History Repeats

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.

-Martin Niemöller (Germany circa 1940)


First they came for the illegal immigrants, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not an illegal immigrant.

Then they came for the Hispanics, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Hispanic.

Then they came for those with foreign accents, and I did not speak out --
Because I had no foreign accent.

Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.

-Dane Nordine (Arizona circa 2010)

Off To The Next Bubble

Sorry for the doom and gloom, but I have lost patience with those seeking hope and those regurgitating rah-rah political platitudes about re-surging American greatness. I over hear conversations all the time about how our economy seems to have turned the corner. Things are getting better. Perception is reality, after all. If we wish it hard enough, maybe it will be true. In all things, we believe what we want to believe, what is convenient, what suits us best. Confirmation bias makes us instantly recognize those things that confirm our beliefs and subconsciously ignore those that contradict. So goes the economy.

The improvements in our economy remain nothing more than mis-perceptions because we ignore these simple truths: our economy is based on debt rather than equity; we concentrate too much on spending rather than producing anything of value; and, we ignore that real value is created from intelligent labor, not a printing press.

It is becoming obvious we have learned nothing from our past bubbles because we ignore how they came about in the first place. Therefore, we are destined to repeat them.

We want things to get better. Unfortunately, we spend so much time trying to convince ourselves that things are better without recognizing the errors that got us here in the first place. Rather than fix anything, we would rather create another bubble -- this time in the US Dollar -- and rebuild our economy on more false premises, rife with new forms of malinvestments. I greatly fear this new bubble will dwarf our preceding tech bubble and housing debacle.

As a country and a society, we have a choice to make: we can take our current path and delude ourselves that it is possible to borrow our way to prosperity, or, we can take the more difficult path and recognize that we must roll up our sleeves, spend less, pay off debt, save more, and use our labor to produce things of actual value.

It scares me that some of the smartest are betting against our ability to make the right choice. As Nassim Taleb put it recently in an interview with the guardian.co.uk: “I also have an exit strategy that others don’t: I make bets against US Treasury bonds. People lecture Greece about debt, but the Greeks are not in debt in comparison with America; in America debt is uncontrollable.”

Unless we are willing to recognize that our love affair with debt is creating our next bubble, we, as Americans, may have seen our better days.

The Whigs -- Black Lotus

Well, I am real excited to be off to see the Whigs (with the Hold Steady) in Santa Fe this week, so I put together this cheesy video as part of my self-training in Adobe After Effects. It is pretty stripped down and basic, but I gotta' start somewhere. I figure I will redo it as I advance.

Fun stuff. I obviously have a lot to learn, though...

Happy Fourth of July.

Is Digital As Green As We Think?

This article that Nicole put together for our company’s intranet gives a great example of how we often assume something to be true without giving it a second thought:

“Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.”
“Sign up for paperless billing, help the environment and save trees.”

In the ongoing quest to be green, these types of phrases are seen daily. And as a publisher of various print publications, McMurry deals with clients everyday looking to go digital, not just to save money, but to improve their image with the community as an environmentally conscientious organization.

However, a recent article on MediaShift, a PBS website dedicated to the “digital media revolution” shows a very different point of view on the paperless topic and asks the question, “is it possible that digital media could be more destructive to the environment and a greater threat to trees, bees, rivers and forests in the United States than paper-making or printing?”

Before screaming out an emphatic, “No way!” the article is definitely worth a read. The author, Don Carli, is not out to deter the reader from using digital media as may first be suspected or assumed. What he is suggesting is that consumers should be more aware and informed about the energy sources for both digital and print, rather than making assumptions and uneducated decisions.

The article goes on to show how the energy used by digital media technologies can be as destructive in its creation as cutting down trees for paper. In the article, Carli points out that in the U.S. alone, electricity consumption by data centers has doubled from 2000 to 2006 and will likely double again by 2011. With coal mining and coal-fired power plants still being a major source of electrical power in the U.S., digital media and its ever-increasing use of that electrical power are thus, substantial contributors to deforestation, loss of wildlife and pollution in the U.S.

In fact, while print media has been in the spotlight for “killing trees” for years, leading printer and paper manufacturers to initiate sustainable forestry, renewable energy projects and environmental performance certification, digital media and the energy consumed to manufacture and use it has gone virtually unchecked.

So, check out the article and become more informed about what going paperless and using digital products more frequently may mean for the environment.

Story submitted by McMurry Senior Production Manager Nicole Dean.

Netflix: Run Fast and Stay Focused

A year ago, my household decided to eliminate cable television.

There were several reasons for this: One, if we kept it, we would feel obligated to watch it or else we would feel like we were wasting money. Two, eliminating it would remove clutter and unnecessary noise, allowing us to read more. Three, although we would miss access to certain channels, we wouldn’t miss 95%+ of them. Four, we decided to explore experiencing life more. TV is an opiate. It’s influence needed to be reduced. Five, much of what is on -- news, dark-themed shows, political talking heads, etcetera -- has negative psychological effects and little positive return. And six, it would save us some money.

It wasn’t easy. Although we can obviously still get the local channels, we miss the plethora of college football on Saturdays and the total baseball coverage during the summer. Luckily, we have some great sports bars within walking distance of our house and not having cable creates a great excuse to visit them. (Of course, that eliminates cost savings as one of our goals.)

The elimination of cable doesn’t mean we gave up on TV as an entertainment medium. With Internet, we still have access to things like Hulu and programing direct from networks’ sites. We also have Netflix.

Oh, the beauty of Netflix. Although they claim to be a secondary source for entertainment, we are finding they have become our primary source. While we constantly have the dvd-by-mail thing going on, we have found there is more than enough instant access to streaming content, all for the same nine dollar a month fee.

They are big and are only getting bigger. Check out this incredible breakdown of how Netflix sees their business model evolving. They have totally wiped out Blockbuster -- and, contrary to their claim of not wanting to become the primary source provider -- may end up being just that for people like us who don’t feel the need to be plugged into the ‘great opiate’.

At some point, we found it redundant to have cell phones AND a home phone. The home phone went away. In the same way, we have now accidentally stumbled upon the unnecessary duplication of our entertainment suppliers. By avoiding the pay-per-view model and ad supported content, we have discovered Netflix’s simple low-cost strategy fits our needs just fine.

Bye-bye cable, hello Netflix.

Protecting Cyberspace

Freedom sucks. Let’s get rid of it.

...and let’s start with the Internet.

According to an article on the PC Magazine website this week, The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee unanimously approved the Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act of 2010 (S. 3480) which now moves to the Senate floor for a full vote. The article states: “The bill is an over-arching cyber-security measure, which would, among other things, create an office of cyberspace policy within the White House, which would be led by a Senate-appointed director. It would also create a new center within the Homeland Security Department, which would implement cyber-security policies.”

Hooray! A Cybersace Czar! Now we are safe! (BTW - How many Czars do we have now? Isn’t it ironic that “Czar” is synonymous with totalitarian authority borrowed from our Russian comrades, and that we now have more “Czars” in our government today than the Russians ever did in their entire history?) Only the government would come up with the idea of a top-down authority figure to oversee a system that beautifully evolved around no centralized structure.

The Homeland Security put out their own propaganda combating the notion that this bill would give the President a “kill switch”, going so far as claiming: “Rather than granting a “kill switch,” S. 3480 would make it far less likely for a President to use the broad authority he already has in current law to take over communications networks.”

Really? They are claiming this bill would “restrict” the President’s authority? That would be a first. The President already has "broad authority...in current law"? Why create a bill then?

And what in the world would ever give them the idea that government bureaucrats could administer directions in an emergency better than the private sector that actually created those systems?

In fact, in the previously mentioned propaganda piece, the government even admits: “For too long, the federal government has failed to adequately account for security when procuring information technology products and services. S. 3480 would require the government to develop a strategy to consider security risks in information technology procurements. It would be similar to efforts already under way at the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.”

The bill would “would require the government to develop a strategy to consider security risks”? They haven’t already been doing that?

They openly admit they have been inept at securing their own systems and their solution to that is to have more control over security in the private sector?

Look, risks do exist. That is the inherent “problem” with freedom. Unfortunately, as usual, our government uses fear to create yet another all-encompassing knee-jerk reaction that does more to destroy the very liberties it claims to protect.

Government already has the authority to protect assets already under it’s own control. Maybe it should work on taking care of them first before it starts giving itself any more authority.

Protect the power grid. Protect federal sites. But hands off the private sector in the name of protecting us. Protecting the free flow of information by controlling it is not freedom.

Venture Capitalism Made Easy

Once in awhile, I like to follow up on the Kiva project I have been working on since 2007. The non-profit site Kiva.org has made it easy for me to fund entrepreneurs from around the world, twenty-five dollars at a time.

I loan them money. They pay me back. I re-invest it to others.


I am currently on pace to fund my 70th venture by the end of this year. Although this really is charity considering I don’t get any interest in return for my backing, I do have the option of pulling my funds out rather than reinvesting them. I don’t see myself ever doing that, though.

Yes, I may be a dirty rotten capitalist pig, but it is just too much fun seeing the poorest people in this world pulling themselves up by their own hard labor. It is even more fun knowing I am playing some small role in it.

For more info on how you can help change the world one person at a time, go to Kiva.org.