Linux to that brand succeeds where others haven't. 4. Have you ever wondered why open offices are awful places to work, but Starbucks isn't? Wonder no more. [N]ew research shows that it may not be the sound itself that distracts us ... it may be who is making it. In fact, some level of office banter in the background might actually benefit our ability to do creative tasks, provided we don't get drawn into the conversation. Instead of total silence, the ideal work environment for creative work has a little bit of background noise. That's why you might focus really well in a noisy coffee shop, but barely be able to concentrate in a noisy office.A comment thread at Hacker News makes much of power dynamics and having to "look busy" -- which I think are good points. But the very day I read this, I stopped at a McDonald's after getting my car fixed. I'd worked at the shop on my computer and was thinking about eating lunch there and then working some more at the Golden Arches... Until some holy roller accosted me with the ridiculous assertion that the sunshine outside had something to do with God -- at which point I rolled my eyes, said, "Gotchya," and left to work elsewhere. Call it a First Amendment Problem: Easily solved. But the point remains that this fool has no bearing on my life beyond where he chose to be at the moment and my willingness to spend energy fending him off. Distraction is a Big Deal. -- CAV Link to Original
  2. Image via Wikimedia Commons.Over at Aeon is an article (that doesn't take one to read) about how trial by ordeal was actually used. This in no way legitimizes the practice, but it does answer a practical question faced by the mystics in charge: Essentially everyone believed in eternal damnation for the unrepentant, but that wasn't always an effective deterrent to actual crime. At the same time, a perceived inability on their part to render reliable verdicts would cast doubt on them as cognitive and moral authorities. The Church needed a way to achieve some level of certainty about innocence or guilt, but the priests knew on some level that they weren't going to get any help from their imaginary friend. What to do? Capitalize on ignorance and rig the result: ... Did you catch the trick? Because of your belief in iudicium Dei, the spectre of the ordeal leads you to choose one way if you're guilty -- confess -- and another way if you're innocent -- undergo the ordeal -- revealing the truth about your guilt or innocence to the court through the choice you make. By asking God to out you, the legal system incentivises you to out yourself...The piece goes on to elaborate on how the instruction manual for the priest who ran the "trial" should proceed: A "miraculous" result was thus practically assured. For example, in the early 13th century, 208 defendants in VĂ¡rad in Hungary underwent hot-iron ordeals. Amazingly, nearly two-thirds of defendants were unscathed by the "red-hot" irons they carried and hence exonerated. If the priests who administered these ordeals understood how to heat iron, as they surely did, that leaves only two explanations for the "miraculous" results: either God really did intervene to reveal the defendants" innocence, or the priests made sure that the iron they carried wasn't hot. [minor format edits]So the Church found a way to both preserve its credibility by delivering a fair verdict often enough for that purpose -- and yet to maintain complete control over the result of any given trial. Even if, as the author claimed, this yielded "improved criminal justice," it served its true purpose, of maintaining the power of the Church over society, far better. The superstitious rabble were kept from utter lawlessness and any uppity heretics were put on notice, too, even if they saw through the ruse. Clever. -- CAV Link to Original
  3. Eric Peters of The American Spectator asks, "Where's Ralph?" For those of you too young to remember, Peters helpfully notes that Ralph Nader, a self-appointed "consumer advocate" made his name as an automotive gadfly. A Nissan LEAF, parked in an area that may have power and someone friendly enough to lend an outlet and extension cord for a spell. (Image courtesy of Pixabay) For those of us who do remember him, it may come as a surprise, considering his silence regarding electric cars, that he is alive at all. In any event, Peters ticks off the numerous deficiencies of the cars, which energy advocate Alex Epstein more memorably and accurately describes as "coal cars." Many items on the list aren't really news. For example, things like "range anxiety" do pop up in the media from time to time. And the taxes that Peters notes come up even among proponents of electric cars, although they seem to regard taxes as a natural phenomenon of the same order of the weather: Not worth making a fuss over. Other things take more thought than many who skim through the news might give it, like the following: [T]he Electric Car Chorus leaves people with the impression that electric car batteries are immortal. Which is like leaving people with the impression that they will never have to replace the 12-volt starter battery in a conventional car -- or change tires or brake pads. But unlike tires or brakes -- or the 12V starter battery that IC-engined cars have -- an electric car's battery pack costs thousands to replace when the time comes. And the time will come. So people will buy a very expensive electric car -- thinking that at least they'll save some money on maintenance -- and then find out they'll be spending several thousand dollars to "maintain" (that is, to replace) the battery -- long before the car itself has worn out. Why no mention of this? [bold added]But the fact that these things aren't really news is not really the important point. Peters's point is that such things as the power having to come from somewhere or the eventuality of having to dump thousands on an old car shouldn't be news, and wouldn't be, if the likes of Ralph Nader really did have our interests at heart. On that score, I'd have to agree. -- CAV Link to Original
  4. A typical journalist, courtesy of Pixabay.An article at Inc. admonishes readers not to be fooled by three "trends" (i.e., examples of progress) that have been getting all kinds of coverage by journalists and pundits who are too busy pandering to fear of the unknown to notice that their big stories could easily be demolished by a helping of additional knowledge (historical or not) and a dash of integrative thinking. I'll highlight the third, because it shows that one needn't always necessarily have a knowledge of history to see that there is often no need to panic (or, conversely, become overly-excited) about the new and shiny. Here's the relevant excerpt on the "retail apocalypse": Many are calling this a retail apocalypse, but look a little closer and it becomes clear that there is more to the story. Amazon has made a big push into physical retail, capped off by its $13.7 billion purchase of Whole Foods. Others, ranging from Bonobos to Warby Parker, also opened physical stores. [links omitted, bold added]Indeed, the executive summary of the article, which is still worth a read in its entirety, might consist of three sentences: What is so special about the latest wave of automation that it's going to make us all idlers when every other previous wave has failed to do so? Please name me a business that can operate without some form of access to tangible assets. If Amazon has shown that brick-and-mortar retail is dead, why did it buy Whole Foods? (But I repeat myself.) I appreciate good journalism like this: It gives me something to think about, and learn from. And it gives me hope that there are journalists out there who don't buy the hype that, since panic sells, it's the only thing that can sell. To those journalists, I would say, although really only as encouragement: There is an audience out there for an objective presentation of relevant facts, integrated with other knowledge, and interpreted in a rational manner. We'd like more of the same. -- CAV Link to Original
  5. Carl Cannon of The Orange County Register asks an interesting question: "Is Harvey Weinstein a cultural pivot point?" He offers some pretty compelling arguments for why this might be the case, contrasting Weinstein's rapid fall with the fates of a couple of other public figures about twenty years ago: Yet, like Bob Packwood, Bill Clinton was "good" on Roe v. Wade, so what's a good feminist to do? In the end, they backed Clinton. This lesson wasn't lost on future offenders. Bill Cosby's camp has openly played the race card, just as Bill O'Reilly claimed to be the victim of a political "hit job" by liberals. Harvey Weinstein responded to the New York Times' expose with a statement beginning with his claim that he "came of age in the '60s and '70s, when the rules about behavior and workplaces" differed. "That was the culture then," he added. [minor edits]And later: If there's good news in this sordid tale, it's this: Once these allegations were made public, playing the partisan political card didn't create even a minor speed bump as Weinstein was being drummed out of polite society. Feminists openly scoffed at this gambit. Prominent Democrats didn't so much as acknowledge it.This could be very good or very bad, depending on why this is happening so quickly. It would be a very good thing if, indeed, this is a sign that, culturally, the kind of mistreatment of women the likes of Weinstein specialize in is no longer getting a pass. But consider that some of the outrage is coming from the left, which has been responsible lately for fostering outrages against men, on the premise that, as Cannon puts it so well, "merely being a man [might be] some sort of pre-existing condition." (Oh. And Caucasians. And the wealthy, but I don't really need to bring that up, do I?) Let's not forget that Weinstein is something of a strikeout: white, wealthy, and male. Perhaps there is a bit of both going on just as, not so long ago, racial bigotry became unacceptable while, at the same time, leftists pushed for the kind of legislation, regulation, and pandering that make such a thing as a "race card" even viable now -- and even after our country has twice elected a black man as President. An interesting thought experiment indeed is to consider where this story might have gone had it occurred on Hillary Clinton's watch, had she won the election. I suspect a one-word answer, starting with the word "no," and ending with the word, "where." Weinstein would have been too useful. I personally think it's both: In the broader culture, men at work are expected to behave like professionals towards women. But at the same time, many on the left doubtless see yet another opportunity to tear someone down, ostensibly in the name of a just cause. Yes, our popular culture has reached a pivot point, but we're saddled with the same old, power-hungry left. -- CAV Link to Original
  6. Four Things I've had to tinker a little with software this week, so here's a short collection of possibly useful tidbits. 1. In the process of reading a web article with footnotes collected at the end, I got tired of having to follow hyperlinks just to see which was worth reading. "Wouldn't it be nice if there were a web browser with a split view?" I thought, then ran a search. As it turns out, a bookmarklet mentioned at Lifehacker can make any decent browser do this. This is also useful for comparing two web pages side by side. 2. After using Gina Trapani's nice Todo.txt script/app combination for years, I suddenly found myself at the store without a grocery list a couple of weeks ago. As a result of Dropbox changing its API, the phone app suddenly become useless -- a problem Trapani reports will require a nontrivial fix. In the meantime, she offers a refund and suggests a couple of alternative phone apps. I had already found Simpletask, which she recommends for Android users, by the time I found her blog post. This app, which follows the same conventions as the script, is not just an able understudy, but superior in some respects, such as being able to look at items for two projects at a time. I still like Trapani's app, and will use it for certain things, should it get fixed. 3. Another app I used daily that was affected by the Dropbox API change was the text/markup editor, Draft. Fortunately, I had advanced notice of the change and had time to try several alternatives. This was a good thing, because Jotterpad, being the prettiest, seems to get the loudest press. But having to pay for basic functionality I could get elsewhere for free, and already disliking aspects of its interface, I found another app, the QuickEdit text editor, which turned out to be much better for my purposes and superior in most ways to what I had, most notably, being able to access anything in Dropbox, and handling sync better. 4. I'll end with a Bash script pomodoro timer I wrote for my desktop and laptop. Fellow Linux/Unix/Cygwin users will appreciate that it provides visual and audio notifications that your "pomodoro" is over. Time period is adjustable, but defaults to 25 minutes, and, for anyone who has to change settings frequently for such things as sleeping babies in the next room, one can test settings before starting by using a minus sign in front of the time argument. Code is in the P.S. -- CAV P.S. Oops! You'll have to email me for my pomodoro script. I thought it would be straightforward to dump it here with a <pre> tag, but font size was huge and, ironically, I have no time to figure out a decent way to display it within the blog post. If there's lots of interest, I may wait a few days to accumulate email addresses before sending it out (or notifying you that I figured out how to post it in an acceptable way), so as to save time.Link to Original
  7. The huge room and extra chairs are optional. Image courtesy of Unsplash. While reading Cal Newport's Deep Work, I ran into an extreme example of a work strategy I have blogged at least a couple of times. (Sort of. More on that shortly.) In a discussion of a strategy he calls the grand gesture, Newport tells of an inventor who basically scheduled himself for an entire conference -- alone: Not every grand gesture need be so permanent. After the pathologically competitive Bell Labs physicist William Shockley was scooped in the invention of the transistor -- as I detail in the next strategy, two members of his team made the breakthrough at a time when Shockley was away working on another project -- he locked himself in a hotel room in Chicago, where he had traveled ostensibly to attend a conference. He didn't emerge from the room until he had ironed out the details for a better design that had been rattling around in his mind. When he finally did leave the room, he airmailed his notes back to Murray Hill, New Jersey, so that a colleague could paste them into his lab notebook and sign them to timestamp the innovation. The junction form of the transistor that Shockley worked out in this burst of depth ended up earning him a share of the Nobel Prize subsequently awarded for the invention. (loc. 1339)The parallel with hiding out in a meeting made me smile, but the result really made an impression on me. Aside from the length of time, anyone who checks my earlier blogs might notice another difference between what Shockley did and what neither of those posts really indicate is an option. Shockley worked with single-minded purpose on one thing. Indeed, one of my posts mentions the idea as a way of catching up on whatever tasks one is behind in, and the other isn't explicitly about what kind of work one could be doing in these uninterrupted blocks. Indeed, it leans the wrong way, if anything. That said, the fact that one sometimes might require blocks of time to catch up even on mindless tasks underscores Newport's thesis, which is that concentration is an increasingly valuable and rare commodity these days. Newport's book has been very stimulating so far -- I am almost half-way through it now -- and is motivating me to reevaluate the way I work. It also, fortunately, offers advice on how to emulate such success along with the reasoning behind it. -- CAV P.S. Regarding the nature of what Newport calls a "grand gesture," it pertains to a high level of commitment one one's part, and is more directed inward than outward. Another example of a grand gesture from the book is J.K. Rowling's use of an expensive hotel for writing the last of the Harry Potter books. The setting provided both inspiration and freedom from distraction, and the expense probably made it hard not to do what she came to do. Link to Original
  8. James Altucher ticks off ten reasons to regard procrastination as a "superpower." In the build up to his list, the entrepreneur makes the following claim, which I am not sure I agree with, even when I take "instinct" to be a colloquialism for "intuition": Image courtesy of Unsplash.Procrastination is the body and mind's way of telling you that you need to focus on another task. It's like this secret guide that points the direction to what is really important in life. You have to trust that instinct and [be] good at listening to it.This can true for you anywhere from never to most of the time, but that doesn't affect the value of the list in terms of getting "unstuck." So, without further ado, I'll present the list: Plan B Give Up Start in the Middle End in the Middle Experiment Do Bad Stuff Smaller Is Better Surprise Myself Read Play As you might have guessed, each bullet above comes with an explanation, for which I'll provide a sample below, of the one for "Do Bad Stuff": I have to make a list of ideas for a project I'm working on. I'm putting a lot of pressure on myself to come up with good ideas. So I was procrastinating. IF you can't come up with good ideas, come up with bad ideas. Bad job, good job, it doesn't matter. The key is: DO.Some of these explanations are better than others -- e.g., "Surprise Myself?" How? -- but the list overall might be a good one to consult the next time you're stuck. And, for that purpose, the article include an infographic. -- CAV Link to Original
  9. Writing at The Cut, Heather Havrilesky attempts to walk a mile in sleazeball Harvey Weinstein's mental moccasins: When you really slow down the tape on Weinstein -- or Trump, or Cosby, or Stephen Paddock, or Richard Spencer, and make no mistake, you have to work very hard not to draw lines between these men by now -- what you see more than anything else is a profound lack of connection to other human beings. It's not just that women or strangers or people of color or children of immigrants or Muslims don't rate in their world. It's that other human beings in general are utterly irrelevant. You are useful and part of the club or you're cast out like trash. The second you're not useful, you are waste. Or you were always waste. Your feelings about the matter couldn't be less relevant. Whether or not their behavior will ruin you or literally end your life and the lives of countless others is utterly insignificant to these people. [bold added]Let's set aside for a moment whether Havrilesky is fair to place all four on the same level of hell and consider the bolded statement above: This is doubly true of anyone who, knowing that open secret about Weinstein and being in a position to do something about it, went ahead and kept things quiet for him, took his donations, sought him out, or some combination of the preceding. And it makes me wonder about any leftist who isn't recoiling in abject horror at what it says about their political establishment that Weinstein, apparently, was (still is?) such a big shot. (This is not the same thing as worrying about lost votes in the short term.) I am no fan of Donald Trump -- and maybe one can draw parallels between his personality and Weinstein's -- but it strikes me as odd that he merits a mention here, and a few big name Democratic politicians apparently don't. -- CAV Link to Original
  10. Image courtesy of Wikimedia.Business Insider presents a pro-regulatory pictorial mis-titled, "Vintage Photos Taken by the EPA Reveal What America Looked Like Before Pollution Was Regulated." This is a good title like arriving at 800 Main Street is getting home -- when the rest of the address is for the wrong city and the wrong state. Yes. These photos do seem to make a case for government regulation of various kinds of dumping, but only when we ignore the cause of such abuses. I noted briefly some time ago: The EPA is a huge, entrenched bureaucracy that we won't get rid of overnight, or without persuading enough people that it is a misuse of government. The EPA runs on loot, violates property rights, and exercises illegitimate authority over private individuals for starters. But did you know that nuisance law had effectively protected property rights such as water quality until it was supplanted by environmental regulations? Or that the EPA can fine companies for pollution violations without proving harm to individuals? Or that it is ridiculously easy to hide rent-seeking within regulations that the EPA knows probably do more harm than good. Or that the EPA adds hundreds of billions to our nation's $2 trillion annual regulatory burden? The EPA has a rap sheet a mile long, and all conservatives can do is complain that it isn't efficient enough? Ironically some environmentalists, such as those at the Property and Environment Research Center, seem to care more about property rights than most conservatives. [bold added]With the above in mind, let me propose a better title for this pictorial: "What America Looks Like Without Enforcement of Property Rights." And let's not forget how much worse things routinely get in countries where the central planners run everything. I suspect that whatever success the EPA can claim can be attributed to (1) how well it mimicked (intentionally or not) what a private watchdog group could achieve in a free society that enforced property rights, (2) how well the new regulations (intentionally or not) patched over the relaxed protections that caused the problems in the first place, and (3) coincidence. We do have pictures of what even more government control produces, and not just from the former Soviet Union. What we don't have is what America might have looked like during the era of these photographs had property rights not been massively violated in the first place. It is patently absurd to crow about how great central planning has been at solving ... problems largely caused by central planning. -- CAV P.S. The above is not to say things would have uniformly been better: Some environmental hazards do require experience or scientific study to become evident. But once they become evident, legitimate law can address them. Link to Original
  11. Four Things 1. Why I am leery of the Internet of Things, part 876: Internet-enabled devices are so common, and so vulnerable, that hackers recently broke into a casino through its fish tank. The tank had internet-connected sensors measuring its temperature and cleanliness. The hackers got into the fish tank's sensors and then to the computer used to control them, and from there to other parts of the casino's network. The intruders were able to copy 10 gigabytes of data to somewhere in Finland. [bold added]That's right up there with using thermostats to extort ransom payments and the infamous spamming refrigerator. 2. While researching fracture fixation methods for a client, I accidentally clicked an image, yielding an amusing computer-generated juxtaposition, circled below, despite the fact that it immediately caught my eye: That's about the reaction such a sight would elicit from me. Snopes has it that the zipper was digitally added, not that the surgical alteration isn't disturbing enough without the zipper. 3. Quote of the Week: I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.-- Thomas Sowell 4. Credit card skimmers are showing up on gas pumps in North America. Fortunately, they are easy to detect: These skimmers are cheap and are becoming more common and more of a nuisance across North America. The skimmer broadcasts over bluetooth as HC-05 with a password of 1234. If you happen to be at a gas pump and happen to scan for bluetooth devices and happen to see an HC-05 listed as an available connection then you probably don't want to use that pump. The bluetooth module used on these skimmers is extremely common and used on all sorts of legitimate products end educational kits. If you detect one in the field you can confirm that it is a skimmer (and not some other device) by sending the character 'P' to the module over a terminal. If you get a 'M' in response then you have likely found a skimmer and you should contact your local authorities. [minor edits] The man who figured this out supplies the gory details at the above link and, better yet, has built a phone app that can do the detection for you. He also provides a link for that. -- CAV Link to Original
  12. Writing at the Huffington Post, screenwriter Ken Miyamoto does a pretty good job of explainingwhat it is like to be a stay-at-home dad, something I did almost full time in Boston when our daughter arrived, and part-time with both kids while we were in St. Louis. In terms of how one fits in with society, Miyamoto is spot-on: Image courtesy of Unsplash.Many honestly do treat you like a lesser man. Women can often do the same. Try being a dad with kids at the playground during the day. You will often feel ostracized. Like you don't belong. Like you are invading some sorority meeting. Now, this isn't always the case. And yes, we live in a different time where this is happening so much more often. Virtual offices are increasing each year. But it's still taboo to most, whether or not people will admit to that.Indeed, I regard much of the rest as spot-on. My main differences are that (1) as an egoist, I wouldn't describe full-time parenthood as a sacrifice, even colloquially; and (2) I'm not sure guilt is the right term for the emotion he feels towards the end. That said, I will freely admit that one can certainly drop context from time to time: There were days when being home with the kids is awful, and can cause one to forget context for a moment and wish he had made other choices in the past. (Bivouacked in the den at 11:00 p.m. with a toddler and a vomiting baby, while waiting for my wife to come home from a late flight comes to mind.) And, I am sure that for anyone not used to going against the grain, the omnipresent pressure to conform to a more traditional role doesn't help matters. But being at home with kids is more a blessing than a curse. They're growing the whole time, and you will grow with them. It is wonderful to see the first, and transformative to experience the second. -- CAV P.S. Regarding the title, Critters is my affectionate substitute for kidsor children, when I am addressing both of them. I once tried varmints on for size, but my daughter immediately objected, and specifically asked me to use critters. The question of which is "Critter Number One" and "Critter Number Two" remains open in her mind.Link to Original
  13. Illustration of USPS and Equifax, feeders at the government trough, via Wikimedia.It turns out that when I belittled the new "Informed Delivery" option being tested by the U.S. Postal Service earlier this year, I didn't go anywhere near far enough. I noted that it got the failing government-created monopoly into the spam business. Annoying, yes. But at least you had to sign up for that, and could simply opt out, or so I thought. That turns out not quite to be the case, and annoyance may be the least of your concerns. Security expert Brian Krebs discusses the vast security hole represented by the new service option, which is being rolled out nationwide by the U.S. Postal service. Calling the service a "stalker's dream," Krebs notes that third parties can easily sign up to learn when mail is on the way, including any thieves who might want to know when anything worth stealing is set to arrive. This they can do simply by taking advantage of the flimsy security measures in place for signing up: Once signed up, a resident can view scanned images of the front of each piece of incoming mail in advance of its arrival. Unfortunately, because of the weak KBA [knowledge-based authentication --ed] questions (provided by recently-breached big-three credit bureau Equifax, no less) stalkers, jilted ex-partners, and private investigators also can see who you're communicating with via the Postal mail. Perhaps this wouldn't be such a big deal if the USPS notified residents by snail mail when someone signs up for the service at their address, but it doesn't. Peter Swire, a privacy and security expert at Georgia Tech and a senior counsel at the law firm of Alston & Bird, said strong authentication relies on information collected from multiple channels -- such as something you know (a password) and something you have (a mobile phone). In this case, however, the USPS has opted not to leverage a channel that it uniquely controls, namely the U.S. Mail system. [bold and link in original]Krebs notes two ways to prevent someone from signing up as you for this service: (1) creating an account before this happens, or (2) getting a credit freeze. Translation: (1) sign up for spam or (2) pay the clowns at the credit bureaus for the freeze that they may have already made necessary for you anyway. Good thing the government ensures mail delivery for everyone and keeps such a close eye on the financial sector. Not. More could be said about this, but suffice it to say for now that I agree with "Manhattan Contrarian" Francis Menton that even more regulation is absolutely not the answer to this mess. -- CAV Link to Original
  14. Just over a month ago, I commented on a thought-provoking column, "We Need To Start Befriending Neo Nazis," by Bethany Mandel. Today, I pass word of a captivating piece by Daryl Davis, whom Mandel mentions. Davis, you may recall, is a black musician who has, over the years, befriended numerous Klansmen, ultimately causing a fair number to renounce their memberships. Here's a passage, about his first meeting, in a hotel room, with the grand dragon of the Maryland Klan: Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.We were both apprehensive of the other, and the interview started haltingly. We discussed what he had hoped to achieve by joining the Klan; what his thoughts were on blacks, Asians, Jews and Hispanics; and whether he thought it would ever be possible for different races to get along. A little while later, we heard an inexplicable crackling noise and we both tensed. The dragon and I stared each other in the eye, silently asking, "What did you just do?" The nighthawk reached for his gun. Nobody spoke. I barely breathed. Seated atop the dresser, my secretary realized what had happened: The ice in the bucket had started to melt, causing the soda cans to shift. It happened again, and we all began laughing. From there, the interview went on without a hitch.The piece and Davis's related work are potentially quite instructive, along the same lines as Marshall Rosenberg's communication methods. Davis was astute enough to grasp a fact that chance had presented to him: Finding a positive commonality with someone else can be a first step towards helping that person become motivated to change his ways for the better. This is an invaluable lesson for anyone concerned with positive cultural change or, for that matter, improving his own immediate life, as Davis's many friendships also show. -- CAVLink to Original
  15. Commenting on an amusing LinkedIn post by Laura Bergells, who contrasts Impostor Syndrome with the Dunning-Kruger Effect, business writer Suzanne Lucas offers some pointers on how to spot someone suffering from what Bergells calls "Expert Syndrome": Expert Syndrome in the wild. Image courtesy of Unsplash. They have an answer for everything. A real expert knows her limits and will say so. Someone with Expert Syndrome will never admit that it is outside her realm of knowledge--often because she simply doesn't know what she doesn't know. Research=Googling. Anyone whose expertise comes from doing "research" on the internet isn't a real expert. Real experts have experience in their field and read or do real primary research. They don't ever need to check. If you ask an expert a complicated question, she might reply, "I think it's X, but let me double check." If you ask someone with expert syndrome a complicated question, she'll say "It's X." If you present information to the contrary, she will reject it. They (almost) always claim total consensus. It is a rare thing when there is only one way to do something. Someone who insists it is black and white is likely someone with Expert Syndrome. [bold and links in original, minor edits] I once speculated that, as Bergells and Lucas might agree, those with Impostor Syndrome might have better habits of integrating knowledge than those with Expert Syndrome. But I didn't address self-defense measures, and I don't have a good answer for the kind of question Bergells jokingly raises: How can one mitigate the ease with which so many with False Expert Syndrome seem to succeed in the work place? An insistence on justice seems to be the base of a strategy. (Don't, for example, remain long in a work place after it becomes apparent that such puffery is rewarded. Learn how and when to toot one's own horn.) Perhaps part of an answer lies in realizing that the universality of the spoils of braggadocio are only apparent: Clearly, real experts frequently do succeed, as evidenced by our daily bombardment with marvels of technological progress. Perhaps that problem, as with inappropriately selling oneself short, lies with an inadequate use of all the information at one's disposal. Perhaps Expert Syndrome is a real problem, but not as big an obstacle as its sufferers might hope it is for the rest of us. -- CAV Link to Original