When Incremental Improvement Isn't Enough

One of the things that I love about the Intelligence Community (IC) is that they think future and they think big. 

Noah Schactman in Wired Magazine (12 December 12--great date!), gave a snapshot view of 2030 as provided by the National Intelligence Council (NIC). 

Some of the predictions (or aspirations) include:

- Bioprinting such as creating 3-D printed organs (how's that for your orchestrating your own organ transplant?) 

- Retinal implants for night vision thermal imaging, seeing the distance without binoculars, or even one-upping Google Glass by providing augmented reality in your eye instead of over it

- Brain chips for superhuman thought and recall (those without remain doomed to brain farts, in comparison)

- Bioweapons where DNA is used to target and take out people by genetically engineering viruses to attack them, specifically, without leaving any markers

- People embedded in machines--reminiscent of when Ripley in the movie Alien enters in an exoskelton robotic suit to kick some Alien butt!

Other predictions include: megacities, climate change, big data clouds, aging populations, and more drones. 

While some of these advances are incremental in nature--for example genetic engineering and bioweapons are incremental steps from DNA sequencing of humans.

However, other leaps are more dramatic.

An article by Stephen Levy in Wired (17 January 2013) discusses how Larry Page (one of the Google founders) strives for inventions that are magnitudes of  "10x" (often actually 100x) better than the status quo, rather than just 10% improvements. 

Google has many examples of leaping ahead of the competition: from its transformative search engine which has become synonymous with search itself to Gmail which came out with 100x the storage of its competitors, Translations for the entire web from/to any language, Google Fiber with broadband at 100x faster than industry speeds prototyped in Kansas City, Google Books providing a scanned and searchable archive of our global collection of books and magazines, Google+ for social media (this one, I see as just a Facebook copycat--to get on Facebook's nerves!), Google Maps for getting around, Android their open platform operating system for mobile devices, and even self-driving cars--many of these are developed by Google X--their secret skunk work lab. 

I really like Google's concept of going for the "moon shot" rather than just tweaking technology to try and stay ahead of the competition, temporarily. 

And as in space, there is so much territory to explore, Google believes it is attacking just .1% of the opportunities out there, and that the tech industry as a whole is attacking maybe 1% in aggregate--that leaves 99% or plenty of opportunity for all innovators and inventors out there.

To get to 2030 and beyond--we're just at the tip of the innovation iceberg! ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

When Incremental Improvement Isn't Enough

Repair Robots In Space

This is a cool video by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) on project Phoenix--which is a robot that can repair satellites in space and re-use components from retired satellites around it. 

Phoenix can intercept, scavenge, and rebuild satellites in space--while orbiting above the Earth at 22,000 miles!

In the corner of the video, you can see progress being made in the lab, and in the main video frame you can see an animated version of how this would actually be put to use. 

Machines working on, building, and repairing machines!

Like the fulfillment of a Terminator-like society, where machines can function with autonomy, eventually learning, self-healing, and even propagating.

I would imagine that these machines can help not only repurpose and recycle material in space to good use and fix things, but also they can clean up the space junk in orbit--similar to street sweeper trucks in Manhattan!

Eventually, these robots will travel to distance worlds--first Mars--to build human colonies and maintain them in inhospitable environments. 

In mythology, Phoenix is a bird that regenerates and is reborn--in this case, this may be the beginning of the rebirth of human civilization throughout the galaxy. ;-)

Repair Robots In Space

Hiding Yourself In Plain Sight

I remember hearing that sometimes the best way to hide is in plain sight--just where no one would think to look.

Now there is a new clothing line being introduced by Adam Harvey for Stealth Wear that hides you using your own clothes. 

According to Slate (11 January 2013), the clothing line is envisioned to have:

- Anti-drone hoodies and scarfs:  These will be made with special metalized material that can shield you from things like drone thermal imaging technology, and I would imagine could also help against facial recognition along the lines of a prior project CVDazzle that uses face-painting and hair styling for concealment. 

- XX-shirts: These cover your upper body and can shield you from x-rays. I wonder how this will impact TSA scanning at airports?

- Pocket-blocks: A cell phone pouch made from "signal attenuating material" to prevent tracking and interception. 

Don't confuse this stealth wear clothing line with a Canadian company called StealthWear that makes a different type of protective clothing--padding for jackets, forearms, shoulders, torso, and so on for those working in "aggressive educational environments."

The new Stealth Wear, however, is a concept for a high-tech fashion line designed to provide counter surveillance and more personal privacy--in this sense, it's really the anti Big Brother. 

With more and more cameras, imaging machines, facial recognition, drones, and other surveillance tools out there--I suppose it is not surprising to see a cultural backlash in terms of everyday surveillance protection clothing coming to the fore. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Hiding Yourself In Plain Sight

Under The Beautiful Sea

The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) is looking for a place to stash some new military capabilities.

In a DARPA news release (11 January 2013) it states they are looking to support the navy by placing hibernated deep-sea capsules with payloads at under water locations and at the seafloor strategically around the globe--"almost half of the world's oceans are more than four kilometers deep" providing "cheap stealth".

The capsules with carry non-lethal payloads for "operational support and situational awareness"--such as command, control, communication, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR). 

Examples of pre-deployed payloads could be unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and probably, unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs). The release specifically states that this is "not a weapons program," but you could imagine future evolutions of this.

The initial capabilities sought are for "situational awareness, disruption, deception, networking, rescue, or any mission that benefits from being pre-distributed and hidden." 

The deep-sea capsules will need to survive under extreme pressure and be able to communicate at vast ocean depths to be remotely awoken and recalled when needed. 

Having capabilities available when and where needed--from the bottom of the sea to forward deployment--potentially mitigating some use of costly and non-stealth land bases.

I think this is an exciting idea especially since China was able to demonstrate its anti-satellite missiles in January 2007 in shooting down its own satellite, and I would think that these new underwater pods being sought may be able to provide some alternatives for sensing and communicating in conflicts where satellites are destroyed or disabled and/or other military muscle in not readily available. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Rakel SdPC)

Under The Beautiful Sea

Innovation Made Easy

Innovation is not something that can be mandated to succeed like a quota system, but rather it needs to be nourished with collaboration, motivation, and giving people the organizational freedom to try new things. 

While many organizations have played with the idea of giving employees "tinkering time"--from a few hours a week to 20% of their time--to explore their creativity and work on new ideas, according to the Wall Street Journal (18 January 2013), "it rarely works" or pays off.  

The reason--most employees have "enough to do already" and most tinkerers are free thinkers and amateur experimenters--and "they aren't the kinds of employees most big companies like adding to the payroll in the first place."

The WSJ suggests "better ways to spark innovation" through:

- External partnerships that can "inject the verve of a promising startup into a big company."

- Public-private partnerships that can leverage government-funded research and development. 

- Providing a profit motive for tinkerers to be successful by allowing them "to profit more from their innovations." For example, tinkerers may "own the rights to anything they develop," while the company retains "the right of first refusal to invest" in it. 

Harvard Business Review (15 January 2013) has a compact guide on "Nine Rules for Stifling Innovation" by Rosabeth Moss Kanter. 

These are the absolute don'ts when it comes to innovation:

1) "Be suspicious" of--or I would say competitive with--"any new idea from below"; everyone in the organization can have good ideas, not just the wise owls at the top!

2) "Invoke history"--such as we tried that already and it didn't work or do you think you're the first person to think of that? Just because something didn't work previously under one set of circumstances, doesn't mean the idea is doomed forever--timing may be everything. 

3) "Keep people really busy"--I would call that "make work"--where we treat people so that if they have time and effort to question the status quo, then they have too much free time on their hands. Or as was written by the Nazis on the sign at the entrance to the infamous Auschwitz concentration camp: "Arbeit Macht Frei"--[brutal harsh enslaving] work will set you free.

4)  "Encourage cut-throat competition"--organizational innovation is not about critiquing others to death or creating win-lose scenarios among your staff, but rather about sharing ideas, refining them, and collaborating to make something great from the combined talents and skills of the team. 

5) "Stress predictability"--innovation while encouraged with best practices is not something you predict like the weather, but rather is based on trial and error--lot's of effort--patience, and even a measure of good luck.

6) "Confine discussion...to a small circle of trusted advisors"--I would say that strategy is top-down and bottom-up--everyone can provide valuable input. Almost like agile development, strategy gets refined as more information becomes available. 

7) "Punish failures"--while we generally celebrate success (and not failure), we must still give people an opportunity to fail and learn. That doesn't mean incompetence or laziness is given a free pass, but rather that hard work based on good common sense is acknowledged and rewarded.

8) "Blame problems"--while the blame game can just make heads spin or fall, it is far better to hold people accountable in a fair and unbiased way and coach, counsel, mentor, and train professional learning and growth. 

9) Be arrogant--we all started somewhere--I served frozen yogurt in a health food store as a teen...we all go through the cycle of life--and everyone has their time. 

I would add a tenth, don't...

10) Mistreat your greatest asset, your people--Treat people, as you would want to be treated: listen, at least, twice as much as you speak, empathize with others, and try to treat people ethically and with heart. 

So can innovation really be made easy? 

It's never easy to do something new, we all have to crawl before we can walk--but we can foster an organizational environment that promotes innovation, sharing, collaboration, transparency, and teamwork rather than one based on fear, bullying, intimidation, and punishment. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal with attribution of the beautiful "Dream" art to Romero Britto)

Innovation Made Easy

Righting Our National Economy

We made it through he fiscal cliff--whew!  But the economic landscape remains a minefield. 

In terms of our national debt ceiling, we already passed the $16.4 trillion mark at the beginning of the year and are on borrowed time (no pun intended) until about mid-February when we exhaust accounting gimmicks and can no longer pay our national bills. 

Then there is the elusive government budget where we are on a "continuing resolution" that funds the government at the prior years spending levels until the beginning of March; there is no agreement on what the budget should be after that. 

Finally, there is the Sequestration that was delayed from the beginning of the year to March, which will produce across the board budget cuts to government--not surgically, but sweeping cuts that will hit almost all major government spending. 

All of these budgetary and debt issues are highly contentious and politicized and involve substantial policy decisions in terms of tax reform, spending cuts, and even income and wealth distribution. 

As difficult as it is to navigate a mine field, there is genuine fear that our national luck is running out and the sides are digging in such that even if we get over another one of these hurdles (likely by another delay) or even two of these, what are the odds that we get through all three unscathed economically and with our national image and strength intact?

Already in August 2011, S&P lowered the U.S. credit rating because of these unresolved issues and political stalemate around them, and Moody (in September 2012) and Fitch (this past week) threatened the same putting us at risk of higher borrowing costs, inflation, and even recession. 

Bloomberg BusinessWeek (3 August 2011) using game theory seemed to advocate for political compromise--that produces a "deal no one likes" but avoids pure political victory by one party over the other where one party gives in and the other holds out, and also avoids "financial Armageddon" where both sides hold out and can't get any deal done at all. 

In games of "chicken" both sides "entertain the option of killing everyone" until they finally realize this results in mutually assured destruction (MAD). 

In Washington "everyone, however, is playing a game called 'election'" and "the only possible goal in that game is to win the next one"--in this game, the real question--is there the leadership to rise above the politics, the short-term focus, and bring the two sides together in compromise to forge a path through a difficult economic road ahead. 

Truly, there is really only one way ahead and it is through national sacrifice that will spare no one, but may save the country and our ideals and make us stronger in the end. We are at a dead end for kicking the can further--next step must be to right the ship through cooperation and making the tough choices.

Just like the Washington Monument is one, we must become one. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Righting Our National Economy

Jumping Jean Saves The Day

This was beyond my belief this evening--it is a true story!

As I was getting off the train, my iPhone slipped out of the OtterBox clip on my belt and fell...but it didn't just fall down, it fell at the precise moment that I was disembarking the train and it fell perfectly vertically right between the small space between the train and the platform. 

I couldn't believe it--I don't think I could drop it through that way myself even if I tried. 

Sure enough the phone is laying in the rock bed on the tracks. 

As the train pulled out, I was sure it was a goner, but apparently it survived not only the fall, but also the train running over it as it lay there.

A woman next to me, saw the whole thing unfold and she says to me after the train pulls out--"if you're going to get it, you better hurry up and do it now!"

I must've looked completely astonished when she said that as I peered over to the signage that said the next train was arriving in literally 1 minute!

I looked around for someone from the Metro to help, but no one was there. 

Out of nowhere, a young man rushes forward and says, "I can get it" and before I know it--he jumps into the tracks with the train approaching.

He did it so fast, picked up the smartphone, and jumped back out onto the platform, all in the nick of time--I've never seen anything like it--it was completely amazing. 

I was in disbelief that anyone would do something so crazy as to jump in front of an oncoming train to get a dropped phone that didn't even belong to them--simply to help a fellow human being. 

I tried to help grab him onto the platform, shook his hand, thanked him profusely, and offered him a reward--he refused to even take that. 

On the train we sat together, and he told me about how he came from Cameroon where he had little opportunity and was working two jobs here, including helping seniors and working at McDonalds. He told me how he liked to help people--and that was more than evident to everyone who witnessed this. 

In the end, the iPhone was still working and Jean strengthened my faith in good people still out there. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal from a prior Metro ride)

Jumping Jean Saves The Day

Challenging The Dunbar 150

Today, Facebook announced it's new search tool called Graph Search for locating information on people, places, interests, photos, music, restaurants, and more. 

Graph Search is still in beta, so you have to sign up in Facebook to get on the waiting list to use it. 

But Facebook is throwing down the gauntlet to Google by using natural language queries to search by just asking the question in plain language like: "my friends that like Rocky" and up comes those smart ladies and gents. 

But Graph Search is not just a challenge to Google, but to other social media tools and recommendation engines like Yelp and Foursquare, and even LinkedIn, which is now widely used for corporate recruiting. 

Graph Search uses the Bing search engine and it's secret sauce according to CNN is that is culls information from over 1 billion Facebook accounts, 24 billion photos, and 1 trillion connections--so there is an enormous and growing database to pull from. 

So while the average Facebook user has about 190 connections, some people have as many as 5,000 and like the now antiquated business card file or Rolodex, all the people in your social network can provide important opportunities to learn and share. And while in the aggregate six degrees of separation, none of us are too far removed from everyone else anyway, we can still only Graph Search people and content in our network.

Interestingly enough, while Facebook rolls out Graph Search to try to capitalize on its treasure trove personal data and seemingly infinite connections, Bloomberg BusinessWeek (10 January 2013) ran an article called "The Dunbar Number" about how the human brain can only handle up to "150 meaningful relationships."

Whether hunter-gather clans, military units, corporate divisions, or an individual's network of family, friends, and colleagues--our brain "has limits" and 150 is it when it comes to substantial real world or virtual relationships--our brains have to process all the facets involved in social interactions from working together against outside "predators" to guarding against "bullies and cheats" from within the network. 

According to Dunbar, digital technologies like the Internet and social media, while enabling people to grow their virtual Rolodex, does not really increase our social relationships in the real meaning of the word. 

So with Graph Search, while you can mine your network for great talent, interesting places to visit, or restaurants to eat at, you are still fundamentally interacting with your core 150 when it comes to sharing the joys and challenges of everyday life. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Challenging The Dunbar 150

You Can Better The World

I am really excited about this new Social Media application called Betterific.

It looks a lot like Twitter but is focused on ideas to better the world. 

Every Betterific starts under the heading of "Wouldn't it be better if" and you fill in the rest. 

Whether you have ideas for improving products, companies, policies, or even the way we treat each other--this is a great way to get your ideas out there. 

You also add tags (metadata) to make the ideas more easily searchable by others. 

Like Twitter you can follow topics or other innovative people, friends, and family members. 

A great feature is that you can actually vote--thumbs up or down--for the ideas, and through crowdsourcing great ideas can rise to the top.

There is also a bar at the top where you can look up better ideas by search term--so individuals, organizations, or brands can harvest this information and hopefully act on them.

One of the featured Betterifics when you sign in online is from someone who suggested that toilet seats come with a pedal lift lid (like a garbage can)--being a little germophobic myself, I vote definitely yes to this one!

I hope this type of app catches on so we can all innovate and get our ideas out there simply and clearly.

This has the potential to become a tremendous archive for great ideas that can be accessed, prioritized and most importantly implemented--so we can all really make a difference for the better. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

You Can Better The World

At The Speed Of Innovation

Here are three perspectives on how we can speed up the innovation cycle and get great new ideas to market more quickly:

1) Coordinating R&D--While competition is a good thing in driving innovation, it can also be hinder progress when we are not sharing good ideas, findings, and methods in a timely manner--in a sense we are having to do the same things multiple times, by different entities, and in some more and other in less efficient ways wasting precious national resources. Forbes (10 February 2012) describes the staggering costs in pharmaceutical R&D such that despite about $800 billion invested in drug research between 2007-2011, only 139 new drugs came out the pipeline. Bloomberg BusinessWeek (29 Nov 2012) notes that for "every 5,000 to 10,000 potential treatments discovered in the lab, only one makes it to market" and out of the pharmaceutical "valley of death." The medical research system is broken because "there ultimately no one in charge."  The result is that we are wasting time and money "funding disparate studies and waiting for researchers to publish results months or years later." If instead we work towards our goals collaboratively and share results immediately then we could potentially work together rather than at odds. The challenge in my mind is that you would need to devise a fair and profitable incentive model for both driving results and for sharing those with others--this is similar to a clear mandate of together we stand, divided we fall. 

2) "Rapid Fielding"--The military develops large and complex weapon systems and this can take too long for the warfighters who need to counter evolving daily threats on the battlefield. Federal Computer Week (19 July 2001) emphasizes this point when it states, "Faster acquisition methods are needed to counter an improvised explosive device that tends to evolve on a 30-day cycle or a seven-year process for replacing a Humvee." There according to the Wall Street Journal(11 December 2012) we need to move to a model that more quickly bring new innovative technologies to our forces.  The challenge is to do this with reliable solutions while at the same time fast tracking through the budgeting, acquisition, oversight, testing, and deployment phases. The question is can we apply agile development to military weapons systems and live with 70 to 80% solutions that we refine over time, rather than wait for perfection out of the gate.

3) Seeds and Standards--To get innovation out in the hands of consumers, there is a change management process that needs to occur. You are asking people to get out of their comfort zone and try something new. According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek (17 December 2012) on an article of how bar codes changed the world--it comes down to basics like simplicity and reliability of the product itself, but also seeding the market and creating standards for adoption to occur. Like with electric automobiles, you need to seed the market with tax incentives for making the initial purchases of hybrids or plug-in electric vehicles--to get things going as well as overset the initial development expense and get to mass development and cheaper production. Additionally, we need standards to ensure interoperability with existing infrastructure and other emerging technologies. In the case of the electric automobiles, charging stations need to be deployed across wide swathes of the country in convenient filling locations (near highways, shopping, and so on) and they need to be standards-based, so that the charger at any station can fit in any electronic vehicle, regardless of the make or model. 

Innovation is the lifeblood of our nation in keeping us safe, globally competitive, and employed.  Therefore, these three ideas for enhancing collaboration, developing and fielding incremental improvements through agile methodologies, and fostering change with market incentives and standards are important ideas to get us from pure exploration to colonization of the next great world idea. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

At The Speed Of Innovation

One-Two-Three Punch For Cyber Security

Here are three crafty ideas for improving our cyber security that can be used to protect, prevent, and recover from attacks:

1) Intrusion Deception (not detection)--Mykonos Software aims to protect websites by putting up a virtual minefield--"setting traps to confound hackers." When the software detects hackers trying to infiltrate, it can flood hackers with false information on vulnerabilities that goes nowhere, mess with the hackers computers such as by pop-up flashing maps of their locations and local defense attorneys, and disrupt their connections and slow down their hacking attempts (Bloomberg BusinessWeek).

2) Scamming The Scammers--Notorious email spams such as from Nigeria that look to ensnare victims into wiring money overseas in order to secure some lost fortune costs $9.3 billion in losses in 2009. Psychology professors Chris Chabris and Daniel Simons suggest that we can prevent many scammers from succeeding by raising the cost of their doing business by scamming them with " baiters" that send responses to scammers and occupy them but never actually send any money. They suggest that artificial intelligence could actually be used to create "automated scam-baiters bots" simulating potential gullible victims. These bots could even be programmed to provide phony account numbers and data to scammers to really get them spun up. (Wall Street Journal)

3) Insuring Again Losses--Insurance is a common way to manage risk by purchasing coverage for potential liabilities--this is used to indemnify against losses for everything from auto accidents to home fires, personal theft, and business interruptions. However, according to Bernard Horovitz, CEO of XL Insurance's Global Professional Operations, businesses (and of course, individuals) are rarely are covered by insurance for hacker attacks. Insurance companies are now offering specialty products to recover from the insuring liabilities. Additionally, the insurers will "help with preventing and mitigating cyber crime" through security audits. (Wall Street Journal)

These three cyber security strategies are great examples of how we can make it technically and financially more difficult for cyber attackers to succeed in geting in a knockout punch on their victims. ;-)

(Source Photo: Minna Blumenthal)

One-Two-Three Punch For Cyber Security

We Don't Accept You Here

A number of years ago I had received an interesting job offer--not actually for a job I had applied to, but for "something else", and apparently the job was supposed to come without any questions asked. 

Because when I asked about the typical things that you like to agree on before you start a job, I found that it wasn't going to work out then for this executive because of "cultural fit."

At the time, it was quite clear that cultural fit was just another term used to discriminate not those that could do the job well from those that couldn't, but rather those who would be too thoughtful, innovative, or even challenging to the (failing) status quo. 

In this particular case, the leadership was highly corrupt (in more ways than one) and it came out in front-page investigations and findings not long after, with the actual sacking of many of the head honcho bunch.

When it comes to hiring, it is challenging for many leaders to not just punch the checklist for diversity, but too really embrace it, and this stems from many reasons including fear, bias and hatred of cultures that are different than our own, but also the need for highly insecure leaders to singularly "rule the roost" without any challenge of opinion. 

These leaders think that if everyone fits their mold and subordinates themselves to them alone, then they are by default always right--regardless of the actual consequences of their decision-making.

The problem is that there is no one to vet issues with, play devil's advocate or give an alternate viewpoint--and the insecure leadership with their minion of look-alike, think-alike followers will often drive the train over the cliff--without anyone so much as saying a boo. 

This last week, when a record number of women Senators (20) and congresswomen (82)--were sworn in to the 113th Congress, there was hope of their bringing to the old political mix a new sense and style of collaboration that could help the nation resolve the many issues that we are embroiled in heated negotiation and impasse (e.g. the debt ceiling, the national deficit, the budget, immigration, and more).

Similarly, Bloomberg BusinessWeek (3 January 2013) published an article called "Only BFFs Need Apply"--about how job applicant's cultural fit often trumps their actual qualifications.

BusinessWeek sums up the dilemma with hiring based on cultural fit: While it "may summon up obnoxious images of old boys clubs and social connections...a cooperative, creative atmosphere can make workdays more tolerable and head off problems before they begin." Put another way: the "American ideals about team diversity collide with the reality of building a cohesive, practical staff."

However, the problem with relying on cultural fit is not only that you don't often get the best candidates, but that it is used not just to describe common values and work ethics, but rather inappropriately "as an excuse for feelings interviewers aren't comfortable expressing" such as not being able to accept a person's accent or that they cover they head for religious reasons. 

While hiring lackeys may have a short-term benefit of cohesion, in the long-term, the lack of diversity may result in groupthink and even that "the one person who has a different thought could have saved a business."

Of course, there is also legal prohibitions against discrimination in hiring and personnel management, as well as the ethical issue of hiring unfairly and what that does to the moral fiber of the organization and its people--it's corrosive to their values and capabilities and will lead to the revulsion and loss of good employees, customers, stockholders, and others over time.

Here's the enterprise architecture slant on this topic: "you have to decide if you're hiring for the culture you have or the culture you want." ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Tobucil and Klabs)

We Don't Accept You Here

The Nature of Envy and Ambition

I watched a really good movie the other day called "The Violin."

It was about a civil war in a South American country where freedom fighters are vastly outnumbered and outgunned and an old violinist tries to smuggle weapons and ammunition to his people in his violin case. 

At one point in the movie, their village in overrun by the army, and the boy's mother and sister are killed. 

The little boy asks the grandfather to explain the horrible life events that have befallen them to him and the grandfather tells how G-d created the world with good people as well as people the are envious and ambitious and those people sought to take everything away from the others--no matter how much they accumulated, they wanted more.

I thought about this with respect to a quote I had learned in Yeshiva that "absolute power corrupts absolutely"--that those who have unbridled power and ability, will use it without limitation and in wrong and harmful ways to others, because they can.

Envy and ambition and power--can be used for good--when people see others succeed and are motivated to work hard and do their best too. 

But when people become blindly consumed with it for its own sake--they can't stand anyone having more than them or even having anything--they think they should just as well have it all--then they will not just work hard to achieve it, but they will act out against others to unjustly take what they want and as much as they want. 

My father always taught me never to be jeoulous of anyone. He told me that if you knew what really went on in their lives--what their basket [of good and bad] was--you wouldn't trade places with them in a million years. 

And I believe he was right. Often when I know someone only superficially and their life looks so grand and "perfect," it is tempting to think they have it all or even just better, but then when you get to know their life challenges--sickness, abuse, death, loneliness, and other hardships--you realize how things could always be a lot worse and how truly lucky you are. 

Of course, there will there always be people who are superficial, materialistic, and can't control their urge for power and things--and they will try to take more than their fair due and by force if necessary. In the end, will it bring them real fulfillment and happiness, the answer is obvious. 

I believe it was my Oma (grandmother), a survivor of The Holocaust, who used to say "count your blessings"--she was right. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

The Nature of Envy and Ambition

Have It When You Need it

At an event that I attended recently, I heard a young woman explain her philosophy on life. 

She said, her grandmother taught her: "Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it."

Thinking about it at the time, it seemed pretty wise--because you never want to be without something you really need. 

And good planning and survival skills say to always be prepared--you never know what happens. 

But then with the fiscal cliff and all the talk about social entitlements, I started to think about this some more. 

In a sense, as a society, we have come to think of social entitlements as something that we better have in case we need it--Unemployment Insurance, Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid and more. 

You never know when it's your turn to get laid off, sick, old, or needy. 

And isn't that what's it for--it's a safety net--these are like personal insurance and you never want to need the coverage and not have it. 

But as we should know by now, having it--doesn't come for free. 

So the question is how much social entitlements or insurance do you need--and part of the answer is how much can you afford. 

So is it really better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it--if you can't afford what you're buying?  

In this case, our grandparents and parents having it and not really needing all of it--may mean that we and our children will not be able to have it when we do need it. 

To have social entitlements, we need to be able to pay into the system for it or borrow to finance it. 

Unfortunately, as a nation we have been doing more borrowing, because we have spent beyond our national means--we have even raided our very own social entitlement programs that we hold so dear, to pay for other things--maybe that's why they call it a trust fund, because you really do have to trust, almost blindly, that there will be something there, when it's your time to need it. 

It's great to have it, but if we are gluttons and don't responsibly plan for genuine needs--then as a nation, we really will be left needing and not having it when the time comes.

In short, spend all your money to soon, and tragically, there won't be any candy later. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Have It When You Need it

Taking On The Predator

My colleague at work has an incredible mask of the Predator. 

Quite a frightening looking creature--that in Hollywood only Arnold Schwarzenegger could take on and defeat. 

When Predator, an extraterrestrial, comes to Earth with all sorts of high-tech weaponry to challenge humankind, Schwarzenegger, who leads an elite special forces team, manages to defeat the alien by using his wits to improvise weapons, traps, and tactics. 

In the real world, this mask is a great reminder that while technology is a tool that provides amazing capabilities, in the end, it is really our people's ability to adapt and innovate that makes the ultimate difference as to who succeeds and fails. 

The Predator mask is not only a great conversation piece, but Predator's looks and technology is not so scary when we realize that good, talented people can wield control over it. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Robert Williams)

Taking On The Predator

Tofu Hot Pot - Delicious!

This is one of my favorite dishes from Yuan Fu Restaurant.

It's called a Tofu Hot Pot and is made with fried tofu, basil, and ginger. 

It comes out sizzling in a pot and the waitress says "Careful, it's very hot."

It's also good with a little hot mustard. 

It's a chef's special at Yuan Fu Vegetarian/Vegan restaurant in Maryland.

Yuan Fu is rated 94% liked at Zagat and 4 (out of 5) star at Yelp. 

Other tasty items on their menu is the Crispy Eggplant, Sesame Chicken with Broccoli, and Crispy Beef with Walnuts. 

Hope you enjoy!

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Tofu Hot Pot - Delicious!

Airing Things Out

For the New Year, wanted to share this humorous picture of a greeting card. 

Oh baby, it's hot outside, and this lady needs to cool off.

So she decides to just air things out a little and enjoy the breeze. 

On what occasion would you give someone this card? 

Enjoy! ;-)

(Source Photo: Minna Blumenthal)

Airing Things Out

Panera Bread and The Disabled Man

So how many of you have seen the ABC show "What Would You Do?" hosted by John Quinones.

The show is a little like "Candid Camera," which ran for over 5 decades, in which a practical joke was played out on people with a hidden camera capturing their reactions. Then when the joke was over, the people would be told "Smile, you're on Candid Camera."

The new show "What Would You Do?" is similar in that a scenario is played out with a hidden camera, but rather than a joke, people are tested with illegal or unjust situations to see what they would do and whether they would speak up for the victim? It is a test of character and conviction. And at the end of the scenario, Quinones and the cameras are revealed. 

I was reminded of this show yesterday, when I was in at Panera Bread and at the table next to me was a disabled man in a scooter--hunched over and not looking too well. 

At one point, the disabled man leaves the table for a moment to get something to eat or go to the bathroom, perhaps.

In the meantime, another man comes over and takes his table. When the disabled man in the scooter returns and asks for his table back, the other man simply ignores him (intentionally) and keeps eating as if the diasabled man wasn't even there. 

The kicker here was that the disabled man could not really sit anymore else as this particular table had the extra room around it that he needed to get his scooter in at.

The disabled man put his head down and just shook his head in disbelief that the other man wouldn't let him sit back at the table. 

The man eating his sandwich finally says, "No one was here--this is my table!"

At this point, I couldn't stand seeing this poor man suffer anymore, and I said "He was sitting there, the whole time, and just left for a moment." To which, I thought this whole "misunderstanding" between the men would be resolved.

But I was wrong!

The man eating his sandwich at the table then shakes his head and nods his shoulders indicating that he just didn't care and too bad on the disabled man. 

In turn, I offered the disabled man our table and that we would move instead, but he refused and just waited for the other man to do the right thing. 

At this point both myself and my wife and the people sitting on the other side of the man try to intervene and ask that he please give the disabled man his table back, where he had been sitting, so he could finish his meal.

Then, the man at the table slams his fist down and starts cursing us all out, loudly. 

My wife got up to get the store manager, and while she does this the man finally moves to another table pushing an empty chair at us. 

I couldn't help thinking how this was like the show "What Would You Do?"--but this was real life and this horrible man was no actor!  

And John Quinones did not appear to interview everyone after and have a few laughs. Instead, we were saddened by how some people can be so cruel to others and I was reminded by something I had read from Voltaire that stated that "every person is guilty of all the good he didn't do."

My hope is that whatever hurt this person had in their life that would cause them to treat others this way is healed and that they can find in their heart to have mercy on others and help them rather than get angry and spiteful--there are more tables to eat at and the food is just as good over there. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Panera Bread and The Disabled Man

A Healing Environment

We’ve all been in work environments that make us either feel good about coming to the office in the morning, and those which don’t.

For those that don’t -- is it the mundane and unsatisfying work? Unpredictable work hours and demands? Annoying co-workers? Bullying boss? 

Let’s face it—the environment we work in can make the difference between whether we enjoy a long happy career someplace or whether we want to run out the door screaming. 

At the extreme, I remember a colleague telling me how when they were temping in college they worked in some mind-numbing jobs for some awful companies and they literally lasted in some cases until noon before they couldn’t take it anymore. 

Factors aside from the people can make a person feel good or bad. 

In an interesting article in Fast Company (December 2012/January 2013) called “Spaces That Heal,” hospitals have found that the patient’s room itself can actually be designed to aid in bringing people back to good health.

Research shows that “the color, shape, layout, and accoutrements of a hospital room have a direct effect on health.”

Some design items in the hospital that aid recovery, for example, are:

- Sunnier and brighter spaces with big windows (unless you are having a migraine!)
- Exposure to “nature and art” (I choose nature—the greener, the better)
- Classical music (make mine high energy or pop)
- Colored walls (light blue is relaxing for me)
- Lot of clean circulating fresh air (I like the air conditioner on all year long--even Winter!)
- Presence of family members (well certain family members anyway) :-)

Additionally, rooms wired for smartphones, tablets, and computers and that keep patients busy and engaged are another big positive—I remember when I was in the hospital and my wife brought me a device so I could blog and be me, and I felt like a productive human being again.

New room design in hospitals will also be single rooms (yes, a little privacy and personal space when you’re not feeling well).
They will also have beds at an angle that “face both the window and the media wall”—the media wall is very cool where you can look at everything from digital photos of your kids to watching Netflix or being able to Skype.

Beds will be placed in line of sight of nursing stations for safe monitoring, and bathrooms will have dual accessibility from the patient’s room for doing your business, and from the hall for hospital staff to come and restock it or clean without waking a resting patient. 

The environment we recuperate in matters to how we recover and the environment we work in matters to how we stay healthy, happy, and productive. 

People are not machines, but thinking and feeling beings, and how they are treated physically, emotionally, and mentally all make a world of a difference to their success or failure—and to that of the organization that employs them. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Be Live Hotels)

A Healing Environment