Anes Weblog

Lately I have been lucky enough to make acquaintances with technology consultants originally born on a wide range of foreign countries.  It has become increasingly difficult to find hard working, qualified consultants born in North America anyways - the variety of nationalities should be no surprise to anyone by now.

What is particularly interesting about a recent engagement is having the opportunity of sitting at the same table, for many weeks, with two consultants of very different origins: One from Palestine, and another that although born in the old Soviet Union, has significant family and religious ties with people on Israel.  Both of them very smart, professional, hard working — people I would love to work with at any time.  They get along wonderfully.  Needless to say, both of different religions, and although they do not practice in a die-hard way (pun not intended) they do feel very related to their own religions.  If it wasn’t because of CNN I would have never thought people with those ethnic origins could fight each other.   

At dinner tables and breaks we treat each other origins with curiosity, respect … and sometimes even some fun - recognizing with good humor the reality of the interesting combination.  Religion is treated in “historical” terms only — without discussions about beliefs.  Truly mature.  And these two friends are only an example - albeit a very interesting one.  The same happens with most of the people with whom I associate myself.

Yet, as far as tolerance goes it doesn’t translate into all of the three “forbidden topics”.  Most of the dear friends I make along my travels are educated enough to truly and sincerely respect differences in religious belifs.  Even those of previously (or event currently) opposing countries are mature enough to try to forgive emotional (or even physical) scars that may have been left by previous conflicts.  Politics however, seems to remain a difficult topic to touch.

I do recognize I was very harsh with those who didn’t shared my political beliefs with me — maybe I still am.  On personal events I still ”preach”.  I am sure I still feel I am right and others are wrong — otherwise they would not be “beliefs”.  However, after I went on my own independent business I have been avoiding the politics theme altogether — at least on business events.  My views are certainly far too radical to be tolerated by the people I relate to — and I do not want to harm my business too much.  Being a true libertarian (who votes republican because they protect my interests far more often than the democrats do), the liberals find me too conservative and the conservatives find me too liberal.  Listening to the comments made by business partners I feel afraid, almost persecuted, by angry liberals who are willing to behead (figuratively… verbally…) the first republican that sits across them in a table (which could end up being me).  I do not feel any tolerance in most of these people’s words.  It almost feels as if they had concentrated the hate they had reserved for the three taboo topics into one. 

Then again… it could be just my opinion.  Maybe I have been or am as harsh as other people has been on my beliefs.  It could be that in a newly democratic world (compared to millennia of monarchies) politics is considerably more important than religious discussions.

As for sports — I guess that when people from very far away and with very different sport tastes meet there is little ground to oppose each other on the sports topic.  Never had an issue on this one.  However, I can’t miss any opportunity to declare my Red Sox fanness to a Yankee fan - even if I do not even know if the Red Sox won last night or not.

Sitting at an airport watching CNN at 5am.  A full hour of a program titled “Being Black on America” about how difficult life is for ethnic groups.  All of the stories are heart breaking - some of them rightly so (I could even identify with some issues), and some of them carefully coreographed to make you shed tears about something that is perfectly natural even if undesirable.  During the program I started remembering the news I have been watching on airport TVs and on the web recently.  Although I have not made any scientific study on it, I am starting to believe that the sad/failure stories outnumber the success stories. 

For a moment I start to think that failure sells better than success.  And I wonder why?

I would rather watch a story of how someone succeeded at fighting a disease, striking rich due to hard work and dedication, or raising four kids who went to Ivy League schools than to listen to numerous families complaining about how difficult it is to make ends meet.  Not that I do not feel pain for them, but watching them does not makes me any happier… or does it?

Could it be that we like to watch other people in a disadvantaged possition (in comparisson to ours) so that we can feel better about ourselves?  It is just an idea… I am just trying to find out why I have the strange feeling that there are more news about how people suffer than about how people can succeed.

I would rather see success stories from which I could learn something.

I should have known that something was wrong when my travel plans where from Boston to Toronto, but my layover included Philadelphia (put them on a map). Not uncommon to get discounted tickets that include such awkward transfers. But for some reason I have always have had a bad feeling about them.

For starters, they waste more fuel than you would have needed to get from point A to point B – unless you think that the seat you occupy was cheap for a reason: it was going to fly empty anyways.

Then there is the waste of time: precious one, as I do not have too much of it. Nobody does. Everybody has a long list of things to do with two columns of priorities (the conscious and the unconscious one – and for some reason they tend to be opposite in order of importance). Fortunately my laptop was equally loaded with documents to finish and episodes to watch.

My Tuesday’s experience included sitting on the tarmac in Boston for two hours, on the Philly airport for 4 more, and an extra hour in the tarmac on Philly. Not to mention the extra two hours of flight that I would have saved on a direct flight.

It seems I have to stop engaging in these Contra-Natura activities.

The fact that you have landed 9 times on your feet doesn’t mean that you will land the 10th time on your feet. The idea of a cat landing on its feet is what I feel every time I face difficulties, yet somehow I get out of them…. or do I?

Could it be that we tend to think a problem resolved itself into a happy ending when in reality we ended up at a worse situation than the one that we would have had if we haven’t met misfortune? Could it be that as long as we get out of a situation alive (landing in our feet and still breathing) we consider it a victory? Could it be that we are more ’survivors’ than ‘winners’?

Cats are wise creatures, I believe. Although they do land on their feet, they do not like to throw themselves into the abyss voluntarily all that often. And if you throw them into the air, they clearly indicate you their discomfort after landing safely on their feet.

Hopefully I will land on my feet… this time. But the important question is not if I will land on my feet – but if I will be able to jump higher than the original position?

This Friday the 11th of June, Apple will release their 8 and 16GB 3G iPhones.  I will be traveling on Friday, so I will not have the opportunity to go and buy one.

Come Saturday morning I will go and check if there are still any available ones.  Apple has surely created more than they expect to sell on the first day — they probably want to sell a few more over the next few days.  Or… have they?  I have heard so many people talking about buying one this Friday that I wonder where are the people who struggle to make ends meet or to get gas money.  Can’t blame them, the iPhone is almost a dream come true:  I would probably go a month without food to buy one if I where economically struggling (talk about an iPhone diet — I can loose about 10 pounds).

• If Apple runs out of 3G iPhones, I propose raising the Gas Tax a few dollars per gallon!  Just to slow down consumption of both, iPhones and Gas: too much money on people’s pockets mean inflation, and inflation is bad.  I should also run and buy a few AAPL stocks, even after the beating they have taken lately.
• If they do not run out of iPhones, I still don’t know if I would buy one.  Waiting for the blackberry bold may be the wisest thing to do.  It is just that the iPhone seems so cool.  Then again… I can probably wait a bit longer with my almost destroyed phone…  After all, it makes calls about 50% of the time.

Seriously… should I buy an iPhone like the hoardes?  Or should I get one of those old, indestructibles Nokia 5160 and be done with the craziness of having the next cool gadget?

The iPhone is calling me…  Yes, I can hear you now….

Farmers have not received their fair treatment in the last few years.  Some have been called rednecks.  Sometimes the profession has been relegated to sectors of the population that can’t get a better paying job, like temporary immigrant workers. In general most haven’t received higher education degree.  Yet, they are some of the people I most respect.  Why?

They do and produce something that people really need.  People do not need ipods, luxury cars, flat screen tvs, or other luxuries.  But they do need food - most people consume it daily.

Lately it has been shown that farmers are more powerful than we used to think.  Recently they have started to hold the world hostage with food prices that are either paid or people suffer.  They hold the key to allowing world population to grow.  Their ability to succeed may prevent wars over resources — or their failure will cause bloodshed.  For a moment… they are not so simple any more.

Sometimes I reflect about my career.  Most of what I do is making people have a faster, better internet.  Although useful and revenue generating - it is not so simple to understand its impact on society.  Without food and/or energy all of what I do is useless.  And the world is starting to show me that cruel reality: food and energy are beginning to appreciate more than my information technology services.

It seems in the end, the invisible hand is bringing the farming and energy gathering profession to a level comparable to the value they offer.  Too bad I am not in them to benefit.

Elections do not seems to be about reason, but about sentiment.  And sentiment seems to be easily controlled by what someone expresses (be it on a speech, or on a more powerfull media advertisement campaign).  I think it has to do less with track record, or scientific/mathematical validity of the arguments and proposed changes.  (Note that social and economical theories are impossible/difficult to proove or disprove, and many politicians like to keep their debates on that level).

I think that from now on (or from many years ago and forward) we will always see the elections split right across the middle, with a winner that earns his title by just a very slight margin.

During the campaign, voters will express their opinion through polls, and campaigners/marketers will adjust their message and spending accordingly. Regarding the money? That is less of an issue nowadays. The same corporations that feed one party feed the other: you better keep both of them happy, just in case they win.

I try to avoid advertising. I try to keep informed by reading the news and entertained by watching movies on DVD - but mostly I avoid CableTV and/or broadcast TV. I think it is my only way of getting out of the marketing loop that creates this bizarre behavoir / theory. (And as any social / economic theory, it can’t be proven or disproven so for a brief moment in time, I am right).

Will Obama stop the madness?  Will McCain increase or decrease the madness? Today the Transportation Security Agency announced that they will be installing the body scan machines at 10 airports.  The 30 second delay and invasion of privacy will soon be on most airports according to the providers of the new equipment.

Since the 9/11 attack, travellers have lost liberties and the sense of humanity.  Some of it has been due to the economic devastation the 9/11 attack and the burst of the .com bubble caused: Airlines are still falling apart.  Some of it has been caused by ourselves: the citizens of what used to be the free-most nation in the world.  Our fear has made the terrorists win.  The pain inflicted by the terrorists has been felt all across the nation.  The excess of homeland security

I am not sure if the excess is mainly due to the Bush administration (as many blame) or because of the nature of terrorism: it makes people act in strange ways.  I am inclined to think is more of the later than the former (although both have contributed).

By default McCain has the vote (although he looses brownie points on Airport Security: he sponsored the bill that created TSA, as did Edwards and Kerry).  But I will give Obama the chance to gain my heart and my vote by looking straight into the eyes of the American people and telling them that Airport security will go back to pre-9/11 levels. If he tells me that I will be able to keep my shoes, my jacket, and my virtual clothes, carry a water bottle or morning coffee through security, he gets my vote.  For some reason I dobut he will take the chance - he only talks about increasing security.  Americans support the Fascist security policies.  The bulk ofAmerica like the security policies.  It makes them feel safer.  Terrorists won.

Now… who wants my vote?  Any takers?

Back when I was a kid, I read in a school textbook that we only had about 20 years more of oil. They where wrong. But at the same time, they pointed out one fact: Oil was getting scarcer, and scarce things tend to cost more — especially if people start using more of them.

We should open our history books and remember a few decisions we have taken, consciously, that have increased the likelihood of an oil price increase:

• SUVs - Nuff Said.
  
• Cozy Homes - The other day a bunch of people looked funny when I was telling them about how cold are the nights in Bogota, Colombia. They thought that everyone in the world had a heating system that kept their homes at a confy 72F degrees. No, this is not the case. Most areas in the world where the temperature do not fall below freezing do not have a heating system. You just use more blankets! Turn the thermostat down! [to 65F]– Jimmy Carter (BTW, Sweaters and Jackets can look nice.)
• Nuclear Plants - We haven’t built ‘em. In 1979 people got scared with the Three Mile Island incident. France has most of their power from them (those green, tree huggers know exactly how to produce green energy - they even make tons of Euros out of it).
• Artic Refuge Drilling - We haven’t done it. Clinton Vetoed. Bush couldn’t get Congress to pass anything he said (independent of the validity of it).
• E85 - Why don’t we have a tax credit for people buying flexible fuel vehicles? We had it for hybrids. BTW, why don’t we expand the one on hybrids as well - maybe increase it only for U.S. produced hybrids so that we can help the auto workers at the same time and please both parties.
• Stop Buying Trinkets - Every time you buy a trinket from China (or other country), you send money overseas. The trade balance gets against us — more dollars in circulation than the world needs — lowering our currency and increasing the price of oil.

Who knows what the future will hold? But following the1973 and 1979 oil crisis, we got the 1980’s Oil Glut - incredibly low prices that got ourselves comfortably seated in greenhouse gas emitting SUVs.

Back in the days of the controversial 2000 Presidential Election many people within and outside the United States complained about the harsh realities of an election process where every person does not have the same weight. Back in those days one Presidential candidate had won the popular vote, while he may or may not have won the Electoral College vote (a voting system that protects the interests of smaller states by reducing the power large states have on the election). Our Founding Fathers found that the Electoral College was the best way to secure a Union, even if an imperfect one (as shown by the Civil War, and the North’s imposition of the law as opposed to the willingness of the South to comply with the law). The fact is, that is the way people vote for President in this country (U.S.A), and until someone decides to amend the Constitution it is the way it will be.Today we are facing an interesting situation on the Democratic Party. Senators Clinton and Obama compete not only for the popular vote within their own political party but for the Super-Delegates that could make them the Democratic Party Candidate for the 2008 elections even if the popular vote decides they prefer the other person.

You see, the idea of Democracy, where each man is one vote and the government does the will of the majority is not as universal as people may think. Most of the time it just happens in exactly that way: but not every time. It seems there are openly legislated systems where some of us are more or less equal than others. I do not complaint about such situations: it is just a fact of life. I also understand that these electoral systems have been put in place to try to make things agreeable enough to get a government going – for anarchy would have been less desirable to the majority.

It is also important to note that these situations also happen in countries and governments we hold in very high esteem: like the European Union (they also assign different weights to their member states/countries), or the United Kingdom Commonwealth (like Australia), where the Queen may still have the ability to overrule a decision – even if such powers are seldom if ever invoked.

Sometimes the desire for peace, unity and/or economic advancement overrules the desire for the plain democratic principle of one man one vote, and majority rules.  It seems this world is not perfect, after all.