May 31, 2012

The Arts of Peace

What a gorgeous day in Washington, D.C. today.

Took a little lunchtime walk to enjoy the great city, sipping my Dunkin' along the way. 

This picture is of "The Arts of Peace" by James Earle Fraser on the eastern end of The Arlington Memorial Bridge. 

On the left is "Music and Harvest" and on the right is "Aspiration and Literature."

These 17' statues are gilded in bronze and are really awesome. 

Not far from the Department of State and the United States Institute of Peace. 

They invoke true majesty as you enter the Capital of the United States of America.

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)


Share/Save/Bookmark

May 30, 2012

Communication, What Comes From The Heart

Leaders always seem to be trying to get their message "right".

They ponder what will it take to win the hearts and minds.

They may hire consultants to tell them what they should say.

They engage fancy speechwriters to say "it" just so. 

Then, they monitor the polls to get feedback and see how their message was received.

However a new article in Harvard Business Review (April 2012) throws a curve ball at this whole notion--stating: "It seems almost absurd that how we communicate could be so much more important to success than what we communicate."

From my perspective, there are many factors that contribute to the success of our communications:

Firstly, let's face it--personality, likability, charisma, and charm go a long way to influencing others--and yes, it seems like this is the case, almost at times, regardless of the message itself. 

Then there is everything else from emotional intelligence and political savvy for "working" the audience to doing your homework in terms of getting your facts right, making your presentation engaging, using back channels to build support, and giving people the opportunity to ask questions, contribute, and buy in. 

According to the HBR article, successful communication directly impacts team performance, this occurs through:

- Energy--"the number and nature of exchanges among team members"--with more interaction being better.

- Engagement--the distribution of communications among team members--with more equal distribution being better (i.e. communication isn't being dominated by one person or a select few).

- Exploration--this is the communication between a team and other external connections--with more outreach being better for creativity and innovation. 

For all of us, communicating is as much about the way and how much we interact with others, as with what we actually have to say. 

That's not to say, that what we have to communicate is not important, but rather that the mere act of communicating with others is itself a positive step in the right direction.

We have to genuinely interact and connect with others--it's a critical part of the influencing and teaming process. 

Only then, does honing the message itself really make the difference we want it to. 

People communicate with other people and this happens in  a very direct, personal, and emotional way. 

There is a Jewish saying that my wife often tells me that her grandfather used to say, "what comes from the heart goes to the heart."

I think that is the correct notion--sincerity is at the core of it takes to really communicate effectively with others. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to VisaAgency)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 29, 2012

Dancing On A Building

This is a picture of six dancers.

They are called Project Bandaloop.

They are dancing horizontally.

Off the side of a tall building.

The Old Post Office Tower in Washington D.C.

This building houses the bells that used to ring in Congress. 

Very cool attraction, especially with the dancers! 

(Source Photo: My wife, Dannielle Blumenthal)

Share/Save/Bookmark

A Cyber Security House Of Cards

Yesterday there were reports of a new "massive cyber attack" called the Flame.

A U.N. Spokesperson called it "the most powerful [cyber] espionage tool ever."

The Flame ups the cyber warfare ante and is "one of the most complex threats ever discovered"--20 times larger than Stuxnet--and essentially an "industrial vacuum cleaner for sensitive information."

Unlike prior cyber attacks that targeted computers to delete data ("Wiper"), steal data ("Duqu"), or to disrupt infrastructure ("Stuxnet"), this malware collects sensitive information. 

The malware can record audio, take screenshots of items of interest, log keyboard strokes, sniff the network, and even add-on additional malware modules as needed. 

Kaspersky Labs discovered the Flame visus, and there have been greater than 600 targets infected in more than 7 countries over the last 2 years with the greatest concentration in Iran. 

This is reminiscent of the Operation Shady Rat that was a 5-year cyber espionage attack discovered by McAfee in 2011--involving malware that affected more than 72 institutions in 14 countries. 

Separately, an attack on the U.S. Federal government's retirement investments--the Thrift Saving Plan --impacted the privacy and account information of 123,000 participants and "unathroized access"--and was reported just last week after being discovered as far back as July 2011.

Regardless of where the particular cyber attacks are initiating from, given the scale and potential impact of these, it is time to take cyber security seriously and adopt a more proactive rather than a reactive mode to it.

One can only wonder how many other cyber attacks are occuring that we don't yet know about, and perhaps never will.

We can't afford to fumble the countermeasures to the extraordinary risk we face in the playing fields of cyber warfare. 


We have to significantly strengthen our cyber defenses (and offenses) -- or else risk this "cyber house of cards" come crashing down. 

It's time for a massive infusion of funds, talent, tools, and leadership to turn this around and secure our nation's cyber infrastructure.   

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Dave Rogers)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 28, 2012

A Little Nostalgia For NYC


A little nostalgia for the talent and creativity of New York. 

Sing loud.

Dance in the streets. 

Show what you can do.

Do it! 

Yearn to be your best.

Don't let anyone else spoil your dreams. 

Live forever.

Thanks Fame--Thanks Irene Cara.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Solitary Social Creatures

We've all had the feeling of being alone, abandoned, and feeling down and out. 

As social animals, we crave being with others--even the biggest introverts out there have got to have social interaction. 

Sometimes, when young people live alone--before finding their significant others or old people live alone--after losing their significant others, there is a deep pain of being isolated in the world...almost as if there is no meaning itself in being alive.

Yet, others seem to adjust in a way to living alone, as long as they can reach out and get social interaction in other ways--family, friends, colleagues, classmates, at clubs, religious institutions, and more.  

Either way--"No man is an island," as John Donne wrote in 2003. 

Being alone is torture. 

No really.

The Wilson Quarterly (Spring 2012) in an article entitled "The Torture of Solitary," by Stephanie E. Griest is about the purpose and effects of solitary confinement as rehabilitation and as a punishment. 

Coming out of the Middle Ages, where physical torture was common--dungeons instead of jails, cages instead of cells, racks and rippers instead of rehabilitation and yard recess--the Philadelphia Quakers in the 18th century, had the idea that solitary confinement was humanitarian.

They believed that "what these prisoners needs...was a spiritual renovation. Give a man ample time and quiet space to reflect upon his misdeeds, and he will recover his bond with G-d.  He will grieve. He will repent. He will walk away a rehabilitated man."

And so prisons (like the 1829 Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia) were built with entirely isolated cellblocks and prisoners were engulfed in silence and aloneness.  

Any rejection of the mental torture of isolation through any form of communication--such as pipe clanging or shouting through flushing toilet pipes--could lead to yet again physical tortures--such as "strapped inmates into chairs for days at a stretch, until their legs ballooned" or even putting their tongues in "iron gags."

The article concludes from the effects of solitary that "the physical pain of these tortures--common in many prisons at the time-paled beside the mental anguish of solitude."

From the horror-mangled looks on the faces of the prisoners, Dickens wrote: "I hold this slow and daily tampering with the mysteries of the brain, to be immeasurably worse than any torture of the body."

I cannot imagine the pain and horror of these tortures by design--physical and mental. In all cases, the scars of the flesh and soul are probably indescribable and outright haunting to even the imagination. 

Eventually the horrible effects of solitary and the high-cost of prison cells housing individual inmates, resulted in Eastern State Penitentiary being converted into a museum in 1971 with the "The crucible of good intention" finally shuttered.

From the Supreme Court, Justice Samuel Miller, we read:

"A considerable number of prisoners fell, even after a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition from which it was next to impossible to arouse them, and others became violently insane; others, still committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better were not generally reformed, and in most cases did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community."

"In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court nearly declared the punishment unconstitutional;" it is now used mostly for "short-term punishment for exceedingly bad behavior."

Currently, there are more than 60 prisons across the country with solitary cells housing up to 25,000 prisoners. 

This is a puzzle--what do you do with offenders that are too dangerous to be with others, but as human beings too fragile to be alone?

What is striking to me is how something as "simple" as putting someone by themselves and incommunicado can drive them literally nuts!

Almost like we cannot bear to be by ourselves--what is it about ourselves that we must turn away from, be distracted from, and causes such inner horror?

Our minds and bodies need to be active to be healthy, this includes being social--being alone and bored in solitary has been shown to cause people to hallucinate, go insane, and even kill themselves.

Yet still people recoil from other people--emotionally, they may be turned off or nauseated by them; physically, they may fight, separate, or divorce and end up for a time by themselves again--people make the decision that it is better to cut your familiar loses, then go down with a ship filled with corrosive and abusive others.

I imagine Buddhists meditating in the mountains or in an open field--alone and yet at peace--but this is self-imposed and temporary and more like a "time out" in life. 

Then I see humans languishing in dungeons and in solitary confinement--physically and mentally tortured--they scream out in the void--and I see G-d reaching out to finally take them from their immense suffering to be reborn and try their lives again.

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Deisel Demon)


Share/Save/Bookmark

May 27, 2012

Taking A Turn At Photography

I took this photo with a simple iPhone.

Couldn't believe these flowers were on the corner in Washington, D.C. 

I love how some of the flowers have their petals facing up and others down and some with a mixture as if they are in midst of  changing directions--almost like they are in motion. 

I also like the different shades of pink colors, and then in the upper right corner are even some with yellow and white causing the eye to slowly sweep in and out across the landscape. 

Maybe I'll try some more photo's for my blog in the future.

Do you think I should? 

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Share/Save/Bookmark

The Truth About Lying

House MD said it first "Everybody lies; the only variable is about what."

This weekend's Wall Street Journal (26-27 May 2012)--states that research confirms this as truth.  

"Everyone cheats a little right up to the point where they lose their sense of integrity."

According to the article--"very few people steal to a maximum degree, but many good people cheat just a little here and there."

They pad their billable hours, underreport their earnings to the IRS, claim higher loses on insurance claims, pocket a little from the cash register, walk out of the store without paying, copy test answers, plagiarize someone's intellectual property, and the list goes on and on. 

Already in the Ten Commandments, we see the fundamental precept of "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."

Yet according to the research, people's dishonesty is enabled by their disposition to:

- Rationalize away the crime.

- Overshadow it with previous immoral acts.


- Excuse the behavior by stating that everyone does it.


- Minimize the significance of the wrongdoing.


- Claim it is necessary or for the greater good.


Interestingly, factors that we would think would have a big impact on dishonesty, don't--such as either the amount of money to gained or the probability of being caught. 

Apparently, the cost-benefit calculus is not the driving factor in wrong-doing, but rather the absence of "moral reminders" and of enforcement/supervision is what creates the fertile ground for people to do the wrong--whether because they can, for the thrill of it, or because in their minds it "levels the playing field."

Everyone has the capacity for evil and to do wrongdoing, but the vast majority of the people with the right moral guidance will do mostly the right things.  

"Except for a few outliers at the top and bottom, the behaviors of almost everyone is driven by two opposing motivations"--these are greed and fear. 

One one hand, greed drives people to push themselves and work hard, but it can also be used to go overboard to the point of acting dishonestly--to take what is not theirs and to lie about it.  

On the other hand, fear of losing our integrity keeps people's unbridled desires in check and perhaps even motivates us to give back to others, but fear can also can inhibit people from giving it their all. 

The ongoing interplay between greed and fear long known to drive financial markets are the underpinnings for our own moral tug-of-war. 

Balancing greed and fear is a powerful embrace that can propel humankind powerfully forward with drive and motivation or undermine its very existence through inhibition and dishonesty.

Reading the article and the underlying research was upsetting to me to see that so many people can be swayed seemingly so easily to have such little integrity.

And while most situations in life are not "black and white"--they are complex shades of gray--people can be tempted to rationalize even when they really know what they are doing in misguided. 

This is the ultimate personal challenge for all of us--to maintain our integrity in the face of all temptations and readily available excuses out there.

G-d speed in making good moral and productive choices. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Gerard Stolk)


Share/Save/Bookmark

May 26, 2012

Warnings: When It's Not Just "Crying Wolf"

There is a famous saying that "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana 

An editorial appeared in the Wall Street Journal (10 April 2012) by French philosopher Pascal Bruckner called "The Ideology of Catastrophe" that accuses those who warn others of danger as having "tiny minds who wish us suffering."

This "philosopher" maligns both Jewish prophets and Christian "millenarian movements" for having "no function other than indignation...and [the Prophet] becomes intoxicated with his own words and claims a legitimacy with no basis."

Mr. Bruckner must be completely clueless of those throughout history that have sought to warn us of dangers that if the world would but have listened, untold numbers of millions could have been saved. 

From the earliest of times, there have been warnings about pending catastrophes and those that paid attention were able to make a difference. 

In the Torah (Bible), G-d warned Noah of the impending flood, and Noah was able to save humankind and animals--2 by 2 they went unto the ark for 40 days and nights of pouring rain that vanquished the earth.

In the Prophets, G-d has Yonah (after being swallowed by the whale) warn the the inhabitants of Nineveh to repent and prevents them and their city from destruction. 

In the 20th century, if only the world had paid attention to the genocidal desires of maniacs like Adolph Hitler (may his name be cursed) in books like Mein Kampf, how many tens of millions may have been spared. 

In terms of the advent of nukes and other weapons of mass destructions, to at least some extent people and governments have listened to warning and retreated from a philosophy of mutually assured destruction (MAD) to instead move toward anti-proliferation, arms reduction treaties, and other safeguards, and we have thank G-d been able to avoid major catastrophes from these dangers. 

Thankfully, with dire medical issuances about various diseases, pandemics, and even warning about the dangers of obesity, smoking, and drinking, we have been able to curb harmful behaviors, promote healthier living, and lengthen life spans.

Similarly, with environmental warnings, we have been able to create awareness and educate people on more sustainable living--through conservation, recycling, reuse, as well as renewable energy sources, and more. 

Moreover, warnings about runaway spending and the national deficit have been heard for decades, but having ignored these for the most part, we now face a $16,000,000,000,000 bill and growing rapidly--soon coming due to future generations of Americans.  And we are already witnessing the effects--inflation, unemployment, default, and perhaps succession from the Euro and the EU itself--of countries on the other side of the Atlantic that have made the similar errors in their wild spending ways.

While some corporate, religious, and political leaders do use fear tactics to gain power or whatever they are personally-seeking that does not make every warning false and malevolent. 

Certainly, at the other end of the spectrum, some people would rather live in denial of any issues and pretend that everything is just hunky-dory all the time. 

Bruckner does makes some superficial and one-sided arguments--denouncing warnings and claiming that:

- Warnings cause fear, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

- Warnings "though they try to awaken us...eventually deadens us."

- People who warn "do not [really] intend to warn us as much as to condem us."

- Leaders issue warnings "to dazzle us in order to make us docile."

Unfortunately, Bruckner has failed to distinguish between fear-mongering and fact. 

Bruckner missed the point of how real warnings can help people--which is through changing hearts, minds, and behaviors. 

1) Fear is not a self-fulfilling prophecy unless people do not act in time to change dangerous and irresponsible behaviors.

2) Genuine warnings do not deaden those who seek truth and a way forward--it only deadens those who are unwilling or unable to adapt. 

3) People who warn based on facts and with sincerity to help others do not wish to condem us--rather they wish to alleviate unnecessary suffering.

4) Leaders who issue warnings to alert people to very real dangers out there in order to seek safety or change course are not trying to dazzle and make docile, but rather they seek to save lives by creating awareness, educating, and empowering people to change before it is too late.

Some people understand well from history as well as from common sense that our behaviors have consequences--other do not. 

For me, when we stray into dangerous waters, I am glad for the true heros out there looking out for us and helping guide us live better and longer lives. 

While it is good to be critical of unfounded warnings and charlatans, it is necessary to have warnings that are grounded in fact, given sincerely, not forced on others, and help people stay successfully on the road to health, prosperity, and human rights.

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Alex Peruso)

Share/Save/Bookmark

Hey, Gesture Like This!


This new gesture-recognition technology from Leap Motion is amazing. 

"For the first time, you can control a computer in three dimension with your natural hand and finger movements."

The closest yet to get us to the vision in the movie, Minority Report

"Leap is more accurate than a mouse, as reliable as a keyboard, and more sensitive than a touchscreen." 

Scroll, pinpoint, pan, play, shoot, design, compose, fly--just about everything you do onscreen, but more in sync with how we generally interact with our environment and each other. 

I like when the guy in the video reaches forward and the hands on the screen reach right back at him!

I'd be interested to see how this can be used to replace a keyboard for typing or will it be augmented by a really good voice recognition and natural language processing capability--then we would have an integration of the verbal and non-verbal communications cues.  

In the future, add in the ability to read our facial expressions like from a robot and then we may have some real interaction going on mentally and perhaps dare I say it, even emotionally. 

According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek (24 May 2012), the Leap is just the size of a "cigarette lighter that contains three tiny cameras inside" and costs just $70--"about half the price of a Kinect."

The Leap is so sophisticated that it can "track all 10 of a user's fingers and detect movements of less than one-hundredth of a millimeter."

At their site, I see you can even preorder these now for estimated shipping at the end of the year.  

I think I'll put this on my holiday gift list. ;-)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 25, 2012

Innovation: Leaders vs. Liars

There's a big difference between doing something and saying you're going to do something. 

Or as I learned early on--words are cheap, but actions speak loud and clear.

The Wall Street Journal (23 May 2012) reported this week about how many companies (and even academic institutions) overuse the word innovation--"the introduction of something new."

It's practically become cliche--"chief innovation officers, innovation teams, innovation strategies, and even innovation days."
So is innovation just the buzzword du jour or is ultimately something more?

Of course, the more we use something like the term innovation, the greater the chance to dilute its meaning. 

- "33,528--times [innovation] was mentioned in quarterly and annual reports last year."

- "255--books published in the last 90 days with innovation in the title."

- "43%--of 260 executives who said their company has a chief innovation officer."

However, innovation is not just a word to throw around and use lightly--innovation is our bread and butter in this country; it is what differentiates us from our global competitors (i.e. its one of our main competitive advantages) and is a source of our economic strength.

Not all innovation is created equal--there is "innovation lite" (my term), where we take something and make it better, faster, or cheaper, and then there is "disruptive innovation"--where we really bring something new to the market.  

"Everybody's innovating because any change is innovation," but not every innovation is transformative.

We can't afford for innovation to lose its meaning, because leaders and companies that abuse it and dilute it--and don't ultimately deliver--will end up losing their jobs and ultimately the companies themselves. 

Real innovation is like condiments, use it sparingly and it can pack a huge punch--pour it on indiscriminately, and you might as well just throw away the whole dish.

What we need are innovation leaders that don't just mouth the words and buy the toys, but champion it, invest in it, and empower and encourage their employees to make it happen. 

Innovate or die is our reality--so be a true innovation leader--don't lie to yourself if it isn't the real thing. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Seth Waite)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 22, 2012

L'Chaim--Live It Well!

I found an article on the consolation of death "buried" in my papers from a couple of months ago--and I'm glad I did. 

The Wall Street Journal (10 April 2012) has a very interesting book review of "Death" by Shelly Kagan.

The book is about how do we live knowing that some day we will die--how do we console ourselves?

Here are a combination of the the ideas reviewed and my thoughts on them:

- The Hard Stop--Since life and death, for each of us, cannot coexist, we are either alive or dead--"no one will ever encounter their own death"--so there is nothing to worry about.  

- Not Me--We live life never really believing that we will die--instead, "death is something that happens to other people."

- Live Without Attachments--As Buddhism teaches that we should cast off attachments, self-concern, and suffering--hence, the loss of own self is a "nonevent."

- Live The Moment
-- We should live in the present and enjoy life, rather than mourn the past or worry about the future.


- Live a Full Life--Live a full and meaningful life, and then perhaps, we "don't cry because it's over, [but rather] smile because it happened."

- Leave a Legacy--If we leave a legacy of our children and good deeds, then we live on even once we are physically gone. 

I was always taught that since no one ever really came back from the other side to tell us what happens to us when we die, we should not be overly focused on it.

I remember overhearing some old men in synagogue debating what happens to us when we die--one taking the position that we go heaven and the other stating that death was the end (he put it more crudely though-something about us being dead no different than a dead dog!)

In the end, since it doesn't pay to worry about what we don't know and perhaps can't even really fathom, I think all we can do is our best every moment that we are alive--and leave the rest to sort out to G-d, afterward.

The consolation then is if you tried your best, what more can anyone ask of themselves or others?

In terms of the picture, the L'Chaim candy bar is a little reminder not to take everything in life so seriously either--live life and live it well. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Uberculture, Jeremy Noble)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 20, 2012

The Reason We Are Given Is To Give

There is a famous slogan about "the gift that keeps on giving" that has been used for promoting various products from appliances to flowers.  

But to me, it is more appropriately used to inspire people to make a donation or give of themselves, because of how fulfilling it can be and how it makes us better people.

There is no more beautiful story about the act of giving then the one by O'Henry called The Gift of The Magi

In the story, a husband and wife, Jim and Della, want to give each other holiday gifts, but they are poor. 

Della has beautiful long hair, but no combs for it, and Jim has a gold watch passed down from his father and grandfather, but no chain for it. 

Each sacrifices for the other and in a tragic irony--Della sells her long, flowing hair to buy a gold chain for Jim, and Jim sells the prized gold watch to purchase a set of special combs for Della. 

They could've been selfishly focused on what each individually was lacking, but instead they rose above it and were superbly generous--giving away their own prized possessions to try and make the other whole. 

They found the wisdom of the ages in terms of loving, giving, and sharing being of the greatest joys one can have. 

I love this story for it's simplicity in teaching about giving and sacrifice and channeling whatever our challenges in life are into opportunities for betterment. 

Maybe as individuals, we can't change the whole world in one fell swoop, but with each positive contribution and act of giving, we can leave it a little better than the way we found it. 

I was so proud earlier today when I heard one of my teenage daughters say: "the reason we are given things is in order to give to others."

I don't think my daughter ever heard of this O'Henry story, but I see how she is learning and living it, and what more can any parent want from their children. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to OpenSourceWay)


Share/Save/Bookmark

May 19, 2012

Preparing For All Hell To Break Loose--The "Doomsday Plane"


Diane Sawyer from ABC News has a great piece here on the Flying Fortress, our Airborne Command Center, for the President and a 50-member entourage including the DefSec and the Joint Chiefs, to manage the United States response and retaliation should a worst-case situation happen--such as a nuclear, chemical, or biological attack. 

The plane has been referred to as The Doomsday Plane, Flying Fortress, Airborne White House, Airborne Arc, and The E-4B Nightwatch.

Located at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska, this plane is on constant high-alert and ready 24 x 7 x 365--it is airborne within 5 minutes notice!  

According to Ideas and Discovery Magazine, there are actually 4 planes--the most-technologically advanced 747s in the world.

Built based on more than $2 billion in research, these planes are the most expensive in the world, fly 40 miles per hour faster than regular 747s, can stay in the air for about 3 days straight with in-air refueling, and are shielded from thermo-nuclear radiation and electromagnetic pulses.  

The planes are protected by 60 Air Force special forces troops, have their own on-board maintenance teams, and precision technical communication specialists. 

The planes have an area for battle staff to assess the situation and draw up action plans and a technical control facility for managing surveillance and command, control, and communications to issue encrypted commands on "virtually all frequencies" through 67 satellite dishes and antennas on the roof.

They can even communicate with submarines by dropping a 5 mile rope with a transceiver into the ocean below. 

These planes stand ready to evacuate the President and his staff in the case of a national emergency.

"The commander-in-chief can then send orders to troops and personnel, communicate with allied governments, or update the American people on the situation."

While it has far less amenities than Air Force One, this high-tech doomsday plane is very cool indeed. 

What I admire the most about this plane is not even the technology per se, but the planning and risk management that go into preparation for something "really bad" happening. 

While some people think emotionally that preparing for disaster is almost tantamount to pushing for one to actually occur, really that is an emotional reaction and denial of reality anchored in fear.   

Like insurance, you hope you never need it, but are really glad you have it, when all hell breaks loose! 

Perhaps, we can all learn something for ourselves here as well, that (disaster) preparedness can be scary and expensive, but we all need to have a plan and make it a good one.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Those In The Know, Sending Some Pretty Clear Warnings

There have been a number of leaders who have stepped up to tell people the real risks we are facing as a nation. 

They are not playing politics--they have left the arena. 

And as we know, it is much easier to be rosy and optimistic--let's face it, this is what people want to hear. 

But these leaders--national heros--sacrifice themselves to provide us an unpopular message, at their own reputational risk. 

That message is that poor leadership and decision-making in the past is threatening our present and future. 

Earlier this week (15 May 2011), I blogged about a documentary called I.O.U.S.A. with David Walker, the former Comptroller General of the United States for 10 years!

Walker was the head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO)--the investigative arm of Congress itself, and has testified before them and toured the country warning of the dire fiscal situation confronting us from our proclivity to spend future generation's money today--the spiraling national deficit.

Today, I read again in Fortune (21 May 2012) an interview with another national hero, former Admiral Mike Mullen, who was chairmen of the Joint Chiefs (2007-2011).

Mullen warns bluntly of a number of "existential threats" to the United States--nukes (which he feels is more or less "under control"), cyber security, and the state of our national debt. 

Similarly, General Keith Alexander, the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and the head of the Pentagon's Cyber Command has warned that DoD networks are not currently defensible and that attackers could disable our networks and critical infrastructure underpinning our national security and economic stability.

To me, these are well-respected individuals who are sending some pretty clear warning signals about cyber security and our national deficit, not to cause panic, but to inspire substantial change in our national character and strategic priorities.

In I.O.U.S.A., after one talk by Walker on his national tour, the video shows that the media does not even cover the event.

We are comfortable for now and the messages coming down risk shaking us from that comfort zone--are we ready to hear what they are saying?

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Vagawi)


Share/Save/Bookmark

May 18, 2012

Making Change Probable

An article this week in the Wall Street Journal (15 May 2012) called us "a nation of whiners."

The national insult aside, what was more important was that the author lamented that whining doesn't help, but problem-solving does!

According to the article, whiners can be treated therapeutically by:

1) Mirroring--letting people see/hear themselves in this state of learned helplessness.

2) Challenging--confronting whiners and asking them what they are going to do about their situation.

3) Encouraging--providing positive reinforcement when people make positive steps to taking control of their lives. 

Similarly, there are those who get stuck in a sort of professional rut, complaining about the status quo, but they have trouble working incrementally to try and change things.

A strong leader can help their people move on from the status quo, applying the therapeutic techniques above, but also by doing the following:

1) Inquire--talk with your people and find out what they think is working, isn't, and how things can be improved.

2) Envision--together, set a vision for a better future that addresses people's genuine concerns in the aggregate.

3) Empower--delegate specific actions so everyone can be a part of the solution; give them the authority along with the responsibility to make change possible.

4) Observe--monitor progress and review whether the changes being made are having a positive impact and where adjustments in strategy need to be made.

These are really fundamental leadership skills, but applied to people who are feel helpless, hopeless, or are just plain resistant to change, the key is how we exemplify forward momentum and help others feel they too can make a genuine difference. 

Bad situations are generally not life sentences, if we can but imagine positive change, break it down into incremental steps, and then put one foot in front of the other, and we are on our way. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Rifqi Dahlgren)

Share/Save/Bookmark

Meeting Busters, Come On Play Nice

The Wall Street Journal (16 May 2011) had a interesting portrayal this week of the various types of people that tend to spoil meetings. 

From low to high on nuisance level, these were as follows:

1) Jokesters--"cracks jokes, appropriate or not." 

2) Ramblers--goes on and on and often off topic.

3) Dominators--dictates to others with their opinions.

4) Naysayers--derails progress with negativity.

5) Plotters--passive-aggressive undermines decisions.

From my experience, I would add a few others (in no particular order):

6) Politicians--focuses on coming away looking good instead of on resolving issues. 

7) Positioners--vies for a bigger piece of the pie, whatever flavor it is. 

8) Honorees--comes to take all the credit, and politely thank everyone for their support. 

9) Bystanders--shows up, but can't or won't contribute anything of value.

10) Bewildered--unsure even why they are here, but were told to just show up. 

11) Malcontents--they are unhappy and they show it, so who cares anymore. 

12) Socializers--shares personal tidbits and whispers about where they want to go lunch or for happy hour afterwards. 

For all the meeting attendees out there, life is not a box of cherries, but you don't have to make it the pits! ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Voka - Kamer van Koophandel Limburg)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 15, 2012

Getting Off The Debtor Highway


I.O.U.S.A. (2008) is the best explanation of our nation's financial problems and the deep severity of these that I have ever seen.

This video is a 1/2 hour condensed version of the full almost 1 1 /2 hour award-winning documentary.

David Walker, the former Comptroller General of the U.S. (1998-2008) is the star of this movie.

The documentary, with Walker's steadfast warnings, describes the 4 ominous deficits that are driving this country to Financial Armageddon:

1) Budget Deficit

2) Savings Deficit

3) Trade Deficit

4) Leadership Deficit

What is incredible is how rather than listening to Walker's exhortation, when the National Deficit was $8.7 trillion in 2007, just 5 years later now, there is a deficit going on nearly double that of $15.7 trillion.

We are facing a financial ticking time bomb that could result in huge inflation, economic stagnation, and the undoing of our economic and national security.

Moreover, towards the end of this year, we are facing the economic one-two punch of rising taxes and reduced national spending that could easily send our economy spiraling into recession or even depression.

Add to that rising interest rates, a financial crisis in the  European Union, a continued housing crisis and high unemployment at home, and a true economic reckoning is at hand.

Watch I.O.U.S.A. and become proponents for financial discipline for ourselves and for the country.

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 13, 2012

Facebook IPO--Love It, But Leave It

With the Facebook IPO scheduled for this week, valuing the company at as much as $96 billion, many investors according to Bloomberg BusinessWeek (11 May 2012) see this as overvalued.

Facebook will be the largest Internet IPO in history, and would be about 4 times as much as Google was valued at its IPO at $23 billion in 2003.

Further, Facebook could be valued at offering at 99 times earnings.

This is more than the price earnings ratio of 99% of companies in the S&P Index, yet even with some estimating sales of $6.1 billion this year, Facebook would only rank about 400 in the S&P 500.

True Facebook has amassed an incredible 900 million users, but the company's revenue growth has slowed for the 3rd year in a row.

Another article in BusinessWeek (10 May 2012) describes a new social networking contender called Diaspora.

Unlike Google+ which is predominantly a Facebook copycat, Diaspora is bringing something new and major to the table--they are addressing the privacy issues that Facebook has not.

Diaspora is a distributed (or federated) social network, unlike Facebook which is centralized--in other words, Diaspora allows you to host your own data wherever you want (even in the cloud).

Each of these independently owned Diaspora instances or "pods" (dispersed like in the Diaspora) make up a true social "network"--interconnected and interoperable computing devices.

With Diaspora, you own your own data and can maintain its privacy (share, delete, and do what you want with your information), unlike with Facebook where you essentially give up rights to your data and it can and is used by Facebook for commercial use--for them to make money off of your personal/private information.

When it comes to personal property, we have a strong sense of ownership in our society and are keen on protecting these ownership rights, but somehow with our personal information and privacy, when it comes to social networking, we have sold ourselves out for a mere user account.

As loss of personally identifiable information (PII), intellectual property, identity theft, and other serious computer crimes continues to grow and cost us our money, time, and even our very selves in some respects, alternatives to the Facebook model, like Diaspora, will become more and more appealing.

So with social networks like Facebook--it is a case of love it, but leave it!

Love social networking--especially when privacy is built in--and others don't have rights to what you post.

But leave it--when they are asking for your investment dollar (i.e. IPO) that could be better spent on a product with a business model that is actually sustainable over the long term.

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Allan Cleaver)

Share/Save/Bookmark

Stronger, Indeed.


Combine the Seattle Children's Hospital Hemoncology Unit with Kelly Clarkson's song "Stronger," and you have the true essence of bravery and hope. 

Having recently been in the hospital for a short time for my own health issues, I know how difficult it can be--how defeated it feels.

It is amazing when someone brings you just a glimmer of hope, how much stronger you can feel. 

For me, my family with me made a world of difference, but also when they brought me a laptop connecting me back to the world and giving me the ability to write and express myself.

Other hospital visits for other health issues have been longer in the past--and I want to run out the door, and there was a time that I actually did--walking around the grounds in my hospital gown--any way to be free. 

Having the freedom to help yourself, be yourself--and not just lay there--is a true gift.

When I see the little boy racing around the hospital floor in his go-car with the I.V. hanging off the back, I am inspired. 

As when I see the victims singing, dancing, and holding signs of hope and strength. 

May G-d have mercy on our ill and downtrodden and raise them up up to be stronger indeed.

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 12, 2012

It's Not iStuff, It's Your iFuture

There is an editorial in the Wall Street Journal (11 May 2012) called "Make It a Summer Without iStuff."

It is written by David Gelernter, Professor of Computer Science at the prestigious Yale University and I was much dismayed to read it.

With all due respect, Gelernter makes the case--and a poor one at that--for keeping kids away from technology.

He calls technology devices and the Internet, "the perfect anti-concentration weapon...turning a child's life into a comedy of interruptions."

Gelernter states pejoratively that the "whole point of modern iToys...is not doing anything except turning into a click vegetable."

Moreover, Gelernter goes too far treating technology and the Internet as a waste of time, toys, and even as dangerous vices--"like liquor, fast cars, and sleeping pills"--that must be kept away from children.

Further, Gelernter indiscriminately calls en masse "children with computers...little digital Henry VIIIs," throwing temper tantrums when their problems cannot be solved by technology. 

While I agree with Gelernter that at the extreme, technology can be used to as a escape from real, everyday life--such as for people who make their primary interaction with others through social networking or for those who sit virtually round-the-clock playing video games.

And when technology is treated as a surrogate for real life experiences and problem solving, rather than a robust tool for us to live fuller lives, then it becomes an enabler for a much diminished, faux life and possibly even a pure addiction. 

However, Gelernter misses the best that technology has to offer our children--in terms of working smarter in everything we do. 

No longer is education a matter of memorizing textbooks and spitting back facts on exams in a purely academic fashion, but now being smart is knowing where to find answers quickly--how to search, access, and analyze information and apply it to real world problems. 

Information technology and communications are enablers for us do more with less--and kids growing up as computer natives provide the best chance for all of us to innovate and stay competitive globally. 

Rather then helping our nation bridge the digital divide and increase access to the latest technologies and advance our children's familiarity with all things science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), Gelernter wants to throw us back in time to the per-digital age.

With the ever rapid pace with which technology is evolving, Gelernter's abolishing technology for children needlessly sets them back in their technology prowess and acumen, while others around the world are pressing aggressively ahead. 

Gelernter may want his kids to be computer illiterate, but I want mine to be computer proficient.  

iStuff are not toys, they are not inherently dangerous vices, and they are not a waste of our children's time, they are their future--if we only teach and encourage them to use the technology well, balanced, and for the good. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to "Extra Ketchup," Michael Surran)


Share/Save/Bookmark

May 11, 2012

A Snake, A Fish, Whatever


Cool concert with Hadag Nahash at the Fillmore. 

Their name means fish-snake, but what's in a name?  :-)

They combine hip-hop, rock, and reggae and a mid-eastern flavor.

While the position in the front of the room gave me a good perch for the video, I learned that my ear drums could take only so much speaker-punishment.

Lot's of heart-pounding fun, and there is nothing like being there! 

Hope you enjoy.

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 10, 2012

Oh Deer!

This is an amazing photo by my daughter, Michelle Blumenthal. 

This deer just tried to jump a fence, but got impaled right through its neck--yikes! 

Truly a life lesson--it is good to reach high for what you want, but not to overreach. 

It really is a fine balance and takes self-awareness, discipline, and some good fortune. 

We have to know how much and how quickly to push ourselves to grow past prior limitations, but also recognize just how far we can make it on the next leap. 

Maybe that's one reason an incremental or phased approach is good.

It enables us to move ever forward, carefully planning and navigating our next steps, while hopefully not getting unnecessarily hung up by the life obstacles we must overcome. 

Good luck everyone!

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 6, 2012

Losing Trust In What We Need Most, Each Other

Last month, The Daily Beast (2 April 2012) ran a interesting article on "Why Humans, Like Ants, Need [To Belong] To A Tribe."

Throughout history, people have joined and held allegiance to groups and institutions "to get visceral comfort and pride from familiar fellowship." 

Belonging is a familiar way to get social connection, meaning, and to make the environment "less disorienting and dangerous."
Essentially, what this means it that we stand stronger together than we do alone and apart. 

Today, people search for "like-minded friends, and they yearn to be in the one of the best" groups--from elite fighting forces like our special operations to Ivy League universities, Fortune 500 companies, religious sects, and fraternities--we all want to be part of the best, brightest, and most powerful collectives.

On one hand, tribing is positive, in terms of the close friendships, networks, and associations we form and the problems that we can confront together.

Yet on the other hand, it can be highly negative in terms of bias, distrust, rivalry, outright hostility, and even open warfare that can ensure.

The downside to tribes occurs because their members are prone to ethnocentrism--belief that one's own group is superior to another and is more deserving of success, money, and power, while everyone else in the "out-groups" are deemed inferior, undeserving and worthy of only the leftovers. 

The negative side of tribes can manifest in the proverbial old-boys club at work looking out for each other to people associating hyper-closely with their favorite sports team and their symbolic victories and losses. 

Despite the risks of tribes, we have a strong innate genetic and cultural disposition to groups and institutions and the many benefits they can bring to us, so it is sad to see as The Atlantic reports (21 April 2012), that Americans have "lost trust in one another and the institutions that are supposed to hold us together."

The article states that the reasons for this are that we've been "battered by unbridled commercialism, stymied by an incompetent government beholden to special interests, and flustered by new technology and new media."

The result is that "seven in 10 Americans believe the country is on the wrong track; eight in 10 are dissatisfied with the way the nation is being governed."

So there is now a historical break from trusting in our affiliations, institutions, and government to one represented by the motto of "In nothing we trust."

Instead of turning to each other and bonding together to solve large and complex problems, there is the potential that "people could disconnect, refocus, inward, and turn away from their social contract."

Not having a tribe is worse than working through the difficult issues associated with affiliation--a society of alienated people is not better!

When people no longer feel bonded to institutions and the rules and governance they provide, we have a potential social meltdown.

This should of deep concern to everyone, because no man is an island

We can see this alienation in action as people withdraw from real world social interaction to spending more and more time online in the virtual world

Although there is some measure of interaction on social networks, the connections are at arms-length; when it gets inconvenient, we can just log off.  

One might argue that people are still affiliated with stakeholder-driven organizations and institutions (the government, the workplace, religion, etc.), but unfortunately these are being seen as having been usurped by false prophets and marketing types who who will say whatever it takes to get the popular nod and the job, and by fraudulent leaders who are in it to take far more than they ever planned to give.

What needs to happen now is to re-institute belief in the group by insisting on leaders that have integrity and a governance process underpinned by accountability, transparency, and diversity. 
 
To get out of our web of socio-economic problems, group trust and affiliation is vital to solving problems together


(Source Photo: here with attribution to CraigTaylor1974)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 5, 2012

Understanding Risk Management

Information Security, like all security, needs to be managed on a risk management basis.  

This is a fundamental principle that was prior advocated for the Department of Homeland Security, by the former Secretary Michael Chertoff.  

The basic premise is that we have limited resources to cover ever changing and expanding risks, and that therefore, we must put our security resources to the greatest risks first.

Daniel Ryan and Julie Ryan (1995) came up with a simple formula for determining risks, as follows:

Risk = [(Threats x Vulnerabilities) / Countermeasures)]  x  Impact

Where:

- Threats = those who wish do you harm.

- Vulnerabilities = inherent weaknesses or design flaws.

- Countermeasures = the things you do to protect against the dangers imposed.

[Together, threats and vulnerabilities, offset by any countermeasures, is the probability or likelihood of a potential (negative) event occurring.]

- Impacts = the damage or potential loss that would be done.

Of course, in a perfect world, we would like to reduce risk to zero and be completely secure, but in the real world, the cost of achieving total risk avoidance is cost prohibitive. 

For example, with information systems, the only way to hypothetically eliminate all risk is by disconnecting (and turning off) all your computing resources, thereby isolating yourself from any and all threats. But as we know, this is counterproductive, since there is a positive correlation between connectivity and productivity. When connectivity goes down, so does productivity.

Thus, in the absence of being able to completely eliminate risk, we are left with managing risk and particularly with securing critical infrastructure protection (CIP) through the prioritization of the highest security risks and securing these, going down that list until we exhaust our available resources to issue countermeasures with.

In a sense, being unable to "get rid of risk" or fully secure ourselves from anything bad happening to us is a philosophically imperfect answer and leaves me feeling unsatisfied--in other words, what good is security if we can't ever really have it anyway?

I guess the ultimate risk we all face is the risk of our own mortality. In response all we can do is accept our limitations and take action on the rest.

(Source Photo: here with attribution to martinluff)

Share/Save/Bookmark

May 4, 2012

Leadership Cloud or Flood Coming?

I came across two very interesting and concerning studies on cloud computing--one from last year and the other from last month.

Here is a white paper by London-based Context Information Security (March 2011)

Context rented space from various cloud providers and tested their security. 

Overall, it found that the cloud providers failed in 41% of the tests and that tests were prohibited in another 34% of the cases --leaving a pass rate of just 25%!

The major security issue was a failure to securely separate client nodes, resulting in the ability to "view data held on other service users' disk and to extract data including usernames and passwords, client data, and database contents."

The study found that "at least some of the unease felt about securing the Cloud is justified."

Context recommends that clients moving to the cloud should:

1) Encrypt--"Use encryption on hard disks and network traffic between nodes."

2) Firewall--"All networks that a node has access to...should be treated as hostile and should be protected by host-based firewalls."

2) Harden--"Default nodes provisioned by the Cloud providers should not be trusted as being secure; clients should security harden these nodes themselves."

I found another interesting post on "dirty disks" by Context (24 April 2012), which describes another cloud vulnerability that results in remnant client data being left behind, which then become vulnerable to others harvesting and exploiting this information.

In response to ongoing fears about the cloud, some are choosing to have separate air-gaped machines, even caged off, at their cloud providers facilities in order to physically separate their infrastructure and data--but if this is their way to currently secure the data, then is this really even cloud or maybe we should more accurately call it a faux cloud? 

While Cloud Computing may hold tremendous cost-saving potential and efficiencies, we need to tread carefully, as the skies are not yet all clear from a security perspective with the cloud. 

Clouds can lead the way--like for the Israelites traveling with G-d through the desert for 40 years or they can bring terrible destruction like when it rained for 40 days and nights in the Great Flood in the time of Noah. 

The question for us is are we traveling on the cloud computing road to the promised land or is there a great destruction that awaits in a still immature and insecure cloud computing playing field? 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to freefotouk)


Share/Save/Bookmark