Author: Curt Doolittle

  • INFORMATIONAL CONTENT ON THE JACKET LINING. BY ROBERT GRAHAM. Men love mechanica

    http://www.robertgraham.us/buoy-sport-coat.htmlFASHION: INFORMATIONAL CONTENT ON THE JACKET LINING. BY ROBERT GRAHAM.

    Men love mechanical content whether its diagrams, formulae, theorems, arguments.

    A little secret technical information right next to you. It will keep you spiritually warm and fuzzy whe out there amidst the chaos.

    RG has become a little too dominated by hispanic patterns for my tastes. But now and again they priduce a piece thats enough victorian in symbolism to appeal to me.

    ( I have the most outrageous Liberace inspired jacket for club wear by robert graham. But theyd never let me into straight clubs in Kiev wearing it. Lol. )

    http://www.robertgraham.us/shopmen/sportcoats/buoy-sport-coat.html?utm_source=cc&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Image_Buoy_Sport_Coat&utm_campaign=Jan26-13_SportCoats_Buoy_Email


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-26 20:54:00 UTC

  • PSYCHOLOGICAL GAME OF THE DAY. Pulling out of a hotel parking lot in to traffic.

    PSYCHOLOGICAL GAME OF THE DAY.

    Pulling out of a hotel parking lot in to traffic.

    Waiting.

    Blonde boy, thin hair, black cap with skateboard asks “please. Please. Give me your car. Please?”

    Mind races through multitude of life lessons i might deliver at this moment.

    I choose one.

    “What will you trade me for it?”

    Shock. Open mouth. Silence. Fantasies fill his mind.

    Before he can gater his wits “I want your soul.”

    Incomprehension. Twinge of fear.

    “I am the devil. I want your soul.”. I smile. “For the car.”

    Half smile mixed with confusion. “yes!?”

    “I thought so. I have it already.”

    Smile. Notice a few horrified adult onlookers. Pull into traffic.

    Never going to forget that moment. I’m sure.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-26 17:16:00 UTC

  • WHY ARE FATHERS BETTER SINGLE PARENTS? Ok. So the data is beginning to look like

    WHY ARE FATHERS BETTER SINGLE PARENTS?

    Ok. So the data is beginning to look like single fathers are much better parents producing happier and more successful children than single mothers.

    Given the vast propaganda to the contrary, and the demonization of men by the feminist movement, why would this be true?

    Is there some sort of selection bias? It looks like the researchers try to compensate for it in their models. What else could it be? Is it income or class related? (I suspect that it’s skewed heavily to the right). But the answer doesn’t just leap out at me.

    There is something very valuable to be learned about parenting, and society in answering this question.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-26 13:06:00 UTC

  • READ: DAVID MAMET ON GUNS – HUMAN NATURE AND GOVERNMENT

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/01/28/gun-laws-and-the-fools-of-chelm-by-david-mamet.htmlMUST READ: DAVID MAMET ON GUNS – HUMAN NATURE AND GOVERNMENT.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-25 23:21:00 UTC

  • SNIPPETS FROM A LECTURE “It was a social experiment.” “You empowered us. For som

    SNIPPETS FROM A LECTURE

    “It was a social experiment.”

    “You empowered us. For some of us it worked. For others, you gave them the chance to believe they could be more than they ever could be.”

    “They’re disappointed. They had all these ideas about themselves. About what could have been.”

    “Some of these people think that if they just follow the manual according to Curt then in three years I’ll be Curt.”

    “Part of it’s your fault, you know. You created a religion. And you were the shepherd. And you left them.”

    OUCH

    Most people can do more than they believe if they will trust themselves to try. They often need permission to try. They need to be trained to be confident. To develop the intuition that the only failure is a failure to experiment – to try.

    I’m very proud of the dozen companies that exist today because we created that entrepreneurial confidence in so many, and the experience that an entrepreneurial environment provides.. And the dozens more companies that have been affected by that experience.

    It doesn’t occur to me when I’m trying to make something great, that there will be people who fail. And that some of those people will be marked by that failure. It wouldn’t be ‘aristocratic’ of me.

    And libertarianism is an aristocratic philosophy.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-25 15:58:00 UTC

  • MAX: You don’t really expect me to do anything of value today, do you? I mean. M

    MAX: You don’t really expect me to do anything of value today, do you? I mean. Maybe with a couple of cheeseburgers, four cups of coffee, two liters of water, and some anti-histamines, I’ll be able to string a few sentences together. But, we aren’t really going to try to work today? Right?

    I hope so. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-25 12:22:00 UTC

  • JUST TO PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH IS: I’M SHORTING MICROSOFT

    JUST TO PUT MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH IS: I’M SHORTING MICROSOFT


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-23 18:04:00 UTC

  • I’VE BEEN SAYING FOR EIGHT YEARS : MSFT IS DEAD AND TAKING SEATTLE WITH IT. -AN

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2013/01/20/sell-microsoft-now-game-over-ballmer-loses/LIKE I’VE BEEN SAYING FOR EIGHT YEARS : MSFT IS DEAD AND TAKING SEATTLE WITH IT.

    -AN ENTREPRENEURIAL CATHARSIS. A MANAGERIAL CONTRAST. AND THE VALUE OF AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS AND PRAXEOLOGY-

    Microsoft has created an absurd environment in seattle. It has given more of its profits to employees that any company in history.

    Those employees have spent that money in the local market. It has created an affluent and educated community in King County. It’s a beautiful place to live.

    I’ve been working with Microsoft since they intentionally recruited me along with other thought leaders from the Borland camp in 1992.

    I’ve been instrumental or built four companies in the Microsoft space. With the most recent being the largest privately held firm servicing Microsoft customers.

    I”ve tried to save two products for Microsoft from outside the company, and in practice I am pretty sure that I’ve saved one (time will tell), and we know that we significantly improved the life of another.

    I spent half of 2005 working with senior people trying to implement change in how Microsoft marketed itself.

    What I learned, was that the incentives in the company made it impossible to change without a CEO who understood the problem, and would force the change, and a board that would back him.

    But interestingly enough. I had precisely the opposite problem. In our company we earned 40% of our revenues from Microsoft.

    So, I knew. I knew it was exit that dependency on Microsoft or die.

    My investor fought me. My management fought me.

    They fought me on the downturn in the economy that was inevitable.

    They fought me on the collapse of Microsoft spending that was inevitable.

    I lost the arguments. Because I could not produce evidence of a future that they could not sense on their own.

    That’s because there is no evidence of a future that they could sense on their own.

    And I had too little power to enforce such a change.

    I quit in May of 2009. They refused to accept it. And that was my mistake. Loyalty trumped wisdom.

    But nothing changes. The board over-invested in both Microsoft and TMobile, further extending our dependency.

    Microsoft constrained it spending. Then TMobile was ‘sold’. Business rapidly evaporated.

    I argued that the government would never, under any circumstance, allow the merger.

    That we should prepare campaigns for the duration of the dispute, and for the eventual failure.

    It was a tremendous gift. TMobile has great customer service. Customers love them. If you’re merger is rejected you have the best marketing opportunity in the world.

    With some significant gyrations, I saved the company in the fall of 2011 by a maneuver that is worthy of textbook inclusion.

    Then, I resigned again. This time for good.

    Am I happier today? Yes.

    Am I still angry about halving the size of the 100M company I built? Isn’t that obvious? Well, who wouldn’t be. It’s like someone kidnapped your child and sold her into drug slavery.

    Yes. I am happier today. I am also a little vindicated that the people who opposed me are humbled by it.

    Austrian Economics Explains Everything. If you are in business and do not understand Austrian Economics you are operating from a position of ignorance.

    Keynesian macro belongs to politicians and to investors who try to make money out of asymmetry of information in a complex economy.

    Macro policy is the system of creating lies in the economy so that people act as if those lies are truth, thereby reducing unemployment.

    Austrian economics is the system of understanding truths in the economy, despite the fact that the state creates systemic lies in order to reduce unemployment.

    The source of my predictive ability is due almost entirely to my understanding of Austrian Economics.

    Austrian Economics taught me to never be fooled by a trend. To look not at empirical evidence and extrapolate. That numbers describe the past but do not predict the future.

    It taught me to look at the INCENTIVES within any organization. The INCENTIVES that encourage consumers to buy a good or service.

    And the economic and social environment that enables the organization to serve the interests of consumers who REACT to that economic environment by changing their preferences in their signaling and purchasing.

    But with those incentives, do you know what really killed Microsoft?

    The US Government Killed Microsoft. They killed Bill Gates’ influence in the company. They killed his ability to execute in the company. The US Government killed Microsoft.

    They did because the government ignores Austrian Economics. We Austrians know that few if any companies hold more than a decade of dominance. It’s almost impossible to do so.

    We know that the only monopolies are created by government privilege and microsoft had no such privilege. It was vulnerable to the market. Which was precisely why it fought to win the browser war so hard.

    Organizations calcify around an existing market opportunity, the market changes, the organization is indebted so falls into the Innovator’s Dilemma. The staff develops rent seeking behavior and the company loses it’s advantage.

    Microsoft will change only when Ballmer leaves and one of the prior execs who understands the company and has experience working in the company under Bill Gates returns.

    Microsoft would have to acquire Dell just to keep pace with Apple in quality. But I would bet that the government will block it, and therefore put additional bullets into the company.

    But the culture at microsoft is ruined. internally it’s a government bureaucracy. The people are frustrated and disheartened by the bad management.

    A question? What portion of the USA’s increase in productivity from 1980 to 2006, and what percentage of the stock market profits created during that period, were from Microsoft?

    If you knew it would scare you.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-22 12:51:00 UTC

  • I know we men are an incomprehensible challenge to women, and I know t

    <Rant On>

    I know we men are an incomprehensible challenge to women, and I know that for almost half of women who have to ‘settle’ they’re carrying someone who may not carry his fair share. But the fact of the matter is that there are just as many women who are either ‘crazy’ or vampires or elegantly sophisticated prostitutes or all of the above. And I think that’s even worse that some unemployed guy who sits around drinking beer and watching sports on television. I mean, women can get rid of us by walking away. For some reason, we’re supposed to give permanent transfusions to vampires. Argh.

    <Rant Off>


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-22 08:59:00 UTC

  • Prague is fine. My initial reaction is the boat or somewhere sunny, but a) we wa

    Prague is fine. My initial reaction is the boat or somewhere sunny, but a) we want a lot to do, and there is a lot to do in Prague, and b) its easy to get there and not easy to get to plenty of other places that are sunny and c) its cheap.

    I think two nights is fine. This should be our off season. Not our big meet. Some of us can come a day or two early if we want to, or stay a day later.

    Finding a hotel with enough rooms available should be easy. This is how hotels make money. Every hotel has an event manager for these kinds of things.

    My schedule is much more flexible than everyone else’s. I think that if it is too far off that we lose momentum. If it is too near we can’t do a good job. So late march or early april is probably about right.

    We do need to have a conference room where we can do a few presentations. Otherwise we’re just a roving band of alcoholic libertarians. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-22 08:21:00 UTC