There are intrinsic motivators–those things you do because you are just internally motivated to do them.  Perhaps you enjoy a task (graphic design, podcasting), or you feel a “calling” to be doing something (the preacher on the sidewalk, the environmentalist chained to a tree.)

I am wondering–what motivates you? And specifically, what motivates you at work?

Do you live to work, or do you work to live?

RESEARCH:

–noun

1. diligent and systematic inquiry or investigation into a subject in order to discover or revise facts, theories, applications,etc.: recent research in medicine.

2. a particular instance or piece of research.

SCHOLARSHIP

noun

1. learning; knowledge acquired by study; the academic attainments of a scholar.

Upon further clickage, a scholar is defined as

“a learned or erudite person, especially one who has profoundknowledge of a particular subject.”

Interestingly, there is no such distinction in definitions for Researcher vs Research.

If we look at what defines the two is the distinction one more of the approach used?  Is it that a “researcher” follows a “systematic approach”  to gathering new information–a methodology, if you will, while a scholar may not follow such a rigorously defined structure?  It that is the case, I would as that you answer a few questions:  researcher of scholar?

I just want to quickly point out a few things, as I prepare for tomorrow night’s Real Tech for Real People podcast (listen live at 9PM ET).

1.  It’s not just computer security–it’s your personal security.  Sony unfortunately stored way too much information about you on their site and in the clear meaning that the hackers got people’s passwords, and credit card numbers, as well as other personal identifying information.  Talk about “bad juju.”

2.  Safe computers are not “safe” any more.  No computer is safe.  And neither are you.  Gone are the days when malicious hackers want to destroy your hard drive, or play silly music, or just replicate their software.  Today’s hackers would prefer you not even know they have made it onto your machine.  They want your passwords.  Your bank account information.  Your social security numbers.  Oh, and your CPU cycles.

Today’s infestations are sneaky.  They don’t advertise through garish graphics and sounds. They sneak on and install keyloggers ².  Or Trojans, or Backdoors.  Or “rootkits.” They all have one goal–to NOT be detected while they steal your precious information, or your computer processing power itself.

3.  In an effort to steal your valuable information and even assume your very identity, hackers still rely on the most trustworthy of approaches–the CON.  Yes, they will practice “phishing”   tossing out bait through mass emails to see if anyone (you?) will log on to a look alike site (bank site, FaceBook, Twitter, whatever…) and then they will simply take your user name and password as you type it in.  Even more “evil” is the approach known as “spear Phishing.” In this attack they go after specific targets, sending emails that really do seem to be sent to you directly. You “trust” it…

According to the FBI Spear Phishing works like this:

First, criminals need some inside information on their targets to convince them the e-mails are legitimate. They often obtain it by hacking into an organization’s computer network (which is what happened in the above case) or sometimes by combing through other websites, blogs, and social networking sites.

Then, they send e-mails that look like the real thing to targeted victims, offering all sorts of urgent and legitimate-sounding explanations as to why they need your personal data.

Finally, the victims are asked to click on a link inside the e-mail that takes them to a phony but realistic-looking website, where they are asked to provide passwords, account numbers, user IDs, access codes, PINs, etc.

This particular attack has recently been made simpler by the loss of the email lists by the mass-marketing firm “Epsilon.”  Perhaps you received an email from one of your banks, or stores your frequent, or travel company, notifying you that their marketer’s system was hacked.  Sadly, this means you can no longer trust emails from those firms to not lead you astray.

All of these stories (and many more) should have you a bit concerned.  Computer security is now no longer about people stealing internet, or putting destructive programs on your hard drives.  No longer is it simply your $1000 computer investment that is at risk.

It is your identity.  And it is time to protect yourself.  In my next post I will share some tips, and software tools, that you can use to help build a protective barrier around your computer, and your identity.

So far, many have found it to be quite useful, but it was initially limited to Windows versions of Word because Microsoft removed VBA from the Mac versions  Microsoft has since added VBA back in, making the macro accessible for users of both Mac and Windows.

If you have a Kindle, feel free to try the macro.  If you like it, please consider making a donation–every $1 dollar helps.

I bought the iPhone 3G when it came out in 2008. Yes, I even waited in line for an Apple device.¹ I liked the phone, and unlike many others really felt no need to upgrade to the 3GS the next year, or even the iPhone 4.² I did jailbreak my phone, but I only did that after Apple unceremoniously removed the Google Voice application from the App Store.

I did generally update my phone whenever a new update came out, only waiting first to ensure the jailbreak was also available at the time. This was true with the 4.0 update as well. I wanted folders, and multitasking. Who wouldn’t? It’s what we have all been clamoring for since the first iPhone arrived. And, as promised iOS 4.0 (and later, 4.01) delivered. Sadly, for iPhone 3G owners that meant that we paid a great price–our phones no longer responded to our desires with swift efficiency. Instead our phones responded sluggishly, if at all. Answering phone calls became a race between the phone responding to my command to answer, and the caller’s patience on the other end. More often than not the caller, unaware of the skirmish between me and my phone, would hang up.

So I, like every other 3G owner who had upgraded to 4.0, upgraded when the 4.1 iOS rolled out. And yes, the snap, the responsiveness, is back. Mostly.

But “Surprise!” that is the only significant new feature announced in 4.1 to actually make it into the 3G version of 4.1.³ In fact, they removed multitasking!

I will say, I was never happier with my decision to switch to the Android OS and the Samsung Captivate Phone I made the switch days before the iOS 4.1 update. I thought it was a good chance to try to Android OS, and I have 30 days with AT&T to decide if I want to keep the phone. I will provide a review of the Captivate later, but after 1 week, I am definitely thinking this is a keeper.

That said, I am willing to go that route, with support from our listeners and my readers.

If you want to support me in getting an iPad, just click here, and make a donation to “Help Steve get an iPad”

Heck if you just like what you read, are pleased that I am here sharing my thoughts, or you enjoyed the video that posted from the swim team (or the other videos here and at http://thefathersonchats.com) then please, feel free to donate.

2 dollars, 4 dollars. 10 dollars.  Anything is gratefully accepted.

Thanks.

I am sure you are wondering “how can I donate, and ensure these kids get credit for it?” It’s simple. From their website:

For Members of the Community

Donations of $100 and up will receive a t-shirt.

Donations can be sent to:

CV Four Diamonds Fund
Cumberland Valley High School
6746 Carlisle Pike
Mechanicsburg, PA 17050
Attn: Elizabeth Rimpfel

These kids work hard year round.  They are planning, canning (raising funds at sporting events and retailers), and reaching out to the media.  They certainly know that it is important to work hard FOR THE KIDS.

BUT… they also know how to have fun.  Don’t believe me? Just watch this video.

Take the time to learn about the wide range of activities they have planned at the CV THON by visiting their site at http://cvschools.org/thon and then watch the video of last year’s LINE DANCE at CV THON!

FOR THE KIDS!

Matt and I had a chat in the car while waiting for his Mom to join us for lunch.  We were talking about his iPhone which has  lived a good, but HARD life. And we chatted about it… on the zi8.

I have been pondering for a while the use of the eBooks (and specifically the Kindle) in Academia.  Ever since I considered purchasing my first eReader (the Sony eReader 505) I have found the convenience of having several books at my finger tips, without weighing me down, to be the most obvious benefit.  That said, I believe there are many others, and some which can result in the elusive “win-win” situations for producers and consumers alike.

• Affordability of textbooks
• Desk Reference/Review copies
• Physical size/weight relief
• notetaking and highlighting

Need to rethink old views:

• why see “a page”?
• how do I “flip” through a book?
• what is the focus/purpose of an “illustration”?
• are there other ways to “illustrate”?
• How do we do “citations?”

Challenges:

• How to compare two separated pages (i.e., pages 57, and 106) (side by side?)

Issues I want to see if they have added/changed:

• Highlighting:  does the menu appear next to where I clicked? How is that interface changed?
• can we move/sync highlights/notes between devices?

Have you given much thought to the changes we can see with Digital Textbooks?  What are your thoughts? Please share them in the comments.

I have just found on the Amazon site that they are selling the original Kindle for only $149.99. (see update above)

If you are interested, check it out.  It’s “almost” as good as the Kindle2.  I have the original, and haven’t felt the need to upgrade, since the only really new features are the ability of the Kindle 2 to read to me (with a computer generated voice) and more esthetically pleasing buttons.  In fact, I personally like the ability, with the original Kindle, to add a memory card, thereby having unlimited storage (and I can remove the card–with my books–before I ship it out if I have problems).  Also, the original Kindle has a removable/replaceable battery, so you won’t have to send the whole unit off to Amazon if your battery dies.

Anyway–just wanted to share this with you.

At least, I thought it was.  Now I am not one to go all crazy over conspiracy theories and the like.  Personally, I like my aluminum foil wrapping leftovers, not as a hat.  But it occurred to me that Amazon is not only gathering information about our buying patterns (our actual buying patterns, and not simply what sites we look at or ads we see), but they are  now getting something more.  Amazon now is learning what we read, and how fast we read it. (Or perhaps whether we actually read them, or finish them?) But Amazon is essentially capable of gathering information on what we think is important by what we highlight, and what we think and believe by any notes we may write.

In my mind this actually puts them a step ahead of Google.

Will Amazon do anything with this?  Probably not.  But think about it–what does it say about you?  This is creating a “virtual you” that can be analyzed.  Tie this with the Google information, and what a picture it becomes.

Recently a guest on TWIT said that not only is this a virtual you, but it is a virtual you that knows more about you than you do.  It’s memory of what you read, highlight, and type is “perfect.”  Can you say that about yourself?

Would you want to learn about yourself?  Or would you (almost) be afraid to know?

After a couple of posts to a variety of blogs on some issues of mutual interest, Steve invited me to step up as a “Guest Contributor” (all of the hassle, none of the pay?) on topics of my choosing.  Since I am new to this whole “blog thing,” I would ask you all to “be gentle” with me . . . Yeah, Right!

Let the games begin!

Scorch aka “The Other Steve”

The entry is thoughtful, funny, and touching.  One would find it hard to read this post, regardless of perspectives on the military and the war in Iraq, and not finish without a tear in the eye, and a warm spot in their heart for the American Fighting Man.

Our soldiers deserve our respect, and honor, not only in their deaths, but in their lives as well.

Please–take the time to read his post.  You will be changed.

And, while he didn’t want his death to be politicized, I feel it remains only proper that we remember him with the closing words of Abraham Lincoln in Gettysburg:

 

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate – we can not consecrate – we can not hallow – this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion – that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

 

President Abraham Lincoln

November 1863

Wow. THIS is an interesting story, and is actually a good lesson in so many areas. Certainly, we can learn much about “common sense” from a company that doesn’t think that a bill of that magnitude is somehow incorrect and out of line. Or perhaps we can learn how automated systems, left to their own devices, without a conscience, can ruin peoples lives.

Yes, we can learn all these things, but let’s look instead at the economics of this. The man is charged 218 TRILLION dollars for his phone bill. For perspective, the national debt, according the the US National Debt Clock, is only 8 Trillion. Additionally, according to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, the quarterly Gross Domestic Product (GDP = consumption + investment + government spending + (exports − imports)) is $1.57 trillion quarterly (and, with the current Bush Administration, growing quite nicely–see the BEA report.) In this case, the phone company in question is in Malaysia, not the US, so you can imagine the impact such a phonebill must have. Just look at the equstion for GDP. Add that level of consumption to the GDP for a single quarter, and you have quite a blip!

Okay, so then let’s look at this. This one example clearly highlights why there is no connection between cost and price. I cannot imagine the Telco will be able to argue that, if the phone was accidently left on or not, they have incurred a substantial cost. They may have some trivial marginal costs associated with providing the calls, but given that the infrastructure (fixed costs) are already in place, one cannot believe that the TELCO would have incurred such great costs. Instead, we now have laid bare the gap, understandable in economic terms, between what it costs the company to provide the service, and what they are able to charge as a price because, at our traditional rates of use, it is a price we are willing to pay.

So there you have it. One man racks up a phone bill 145 times the US Gross Domestic Product, and will perhaps go to jail if he can’t pay.

So yes, the old Science Fiction story seems to be correct. The phone company will own everything and everyone.

HOMEWORK: anyone want to compute the “Earth Domestic Product” and determine if he could even come close to paying off his debt.

This story is interesting on many levels. Of course, there is the obvious “Boy meets King, King shafts Boy” angle to the story. Or perhaps “Fast Food forces Diet” as an alternative headline.

What intrigues me is that an average person (the BK Cashier) made such a significant mistake. This cashier isn’t some government employee somewhere, she isn’t working for NASA, or DoD. Nope, and every day person made a mistake that could happen to any of us, at any time–and it had a near-catastrophic effect for the Beane family. Mistakes aren’t limited to the government, and while we should all work to improve the “quality of service” we need to recognize that mistakes will happen (no matter how good an organization you are)–it’s what we all do after those mistakes that tends to separate the high quality organizations from the poor ones.

What is most difficult is that the provision of a “service” is not as simple as delivering a product. One cannot establish “The” process that will deliver a high quality good. We cannot sample the product to ensure the process is “in specification” since each delivery of the service is unique. Oh–and we expect everyone, from the High School kid at the fast food counter, to the introverted engineer, to be an expert at providing quality service.

So my challenge today is two-fold: First, insist (politely) on high quality service. And second: when you don’t receive it, work with the people who are there, not against them–and constructively let them know how they could improve.

The Prof(f)

PS: Does anyone else think that, perhaps, BK should have provided something above and beyond the meal for free?

Care to know what the future holds, for news agencies, google, Amazon, and Microsoft? This is an interesting look into the future of media convergence, done in documentary style. Of note is that it must have been created in 2004 since the timelines (predictions) begin diverging in 2005.

I particularly like the fact that this actually has Google Ads running at the bottom–real ads, I believe!

I believe I have mentioned here my affinity for stories about surveys, and how we report and interpret them. remember my blogging about the Lt Col who incorrectly talked about speeding, or even my referring you, dear class, to the book Freakanomics? Or perhaps, you remember my discussing The Numbers Guy at the Wall Street Journal?

Well, this story is, as my brother points out, right up my alley.

This “language log” tackles the all important nature of spin, asking essentially how one can spin a story to get the most effect. While I appreciate everything the author puts forward, what the two greatest contributions, in my mind, are the a) point the author makes about how people, including other reporters, will easily mis-understand what is meant and then report it incorrectly, and b) how positive stories are passed for negative ones.

It’s a good read. Go check it out!

The Prof (or, if you are from London– The Proff. Don’t ask ME why–ask her! LOL)

Okay, so this is a bit warped. Interestingly, I had just listed to an episode of TWIT (“This week in tech” by Leo Laporte) where someone in the gang of about 5 commented that the security in OS-X was quite weak, but that thankfully no one ever wants to attack it. Perhaps the worm-writer was a member of the TWIT Army feeling sorry for Mac users? While that seems far-fetched, the author perhaps understood that, as this article points out, they would be “gleeful” when it was “born free.”

Perverse pleasures may be pleasurable, but they remain… perverse…

This story obviously has sinister overtones. What evil, anti-Christian conspiracy lurks in Alabama? It must be some concerted effort to drive out the Christians from the Bible-belt, and is symptomatic of a deeper running repudiation of the evils of Christianity.

Yeahhhhhh, Right. Or, perhaps, it is one sick puppy.

My bet is on option two.

The Prof.

PS: I found it somewhat interesting that at the end of the article they mention “The nine churches that burned included both predominantly black and predominantly white congregations.” if it was only predominantely black churches, that would of course have been the headline. Remember this story, the next time you read about how many “black churches” are being burned, and how it is symptomatic of the racism that still burns hot in the south, and recall that, when you look at the numbers (in this case, and actually in the FBI reports) the numbers of “white” and “black” churches burned usually run about equal… (DISCLAIMER: I haven’t done the analysis to evaluate what that works out to on a “per capita” basis… feel free to do that work, and report back!)

Gay Policy Biting The Pentagon on The Butt

I suppose the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy works to an extent, but once someone is outed and the military releases them it certainly calls into question ["certainly" a dogmatic statement, if not one asserting FACT] the rational for the policy, especially when we are at war. We are going through military left and right, either due to death, incapacitation or exhaustion. ["going through the military left and right" seems to assert this as fact. Just how many soldiers does it take to be going through them? Hmmm? Reads like fact--but is of course, OPINION] Recruitment is down and will probably stay low. [Assertion of FACT, but actually again opinion, or at least poorly researched. As Brother_Bones posted on the comments, most services are not having problems recruiting.] Safe to say that policy on gays in the military starts to sound a bit stupid all of a sudden, don’t it? [Sounding stupid--clearly opinion... right? No matter how "safe" she thinks it is to say]

Also, I never quite understood what the difference was between horny homosexuals chasing after each other, and horny heterosexuals chasing after the opposite sex in the military. The military is aware we are now co-ed? One of the best Iraq stories I heard was from a friend in the Army who in between casing empty homes in the area he was designated to cover, found time for some one-on-one with another female soldier right behind a huge cement wall in the Iraqi heat. Of course, the military will probably look at that and think it’s fabulous. [Anecdote--so perhaps factual, but certainly not sufficient data to form a valid opinion] (Maybe “fabulous” is the wrong word.) But the point is, if they are concerned about inappropriate behavior , does it really matter which two sexes are involved?

So what we have here, despite the protestations, and constant obfuscations from the perveyors of smoke, is a blog full of opinions asserted as fact, anecdotes put forward as arcetype, and *I didn’t write it!* (now THAT is Fabulous!)

This reminds me of the studies that came out in the mid-1980s, where a “link” was found between aluminum in the brain, and Alzheimer’s. At the time, the “fear mongers” then started encouraging the disuse of Aluminum Pans (oddly enough, in favor or cast iron, and teflon) and discouraged drinking sodas out of a can. (forget that sodas themselves are evil, evil things.) At the time, I pointed out, to those around me, young pup that I was, that the evidence was only that there existed a link–high levels of aluminum in the brains of Alzheimer’s patients.

Note a few things here:
– They had only looked at autopsies of Alzheimer patients, so couldn’t draw a solid comparison
– They (The researchers) found high levels of alumnimum

I surmised that it could be one of two (or many) things. The two most obvious is that a) Aluminum causes/contributes to Alzheimer’s, or b) whatever the cause of Alzheimer’s, it may, as a result, *also* result in the brain retaining significant levels of aluminum. (Of course, there was the next option–that the levels were high, but no higher than in anyone else… )

I believe later studies have shown that there is no causal link. I leave that research to you, dear reader. But if you find anything, be sure to come back here and tell us–certainly a motivated reader makes the best researcher! (In fact, that’s one of the things I like most about the blog at “the Lobby“–Let is quite motivated!)

Keep on thinking!

The Prof

Okay, read this story over. But in case they take it off–let me excerpt:

“he failed to declare the $1 million he earned for beating out all other contestants on the hit reality TV show in 2000. ”

“Hatch, a corporate trainer and consultant, is also charged with failing to declare the $10,000 prize he earned for appearing on the series’ final episode and more than $300,000 he earned the following year from radio appearances. ”

Now here is my question: What made him think they wouldn’t notice? If I remember correctly, he won the money on NATIONAL TV, and most likely had international coverage. Did he think that IRS employees don’t watch TV at home? Did he think that someone winning over a million bucks wouldn’t be flagged?

I cannot wait to hear what he has to say in his defense, however, that may not happen since he has agreed in a non-binding agreement to plead guilty.

Too bad–it would be more interesting than many of the murder trials we have seen lately.

Yes, I called this my “lecture notes.” And after reading several other people’s blogs, I find that I will perhaps take some heat for the presumption taken in that title. I couldn’t think of anything else that really captured my “style” of communication.

I love fishing–the time alone, surrounded by thoughts and water. I enjoy the battle with the fish, but can be happy catching nothing. The problem is, it is still not “communication” with anyone but myself, God, and perhaps nature.

Of course, like any good professor, I am opinionated, and vocal about them. Unlike many professors, my opinions are politically conservative. If Sean Hannity were to meet me, and my brother (also a professor) he might perhaps moderate his opinion about all academics being liberal pinheads. Of course, he isn’t all THAT wrong–most are! I would like to think that I am rational in my opinions, and I try to remain balanced, willing to call certain ideas BS even when they are supportive of my own perspective, if they are unsupportable. On the other hand, I don’t run from the label “ideologue.” All it means is that I have an ideology–I have a view of how the world should be, and believe that certain ways of getting their are “better” than others.

Of course, like any good professor, I am also seeking truth, and willing to entertain challenges to old ideas, and seek out new ones. But I am also honest enough to admit that, if ideas conflict with ideology (I am not talking “Facts” here, but ideas) that I will be willing to reject them, easily.

Well, enough from me for now. Let’s see how this blog thing works out.

Lecture over.