Keith's Web Blog RSS Feed

Radical Proposal to Google to Monetize YouTube

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:27:35 -0600

Eric Schmidt mentioned in the news maybe a month ago that Google is still contemplating how to monetize YouTube. Naturally, the desire to put ads on everything is at the core of Google's business policy (and when I say business, I mean making money). With the Viacom case looming and rearing its ugly head, and in reading that Stratovarius keyboardist's complaints about earning money, I thought of an interesting strategy for helping the artists and Google/YouTube.

First, I think that Google/YouTube should create a new sector for employment within their company. For artists, they ought to hire them full time for the rate of a good junior to senior level engineer. Say between $40k - $120k/year. Many artists complain that the biggest problem in file sharing is how artists get swindled by the recording industries and "need to put food on the table for their kids." Well, in the case of people like Scott Wieland, or Lars Ulrich, their kids must be pretty obese by now with all the millions their parents make. And in many of these artists' cases, most of the money goes to luxury goods and bad drug habits. So if someone pay them a reasonable rate like a full time employee, then they'll benefit without becoming mentally fucked up like Britney Spears, Paris Hilton or Tom Cruise (I blame the money not Scientology for this one). I mean, if really all these people want is food, shelter, water and transportation, that salary range is quite good in fact! Besides, do we want another MTV creating yet more generations of skanks, drug induced losers and poor role models for our kids?

The thing with the recording companies traditionally been the whole issue of mass producing and marketing their artists. These days anyone can honestly mass produce their own stuff. Just go to iTunes, or some other online distributor. So the real big issue is marketing. The videos, branding, interviews, etc. We already cut cost down tremendously in this schema by eliminating the need to physically produce goods (which has been said to be one of the largest cost).

Well, videos are great but I think they mostly send the wrong message regardless. When you see hip hop videos, they tell you to be a slut, stupid or dress in a certain way (hence being a conformists). Rock videos glorify sex, drugs and rock n roll. Pop music simply induces stupidity and besides those so-called artists are just puppets propped up in front of a mic so that some puppetmaster in the background can vicariously use them for their own incapabilities.

So that leaves branding and promotion. Well, branding is bullshit most of the time because marketing is telling us to buy something that is really worse than it is. Or they're telling us that without something, we suck. So I think branding can be eliminated from the equation.

That leaves promotion to improve distribution sales for the artists as well as the management aspects for venues. Unfortunately, venues are typically run by a different mafia (i.e. Ticketmaster or the Yak in .jp). So we have to avoid that. But most management are just leeches in all of this anyway. And if an artists does not want to perform, they either are 1) closet artists that really should be sharing their music with friends; or 2) fakes because they don't care about their fans.

As a result, the real thing in the end is the promotion aspect that would be in the hands of Google/YouTube.

So here's where everything comes together for Google/YouTube. The problem with music is that it's all trend based. As I mentioned, labels don't really support their artists. It's like a guy who is 60 years old, been a veteran at software engineering but only knows COBOL. Now and then, these veterans have their comebacks (Y2K bug, Rolling Stones), but most companies and labels prefer keeping them in their pastures or moving them to a different role (management, producers, etc.).

The truth is that the labels should never stop supporting their artists. So if we end the whole notion of the "in-artists" and create the "intern," "junior," "mid-career," "senior," and "lead" type of artists just as we have created for engineers and similar positions, then the game changes entirely. And if we promote these artists in a similar way, say veterans with their larger catalogs can be in the forefront to represent certain categories of music or headlining shows while younger people are proving themselves in learning the business, we might create a new, less vicious model of handling the music business.

But alas! I still have yet to reveal the model of making money for Google/YouTube. I mentioned before about how music (and other digital goods) is priced at an inequitable level because of the way supply and demand works in the electronic/online world. So if Google sets up a "credit" account where users can employ different methods for compensating artists, then that's where Google can earn their money.

Here's some possibilities:

Charge as you go. .02 cents/song for a full download. Video requires .10 cents/viewing or .20 cents/download.
Users must click on ads.
Users get credits for spreading the music/video to other friends
Users receive viewing credits for actions performed (creating Google Application spreadsheets, signing up with orkut, sending out an email from GMail)
Users receive credits for performing some exchange service for the artists (e.g. building a fan page, signing up with a fan site, etc.)

The thing is that none of this has to be directly monetary. We're seeing online games do creative campaigning for giving users credits who don't have money. Eventually, these actions convert into something between businesses (partnerships, revenue sharing, traffic sharing, etc.)

I think one problem that needs to be resolved is that artists have to become multi-millionaires with these excessive lifestyles. I don't think it's fair that a guy like Tom Cruise can earn $25 mil + 20% gross at the box office for doing so little. Or watching some jerk like Vince Neil tell everyone that living like a rebel is great then become a fat slob with numerous personal problems with drugs, alcohol, etc. Sure there's an artistic glory to it, but is this for everyone? Why is it that some fake artists with no talent like Jennifer Lopez make tons of cash for shaking her phat ass, but hard working artists like Fernando Miyata get little recognition (until recently)?

I think giving these artists fair compensation with stable jobs (not treating like session players) is a great thing. I don't like the idea of a middle man still, but the recording industry is just too ruthless and handles their people worse than cannibalism. At least this model seems fair at the surface, except for the ruling elite. But those people already made their money and maybe it's time to send a message to them as well.

How To Stop Companies Like Viacom

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:09:11 -0600

I decided to use my civic duty of civilized protests over the NY court's decision to force Google/YouTube in handing over users' data on YouTube's usage. My actions are this:

No longer go to any movies in theaters
Stop watching TV permanently
Never to purchase another album again
Never to click on an ad related to media promotions
Inform my friends, family and acquaintances to do similar actions whenever possible
Support only independent artists, movies and labels.

Fortunately, I've been doing almost 100% of these actions. But I will urge people to do the same in order to put dents in Big Media's profits whenever possible.

Copyright Kills Creativity

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:18:10 -0600

The whole notion that copyright and intellectual property exist in the effort of protecting the individual's rights in completely archaic and definitely are not supported in the global economy. The latest Viacom case proves that the only winners in intellectual property/copyright are lawyers and large companies.

All musicians know that they are enslaved to Big Media. In their case, they have little to no alternatives. But for them it's like their next hit of crack (which I think the Big Media companies support anyway in a literal sense to keep most of these artists stupid and weak; I mean, I've heard stories in Japan how many puppet artists are drugged up to keep them under control and it's no secret about the so called sex-drugs-and rock n roll lifestyles of celebrities that demand these people in needing money which screws up their lives). Also, people working for companies who build their own tools end up losing their inventions once they sign contracts with non-compete clauses and company ownership clauses. Then you get the medical profession which is completely hampered by patent disputes, preventing more companies from coming out with vaccines. A while back Intel's former CEO had criticized medicine with this argument.

Copyright and intellectual property were supposedly used to allow people to take ownership of what they create back in the day when kings ruled the land. Individuals, not mega corporations. But what we're seeing in the global economy (especially American politics) is the return to feudalism, where we're simply enslaved again to the owners that we work for.

Right now, over at TechCrunch, I see a lot of spammers, people who fear their activities with YouTube, and those even supporting the notion of copyright and the judge's decision in NY over this. However, I find it ironic that because of so-called copyright infringement technology like YouTube that, for instance, Japanese game shows had become so popular, it's now going to be produced in America. So without YouTube, these Japanese game shows would be hidden gems in Japan, while Hollywood runs around producing another creative-less crappy reality show. And isn't even further ironic that it's Hollywood literally copying the format (more or less) from another source? Are the Japanese studios going to receive proper compensation or even recognition for this? Or remember that horrid movie Stealth? That was a blatant ripoff of Macross the Movie. I don't recall seeing any credits being given to the makers of Macross. Or lets go to movies like Lost in Translation or Babel. It's known the shots of Japan in those movies were taken in gorilla-style because obtaining a proper license to film in Japan is quite difficult. So those activities in themselves are considered illegal, yet they're being perpetrated by the same industry which is 1) breaching users' privacy unlawfully; 2) suing users for perceived violations of law.

The world really needs to re-examine the whole issue of copyright, patents and intellectual property. I'm not talking about the constitutionality of them. I'm talking about the real purpose of them in the first place. In reality, artists, engineers, scientists, etc. are not the ones being protected by the law. The firms are using these people as puppets to protect their own interest. But individuals are losing out at every turn as well as society.

Personally, I would like the world/court systems to at the very least:

Demolish the usage of the word "intellectual." You can't call what Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, Justin Timberlake, or MTV put out "intellectual." Call it a cold hearted asset because that's the only thing the court is protecting. Something intellectual means something smart from someone talented and smart; not a tool, not a puppet. In this case, it doesn't insult a truly talented person's intelligence when their capabilities are not protected by a court system, but some figure head for these capitalist machines.
Don't ever associate copyright protection, etc. with individuals. These days individuals aren't the ones being protected. Just the lawyers and companies. People cannot use this argument anymore because it just isn't true.
Make it illegal for companies to use the defense of protecting their artists' property. Companies can only say that they are protecting their assets because individuals in the post-feudal world basically have no rights without being subordinated to a large company to pay them off for pennies.

For myself, I don't want to be driven into fear of my activities online. I fully support Google/YouTube on what they've done. From a cultural point of view, the presence of viral video/music sites like YouTube has allowed more cultures to interact and be appreciated, even at the expense of large companies like Viacom. This case is unfair for the legally uploaded videos and users who employ YouTube for their own benefit. Also, this situation is global since people all around the world participate in these activities.

I hope that the judge realizes that what he's done is perpetuate favoritism for one company whose sole purpose this entire time is to simply benefit their shareholders and executives. And I'm not talking about Google/YouTube. I doubt that this judge realizes anything except the money that Viacom is handing him in the back parking lot to make these decisions. But that's the US court system these days.

Re-Inventing Money

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:19:28 -0600

I read this interesting excerpt from the keyboardist from Stratovarius (Jens Johansson). I don't necessarily agree with his assessment of Napster (I think it must've been written in 2000 or 2001 when they were getting sued), but it's interesting to see a viewpoint that isn't from a mutli-million dollar recording industry puppet. I actually respect what Mr. Johansson does as a musician and I appreciate the music that Stratovarius provides. Unlike the Britney Spears, Paris Hiltons, or other Johnny Come Latelys, Johansson and Stratovarius produce true intellectual property and have definite rights to call themselves artists.

In reading his entry, I do sense a conflicted viewpoint though. It reminds me of Vader in Return of the Jedi where Luke is telling Vader that there's still some good left in him. Johansson rightfully points out how the music industry big shots are nothing but slime. But he also is very anti-corporate in his views of Napster (even though now they've become a "legitimate" corporate puppet). He does acknowledge too that bootlegs have, like file sharing, been traditional means where fans could obtain music they normally could not as well as spreading recognition where some bands normally could not penetrate in terms of market share. So he's obviously in limbo on where to take a stand, even though at the end he readily acknowledges that at the very basis, his livelihood is at stake.

Ultimately, if we were comparing him to Return of the Jedi, the money would be the "Dark Side of the Force." If you got rid of the money factor, I'm certain that Mr. Johansson would appreciate companies like YouTube, Napster, and other file sharing systems in spreading his (former) band's good name (well someone else decided to shut that down, but that's a different story entirely).

Still, one of the most important paragraphs in his write up is:

"Artists get fucked enough anyway. The music industry is notorious."

By his own admission, this means that it's perhaps the industry as a whole that's hurting artists? Perhaps, the greed of corporations tend to treat their artists as mere pawns in a high stakes game where only the most politically savvy can survive?

Reading other parts of his site, he mentions about how a musician is like being unemployed. In some ways, it's like a start up or venture company where you might not be making any money and just working out of a garage. In many ways, he is not unlike Shawn Fanning, creator of Napster, who worked out of his college room towards success. So there's definitely something in common with both people and the idea of not being employed for doing your dreams is the basis of that commonality.

He also mentions the common excuse/fear most artists use in describing their (hesitant) support for the Big Media industries: if people download for free, then the artists won't get compensated and will eventually stop doing it. I seriously doubt this will ever happen. For every artist that gives up, a thousand more will spring up because they see a gap that they can fill. Heck, look at all the guitar videos up on YouTube. None of those people will probably make a cent, but they're immensely popular and are doing more for the recognition.

In the end, the problem always boils down to money. When do the artists get compensated? Part of me thinks that artists should simply be like software engineers. Rather than making money per label with the crappy royalty fees, they should just get an annual salary. That's one way to solve the greedy artists problem (it worked for the Shaw Brothers in Hong Kong!). Let's face it; most artists just want to be rich and not have to work a 9-5 job. I find it offensive when they say that the thousands of hours put into recording their label becomes worthless as a result of people downloading their music. Doesn't that mean that more people recognize that they're great musicians? So again, the only thing the artists want is money.

Le'ts hear the old Ted DiBiase song:

Money, Money, Money, Money, Money!
HAHAHHAHAHAHA!
Everybody's got a price to pay for the Million Dollar Man!

Well, even if these artists get a flat salary like any good software engineer, there still is an issue of getting people to pay for their music and movies. So we return to the fact that money is involved again.

Perhaps, it's a good time to end the whole notion of money.

Currency just makes no sense. I don't understand how someone like Matt Damon get tons of money for doing so little. On the other hand, an elementary school teacher barely receives enough. Then you have the global economy where people's skills are devalued in one country and further devalued in another, leading to job losses in some countries. Or better yet. You have these useless old people sitting on a board, playing God essentially and barely doing anything socially worthwhile and making enough to feed part of Africa.

Does the whole notion of money make any sense to you?

Sure, I've read about supply and demand. I know about the need to value things to create opportunities of exchange.

But the problem is that the system is abused, manipulated and completely out of control, except for a few elite who understand how to manipulate the game for their own short term gain.

So common sense, rationality, conventional wisdom go out the window for pure avarice.

Johansson's inherent problem is not Napster, the company, nor the public as downloading his music and potentially turning his hard earned work into a meaningless epiphany. Johansson's real problem is that the system of currency and valuation as well as trickle down economics make absolutely zero sense in the postmodern world, except for the tiny elite that have control over the system.

Johansson might be recognized as a great keyboard player, but he's still a little guy because he's not a pure tool by the corporations he unwittingly supports.

Since starting work, I realized over the course of the last 9+ years that the majority of these economic bubbles and recessions are always caused by Wallstreet. Their constant attempts to manipulate the market and play people are what create these financial gaps. At the basis, the stock exchange no longer has any true value because none of it makes sense, except against for the few investors and people manipulating the game.

The stock market and institutional banking are also known as "trusts" for a reason. The public implicitly trusts these institutions to grow their money. However, as Wallstreet historically has demonstrated, they cannot be trusted because their greed supersedes the interests of the public at large. Wallstreet and institutional investing really do not have a meaningful place in the 21st century society. It is an archaic institution founded upon the flawed trickle down economics principle. And it's flawed because when the shit hits the fan, it hits everyone as well and there are no true winners with the few rarities.

So after this lengthy diatribe, what can we use as a substitute for money? We still as a society and as a global society need to determine a system of bartering that is somehow equal and fair.

I don't have a pure solution, but I've started noticing things in the online world. For example, I recently joined an online SNS game off of Facebook called Mob Wars. It's like any silly role playing game where you have stuff, property, stats, power, fights, etc. But to grow in the game, you need more money, people on your team, equipment, actions, etc. So one way you can obtain more is through using your PayPal account to increase your virtual money (which I admittedly have done), your energy or your mob members. Also, you can obtain "favor" points through partnerships that do not necessarily require monetary compensation, but "actions" like viewing ads, taking surveys, watching videos, etc.

When I did my report on online advertisement, one of the key things in measuring the success of clickthrus/conversion rates was this notion of "performing actions." So perhaps getting someone to buy something is not the end goal of a campaign. Perhaps, the end goal is to watch ads or register for a newsletter. These are small signs of a new economy. Similarly, the virtual online world/game SecondLife has the notion of "virtual money" as well. And as we're seeing sometimes virtual money means more than "real money" as people sell their characters through 3rd party websites like ebay.

I've mentioned before how the stock market would considered a kind of web 1.0 artifact whereas online keywords are now the true measurement of companies in the online world. Perhaps, someone can create a trading system for keywords online. Or perhaps we need a bartering system for actions. I've discussed many times with friends about trading services and building systems where people decide the value of their service.

If we go back to Johansson, since his band is pretty much dead, his value might be helping new musicians to produce music. Obviously, his experience, talent, ear for music and depth of knowledge in keyboards are a wealth that any musician one day aspiring to be the next YouTube idol would want.

Another chief advantage in this is that America potentially won't be sold off as the dollar value of the land decreases proportionally to middle class America's pocket books. I mean, imagine this: everyone gets some sort of home, food, water, transportation, all these essentials. Luxuries are the only things where we need to barter. It is socialistic in many ways but the main idea is that people can survive without living in excess (and therefore suffering from obesity, gas price problems in having oversized SUVs, etc.) while still having some illusion that their work isn't entirely meaningless in being able to compete for luxury goods.

It's wild thoughts but at this stage of the game, what options are there that won't offend everyone? Besides, Google already is doing part of this and they're receiving great praise as the best company to work for. So if that's the case, why not just spread the idea to an even greater degree?

A Scenario in America

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:05:33 -0600

I read earlier how it's possible that GM might go bankrupt. It's pretty amazing considering that at one time they were the largest employer in America and still is the number one automotive seller in the US. Back when I had the opportunity to visit Las Vegas back in May, I met an old woman from Detroit who told me the horror stories of how troubled the Motor City is. The big quote she gave me was, "Some people say that if Detroit goes, the rest of the US goes."

Taking these two elements together that made me think hard. Let's examine just how messed up America is right now:

Subprime loan problem
Credit Crunch crisis
Financial sector completely decimated
Bear stock market
Dying housing sector
The auto sector is almost completely wiped out with manufacturers ONLY NOW starting to wake up to the reality that their cars are economically not feasible even with employee level discounts
The gas crunch
The energy crunch
The decimated airline industry
The food industry
Worsening education system
Massive job losses and layoffs
Continuing funds being siphoned off to the wars on fictitious terror
Continued outsourcing

Of course, this situation is percolating globally, but America is feeling the brunt of the damage. Some call this a recession, but I call it a depression. America is just getting annihilated by everything they setup in the 90's.

A short while back, I was interested in researching land prices in Vegas. In doing so, I uncovered some interesting bits like how much of the land is being bought off via foreign sources. A good example is the new City Center project. Apparently, Dubai is funding that one. The Wynn hotel is another where a Japanese guy named Okada owns a 10% stake in the hotel.

Then you look back to the financial sector with Citigroup. At one point, Citigroup was the largest and most powerful financial company in the world. This past year as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis and windfall credit crunch, Citigroup was forced to write down over $500 billion of assets. That's half of what they had at one point. On top of that, they made a bargain with a powerful investor in India who agreed to help bail them out for a huge stake in the company.

I'm not certain if these are the only cases where foreign investment is arriving in America to bail the country out. In some way, it reminds me of the 80's back in Japan's economic bubble heyday. At that time, it simply was that Japan had all the money and was buying up property in America. But all that investment turned bad when the loans went belly up. However, in the current situation, we're looking at something entirely different. Now, we're seeing a scenario where many major sectors in America's economy is weakening so much that America and American companies are looking for foreign sources to help prop them up.

So one major scenario to think about is whether or not America, as we know it, will be "owned" by Americans anymore.

Certainly, land and companies are starting to look like bargain prices. I mean, I was examining Omaha, Nebraska the other day since my coworker had studied there. I found that a regular house (many built around 1900-1910) would go for about $10000. That's amazing! What was more amazing was that the average cost for a home in LA in my area, which would be between $400k-$600k, would get you something like a mansion from the show the Rich and Famous!

Of course, most people wouldn't want to live in some place like Nebraska, but you have to think that economically that's what's affordable. I've read about how many people are moving away from places like LA on the basis that it's simply too expensive and going to cheaper areas like Arizona. If that happens, then you'll see numerous foreclosures and real estate being driven down even further. Obviously, the people who left won't be able to buy back that real estate because they were the same people who couldn't afford it in the first place. But someone will naturally have that kind of money to turn that type of property around. And LA, being a hot zone for anything, is naturally a spot some other outsider might want to pick up.

If you examine logistically/geographically how this might look over time, it would appear that lower to middle class America might slowly be forced "inward". Some interesting stories on the net even talk about scenarios like this or weirder ones. I recall reading about a story where some families are moving away from cities to something like co-ops or isolated regions in the country where people can live off the land. Some people are buying homes and stock piling food in case of riots or a major food scare. One of my friends in Tokyo had a deep discussion with me about how he has a house on a hill top in Marin County near San Francisco. He picked that location because of the fact that it's isolated, near a body of water (a ravine in his backyard) with deer and other animals; in short, if something happened, he would be able to protect his family. He didn't say specifically about carrying firearms, but I wouldn't doubt that he'd have a pistol or rifle somewhere in his place.

With the Katrina incident back in New Orleans a few years back, we saw a different side of America, a hypothetical scenario that actually came to life. That scenario was if somehow the government lost complete control in a huge natural disaster. With Bush in power, the government responded far too slow and the city became a cesspool of violence. The situation devolved so badly that people would go to Walmart to steal weapons just to protect themselves, even carrying weapons above their homes.

That incident was far different from 9-11, since at that time America was able to focus the blame on a perceived common enemy of Bin Laden (who in my opinion is a theoretical human just like Saddam Hussein). 9-11 bonded people to some degree as politicians were able to manipulate people's natural hostile attitudes into rallying for a cause. Katrina, on the other hand, was an act of nature and left people desperate with the fear of their lives.

So we come to the final possibility of the future of America: a completely torn America. America's current hope for economic survival lies in technology and green energy as well as its abundance of creativity. So areas like California, Washington, NYC, etc. might still do well. However, middle America (really meaning most of "middle class" America) is in for a lot of trouble. The points I made at the top of this blog are a sheer indicator that America on a whole will suffer greatly in the coming years because of the major downturn in the economy. Before, during the dot com burst, the only real industry that was affected in a negative way was most technology companies. This time, we're seeing not one sector, but multiple sectors that support middle class America slowly being devoured from the trickle down economic failures of capitalism. Since the middle class is what composes the US, what happens when that how structure falls apart?

We've seen the worst come out of America in recent years with Katrina. That was a hint at the possibility of the animalistic nature of humans. But now, we're seeing the government fail the US and doing little except passing rounds of champaign between all the elite class. The government has recently failed in protecting the citizens against the ruling class. For instance, there was no bail out for the US citizens by taxing the oil companies. There's been no limiting of job losses from American soil. There's been nothing done to prevent the constant gouging by the airlines industries to save their precious shareholders and executives' compensation packages. Oh, but there was laws passed for the credit card companies to make it harder for people to declare bankruptcy and receive protection. Oh and Hollywood and the music industry constantly receives favoritism by the government to penalize electronics manufacturers and the internet industry (since Hollywood and the music industry are traditional financial supporters of the democrats, which is kinda ironic in some ways considering that the Democrats are supposedly for the common man).

With the upcoming election, as I have mentioned, it really doesn't matter who wins. Actually, if Obama loses, it's actually great for him because he doesn't have all the pressure of immediately fixing up the mess that Bush and his cronies have created. But if he does win and people are dissatisfied, I'm guaranteeing that the world and the American people will lose complete faith in American politics.

So in this scenario, outside of more foreign sources buying up the remnants of the political and economic fiasco in America, we might even see America as a country actually split. The government has not guaranteed nor provided universal health care. There's no pension plans and social security is a joke. The FDA cannot guarantee that food is safe. The damn justice system's copyright and intellectual property mess screws up virtually everything because only a few groups (namely large corporations rather than the artists and creators within the corporations) actually gain any benefit from this system. Medicine likewise is held up because of the patent system within America and religion completely fucks up everything by basing things on an archaic and unfounded principle! And I seriously doubt that when someone walks up to you with a shotgun, that you're going to be pleading with God. The God will be the shotgun that you're begging mercy from.

In this scenario, people will finally see in America and the world how impotent the American government is. Perhaps, the government might attempt to implement national martial law, but I can't imagine them holding their own country hostage. It'd be like a government coup, except this time from a hypocritical America!

The only thing as I had mentioned before that promises any hope for America are the mega corporations. The mega corporations are the only things left that provide anything for people. It'll be mini fiefdoms. I mean, it's already like that minus the actual soldiers with physical weapons shooting each other. The soldiers are simply corporate lobbyists. But with this scenario, I see the corporations becoming their own states. Most already are. Google? Check. Walmart? Check. Microsoft? Check. etc.

I honestly don't see why we have a government these days. There's little that it provides people. Education? Not really. Why send your kids to public education? The court process makes no sense because it's all purchased by companies. Military? Heck, i don't want people with guns around my neighborhood! I don't feel safer! The fucking country can't even decree that guns are illegal because of special interest groups (NRA) even though common sense dictates that no guns means less violence by default. Didn't anyone learn anything from the Cold War era? We can't trust it for food. We don't money from the government; they simply take it away in giving nothing back to us. They barely can maintain the roads. They don't provide us decent public transportation (at least in most areas that aren't major cities). We can't get health care except when we pay for it. So what good is the government when they're not even interested in helping the average citizen out?

Despite saying this, I personally don't hate America nor the citizens. It's the same with Japan. I do blame many problems on the elite ruling class though. I think every country faces this. It all boils down to resources in the end. If we had infinite food, land, and hot women, etc., you wouldn't see any problems in this world. So as Marx mentioned (and was unbelievably correct), it's the ruling elite who control the means of production. They own these networks to keep themselves in control. We're just puppets for their amusement. We have no meaning to them except to function for some dictated purpose. We have no control

Now, if middle class America ever wakes up to this fact, then they'll hopefully realize that all their material wealth is a transient illusion created to deceive them in believing that their reality is a glorified and meaningful one. But if say, like the victims in Katrina, suddenly faced a similar situation like a major fire decimating their homes, then the majority of them would suddenly become aware of the fact that materialism is indeed meaningless and that the government never had any intentions of doing anything for them, except perpetrating the belief that their lives had some value.

All I can offer to big businesses like the Viacoms, the recording industry, the banks, oil companies, fast food as well as the government is this advice: don't fuck with people's lives. Just look at Katrina and look where you're heading. You can continue building up your ivory tower and hiding within, but eventually either you can't find anymore materials, the people building your ivory tower stop supporting you, or that everyone catches up to you and takes you back down.

Death to Viacom!

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:00:35 -0600

Apparently, a judge ruled in the recent Viacom vs Google/YouTube case that Google/YouTube is to hand over the records of people's viewing habits, which is obviously a clear violation of people's privacy. Earlier I read this and thought it was a joke, but apparently, this is no joke.

I urge everyone to stop viewing any of Viacom's products. That company has done more damage to the world with their crappy MTV compared with any other media industry. Heck, the makers of South Park had even stated in one of their episodes how MTV is solely responsible for damaging most of America (or in my opinion the entire world). In a way that is ironic considering that Comedy Central is the parent company for both networks. But that just goes to show how it's all inside jobs.

Well, the American justice system is just so damaged when it comes to copyright and intellectual property. Funny how a company like MTV or VH1 can hold something with the words "intellectual" and manage to get away with major lawsuits.

Maybe someone should sue the US government and WTO to force everyone to change the entire notion of "intellectual property" to just assets. If that were the case, I think people would have a better chance of arguing how most things cannot be protected since there's very little academic stimulation involved in all this.

Going back, I really hope that Google fights this case. I hope even further that someone investigates the judge and finds out how much he was bribed behind the scenes by Viacom. This is just plain wrong and it affects people not just in the US but around the world.

For myself, I don't have problem of Viacom shutting down entirely if one day people stop purchasing their goods, clicking on ads or draining them of resources after pirating their stuff. I want them to go out of business. I want all those people to lose their jobs and think even harder about being overly greedy. I shed zero sympathy for any of the staff members. As long as they support that fascist company, to me they are nothing more than Nazi soldiers obeying an order for the simple sake of money.

Watching Steve Jobs and Apple

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:38:16 -0600

I've been watching Steve Jobs give his Macworld Keynote speeches from 1998 where he made his comeback. It's very fascinating going back in time and witnessing some of his bets and where they've landed today. Since my UCI days where I was tortured through being imprisoned in the infamous "dungeon" computer labs, I had a huge distaste for anything Apple related. Fast forward to the present and I'm absolutely stunned by how far Apple has come since those days.

While I don't agree with 100% of their business philosophy (a lot of vendor lock in, not unlike Sony), I have to give them props for their products. Definitely, with Steve back at the helm, there's a vision guiding Apple where they're pushing themselves as leaders in the industry.

I think one of the major keys to Apple's success is what I'm seeing as how they use case studies to present uses for their products. For instance, in the Time Capsule presentation, it's mentioned how one might be inconvenienced with a cable. A simple statement like that is actual profound in this industry because it illustrates a thought process behind their development of their products. Also, in looking at the MacAir, I could not help but think that Steve's ultimate goal is to have a piece of paper that can be folded up and remain non-obstructive and space saving. I imagine the scenario would come out of how computers tend to take a lot of space and notebooks themselves remain bulky.

Anyway, it's a great thing to see the evolution of Apple and what they're presenting as futuristic devices. My main complaint right now is that they're too media focused. I'm hoping that Apple can extend the whole "lifestyle" metaphor into other home appliances that interconnect with some form of software. Many Japanese companies have worked on those issues, but I find their interfaces to be blunt, brutal and not friendly at all. However, Apple has typically been in the forefront when it comes to interfaces so I'd like to see them continue expanding themselves into other areas like vacuums, automated lighting, dish washers, etc.

America: Please Annex Japan

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:07:08 -0600

I'm not kidding. I'm begging the US government to do what I think everyone expects them to do to Japan: fully annex it. I don't see a point of Japan being a sovereign country anymore. They practically bend over for the US government in terms of appeasing them to allow international trade relations and protection from Asia (since everyone practically hates them there). And considering that they're one of the few countries that get heckled that much by INS, why not just let them go through?

I think the only people in Japan who would resent such a proposition are old people. The old people here are really useless. I mean, being useless and invisible is one thing. Being useless and imposing their will on people here with little basis in the modernizing, globalizing world just is hurting their descendants. These people can eat all their "natsukashii!" foods in the summer and choke on their mochi during o-shogatsu for all I care. But let the young people finally take control of this country.

I figure that the only real way that the young people here have any chance at all in surviving the next 30-40 years is if America fully annexes this country. I mean, if it's true in what they're saying about how most students are moving towards arts and finance, then this country is truly screwed! Back in the 80's from what I remember, it was the Japanese who excelled at math and science. Now, there's a said deficiency. So does that mean kids are growing up dumber here?

It's funny because when I talk to my coworkers, many say that at one time they were good at math, but can't remember a thing. So my guess is that most people memorized for tests and then promptly forgot it once they passed their exams to get into the next level of education. Then once college rolled around, people immediately went brain dead as autopilot took over.

Not that the American education system is that much better, but at least the few necessary skills that can be imposed in this annexed new world would be English skills (or at least greater emphasis starting from kindergarten) and critical reasoning. Then allow students from Japan to be able to participate as US citizens at the university level and completely dispense with the jyuku system.

Another positive aspect in annexing Japan would be to get rid of the completely corrupt judicial system here. The jury duty system in the states sucks big time, but the court system in Japan is ruthless and lacks a balancing system. Sure, the court system in the states is bad too, but I do feel slightly more assured in that system than the notoriously bad system in Japan.

Maybe Japan can provide better dieting practices, work ethic, service capabilities and higher demands for better quality in America as a trade off. Now, working over time isn't that good either, but at least the work ethic and diligence that most Japanese exhibit (while not necessarily efficient) is something I'd like to see more in America, rather than this ultra lazy and indignant attitude. Also, teach Americans manners for their service industry. The American service industry is absolutely pathetic.

Well, I doubt my dream would come true. But it's also nice to ponder such ideas....

Fascism In Japan

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:49:47 -0600

Walk around Shibuya, Roppongi, Shinjuku, etc. and what will you see these days? Cops in pairings of three. Every corner, going down all major streets. Their purpose? Just as George Carlin would say about airport security: to present the illusion of safety to the paranoid middle class Japanese.

But the funny thing is that if you walk around, say Roppongi, you don't see these officers hustling the Nigerian pimps trying to harass customers into their shady bars and strip shows. Matter of fact, you'll see them sharing a laugh with these guys.

Try to proceed across Roppongi Crossing with the psychotic taxis and impatient drivers ready to ram pedestrians down or clogging the crosswalks. These guys simply watch from afar and do nothing except stay in their toll booths.

That stupid fuck who murdered a bunch of people in Akihabara is definitely to blame for this incident as it naturally gave rise to the constantly growing paranoia of Japan becoming a hazard zone, which is completely moronic considering that these incidents are typically isolated and caused by some disturbed nutcase. Still, it's obvious that the government wanted an excuse to put more fascism in the streets.

Come to my building and see all the surveillance cameras installed everywhere. Front door, elevator, near the garbage area. Fortunately, that didn't cost me a dime or I would've given notice by now for something completely useless.

People constantly gripe about privacy here but they seem to accept Big Brother as a solution to their problems. Actually, I think it's old people pushing for these lame standards as well as the typically air headed women who are unbelievably insecure about everything (fucking gain weight, lift at the gym or take a martial arts class instead of being a bunch of weak ass whiny bitches!)

This place disgusts me further and further, day by day that I live here. It's not fun anymore here and I'm seeing little benefit of staying much longer in this country. Too bad the citizens are mentally weak people. They really like butt fuckings because that's what happens to them as their imbecilic government continues to erode the very few rights that they perceive to have.

Neat Perl Tricks

Mon, 30 Jun 2008 03:10:22 -0600

Using qw for an array ref:

[qw(item1 item2 item3 item4)];

Extracting parts of a split list

my ($item1, $item2, $item3) = (split(/s+/, $str))[2,4,5];

Converting An Array To Key-Value Pairs For A Hash

my @list = qw(key1 val1 key2 val2 key3 val3 key4 val4);
my %h = %{+{@list}};

Calling a function inside of a quoted element

Very useful when you don't want to end a quote or heredoc.

my $var = "hello @{[getName()]}n";

Checking if the correct number of parameters are passed into a subroutine

sub func {
die unless @_ == 4;
}

Using A Lookup Table To Quickly Validate If Arguments Exist

Good for checking input.

sub validate {
my %args = (arg1 => 1, arg2 => 1, arg3 => 1, arg4 => 1);
return exists $args{$_};
}

Converting a subroutine's arrayref argument to an array

some_func("arg1", "arg2", ['item1', ['item2'], ['item3'], ['item4']);

sub some_func {
my $arg1 = shift;
my $arg2 = shift;
my @items = @{shift()};
print "$_n" for @items;
}

Dynamic Subroutines With Hashrefs

Nice technique when you want to create callbacks and require that the function calls are a little dynamic (for instance, when you don't know what function you might need to call).

my $h = { progname => 'some_func' };
eval "$h->{progname}('David')";

sub some_func {
print "Hello $_[0]n";
}

Getting Local Time in Epoch Seconds

use Time::Local;
my $sec = timelocal( (localtime)[0..5] );

Efficient File Slurping

open (FILE, $dir) || die $!;
my $file = do { local $/; };
close (FILE);

Getting All Files in A Directory

opendir( DIR, $dir ) || die $!;
my @segdirs = grep { !/^./ } readdir( DIR );
closedir( DIR );

Better Inheritance in Perl

use base(Path::MyClass);

Creating A Basic Constructor

sub new {
my ($class, %args) = @_;
my $self = {};
bless $self, ref $class || $class;
}

Creating A Singleton Instance

Using the constructor from above:

sub instance {
my $class = shift;
strict 'refs';
my $instance = ${"$class::_instance"};
defined $$instance ? $$instance : ( $$instance = $class->new( @_ ) );
}

My Real Attitude Towards Japan

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:22:20 -0600

I mentioned why I came to Japan on my blog. And these recent "outbursts" describing my frustrations with Japan are just me learning more and more about the darker aspects here. But like everything there's many stories to me.

The basic thing is that I like living here but I hate working here. I really like being with my friends and I enjoy the convenience of being able to get around. But working here in general sucks. Office politics, trying to conform, the expectations on me to improve my Japanese at a unrealistic rate, the crappy weather, the stupid laws passed by irrelevant politicians and old people are really dragging me down. I've become more tempted by the day to make a phone call to a US recruiter and just see if someone is willing to help fly me home to LA.

But I really like many of my friends, but Japanese and non-Japanese. Most of my friends are here these days so the day I go back permanently, I'll probably won't have many opportunities to see them again. Hopefully, by then I'll be married and won't have to come back to Japan in terms of work ever again (and hopefully the US will solve a lot of their political and economic issues by then).

Until that time I remain frustrated and feeling that I have little power to change things out here. That isn't to say that I don't try to do things, but the level of help that this country needs is far beyond what I can provide.

Mostly, I feel really bad for my Japanese friends who have little choices except gut out the life style here. I'm fortunate in being able to have choices in terms of where I can live. If I don't want to live in Japan anymore, I can go back. Yeah, the gas prices might suck and the job market isn't great compared to 1999 or 2007, but I have a home in LA and my mom can help me out. For my Japanese friends, most won't have any opportunities to live abroad or improve their paycheck by that much.

When I look at how this country is run, sometimes I just wish America annexes Japan entirely. To me it makes more sense by the day. Some people might fear that Japan would lose its culture. But at this rate, what is there to really lose? Most of what people fear is just nostalgia. However, images and beliefs are extremely influenced by Western media. Businesses are forced to adapt quite often to how things are done in the west. It's just part of evolution. The thing is why continue all the hassle with the legal documents and international politics anymore? Just let America adopt Japan as the 54th state. Even at work, my coworkers and I often joke that the only thing missing is the legal documents saying that Japan is part of America.

Mainichi Daily Shimbun Takes Down Raunchy Column

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:01:44 -0600

I saw this and had mixed feelings. While it's true that the content for WaiWai was racy and very crude, I did find them interesting, albeit it does give a poor impression of the Japanese society on a whole. I think it sucks big time that they removed the column entirely because in some ways, you don't want to just read about their latest generic pitcher throwing some ball for a US team or how some mom made cookies for her kids. It's nice having edgy stuff once in a while, even if it doesn't represent everyone.

Censorship in any form is a bad thing (well I hate useless comments on the net but heck that's what gives me my paycheck at the end of the day). The thing is that this is a huge form of censorship about Japan and its imagery. I think the Japanese want to promote just their temples, food and arts culture much in the same way America likes to enforce itself as the world's police man. But there's a lot of underground aspects to Japan that makes it gritty and less pristine. This is a good thing in reality because those other images are archaic and for historians.

This situation reminds me of the old English teachers that want their students to worship Shakespeare and Chaucer for their poetic artistry, but not really expand the relevance to current issues. Yeah, we know Shakespeare and Chaucer are great, but tell us why and how they pertain to me in 2008. With Japan, templates, sushi and some silly theater are just one aspect of Japan. There's enormous amounts of subcultures that are virtually hidden because like many other countries, they only want to glorify their equivalent of Renaissance periods.

I wasn't a huge fan of these columns but I think it's a travesty to Japan and speech that they did this. Well, hopefully other sites will open up some interesting gossip. I mean, it exist everyone and people really aren't angels as they'd like people to believe.

How Japan's Elderly Managed to Give Themselves Retirement Plans

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:40:59 -0600

I had the opportunity to talk with my coworker over some beer at the pub tonight. It was an interesting conversation where she divulged some private issues (which I won't go into) and one other issue about how she's looked down upon in the office as a woman and recent graduate. My other coworker is treated with little to no respect either as he lacks experience, even though he's potentially full of good ideas and energy.

These situations and my own situation got me thinking about a huge problem in Japan.

Old people.

The older generations in Japan are a huge plight for the young. Asian societies in general have been typecast as being respectful towards their elderly. Japan, in particular, has this moral social code. Heck, at bars at times I'm heckled by some drunk oyaji who demands that I respect him. Sometimes it's facetious but other times I feel that they're being serious.

Either way, I find this respect to be disrespectful towards the young people.

The thing with respect (for me at least) is that you earn it, you don't demand it, and you never force it upon people. In Japan at least, it's the latter. I see these young kids with potentially bright futures subjected to this social discourse where they're essentially trapped. The older generations basically have these kids work long hours for small wages while the older people leave early from work, collect fair sized paychecks, impose their wills on their subordinates, and basically act as leeches off society. It's absolutely brilliant because they've managed to create a neo-slave society without the world being able to accost them in a legal manner.

There was a study done and reported over at Yahoo where they polled the hardest working people/countries. For some strange reason, Japan wasn't even mentioned. Even more bizarre, they counted America(ns) as having longer hours. Certainly, the Japanese have a few extra holidays compared to Americans, but I don't think the polls were fair. From a productivity viewpoint, America will win out in comparing sizes with the Japanese. But I think most Japanese don't report the horrendous overtime, which is actually illegal here. I know for a fact that most Americans probably don't work nearly as many hours compared to the Japanese, unless they're holding multiple jobs. I'm not saying there aren't jobs where people are under working the Japanese in America, but the majority of the Japanese people I know (even in my office) have terrible hours.

Going back to the topic, the Japanese society is still feudal in nature; they've simply reorganized it with laws and corporate buildings to hide what's going on inside. The guy on top still wins out while the rest are petty farmers looking for a break that never will happen.

Then you get the anomalies like Horie-mon. But because he didn't suck up to the older folk, he got slammed back down as a message to all the younger generations in Japan.

It's really sad seeing all these kids with little hope to escape these situations while these big wigs play puppet master, entertaining themselves with their network of buddies from the old days. They leech off society and stay in companies well beyond their usefulness.

I'm not saying at all that people should not respect elderly people, nor that old people should not hold jobs. However, it's one thing when these people long outlived their usefulness to society and contribute nothing back in a constructive manner.

My main fear about how things work in Japan is that it'll send a horrible message to how things should get done, which is terribly inefficient. With younger people unable to be given the confidence, authority and wisdom to make decisions, they constantly are forced to delegate to a higher authority. With this dependency chart, you have endless confirmations that return to an answer that would be obvious. Worse yet, these methods of perpetually delaying decision making or understanding the quickness of how the world moves simply slows down the potential progress of what Japan can achieve.

Take the internet for instance. The internet really is a young person's domain. The constant growth and changes require a lot of energy and open-mindedness to be able to absorb and adapt quickly. Technology has traditionally, between culture to culture, never been something that older people could adapt because of force of habit. However, in places like America, we've seen many explosive companies emerging from the imaginations, creativity and desire of young people who see visions and promise. You name it from Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Myspace, ebay, Napster, etc. Where are the disruptive, world changing internet technologies in Japan?

I personally want to see more of the older generations starting to step down and allowing the kids to take up the cause, take bold risk and do things against the norm to make Japan great as a leader in the world. It is a country that has done well, but everything is locked up in perpetual potential and can only be released if this situation is amended.

WireIt.js Removed

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:48:12 -0600

I got a funny email on Facebook and Myspace the other day and found out that WireIt.js was removed. It's a real shame because this library is quite nice. The reason: copyright infringement.

While the author mentioned that the library might be released as a YUI widget, it's the original source code that makes it useful.

I don't know how useful a widget might be. Take Google search results for instance. You have to employ their sucky AJAX library to get the results you want. I prefer to have the raw data. Yahoo actually did a good job in allowing developers to retrieve XML data feeds from their search.

However, we're seeing the shoe on the other foot. Come on Yahoo! Yahoo Pipes is visually interesting for developers but it isn't that special. WireIt.js is one of the more useful Javascript libraries out there for doing data flows and potentially other visual applications that require connecting elements together.

Well, then again that's why all those people are leaving at Yahoo, right Mr. Yang? ;)

Stratovarius

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:24:24 -0600

I recently decided to grab some of their stuff. I had a few songs of theirs but not their entire collection. Then I put a bunch on my ipod and decided to take them for a spin at work. I have to say that they are (were?!?!?!) an incredible band!

I knew about these guys about 10 years ago back when I was into joshi puroresu. A friend in New York showed me a few of their songs (along with Gamma Ray), but at that time, I wasn't really into power metal. Lately though, I've really been getting into the whole power metal genre, mostly because its the perfect music to compliment my cardiovascular exercises. Nothing like a heavy, hard, fast beat to get you jamming!

Stratovarius though isn't just a simple fast playing band. I find their music ethereal, contemplative, well orchestrated. I hate saying this, but the guitar playing, for instance, is like Yngwie Malmsteen if he could compose well focused songs rather than just blazing solos. Add some Maiden and Priest influence with Queensryche-like vocals and you got an amazing mix.

I think some of their mid-career stuff is truly excellent. It feels darker, more atmospheric. They don't just play in one key or rhythm, but really delve into the whole power metal genre. Take for instance, "Twilight Tonight." The song uses some interesting chords to create a dark feeling at the beginning; then add in the synthesizers with the strings generating an orchestra and you can really get into the tune. But the tune slows down and builds to a climax at the end. In some ways, a tune like that reminds me of something that you could place in an epic action movie.

Originally, I wasn't too fond of their stuff earlier. But at work I have a great opportunity to really let the music sink in. So I'm discovering tunes here and there that are amazing and really grow on me. Stratovarius sadly is a band I wish I had discovered earlier, considering that they had a major falling out and disbanded. Definitely, one of those bands I would've loved seeing in concert.

Fat Prevention Law in .jp?

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:05:42 -0600

I saw this link over at /. This is utter bullshit. Are they trying to get rid of foreigners, or attempting to force rationalization by using the obesity scares in America as a way to reduce consumption of food?

Funny that the Japanese government doesn't attempt to investigate all these anorexic women on the streets. I've seen women out here whose arms and legs are skinnier than a pencil sliced in half! Or the law makers should do something about all the homeless problems around Tokyo that people want to ignore.

US law makers are scary because they have laws that intentionally hurt the public while only helping the rich (i.e. those paying off the government). In Japan, the law makers are either stupid or really annoying. Sometimes, I really pity Japanese people because they're subjugated by these idiots with little choice but to remain docile or stupid. The ones I really pity are the ones that get smart enough to figure out how screwed they are and end up giving up because there really isn't a lot of hope in this country.

Fortunately, for someone like myself, I can always go back to the US. I might even be able to one day migrate to Canada if things become horrible in the US. But the Japanese people here mostly are trapped. And worse yet, many people don't realize that the trap is mental and social.

By Far the Coolest Thing I've Seen Online

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:31:01 -0600

The Lego Vault.

Yes, I've had dreams since I was a child of seeing something like this. But apparently, Lego has a historical vault of all sets since the beginning.

How cool is that?

As far as I can remember, I would have these dreams growing up of going shopping at places like Toys'R'Us and being able to re-purchase old Lego sets. I still do. Of course, that's partially possible by going to ebay or the BrickBay and paying an arm and a leg(o) for a set that at one time had a value of $10-20. But to be in a store where you can pick up any set you want from the past is one of my life long true dreams.

I hope some day that Lego partly fulfills my dream of being able to purchase any set online in their entire catalog. Honestly, it shouldn't be that difficult, especially now that Lego has their Lego Factory software. Yeah, I could theoretically create my own sets, but there's something to be said about authenticity. Not to mention personal fulfillment of some day claiming to own all the major town, space, castle and pirate sets.

Crappy Weather in .jp

Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:32:22 -0600

Now that I think about it, I should've just taken the whole month of June off in LA rather than May. The weather for almost this whole month stunk like the men's locker room at the gym. Tonight was no exception. Just one heavy rain storm right after I left my office. But I read that the storm would let up eventually, so I took shelter in the gym. Fortunately, my estimates were correct so that by the time I left, the sky cleared up enough for me to miss any further torrents.

Yesterday was worse. Fortunately, I could stay home rather than endure the elements of nature. Unfortunately, I have virtually no food in my place. So I tried ordering a pizza from Dominos and the fn' website stopped functioning!!!! I guess everyone else had the same idea. It makes me wonder though if Dominos even realizes that their site crawls to a halt on rainy nights like last night?

Well, hopefully this cruddy season ends soon enough. I'm looking forward to some sun where I can actually utilize my weekends and see some parts of Japan!

Very Sad Day: George Carlin Passes Away

Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:10:21 -0600

A friend of mine introduced me to George Carlin back in college. Prior to that, I heard his name used on occasion, but I only thought he was some old fart goof. The first time my friend played George Carlin, I was quite shocked at his vulgar and hard hitting style of comedy. But even then it didn't make much of an impact upon me.

Later this past year, I found some of Carlin's famous live performances on YouTube after being intrigued by his (literally) cock sucking, hitch hiking character shown in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. Being more socially aware these days, I instantly bonded to his commentary, finding what he said to be on the mark. His brand of comedy isn't naturally for everyone. But if you have beliefs like myself, then you'll love his poignant statements.

To this day, I often quote from Carlin. I'll never get out of my head things like "golfing Connecticut rich faggots" or "those crooks on Wallstreet." One of my personal favorite performances of his was when he talked about airport security. I love how he just completely debased airport security as a perpetuated myth to keep white middle class Americans feeling safe. Absolutely true. I've even heard that particular speech was given prior to 9-11, so it's interesting to note his social prescience.

Some people had Carlin's comedy almost nihilistic. Maybe to a certain degree, but I think that he has some good points in it. He's comforted in nihilism because the shit around us stinks so badly that nothing is still better comparatively.

It's going to be hard or near impossible to find the level of cutting edge comedy Carlin could dish out. He had a philosophy behind his humor, kinda like a postmodern Dante. But he never really preached his philosophy as a religion, but satirized it and the whole notion of institutionalism to keep himself clean.

I find it very disappointing that I will never have an opportunity to see George Carlin live. Sadly, I had left Las Vegas about a week after he would return. So I had missed the very last opportunity to see a real comedic genius at work. The other thing that saddens me is that I'll never have an opportunity to speak with the man. I think the two of us would bond quite well as we share extremely similar beliefs (at least from what I could discern from his stand up performances).

But I will say that it was a real pleasure having someone like George Carlin on this Earth to provide that little bit of enlightenment. You'll be sorely missed.

Reading Between the Lines: The Yahoo-Google-MSN Saga

Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:50:14 -0600

The other day I was explaining to a few coworkers the significance and lead ups to the various situations of Yahoo. I realized that the scenario is far more complicated than people realize and that there hasn't been a well written summary of the whole situation at hand.

Probably, we need to start with the deal on M$ and Yahoo that never went through. For a few months, I remember reading more than one site discussing the possible buyout of Yahoo by MSN. I believe even I suggested something like that with the threat of Google looming in the background. Despite the actual move, I never actually thought MSN would make the move so soon, but that move had triggered a chain of events that are historical and political in nature.

The natural reason for the buyout from M$'s point of view was to thwart Google. Steve Ballmer has been notorious for his outburst, directing his rage against Google. Rather than utilizing the situation as a real business opportunity, Steve Ballmer turned this situation into what seemed (to me at least) like a personal crusade to bury Google and Eric Schmidt in particular.

Ballmer ought to watch the Godfather (kinda like Bill Gates' character in Pirates of Silicon Valley) in emulating Vito Corleone in never showing his true intentions and feelings. If anything his outburst aided in the perception that M$ was purely going to do this deal to hurt Google, much in the same way Sonny Corleone would tip off Solozzo "the Turk" in being interested in Solozzo's drug deal, something Vito Corleone wanted no part of.

My interpretation of Ballmer's choice of Yahoo in particular was to get that final feather in his cap he desperately needs in his tenure as a CEO. Thus far, Ballmer's reign as CEO has been plagued by highly publicized disasters. The XBox money losing fiasco, Vista's lack of acceptance by the public, M$'s failure to capitalize on new grounds on the internet market (particularly social networking), the massive loss of ground of the server side to Linux, and Google's slow but imminent penetration in the enterprise through their free apps. Thus far, we have yet to see M$ come out on top as they had conquered the 80's and early to mid 90's.

The deal in itself is nothing new to M$. In fact, M$'s typical business practices historically have been to buy or copy, never innovate. In relation to the internet, M$ has no clue. Without monopolistic practices like bundling Internet Explorer with the operating system, M$ would have a difficult time catching up to some of the mega internet crazes such as social networking, blogging and open APIs. With Yahoo having a huge percentage of the internet in their pocket due to their longevity and brand name recognition, Yahoo would fit nicely in M$'s scheme of things.

That aside, another well known fact about M$ is their anti-competitive practices. For some reason, it seems that many of the internet writers had suddenly favored the deal, rather than remembering M$'s infamous past cases of monopolistic practices (and I for one believe that these writers probably had some stock in either M$ or Yahoo). Still, many of us remember the pre-internet days where we were enslaved to the M$ OS. With M$ potentially acquiring Yahoo, the outcome would be a monstrous capitalization on the internet ad market, something that M$ wants dearly as everyone knows for a fact how Google uses that market as their primary course of survival.

Fortunately, for whatever reason, M$/Ballmer did not go through in the end. Of course, Jerry Yang and other Yahoo executives had staved off the invasion temporarily through attempting to raise the price (although Yang himself doesn't really need the money), provide excellent severance packages for their employees and just delaying. Threats of proxy fights would be imminent as would shareholder lawsuits. But truthfully, there is far more at stake than money on the table.

From there until now, Yahoo itself would go through a new barrage of assaults. Although Yahoo and Google would ink a deal (which I will discuss hereafter), that would not halt the acid rain coming from the murky clouds of disgruntled employees and the wrath of their shareholders. The shareholders, in their infinite myopic perception, only care about immediate return, especially in this downturn economy. In some ways, Yang and company are now finding out the hard way why having a public company isn't always about just making money from stock options and that those years of loyalty were non-existent and that these people were waiting just for a moment like this to cash in their checks.

Worse yet, Yahoo, kinda like a whore spreading her legs and awaiting an infection, would receive a truly menacing threat from Carl Icahn when he would purchase up a good number of their shares on the market. I can't say anything good about this guy. I don't even know if he understands the implication of what he's doing in his proxy fight. But it's obvious how some investors had managed to manipulate him into going into this fight as a cause.

Then you have the mass exodus leaving Yahoo. As I mentioned the other day, this doesn't necessary imply a bad thing. But I'll get on to that later.

But let's step back to my previous point about the Google-Yahoo deal. I think this latest and known development is pretty blatant and really is where you have to read carefully between the lines. The deal in a nutshell is Google giving Yahoo some bribery money to appease their shareholders. It's not the level of money that the shareholders want, but it's meant to prevent them from bitching too much. It's also a (begrudging) thank you to Yahoo for helping them out before, back when they were starting out. Most importantly, it's a way to keep Yahoo in Google's pocket (which is the irony of ironies) and for M$ to stay away.

Now, one may ask, "Is that really such a great thing? Isn't that collusion?" YUP!!! It's collusion kinda like George Bush and Cheney getting hidden handshakes from the oil companies in supporting their campaigns while the administration goes through great lengths in protecting these industries. Well, if that's the case, why isn't that considered monopolistic or why would I slam M$ for only doing what Google ended up getting?

It's simple. From my point of view, I really don't fear and mind Google as much as other people. Do I trust them? No, I don't trust anyone (for that matter). But I know for a fact based on history, based on Ballmer's rants against Google, that the deal was basically the lesser of two evils. The main thing is to continue allowing a company like Yahoo to remain independent.

At this point, both Yahoo and Google are propping up a lot of smaller companies through their ad networks. Eliminating one or both would stifle competition potentially. Back in the day when I was attending UC Irvine, the "in-thing" (prior to the IPO dot com craze of the late 90's) was the MBA guys hooking up with the computer science undergraduates, building an application and hoping to get the company sold to M$ so that the founders could make out like bandits. These days, we have a lot more players that can provide that assistance in the form of eBay, Google, Yahoo, Amazon (though not as a common), etc. Eliminating those companies would mean that a more limited selection of companies and people could make it, rather than having an increasing number of competitors on the market. Just common business sense for anyone who isn't a shareholder of M$ or Yahoo.

The other thing is that when I look at Sergie Brin and Larry Page, I don't perceive the same obsessed nuttiness of Ballmer nor the domineering, business savvy of Bill Gates. I see two guys who are very smart scientists/engineers working with someone who has a good sense of business in Eric Schmidt. Maybe 10 years from now, that might all change, but seeing their interviews and such, I just don't get the same vibe as I do with Ballmer. And that to me means a lot in this episode.

Circling back to Yahoo, I have to say that when I saw the so-called mass exodus of executives or managers, I thought it was a great thing. I believe the count of people leaving was somewhere in the neighborhood of 140. Well, if you read/worship Dilbert like I do, you'll realize that having that many executives is probably what's killing the company in the first place. Sometimes, you'll get these mid-level managers who attach themselves to companies like parasites until the rum runs out. It looks like the rum is running dry at Yahoo quite quickly. But again, I feel this is a great thing because potentially, younger, hungrier people can move up the chain faster.

The other thing is that you have to realize 140 executives/managers means that you had that many more competing viewpoints to deal with. Now, with 140 less people, you can try focusing the business more. Forget trying to hire from the outside (unless it's me). Go internal and get some of those kids who are itching to climb the ladder faster and move them into more strategic positions. If anything, those people are the ones that ought to be able to re-vitalize Yahoo. You don't want to insult the employees' intelligence by hiring more external help (except me) when you have all the talent within the organization. I'm certain there's more than one person who has the energy and vision to help drive a component or two in the company back to success.

Then you have Jerry Yang and the remaining top people. Let me advise something to Yang: maybe let the people below do the driving. In situations like these, you really need someone like a Steve Jobs to rally the troops. You need visionaries who understand what people and/or need. I don't know if Yang has that vision nor passion. I think when you make as much money as someone like him at his age, it's easy to become complacent. Rather than being on the streets, hungry, yearning for that first taste of success, you're hanging out with celebrities and living a glamorous life. You need to be street to execute something like this because it's the common person that's going to be using these things.

I already know where Yahoo ought to be taking itself. I know where M$ should go too. And I leave Google alone because they've got enough vision and talent to do without me. Nonetheless, this whole year is going to continue to be interesting. Good thing for me I'm back with the net!