Volunteer

http://www.saalt.org/regind.php

Risks

If your not taking risks in life, your just alive and not living. Whats the biggest risk you have taken today?

Salted Soft Pretzels

If your anything like me, when you get one of those big Soft Pretzels, you get it salted vs unsalted. I am not sure why I get the salted, because I really think they are too salty and always scub off the salt off! So why bother in the first place? Right? Why not just get the unsalted to begin with?

Well, I kind of like rubbing the salt off the pretzel leaving only a satisfactory amount. This little idiosyncrasy got me thinking, does anyone ever eat a Salted Soft Pretzel with *all* the salt on it? Well from my extensive research and hours of surveying (actually I just asked the person next to me) I found that everyone gets the salted pretzel, and everyone invariable always scrubs the salt off. So what is really going on here? Why go through the extra motions?

Then dawned on me. It wasn’t the fact that I was scrubbing the salt off to make it a pleasurable chore, but rather the feeling that I was preparing my food! Living in New York City one does not often getting around to cooking and I, like so many other people have now come to the sad stage of my life where unsalting pretzels equates to cooking a meal.

Okay maybe that is a stretch, and perhaps just flat out wrong, but gives you something to think about right?.

Efficiency...

How has the increased need for efficiency in the fast paced world changed the modern world? If people look around today they will see two different worlds working together, that of supply and that of demand, both being dictated to by the need for increased efficiency. Today’s demand wants a cheaper product with value and today’s suppliers wants a large market that can easily be manipulated to suit their selling needs. Both sides, suppliers and demanders, want increased efficient either in consumption, what the producers want, or the creation of a cheap product with value, what the consumer wants. The idea of increasing efficiency is not nescient by any means. There are many quesitons on the topic, but the one that may be the more important is: are the outcomes of a more efficient world for all intents and purposes a better world?

In the modern world, people consume, it is a fact of existence. How people consume and what people consume is of great interest to anyone who produces any type of good. With the growing market, the need to secure a niche and have control over consumption is increasing because for those who do not secure a niche will soon be out of business. I recently read Vinyl Leaves; Walt Disney world and America by Stephen Fjellman, and he contends that this need to control has manifested itself in the manipulation of perception through mass media in the form of advertising. Fjellman gives the idea that consumer being actively created by replacing wants with needs. Fjellman contends that people have this constant powerlessness and guilt and to alleviate this guilt people identify with products that have been so easily laid out for them via mass media. In addition he states that there exists a corporate paternalism: telling people what to do and how to be which goes to further his point of the consumer being actively created. Fjellman states that the creation of the consumer comes with its own implications and responsibilities. One of these implications implied in his argument is the new consumer is being programmed to consumes with efficiency and subject to the whims of the suppliers.

Goal in life ...

is to be shadowed and simultaneously illuminated by obscure simplicity.

_SNR

Pennies are worth less

Am I the only one that has trouble getting rid of pennies? I literally have a jar full of pennies and I can't seem to get rid of them ever. I have offered co-wokers an exchange rate of 11 pennies for a dime, but much rather just give me a dime and not bother with the pennies.

If you think about it, you can get rid of at most 4 cents per purchase if your lucky. And even if you did have an opportunity to spend more than 4, if you tried, you will get a dirty look. I am serious, I tried passing 7 cents on to this pizza guy and he was disgusted and asked me if I didn't have a nickel. As much as I wanted to say "Well moron, if I had a nickle, I would use it" I said, "sorry thats all I have", but really I did have a nickel and I was just trying to unload these worthless pennies on him. Sadly there was a line forming behind me, but darnit I wanted to get rid of the pennies. All this would be a mute point if the vending machine took them. Then you could sit there with out wasting anyones time and just feed them in to a machine for a tasty delight, kind of like a reward for recycling pennies, but unfortunatly they do that. I don't know why, but what the hell?

Also the problem with change in general is, If your anything like me, you don't carry it. Not that I don't want to, but its kind of heavy and weights your pants down, and more than that I just find it rather annoying; foremost in NYC. Why? Because if you do happen to have any change at all, the homeless will ask you for it. You could be like a block away and homeless person could be passed out drunk on the street, but soon as he / she hears the delightful jingle of coins, they jump up and are all over you like horny dog lusting over a thigh. At which point you really have no choice other than to give them a nickel. It's like they have an extra sense that tells them who has change and who doesn't. Then the real bad thing is you can't use the excuse that you dont' have any since it is an obvious lie. Not that I am againest giving money to homeless people, just find it rather pointless because its all tax free to them and its after tax $'s for me. Anyway that is just a tangent, back to my main point.

So if you can't use these pennies in vending machines, and you can't spend more than 4 cents at a time, you are basically screwed. Maybe I can solve two problems at once and just give the pennies to the homeless people, but the real question is what are they going to do with them?

What do you do with your pennies?

Down with Jack, bring Star 100.7 Back

I for one liked San Diego's Star 100.7

Advancement in Technology

Media consumption has become a problem in America.

As people embrace and combine technology that advances at an ever-rapid pace with their predisposition of an egocentric nature, you have in affect created an army of mindless media consuming automatons.

This problem permeates every aspect of modern media. At the inception of visual medium, there was printed paper which contained a limited number of articles, primarily used to communicate the news. As technology advanced it facilitated the creation of other print related media such as magazines, news papers, books, journals, etc. As it evolved, it allowed personalization at every level. There are news papers for financers, magazines for fashion designers and journals for lawyers. When computer age dawned, so did the internet. The Internet allows for pinpoint customization of everything: it allows people to read anything they want whenever they want and how they want it. If the font is too small, one can make it bigger. If the pictures are loading to slow, one can get high speed internet. If you don’t like what read, one can not only go to another website, but you can go out and now Blog about it and make your voice heard.

As print was evolving, the television era was well on its way. When Television first came out, they were black and white as well as small and had at most 5 channels. The quality, as compared today, was poor. Today, we have large 60 inch plasma screens to delivery crystal clear picture as well as 7.1 surround sound systems that engulf end users in a “media entertainment” centers experience. To feed this “media” center machine people have satellite TV and cable in addition to their healthy library of DVD’s. If that were not enough, with the advent of TiVo and On Demand, people can watch whatever they want, when ever they want and fast forward through all the advertisements that support the content in the first place. Again, complete control over what you watch, when you watch it, and all with a few clicks.

The story is the same in audio. The Audio medium has come a long way since Charles Herrold began regular radio broadcasting in San Jose 1912. As first, much like other mediums, radio was used to transmit relevant information such as news. As the medium evolved, so did the quantity and quality of material. Soon came news radio, talk shows, and of course music. And just as with other mediums, people wanted customization which brought the onslaught of LP’s cassettes, CD’s and now personal media players such as IPODs. With each step, the quality increased and so did customization. Today one can have almost a limitless amount of digital quality music in their pockets.

So what is the point of all of this? I feel while all these advancements are an excellent step forward for technology, it really has become a step backwards for society.

We have come to a point in the world where society requires, nay, demands instant gratification because people perceive it as more of right than a privilege. Why? Because technology allows us. We want things now rather than later. We want things our way, rather than a way that displeases us. We want to be in control with no uncertainly. And why not? It is so simple these days. We get what we want, when we want it, and if it disappoints us in the slightest way, we can tune it out with a flick of a wrist. All these underlying ideologies have grossly manifested themselves in the way we consume media of all form. Don’t like what you’re watching on TV? Fast forward. Don’t like what some one is saying on Instant messager? Block him/her. Don’t like what you’re listening to on the radio? Put on your iPOD.

I ride subway, I see people with iPODs listening to their music. Go over to a friends place, TiVO and DVD galore. Annoy someone online, get blocked. One might be able to argue that all these advancements provides for a delusional misconception of control in their life. The fact of the matter is life was, is, and always will be random and not controllable.

I think it’s come to the point where it’s ridiculous. I went to a club a few weeks ago to see that someone had brought their IPOD so they can listen to their music rather than the DJ’s. What would your reaction be? I went over to a friends place with a tivo, and he fast forward through a whole show just to see what happened at the end. What happen to patience? It is one thing to have things your way, but where is the line where it becomes absurd? I think we are closer to that line than most people would like to admit.

The second problem I see is that we are now in a world were large corporations are tailoring media to what we believe our desires and preferences are which have been conditioned already by these same large corporations. With our guard down because of our perceived control over media, it is only a matter of time before we don’t even know what we want. To typify this point, I was talking to an acquaintance of mine who works at a movie marketing group. She was telling me how their organization already knows what kind of demographics are going to like what kind of movie. Granted this is for movies, but it goes far beyond that as well all know. We can all be broken into demographics: Perhaps your Caucasian, 25, male and have professional jobs, or perhaps your 23, Asian & female and love to salsa. Whatever your demographic may be, there is an organization that knows what your demographic likes and dislikes. Now the real question is, is this correlation or causation? I contend it really is just because of conditioning. At a conscious or subconscious level, people are thinking and acting because they some how believe that this is what is acceptable within their social demographic: “I have seen so many people wear pink dress shirts to work, so maybe I should get on as well”

Where does all this start? No one can really tell you. In the mean time, people will continue to keep consuming the media they think they want, and try to fit into this mean reverting process of social demographics. Perhaps the real question we need to ask is where does this all end?

Happiness: Right or Privilege?

Simple ? or is it? Think about the constrains society puts on people

...

Its not the Big eatting the small, its the Fast eatting the slow

Coffee Order

Can you think of a longer coffee order:
Double Ristretto Venti Nonfat Organic Chocolate Brownie Frappuccino half cafe / half de-cafe mocha-chino extra Hot with Foam and Whipped Cream Upside Down Double Blended with java mocha cips and warm frothy skim moo juice, extra mocha and double shot of expresso on ice with a dash of cinammon

Do you Snooze?

This morning I had the most interesting thought. Where would the world be if alarm clocks did not have the snooze feature? I set my alarm every day for 6:45 when I almost always actually get out of bed at 7:10. 7:10 you ask? Yes 7:10, because in some vain attempt to trick myself every morning I have my clock set 10 minutes fast. Well I guess fast isn't the right word, although a lot of people use that word to describe clocks. I guess to be correct my clock is 10 minutes ahead. But anyways, I never am able to trick my self into thinking that is actually the time that is displayed but fully am aware that it is 10 minutes ahead.

Okay, well that was a pointless tangent, but than again the this whole blog is a pointless tangent. Back to my first thought. So the real question is, why not set my alarm to 7:00 in the first place instead of going through this whole ordeal if I am going to wake up at 7:00 everyday anyways? Well I for one love the snooze feature. Your kind of like in the semi-sleep state and in bed but still somewhat awake so you relish in just how comfortable you are and lament that fact that you have to go to work. It kind of eases me into the day, I guess.

Which brings me to my point, where would the world be if we didn't' have snooze, I know I would be just late to everything in the morning. I mean really, how many people actually get up soon as their alarm goes off? Almost everyone I know uses snooze, we are a society of snooze depended plebeian. If that feature was never invented would everyone one in the world just be late or would the opposite be true? Would everyone be super productive since the just get up soon as their alarm goes off? (Again, this is common terminology, but really if your alarm "goes off" wouldn't that mean that its not really making noise since its off, I guess the right word phrase would be alarm goes on??" haha)

I also find it interested that blogger doesn't NOT have the word "blog" in thier dictionary. I mean really, this is a blog site, and you guys can't even have the word in the dictionary?

Friend Portfolio?

Yesterday I was sitting around with a couple of my friends and we just joking around like normal when someone made an interesting comment, which at first was just a joke. I think everyone else, except for me, passed it off as a joke, but for some reason it stuck with me. I am not sure who said it, hell; it might have been me, but the more I thought about it the more it became interesting.

Most of my friends are finance geeks, and we invariability always apply finance logic to everything. It could be anything from using derivative terminology to inappropriately describe the female members of our society, or it could be to justify some stupid thing. This time it was on the subject of friends.

So what was the exact comment? Well someone said something along the lines of "your always trying to rebalance your friend portfolio"

Well what does that mean? For those of you who don't know finance or portfolio theory , I won't go into. The basic idea in rebalancing a portfolio is to minimize risk you take and maximize return you get. Or another way put, you want to get the most for your money with the least amount of uncertainty. So if you have 10 stocks, how do you allocate your money so you get the most out of it? So how does this apply to friends. Well the reason I am fascinated with the idea is, how many of us actually sit back and think how to efficiently allocate our time (investment) amongest our friends (return). If you think about it, it really is the same problem that thousands of finance people are trying to solve everyday, but instead of stocks or bonds, it with people.

So think of it like this, you have 10 friends and you end up spending all your time with 3 of them, even though you end up getting very little out of the friendship. You would like to spend more time with the other 7 people since you get more out of it, but for whatever reason it just doesn't end up happening since you might have known these 3 people much longer or they live somewhere else or something. I mean I know I am not logical when I spend time with people or my friends, I kind of just go with the flow. I mean naturally you want to spend more time with people you have more fun with right?

More I think about it, more I realize, that I have no rhythm or reason behind what I do in terms of social aspects. Sometimes I feel I am in friendships that are kind of not going anywhere. I mean, I don't know, are friendships supposed to go somewhere? Am I wasting time with people that are obviously a bad investment?

Basically, the real question is, is my friend portfolio currently optimal. I can say with no uncertainty that its not. I mean it can't be, it hasn't been rebalanced in ages really. At work people rebalance client portfolios daily, or maybe even hourly. How long is the cycle time for friends? Weeks? Months? Years? I am not sure, perhaps you can shed some insight into that.

So what is the conclusion of all of this, well basically, I need to find need assets, friends, to add to my portfolio, or reinvest/ reallocate current time investment in current assets (friends) that are mutually beneficial for all. Maybe I'll make an excel spreadsheet and figure out who is a waste of my time and just cut them out of my life

Grey Hair

Well thats it, its the end of the line for me. I found a grey hair. Actually thats not true, it was stark white! I mean that has to be worst, compared to just grey. It was only a matter of time, but i guess my age has caught up with me, im going to be greying soon. I mean if you can't hide it you might as well embrace it, so believe me it's not easy.

So I did some research and according to the Mayo Clinic, (yeah I had to bring out the big guns for this) :
=====================================
Hair typically turns gray as a result of aging. Pigment in the hair shaft comes from special cells at the root (base) of the hair. These cells are genetically programmed to make a certain amount of pigment (melanin) at specific ages. At some point in the aging process, these cells make less and less pigment until the hair has very little pigment. White hair has no pigment, and gray hair has some but not as much as a red, black or brown hair.

Not all hairs respond in the same way or at the same time. So the graying process usually is gradual. You can't prevent graying. Some people start graying in their 30s, and some not until their 60s. Genetics likely play a strong role in graying.

People rarely go gray overnight. If they do, it's typically due to alopecia areata. This condition causes the thicker, darker hairs to stop growing before it affects the growth of gray hairs — giving the impression of graying overnight. Alopecia areata eventually causes roundish patches of hair loss or complete loss of hair on the head or body. Its cause isn't known.

=======================================================

Well thats a load of crap, im in my early 20's and i am greyings, i am some sort of super aging freak! You know, I really need some help. A regular doctor couldn't even help me. I need to go to like Vienna or something. You know what I mean? I need to get involved at the University level. Like where Freud studied and have all those people looking at me and checking up on me That's the kind of help I need. Not the once a week for eighty bucks. No. I need a team. A team of Doc's working round the clock thinking about me, having conferences, observing me, like the way they did with the Elephant Man. That's what I'm talking about because that's the only wayI am going to get better. Souce: Seinfield

Bride and Prejudice

As most of you probably don't know, a little movie staring Aishwarya Rai, opened in the US this past weekend. I saw a few weeks ago, and I didn't think it was great, i mean it wasn't bad, but it wasn't really awesome either. I guess it was an okay film.

Well the point really is, that for the first weekend, it ranked 20, with $385, 848*, far behind the number one film, Hitch which had $43,142,214* in sales. So I guess your thinking whats the point. I think the point is, even though most of you haven't heard of this film and it ranked 20th on the weekend gross, it did much better than what you think at first glance. Being banking you just start to think about everything in terms of ratios. Granted this isn't EV/EBITDA, but if you take Weekend Gross / # number of theaters, you can get a much better picture of what really is going on. I mean after you normalize weekend gross by number of theaters, you see Hitched came in at $12,067.8 per theater and Bride and Prejudice came in at $12,057.8 per theater. (3575* theaters for Hitched and 32* for Bride and Prejudice)

(*source : http://movies.yahoo.com/boxoffice/latest/rank.html)

Anyways, there is exactly a $10 difference. But I will now proceed to prove that this difference is statistically insignificant. We will have to implementing a two dementional t-test to test the significance between the two means.

t=[(x_1 bar - x_2 bar) - (Mu_1 - MU_2) ]/ [s_p^2 / n_1 + s_p^2/n_2]
where s_p^2 =[ (n_1 - 1)* s_1^2 + (n_2 - 1)* s_2^2]/(n_1 + n_2 -2)

Since we don't know the variance of the sample, lets just hold that constant as a variable and will address it in a bit. Let us also assume that the variances are the same for both samples. I think in the context of this framework it is realistic to assume this.

s_p^2 = 3605 S /3605 = S.
t =[ (12,067.8-12,057.8) - (0) ]/ ( .17757 * s )
t = 10/.17757*s
t=56.317/s

degrees of freedom = 3575 + 32 -2 = 3605. We can now look this all up in a t table.
Since we don't know the variance, we can back in to it depending on the significance level.
At the
.1 significance t = 1.282,
.05 significance t = 1.645,
.025 significance t = 1.96,
.01 significance t=2.326,
.005 significance t = 2.576.

So lets just test at the .005 level, to see what the implied standard deviation.
2.576= 56.317/s ; s = 21.86
2.326=56.317/s; s = 24.21
1.96 =56.317/s; s= 28.73

So clearly based on this we see that even at the .005 significance level, the standard deviation would have to be only 21.86. Which is completely reasonable. Meaning that there is a .5% chance we can reject the null hypothesis which is the means are the same.

So based on this we can clearly determine that Bride and Prejudice and Hitched did just as well.

So what was the point of this whole exercise, well to show that Bride Prejudice did well, that and Aishwarya Rai, is hot. Well i guess i didn't really prove that, but hell, thats the only really thing that matters

This past weekend

Well this past weekend was insane. Friday afternoon my boss tells me that we have to go see this consumer electronics compnay in San Diego. I was more than estatic to go, since you know I live, or I lived in San Diego. I was suppost to fly out on Friday, except I was at work late, I took the first flight on Saturday. I got to poway at 10:00 something and surprised my mom. She was so happy! My dad's first reaction was "I hired people". For those who don't know, my parents own a flower shop in Poway, and the past weekend was v-day. (the busiest time of the year for any florist.

Well anyways, I end up working at the store and chill at home until my meeting on monday morning. I go up and have breakfast with the CEO and the sponser as well as the senior mangement team. They showed up around and we discussed the company. After the meeting I spent rest of the day at the store doing stuff.

I was lucky enough to squeeze in some time to see a good old HS buddy of mine, Marc. We didn't do anything fancy, but grabbed some coffee. (althought I don't drink coffee). I took the red Eye back monday night, and got back to my place this morning at 5:30 and then decided to just go to sleep since I was so beat, even though I was suppost to go to work. Ha, oh well.

All in all, it was a great weekend

Well, I am moving from Xanga, not because Xanga is no good, but I figure Google is just better. I will just have to link to this from my old Xanga. You know what would be a good feature, to be able to port your blog from xanga to Blogger, I wonder where I could submit that idea. I am sure people at Google can figure that one out