I Believe In The 2nd Amendment

I am a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. I do not believe in this right because I want to hunt animals, or protect my home against burglars. I believe in this right as the founders of America intended it: to protect the freedom of the people against oppression and tyranny.

The sitting President of the United States has been under investigation for potential treason. Strong evidence exists that he has come under undue influence from a hostile foreign state. Russia has been aggressively trying to subvert democracies world wide to further it’s own interests, and it appears our government may have been one of them.

The FBI has been investigating these potential issues, and in a very dark twist, President Trump demanded personal loyalty from the FBI Director and when the FBI Director told Trump he would give him honesty, Trump fired him. It is shocking to see this happen in America, though it’s a common occurrence in dictatorships in places like Turkey, North Korea, and Egypt.

This appears to be a blatant obstruction of justice. Our country depends on the rule of law and justice for everyone. We also depend on free and fair elections, and leaders who are not dependent on hostile foreign powers.

Our freedom in America may be under severe attack and this is the time our citizens need to take a hard look at exercising our 2nd Amendment rights. If you allow for attacks on our freedom like this, it’s a short road to being ruled by a fully authoritarian government.

I am a successful business owner and am closest to being a Libertarian. A lot of Trump’s tax and healthcare and economic policies would directly benefit me. I do believe in reductions to government spending (both to military and entitlements). However, I would rather see Trump impeached and a big government liberal elected than see us lose our freedom to a foreign power’s influence and watch the rise of a tyrant.

What is the red line for when citizens need to exercise their 2nd Amendment? Has it been crossed?


Los Angeles Interactive Agency Considers the Future of Interactive Icons

As the founder of a leading Los Angeles interactive agency, I’m constantly reassessing the digital landscape and looking for ways to put my clients ahead of the curve. As more and more Web surfers go mobile (mobile Internet searches are expected to surpass desktop searches as early as this year), we’re seeing a rapid evolution in the ways that people process information. Screens are getting smaller, searches are getting more precise (thanks to the wonders of voice command), and information is becoming more condensed. I could go on and on about best practices for online businesses in the 21st century, but I want to focus on something specific that perhaps you haven’t considered in any profound way: the use of icons.


Why Icons Matter

Icons are all around you, whether you realize it or not. You know that if you want to pause your MP3 player, you tap the button containing 2 vertical lines. If you want to perform a search on any given website, just look for a picture of a magnifying glass. When it comes to online business, icons are powerful because they allow you to say a whole lot with very little. For instance, if you sell merchandise on your website, you don’t want to fill up valuable space with an expansive rectangular button that reads, “Click here to purchase your items.” It’s so much more efficient to just use a picture of a shopping cart.

Why do I mention all of this? Because icons are becoming more important than ever before. As I already emphasized, Web surfers are turning to smaller screens, and that means you have even less space available to organize information and get your message across. Being pithy is no longer simply a good idea. It’s absolutely critical to the success of your online business. Are you making the maximum use of icons?

The Future of Icons on the Web

Mark my words. In the coming months, you’re going to see icons take center stage. In fact, it’s already happening. If you look at a navigation bar on a desktop-optimized website, you’ll see words and phrases like ‘About Us,’ ‘Contact Us,’ “New Products,’ etc…But if you click on an iPhone app, you typically find very few words on the nav bar. Instead, you see a row of icons. I’ll use Facebook as an easy example. The Facebook app features no words on the main nav bar. It features only icons. One icon consists of human silhouettes (to signify new friend requests), another icon consists of a speech bubble (to signify chat) and another is an illustration of planet Earth (to signify your News Feed or Facebook wall).

In the future, we’re going to see a lot more of this, even on desktop websites that utilize responsive design technologies. In doing so, we can ensure that one single website is just as user-friendly on all devices, no matter what the size or shape of the screen. Furthermore, we’re going to see icons become a lot more interactive, shifting and changing and taking advantage of useful animations.

Contact the Best Los Angeles Interactive Agency

If you’re concerned that your website isn’t making the necessary use of icons, give Coalition Technologies a call. We’re not your average Los Angeles interactive agency. We’re building the websites of tomorrow, today, and we can create custom icons that send just the right message and improve the user experience of your visitors. Call us for a free quote at 1-888-800-9101, and put your business one step ahead of the game.

Lindsay Lohan Should Not Be Sent to Jail

Surprise, surprise.  I am actually going to defend Lindsay Lohan on my blog.

Lindsay Lohan: No Jail
Lindsay Lohan: No Jail

Lindsay Lohan was arrested in 2007 after getting caught drunk driving twice.  Much more recently, her alcohol detecting bracelet determined that she had been drinking.  The circumstances surrounding this incident are incriminating: she had just attended parties after the MTV Music Awards.

I have had experience with alcohol detecting devices, including ones that use the same technology as Lindsay Lohan’s alcohol detecting bracelet.  These devices are SEVERELY inaccurate.  I had one tell me that I had a .20% BAC level when I was sober and hadn’t even had a drink.  Ridiculously terrible at judging drinking.

I did some research on the device Lindsay Lohan was wearing, called the SCRAM made by Alcohol Monitoring Systems (AMS).  I found an article detailing the following information:


The judge very harshly sentenced her to 3 consecutive 30 day sentences and an additional 90 days in live-in rehab afterwards.  Essentially she is supposed to go to jail for 90 days then serve an additional 90 days of

The Science and Practice Of The SCRAM Bracelet

The SCRAM bracelet measures alcohol using the same fuel cell technology used by most portable breath testing devices. With this particular device, the fuel cell is manufactured by Draeger. A fuel cell is a device designed to continually convert fuel and an oxidant into direct current. The reaction that takes place in an alcohol fuel cell is alcohol oxidation, and for these purposes, the “fuel” is alcohol. So, as alcohol is converted in the fuel cell to acetic acid it produces two electrons for each alcohol molecule. This oxidation creates a current, and the intensity of the current correlates directly to the amount of alcohol consumed by the fuel cell. This measurement can be further converted into an alcohol concentration.

What makes SCRAM unique is that it uses this technology not to measure the amount of alcohol in one’s breath, but instead uses it to measure the amount of alcohol migrating through one’s skin. Once in place the device will monitor the wearer based on a schedule set by the monitoring agency. Then, at a predetermined time, the bracelet communicates with a home-placed modem via a 900 MHz radio signal. The readings are sent to a remote computer that acts as a central clearing house of data where it is monitored and interpreted. The data for a specific offender is then available to the home state’s monitoring agency through a secure Internet Web site.

SCRAM’s alcohol measuring technology became feasible based on advances in technology that allowed a transdermal device to be small enough to be worn continuously, and sophisticated enough to communicate the readings obtained to a remote location for analysis. Prior to AMS, several other transdermal methods had been tested, including sweat patches and a competing and very similar device worn on the wrist. This wrist device was manufactured by Gither, Inc., and was the subject of research performed by Dr. Robert M. Swift, who first published on the topic in 1992. Ultimately, Dr. Swift published three articles as well as an editorial on the subject of transdermal alcohol measurement, with the last of these published in 2000. In this last article Dr. Swift indicated for the future, that Gither, Inc. plans to perform more experiments that measure transdermal alcohol under more natural drinking conditions. This research has either not been performed or not yet subject to publication. In his 1993 editorial, Dr. Swift states that additional research is being conducted to better elucidate the clinical pharmacology of transcutaneous ethanol and its relation to BAC, and to test reliability, specificity and acceptance of the transdermal methodology in different individuals over a range of research and clinical applications. While the article published in 2000 addressed some of these issues it is clear that much research remains to be done relative to the overall efficacy of transdermal alcohol testing, as well as to its overall applicability the non-clinical setting.

The only published research dealing specifically with the SCRAM bracelet was paid for by AMS, and was researched by J. Robert Zettl. In this paper, Zettl indicates that the objective of this research was to compare the accuracy of readings using the AMS SCRAM bracelet to alcohol concentrations measured by conventional breath analysis. He concludes that this independent research establishes SCRAM technology through its ability to provide accurate, continuous blood alcohol tests on clients who would have normally tested negative in a random testing program. Where random tests during the day might not detect an offender’s drinking event, SCRAM’s continuous testing will catch the event.

What is particularly noteworthy about the Zettl paper is that he is not a research scientist, and his research appears not to have been published in any peer reviewed scientific journal. In fact, it appears not to have been actually published by anyone other than AMS. Also, the only indication of the methodology employed is an indication that hundreds of subjects were tested over an approximately 9-month period. Alcohol Monitoring Ankle BraceletThe paper indicates also that the results of the SCRAM bracelet were confirmed not through the use of blood tests, but instead through the use of various breath testing devices. There is no statistical analysis done with the numbers obtained by Zettl in this study. It is also unknown whether or not the data was actually recorded. What is clear is that no statistical data is included in the text of this paper. After Zettl’s testing, unspecified modifications were made to enhance the SCRAM unit’s precision, comfort, communication software and data links and detector clearance. What changes were made to address what problems with what rate of success are questions left unanswered by this paper.

A second paper commissioned by AMS and written by Zettl addressed the issue of tamper verification.10 The device has three critical tamper safeguards. The first of these is an infrared (IR) sensor. The device emits an infrared light signal directly at the subject’s skin, and the skin absorbs a given amount of the signal’s energy. The portion of the signal that is reflected back to the device’s receiver is then converted to a voltage. When the device is placed into service, an initial infrared baseline reading is taken. (Interestingly though, no similar baseline is taken to individualize the bracelet’s ability to properly monitor the wearer’s alcohol use). Subsequent signals are compared against this baseline. In theory, if the subject attempts to frustrate the device’s ability to monitor ethanol by inserting a foreign object between the device and the skin, the strength of the reflected infrared signal will increase due to reflection. The device also continuously monitors the subject’s temperature. The theory here is that if the bracelet is tampered with by blocking or removal, the device will detect this tampering by detecting a change in the temperature measurement. The third tamper safeguard is in assuring that the device is not cut-off or otherwise removed. This is accomplished by measuring a small electrical signal that is continuously passed through the front and back straps to both halves of the device. If a break in the electrical signal occurs then the device will generate a message that is sent to the monitoring agency.

Limitations Of The SCRAM Bracelet

The manufacturer readily acknowledges that transdermal alcohol measurements can only be used to estimate the amount of alcohol in a subject’s blood, and therefore, the SCRAM device can only be used to make qualitative rather than a quantitative assessments. This position is supported by the scientific literature.

However, the essential theory of the SCRAM device is that it can detect a drinking episode by comparing its periodic measurements with an expected blood alcohol curve (taking into consideration the absorption, distribution and elimination of alcohol). If the ostensible ethanol measurements rise and fall in a gradual manner, then it is presumed that the measurements can be attributed to the metabolism of beverage alcohol. The manufacturer claims that this curve looks and behaves like a blood alcohol curve, but differently than a curve associated with a non-drinking episode. With an interferant, rather than a gradual rise and fall, the curve will show a rapid peak followed by a rapid falling off. What this essentially means then is that the monitoring agency is relying on the quantitative measurements of the device in creating the curve when it is acknowledged that transdermal measurements are only qualitatively valid.

However, the most pervasive problem with the SCRAM technology is that it is non-specific for beverage alcohol. In published experiments where skin vapor ethanol is measured, a system very similar to that used by SCRAM, the researchers concluded that an effort should be made to exclude extraneous ethanol. Such ethanol can come from a variety of ethanol containing toilet products used by many persons. This non-specificity is due in part to the fact that the measurements are taken above the skin, allowing environmental factors to be inadvertently measured by the device. Perhaps more problematic is that the fact that fuel cells are used to detect the alcohol, and fuel cells are generally non-specific for ethanol, and can potentially respond to other alcohols such as methyl-, isopropyl-, and n-propyl alcohol, and to acetaldehyde. At least in theory, because fuel cells are non-specific, these other types of alcohol, if endogenous, can produce a curve that looks identical to one produced from a verifiable drinking episode.

Another significant limitation is the fact that the entire predicate for distinguishing a drinking episode from a non-drinking episode, which of course is the behavior of the curve, has never been subjected to any legitimate scientific scrutiny. The only testing that has been done was commissioned by AMS, and performed by Zettl. There are no published research studies confirming that the SCRAM device can distinguish between drinking and non-drinking. There are also no published research studies confirming that a non-drinking curve will always contain a rapid rise and fall. In fairness to AMS, one study was published suggesting that the sweat-patch has been shown to be 100 percent specific and sensitive in distinguishing drinkers from non-drinkers. The problem is that this study involved only a small number of individuals who were monitored under tightly controlled circumstances, and needless to say, the sweat patch is not the SCRAM device. Additionally, this study did not address or control the possibility that interferents could be inhaled, ingested or produced endogenously. In these cases one might expect that the interferent curve would closely mimic a drinking curve, thereby reducing both the specificity and sensitivity of this testing method.

Defending The SCRAM Case

Defending one accused of violating a condition of bond or probation based on a SCRAM report requires a thorough understanding of the science behind transdermal alcohol testing, as well as the manner in which the SCRAM bracelet operates. From this research counsel is likely to conclude that transdermal alcohol monitoring has not yet been subjected to an appropriate level of scientific scrutiny, and in order for there to be any likelihood of success this conclusion must be effectively communicated to the Judge. This conclusion appears to be supported by the fact that during development AMS was in competition with Gither, Inc., and their very similar wrist bracelet. Apparently, this competition lead to AMS placing their SCRAM bracelet into service without proper research first having been done.

Once the science is understood, defense counsel must next obtain from the monitoring agency the graphs that ostensibly reflect the drinking episode. The graphs should be accompanied by a linear read-out of each individual TAC reading. The graphs will contain three curves, one each for the infrared signal, the subject’s temperature, and the alleged TAC. These graphs must be scrutinized to determine if in fact the numbers appear to reflect a typical blood alcohol curve, and whether or not any blocking episode actually coincides with the drinking. With respect to an analysis of the blocking aspect, bear in mind the delay in TAC relative to BAC. While it may appear that they coincide, actually they may not, because the infrared signal is in real time while the TAC may actually be attenuated by as much as 120 minutes or more.

It is also helpful to obtain a detailed medical history so that it can be determined if the offender has any medical condition or chemical exposure that could cause a false positive. The accused should also report exactly what they were doing during the entire day before and after the alleged drinking episode, and this history should be examined for possible interferant exposure. If possible, counsel should attempt to match up the medical condition or chemical exposure with the alleged drinking.

If it appears that there is a legitimate argument against drinking, defense counsel should request an evidentiary hearing based on FRE 702 and 703, and if the rules applicable to evidentiary hearings in your State allow, pursuant also to the Daubert and Kumho Tire cases. At the hearing the limitations of the scientific research can be elucidated for the Court.

It is only with this level of advocacy that the judiciary can be properly educated about the significant limitations of the SCRAM device, and if the violation is approached in this way defense counsel should obtain a much higher likelihood of success beating what might otherwise appear to be an unbeatable allegation of drinking.

8 Best Windows 8 Keyboard Shortcuts / Hotkeys

Below are my 8 favorite Windows 8 keyboard shortcuts / hotkeys to use:

  1. Windows key + M minimizes everything on your desktop so you can see the background.
  2. Windows key + Shift + M restores all the windows you just minimized above (but not ones individually minimized beforehand).
  3. Windows key + E opens the windows explorer for quick access to files and folders on your computer.
  4. Windows key brings up your metro start screen along with quick search for applications and files.
  5. Windows key + L locks your computer so when you walk away your coworkers won’t install silly software.
  6. Alt + Tab cycles you through open windows.
  7. Windows + P  let’s you change your screen setup
  8. Windows + left or right arrow allows you to cycle through your windows quickly.

Hiring Slow, Firing Fast: Problems of this Strategy

I have been following the strategy of Hire Slow, Fire Fast when it comes to recruiting and have come to realize that there are a number of severe limitations to this strategy. Here are a few:

  1. If your company’s customer base is growing rapidly, your team of brilliant people can become overworked and demotivated because of it. Hiring more rapidly might be a good idea in these situations.
  2. Firing fast is much easier said than done. Once you’ve brought on a new team member, I feel a strong obligation to give this person every chance I can before firing them for underperformance. I try to help them with training, switching them to different types of tasks, and doing everything I can to help them succeed.
  3. Hiring slow will limit your growth. My capacity has pretty much been the biggest limitation of my business growth over the last year.

I will still follow the strategy of Hire Slow, Fire Fast… but there are some major disadvantages to it. Your thoughts?

Social Security Disability: America’s Largest Scam

There was an excellent article in NPR today about the Social Security Disability Scam. At $260 BILLION a year it is by far America’s largest scam. Bernie Madoff only managed to achieve $60 billion through his entire lifetime. However, the Social Security Disability scam is considered politically untouchable because 14 million Americans benefit from it and don’t have to work. Each one of these people will vote and fight extraordinarily hard to protect their disability entitlement.

I actually personally know many people on Social Security Disability who are scamming the system:

  • My own mom – never worked in her life but is fully capable of sitting in a 7/11 gas station or admin position.
  • Buddies dad – hasn’t worked in 10 years but has done tons of odd jobs around the house and for neighbors for extra cash.
  • Buddies mom – she regularly works at the gym, but still collects a disability check.

I can think of probably a dozen more people like this. The only legitimate person I know on Social Security Disability would be my stepdad who fell off a building while working and crushed his legs. He is much of the way recovered now though and could probably do a desk job.

Come to think of it – why I am working so hard? I could collect a disability check and get a doublewide and play computer games for the rest of my life! And if I really wanted to do well, I would have a bunch of kids and purposely make them do poorly in school so I could collect disability checks on behalf of each one of them! Then I could buy a sick Alienware gaming machine.

Work is for suckers, right?

The Foolishness of Chasing the Quick Buck

How often have you thought to yourself how great would it be to make a lot of money without a lot of work? To have a passive income stream? To build the next Instagram?

Do you think you’re the only one who wants to do that?

The marketplace of people who want to make a quick buck is huge. The competition is enormous fighting for the obvious low hanging fruit… people trying to build the next hit web app, write a quick e-book that becomes a bestseller, or get a quick pay day. A whole cottage industry has grown up that preys on people’s desire for a quick buck (think of everything from Nigerian scams to Tim Ferriss’s 4 hour workweek to real estate & stock seminars).

Here’s my breakdown of the different types of get-rich-quick schemes ranging from low brow to high end:

  • Nigerian scams – “Just send your bank account details and I will wire you $9.6 million”
  • Multi-level marketing – “We have an amazing Sham-Wow product and if you can sell it to your friends and family and they sign up and sell it to their friends and family…”
  • Investment Seminar – “Sign up for our $999 weekend seminar and learn how to be a millionaire like me!”
  • Tim Ferriss – “Work only four hours per week and have an income stream forever” (forget to mention Tim works 70 hours a week)
  • Copycat Businesses – “X person is making $200k a year doing Y business. I would be happy to make $50k a year and work 1/4 as much!”

The elderly and infirm fall for the Nigerian scams, the uneducated fall for multi-level marketing schemes, low to mid level employees fall for the investment seminars, and the young and smart fall for Tim Ferriss’s ideas (some of which are quite good, but the concept as a whole is unrealistic).

Key principle undermining the quick buck: If it is so easy to make money in a certain specific area then why wouldn’t someone work just a little harder than you to make that money?  If you can make $100 selling a crappy e-book, what is to stop a competitor from offering an e-book for $20 that is slightly better written? If you can build a web application in 200 hours of work, what’s the barrier of entry to someone else doing the same thing but better?  Competition will always make it more difficult to make money in an area. The first guy might have an advantage, but unless he works his butt off to defend it competitors will come eat your lunch.

Why competitors will eat you alive if you just want a quick buck: So you want to start a business that doesn’t take a you a lot of time but provides some nice extra income?  Let me give an example of why this doesn’t work.  You see that I have been successful at web design and think “Hey, I would be happy with 1/3 of Joel’s success and only working 1/3 as much, I’m going to start a web design company!”  So you go out and get a couple of books on web design, or try to hire a web designer.  You put up a website selling your services. You incorporate and set everything up.  Nothing happens.  Why?  There are one thousand and one competitors working overtime to be successful and fight for the potential clients out there.  You need to develop a competitive advantage (better looking websites, lower costs, white paper directory, major partnerships, better programming, etc).  If you aren’t outworking your competitors you will have no competitive advantage and you will get no business.  Competitive advantages are not easy to develop – each one of your competitors are focused on being the best in a certain way and many times have spent years honing their edge. You think you will just laze about and customers will choose you? Rarely.

The Bottom Line: Yes, occasionally people get lucky and win the lotto or build a web app in little time that goes viral or have some other piece of good fortune with little effort.  However, this happens far more rarely than you might think.  Most successful people spent years and years working hard at it.  There is no quick buck – usually just scams.  If you focus on being the best at something and developing a competitive advantage you will be very successful and make a lot of money. If you focus on making money fast with little work, you will never get anywhere.

Italian Employment Law Caused Carnival Cruise Ship Debacle

Almost everyone agrees that the Italian captain of the Carnival cruise ship was utterly incompetent and caused the deaths of several people when he ran his ship aground.  He is now being charged with manslaughter, abandoning ship and other crimes.  Read more about him abandoning ship here.

The question is: Why was this idiot the captain of a major ship in the first place?

I don’t know the captain’s personal details, but I do know that Italian  law makes it nearly impossible to fire any employee, regardless of how incompetent they are.  Such a legal structure not only causes obvious disaster such as the cruise ship, but it causes hidden economic disaster since you can’t fire someone when they are underperforming.

Interesting Conversation on Singularity.

7:03 PM ”A Friend”: I like Kurweil’s idea

7:04 PM he’s kind of a salesman for it

this blog of his is good


7:05 PM absolutely man will combine his body with machines to a ridic extent

already happening

google in your hand

next in your glasses

sorry I was at dinner last night

plus this http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/01/sexual-favors-chicken-mcnuggets.html

35 minutes

7:40 PM me: haha man declined the offer

7:41 PM yeah kurzweil is fascinating

if he’s right with the exponential advance (and previous data does show that trend), i think he’s very likely right and right around 2029 we’ll hit the point where our machines are smarter than us and become creators themselves

7:43 PM ”A Friend”: I’m ok with that

7:44 PM me: me too

i’m looking forward to uploading my brain to the internet and floating out in cyberspace till I get deleted cuz i’m an old unused program

14 minutes

7:59 PM ”A Friend”: ha

8:04 PM I would totally augment my body

an iphone connected to my skull

I’m down

13 minutes

8:17 PM me: yeah

8:18 PM full google API feed 24/7

thats a wet dream

+ statistics & mathematics packages

instantly calculate anything

expanded memory – instantly see full video/audio/smell/other sensory data from any moment in your life

8:19 PM be able to email those memories to other people

crime disappears instantly

actually, could you imagine if you had that connected up and then lost it? I bet you would feel incredibly alone & sad…

8:20 PM our dull senses and problematic bodies prevent us from achieving higher levels of life

“A Friend”: totally agree

8:21 PM I’m interested in taking drugs to enhance my intelligence

I look forward to the day where for $10 a day

you can increase your IQ by 30 points

8:22 PM I will consider messing around with this myself once I make my first million

figure out a brain cocktail

adderall plus cutting age other shit

me: i’m much more interested in discovering how to interface robotics, AI & data feeds directly with my own mind. I want to massively increase my memory, logical processing abilities, ability to share direct experiences, advance technology by directly interfacing with other augmented brains.

8:23 PM i think the potential will be here in 20-40 years

“A Friend”: I don’t know how much my mind can take advantage of that right onw


me: i want my company to be at the cutting edge of it

“A Friend”: there will be limitations

me: i want to earn cash in services & products

to get something like this

could you imagine if you were the inventor of direct brain interfacing technology????

bigger than apple, microsoft, ford, GE… any other company in history.

8:24 PM think about how much faster technology is getting now

how much faster companies can grow

it took rockefeller a lifetime to build his fortune

Mark zuckerberg is 27

the google guys started less than a decade and a half ago

8:25 PM Gates built it & retired in three decades

now a silly ass coupon site was the fastest growing company in history in terms of revenue for their first two years

imagine a company with a world-altering product

“A Friend”: yeah facebook will be silly soon

8:26 PM did you see my new blog?

“A Friend”nunnally.tumblr.com

me: yup

followed on google reader

8:27 PM btw, i don’t know if you noticed it yet, but we are already becoming obsolete

“A Friend”: how’s that?

me: my little brother josh is better with technology than me and he doesn’t even like it

his friends are epic

8:28 PM in terms of text messages sent, online content viewed, social media sharing

and quickly adapting to changes

you should play a video game with a 12 year old

its eye opening and humbling

i used to be really good myself… not remotely close anymore

doesnt matter for games

8:29 PM but there are 100x more kids today who are growign up tinkering with computer circuit boards & programming code than there were when we were kids in the 90s.

“A Friend”: yeah that’s true

me: not to mention the 3rd world countries bringing billions of people online in the last few years

8:30 PM the world is changing & life is upgrading at an exponentially increasing pace

8:31 PM in 20 years, we will both be shut down unless we can learn how to teach our companies to adapt – robots will be cleaning houses and websites will be far outdated and replaced with something else

“A Friend”: adaptation is always necessary

but becoming more so

8:32 PM me: its the power of using new generations of technology to advance to unheard/unthought of generations of technology

“A Friend”: Orting people are so fucked the don’t even know it

me: yeah… the % change that happened in the 16th century is about the same % change as we have seen in the last 5 years

if not even more exagerrated

8:33 PM look at some of these charts


8:36 PM ”A Friend”: wow

that’s mind boggling

me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PPTSuperComputersPRINT.jpg

“A Friend”: I want to take advantage of these changes

me: we sit here and think history will advance at the same rate as always before…… but that is not what the data shows

i do too

i want to get into robotics/ biology

8:37 PM neuroscience

cuz thats where the world is

is going

at a pace faster than anybody thinks

8:39 PM me: going to college at this point to try to learn a fixed subject the same way people have for 300 years strikes me as incredibly silly

8:40 PM every time i start learning a new programming language, it gets outdated in a few months and passed by something better

8:43 PM ”A Friend”: hmm

I think you have to learn how to learn

8:44 PM you also need somebody to pour on motivation in a lot of creative ways

I’m interested in education and how to do it well

it’s a tricky subject

what I would like is to create a school of elites and motivate them

open their minds

but I don’t like the thought and the drudgery of teaching the masses

8:45 PM me: i do it myself – i am self taught on everything I do on the web. i once took a class on asp.net but it was way too slow

and i got bored cuz i didn’t have a direct purpose for what i learned

for instance, i’ve just taught myself how to use google apps script

”A Friend”: nice

I’m having to learn more and more

me: and have written code for going through my salespeople’s #s

and giving me custom reports

8:46 PM beyond anything you could do with any spreadsheet function… cuz i wrote my own damned functions

want to see?

you will be impressed/ find it very useful

”A Friend”: I think making my website the first time was the best thing I could have done for myself longterm

me: yeah that was genius

u have skype?

”A Friend”: yeah

me: let me show you

skype username?