All Good Things…

I must admit, I didn’t think it would be this difficult to say goodbye to my friends in Buenos Aires. 

I spent the last week visiting the Bible students one last time.  As I would leave each of them for the final time, I felt it:  a knot in my stomach.  Part of is that I got close to them.  Part of it is that it brought me so much joy to see them progress.  Part of it is that I hope they continue to do so.  I know they are in good hands and that the brothers here will take care of them.  But it’s still hard.  Not only did they appreciate the truths they were learning from the Bible, but they appreciated me personally.  That makes me feel good, but it makes leaving so much harder.  Many gave me gifts.  As I write this, I’m wearing some of them.  They are mementos of the wonderful people whose lives I was privileged to touch. 

And then there are the brothers here.  They were my life for the past two years.  They helped me in so many ways.  Many helped with language issues.  Many provided transportation and meals.  Many invited me to work with them in the ministry.  Daniel Villalon, in particular, was a tremendous help.  I remember meeting him back in June 2009.  I thought to myself, “If all the brothers in Argentina are like this, I want to stay here.”

Of course, as brothers, we always help each other.  We have come to expect that.  But I really have to thank the brothers here for doing even more than that.  They let me into their hearts.  I underestimated how close I became with them.  Last night, amidst all the hugs and kind words, I realized how much they mean to me.  And now, as I sit in the airport awaiting my flight, I feel that knot in my stomach again. 

Hmm, I just got a text with a song lyric: “Goodbye is a crummy little word.  Goodbye is the worst word around.  I’ll skip that word of you don’t mind.”  Apropos, no? 

My plane is about to board.  But in that same spirit, I won’t say goodbye.  I have a feeling that one day soon, I’ll be back at this airport. 

See you soon, Buenos Aires. 

[Mis]application

I've been meaning to write this post for a while, but, as usual, I couldn't clarify my thoughts well enough.  However, just now, I was swinging in a hammock in a penthouse in Copacabana and the ideas started to solidify.  They are not completely solid yet, but here we go anyway:

The difference between knowledge and wisdom is application.  You can know something, but until you apply it, it really doesn't do any good.

For example, mankind has gained tremendous knowledge of natural laws, but is the application of these laws that leads to useful innovations.  An obvious example is electricity.  It's great to study how electricity works, but until you actually do something with it, it doesn't provide any benefit.  What would you rather have?  A book full of formulas like V=IR, or, I don't know, lights in your house?

So application is extremely important.  And really, the example of natural laws is overly simplistic.  Their application is easy.  With electricity, you can easily make a circuit and test it.  If it works, you have successfully applied your knowledge.  It becomes much more difficult when we have to apply some bit of knowledge in our own life.

And herein is the reason I'm writing this post: I have seen a lot of misapplication lately.  More times than I care to count, I have seen people take a bit of advice, an analogy, an illustration, or even a personal experience, and misapply it.  (I don't want to give specific examples, so I apologize if this is overly vague.)

I'm sure they are not doing this on purpose.  In fact, they are to be commended for seeing a useful bit of knowledge and trying to apply it in their life.  But they are missing the mark.

I've spent a lot of time trying to determine why, exactly, they are missing it.  Sometimes it is failure to consider the context.  Sometimes it's oversimplification - or overcomplication - of the situation.  Sometimes it's simply seeing what they want to see.  If there is a single, unifying reason, I have yet to find it.

So I really don't have any conclusions yet.  Since I started noticing this in others, I've really tried to examine my own application to make sure its valid.  I guess that's all I have right now.  I would like to revisit this once I learn more...

It Alters Your Mind

In The Big Short, one of the investors who saw the subprime collapse coming said that one day he realized something:

"We turned off CNBC," said Danny Moses. "It became very frustrating that they weren't in touch with reality anymore. If something negative happened, they'd spin it positive. If something positive happened, they'd blow it out of proportion. It alters your mind. You can't be clouded with stuff like that."

"It alters your mind."

In the November Awake, there is a great article about DNA.  When I was in school, I was taught that 98% of our DNA is "junk," left over from evolutionary dead-ends.  The idea immediately felt wrong to me, for multiple reasons, but I never pursued a better answer.

A single scientist coined the term in his paper So Much 'Junk' DNA in Our Genome.  That single paper repelled other scientists from studying this noncoding DNA.  It turns out, of course, that this DNA is not junk at all, but codes for important regulatory RNA.  But that took much longer to figure out than it should have.

That paper altered the minds of these scientists.

This happens all the time.  We may have a very well-defined and well-supported position on something, but if we hear something to the contrary, it 'clouds' us, as Danny put it.

Maybe this has happened to you, because it's happened to me:

The internet is great in that it is an excellent medium for two-way communication.  Articles and blogs often allow for comments.  Now, at first glance, this seems like a great way to have a discussion and develop the points even further.

But here's what often happens to me.  I read a well-thought-out article on whatever subject.  I think, "Hmm, this makes sense.  The author seems to be an expert on this topic.  His arguments are clearly laid out.  I like it."

But then I read one or two comments.  Invariably, one or more comments disparage the author and his article.  Usually, the commentor presents no valid reasons for his criticisms.  He presents no credentials to establish himself as an authority on the topic.  And he offers no satisfactory counter-proposals.

I understand all of this.  Yet, his comment has already done damage to my view of the article.

It altered my mind.

This is, albeit, a silly example.  But it is one that is easily observable today.  There is so much information readily available, and so many people spouting their opinions, that this kind of mind-altering is ubiquitous.

How do we fight it?  As usual, the first step is identifying the issue.  Only then can we protect our mind from being altered.

Danny had to turn off CNBC.  I have decided to stop reading the comments.  

Infrastructure

I've really tried to not use this blog as a vehicle for complaining.  I hate complaining.  So I'm going to try to write this post without that tone.

The US has its share of difficulties.  But one thing that I, as an American, had taken for granted was its infrastructure.  I had taken it for granted, that is, until I moved to Argentina.

In the US, basic stuff just works.  You have water, power, gas, electricity, internet, phone, etc. without having to think about it.  That frees you up to focus on other things.  It would seem ridiculous for an Ameican to be without any of these things for any amount of time, barring some natural distaster.  And it would seem equally ridiculous to have to periodically get on the phone and fight with these companies to restore service.

Now let's talk about Argentina.  Where to begin?  Did I mention I didn't have gas for 8 months?  Or that periodically the water doesn't work because they are cleaning the tank?  Or that I've lost power more times than I care to count?  Or that my internet connection will randomly go off?  (Sometimes due to workers accidentally cutting through the cable.)  More than once I lost my internet connectivity in the middle of a business transaction and I had to take my laptop to a McDonalds with working wifi to finish it.

So why write about this now?  I tried to add credit to my cell phone line.  Such a simple thing.  I use a prepaid line and so recharging it involves buying a card with a number you punch in. 

Lo and behold: there was no number on my card.  I took it back to the store.  They said to call a number and talk to the phone company directly.  We called.  After much playing with the phone tree, the lady said the line has been recharged.  I checked.  Nope.  Called again.  More phone tree action.  Another lady said the line has been recharged.  This time it did indeed work. 

Now, I had also purchased a second card.  I decided to check if it was also lacking the number.  Yep.  So I went back to the store again and told them now a second card was missing the number and that I would like another card - you know, one that is not defective. 

They said its not their problem.  I said selling something defective certainly is their problem.  Ah, but I forgot: this is Argentina.  So I just told them I wouldn't return to their store.  Ah, but I forgot again: this is Argentina - they wouldn't care. 

You see, in the US, companies will bend over backwards to try to make their customers happy and thus keep them as customers.  But in Argentina, companies feel they are doing you a favor by letting you use their services.  It's probably part of the reason why the economy is terrible and getting worse by the day. 

All told, the endeavor wasted about an hour of my time (as well as that of my friend's, who helped translate) and about 14 pesos of credit on my phone. 

Update (9/16/11): So today I decided to use that second card.  This time when we called the phone company, they said they could not recharge the line over the phone, even though they had earlier.  Great.  They said to go to Corrientes 301 to the Movistar center and do it in person.  

Now this is obviously silly, but it is only the beginning, my friend.  I went to Corrientes 301.  There is no Movistar place there.  Now I'm upset.  I start heading back home.  On the way, I see a Movistar place.  I stop there, tell them about my card with no number.  They said I erased the number.  I said that, no, I didn't.  There is no number.  They say "ah no, we don't handle that here, go to that place over there."  

Have you ever seen one of those cartoons where the character gets angry and his face turns red like a thermometer?   

So I go to the second place.  "Ah no, we don't handle that here, go to this other place."  

There are no words.

I get to the third place.  I tell them my problem.  "That will be a 40 minute wait."  I express my dissatisfaction. But after the wait, I am happy to say I did indeed get my 30 pesos charged on my phone line.  This adventure added another hour and a half wasted.

Ok, one more.  If you rent your apartment here, you not only have to pay the rent and utilities, but also "expenses."  These are like common charges in a condo back in the US.  To pay them, you have to go to a bank and deposit the funds directly into the common account.

Now, banks here always have lines.  I would say I wait an average of 10 minutes when I go to pay these expenses.  And you can't use your cell phone while in line.  Not even to play a game, listen to music, or read something.  In fact, all banks have a guard whose sole purpose, as far as I can tell, is to prevent you from using your cell phone.

So the other day I decided to try paying the expenses using an automated deposit machine rather than waiting in line for a human teller.  A girl at the bank was very helpful in helping me with the machine.  My bill amounted to 669 pesos.  She got the envelope ready.  I had 700.  I asked if that was ok.  She said yes.

So I inserted the envelope and the machine spit out a receipt.  She said it was all set.  But asked her about my change.  She looked surprised/confused.  "The machine doesn't give you change."

"So how do I get it?"

"You can't."

"That is ridiculous."

"If you want change, you have to make the deposit at the human teller."

Now, when faced with a completely illogical statement, I often do not know how to respond.  It's like my brain is trying to process this input to find some semblance of reason.  And if it can't, it simply treats the input as garbage and determines that as such it does not necessitate a response.  So I just left.

So, my fellow Americans, yes you have problems in the States.  But appreciate the little things that just work.  At least, for now.

The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine

Another excellent book.  In it, Michael Lewis follows a handful of investors who foresaw the bursting of the subprime mortgage bond bubble.  They made massive bets on the collapse of the financial system that nearly brought the world to a halt in 2008.  Of course, they made tens of millions of dollars each during that crisis.

While the narrative is certainly sapid, the most salient point is made in the epilogue: the financial system is still broken.  Maybe these few investors were vultures in making obscene amounts of money betting on a collapse, but the bigger problem is that no real measures were taken to prevent such a collapse in the future.  The US government just threw money at the problem to make it appear to go away.  No lessons were learned.

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.  - Upton Sinclair

A collapse will happen again.  Maybe something else will trigger it next time.  But in one way or another, greed will rear its ugly head.  With a vengeance.

Predictably Irrational

On the recommendation of a friend, I recently read this book.  Excellent.  So I started to read the second book by the same author.  As I was doing so, I noticed that I was already forgetting what I read in the first book.  I realized I should probably write down the interesting points from books I enjoy.

So here we are. 

Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces that Shape our Decisions is all about how humans behave in... drumroll please... predictably irrational ways.  Each chapter starts with an anecdote or observation that leads to a hypothesis.  The hypothesis is then tested via carefully crafted experiments.  Here are some highlights.  The videos below are not nearly as good as the chapters, but they give you an idea:

Chapter 1: The Truth About Relativity: Why Everything is Relative, Even When It Shouldn't Be

Chapter 2: The Fallacy of Supply and Demand

Chapter 3: The Cost of Zero Cost

Chapter 4: Why We Are Happy to Do Things, but Not When We Are Paid to Do Them

Chapter 7: The High Price of Ownership: Why We Overvalue What We Have

Chapter 8: Why Options Distract Us From Our Main Objective

Chapter 9: The Effect of Expectations: Why the Mind Gets What It Wants

The second book is equally engaging.  More on that later...

Congress Is Obsolete

I am by no means a political activist.  But as my frustration continues to mount with current events, I couldn't help but come to this realization.

Democracy, by its very definition, allows the populace to partake in the making of decisions that affect their lives.  But the Founding Fathers were a clever bunch.  They realized two things:

1.  A Direct Democracy, wherein each citizen partakes directly in the legislative process, was impossible 
2.  The general populace was largely unqualified to partake directly anyway

As a result, the US has a Representative Democracy.  But it has become painfully clear that this form of democracy no longer functions.  It no longer represents the people.  It fails in two ways:

1.  It is now owned by corporations 
2.  It consists of representatives who squabble over partisan issues

The first is the biggest problem.  It has become all too easy for a corporation to purchase favorable votes.  Immediately we see the conflict of interest: how can a representative represent the people when a corporation is paying him to vote in its favor?

And if, for whatever reason, the corporate influence is not strong enough, the second issue becomes the motivation.  This can clearly be seen in the current debt ceiling debacle. 

Now, it turns out, both tenets of the Founding Fathers are wrong.  A Direct Democracy is now possible.  And realizing this (and making appropriate changes) would fix both of the failures of Congress.  Today:

1.  It is not only possible, but feasible, to have every single member of the state partake directly in the legislative process

2.  The general populace has sufficient education and information available to partake directly

How can each citizen partake directly?  Technology.  Picture this: Congress is eliminated.  In its place stands an online system.  The system allows any citizen to vote on any law he is interested in.  Any citizen can submit a new bill to be considered by the populace.  If you care enough about a bill, you advertise it.  The system is sophisticated enough to organize all laws and bills so as to show context, conflicts, changes, and history.   

For now, we can leave the Executive and Judicial Branches in tact.  But the populace would itself be the Legislative Branch.  This automatically solves the two major failures of Congress:

1.  No corporation would be able (or willing) to buy every citizen's vote
2.  There is no longer a need for political parties, thus eliminating partisan bickering

The bottom line is: Congress has shown its inability to do its job.  But with current technology, it is obsolete anyway.  It can be removed.

Will this ever happen?  Not without a revolution. 

Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it. - Aung San Suu Kyi

Would it be a perfect system?  Definitely not.  No human government will truly satisfy our needs.  Only God's government can do that.  But this system would at least leave me less frustrated with the daily news... I think. 

Edit Dec 23, 2013: Scott Adams agrees: 
http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/eliminating_government_in_a_hundred_years/

You Are the Product

Everybody is talking about Google+.  And, perhaps, rightly so.  But I couldn't help but think about a quote last year from MetaFilter:


If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold.


I don't know about you, but I have grown accumstomed to using many free services on the internet.  But we live in a capitalistic society.  Companies are in business to make money, not to promote the overall good.  So if a company is providing you a free service, you are the product being sold!


Let's continue with the Google+ example.  The service is provided to the user free of charge.  So how is the user the product being sold?  The user is giving Google all sorts of information: his personal and professional data, his network of friends, his interests, etc.  Now imagine that amount of data for millions of users worldwide.   


It would be naive to think that Google will simply do nothing with that data.  Rather, Google can use that information with all sorts of capitalistic intent.  In its simplest form, it could just be targeting advertisements - essentially selling you to their advertisers.  But I'm sure there are a lot more subtle, yet profitable, alternatives.


The point is this: if you are being provided a free service, you are the product.  Your data.  Your time.  Your clicks.  Your mind.   


Will that stop me from using these free services?  No.  But I think it's important to at least be aware that I am not a customer; I'm a product. 

Studies... Again

It has been some time since I last mentioned some of the studies here.  But in this case, no news is good news.  Many have continued to progress well.

One is a man who speaks Amharic.  Well, I don't know about you, but I'm pretty rusty with my Amharic.  So we studied in English for a long time.  His appreciation kept developing.  He attended meetings.  But it was not his mother language.

Then a family moves into our congregation.  One day the brother mentions that he has a friend who is learning Amharic back in the States.  We get her email.  We chat with her on Skype.  Her Amharic is basic, but she gives us the email of a native Amharic speaker.

Long story short, now we include him on our study via Skype!  And it is fantastic.  Sometimes I will just sit there for an hour while they talk.  But he understands everything clearly!  It is really a blessing.

I mentioned another study a long time ago.  He continues to grow in his understanding and appreciation.  The last time I went it almost made me cry.  He is so thankful when we come that he always gives us a donation, even when we don't give him any new literature.  He always says "thank you for showing me the way."  And when he can't keep an appointment he says "I beg you, forgive me, let's make it another day."  It is hard to put his attitude into words, but it is a beautiful thing to see.

One of the Most Obnoxious Things is Someone Voicing their Strong Opinion about Something of Which They Know Very Little

That is all.

Cognitive Biases... All of Them

I noticed that recently I have written a lot about various cognitive biases.  I didn't plan it that way... I just kept seeing them and found them interesting.  So imagine my delight at stumbling upon this article the other day:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

It's the cognitive biases.  Like... all of them!  In one awesome list!  I almost started drooling.

I am tempted to highlight one or two of them, but there are so many good ones it's hard to pick.

So... enjoy!

Drink Up, Me Hearties!

Yo Ho!

The Ostrich Algorithm

I have never actually seen an ostrich do this, but supposedly, when in trouble, an ostrich will hide its head in the sand.  Its apparent rationale is that if it can't see the problem, the problem is not there.

In Computer Science, we have: The Ostrich Algorithm. 

It says, in short: "Solve a problem by pretending it doesn't exist."  So, clearly, the term 'algorithm' here is used very liberally.

At first glance it seems rather ridiculous to use this as a precept in software engineering, but at times it is a reasonable course - particularly when the problem in question happens exceedingly rarely and countermeasures are not cost-effective.

Well, you know me: I am a little over-zealous in applying software engineering principles to real life. 

In this case, it fails miserably.

I have tried ignoring problems and hoping they will go away.  I learned something.  If 'hoping' is part of your plan of action... you need a new plan of action. 

That's an important point, so I'll say it again: If you find yourself simply 'hoping' a situation will improve, you're not doing it right.  Stop hoping and start doing something.

I have, on several occassions, not done this.  I invoked the Ostrich Algorithm.  Usually because it's easy.  Actually, always because it's easy.  But now, whenever I catch myself 'hoping' for something, I remember the ostrich and how silly he looks with his head in the sand.

Don't Do What I Did

We have all heard this, right? It's often the beginning of some advice from a well-meaning individual. He made some real or perceived mistake and now he does not want you, his younger friend, to make the same mistake.  

I have heard this many times. And I think I have said it to others a fair amount of times too.

Now before I go on, I should be very clear that I really appreciate good advice. If someone feels strongly enough about something to come and talk with me about it, I always give his thoughts serious consideration.

But...

Recently I saw this kind of advice fail. The advice-giver had the best of intentions, but the advice just didn't work. And it was no small failing. The repercussions will likely effect the 'young friend' for her entire life. 

So I got to thinking: "How could such loving advice from an experienced person be wrong?"

The answer is multifold. The prime piece of it is strikingly simple when you think about it. And it is this:

I only know the outcome of the decision I made. I don't know the outcome of 'not doing what I did.'

Let's take an example. The older friend says, "I bought a used car for $3000. It was full of problems. I spent $100 every few months fixing it. Don't buy a used car!"

The younger friend thinks, "Yea, that makes sense." So he leases a new car with an intial payment of $3000. But now he is spending $200 every month making the payments.

See the problem? The older friend didn't realize that the alternative to his choice actually resulted in a worse outcome. Why? Because that's not the choice he made. How could he know the outcome?

This is, albeit, a silly example. One could easily do the research about a car and calculate the cost.

But most of this kind of advice is not such a simple matter - not so easy to confirm by a quick Google search.   

Maybe we are unhappy with a course we took. So it is easy to recommend an alternative course to others. But we should be careful with that. Because we really don't know the outcome of that alternative course. Maybe it's worse.

I will reiterate that advice is great. It's just that we need great caution, both when giving and receiving it.  We shouldn't give advice about what we don't know. Perhaps even more importantly, we shouldn't accept advice about what the advisor doesn't know.

It [More] Begins

Something just occurred to me.  Let's look at some facts:

The cost of rebuilding Japan is at least $309 Billion
The vast majority of Japan's currency reserves are in US Treasury Bonds
The US Government's AAA rating is now being questioned by Standard and Poor

In other words, Japan needs its money back.  And now one of the most respected rating agencies is casting doubt on the US Government's ability to pay back its bond-holders.  What better time to cash them in?

If this does indeed happen, it will be like the few small pebbles that trigger an avalanche:

Time 0: Japan redeems some US Treasury Bonds
Time 0: Ipso facto, Japan stops buying US Treasury Bonds
Time 1: With this loss, the US economy becomes even weaker
Time 2: Other nations (read: China) likewise question the safety of their investment and pull out
Time 3: Go to Time 1 and repeat

As a side note, when the populace loses faith in fiat currency, gold and silver skyrocket.  Is this happening?

You better believe it.

Where is this going?  I'm officially calling Dow 4000 within 2 years.

It Begins

The BRICS have just decided to drop the US Dollar when issuing credit to each other.

The group holds 40% of the world's currency reserves.  So this is a big hit to the dollar.

But this is just the beginning.  As I've said before (and keep saying), it is going to get a whole lot worse.

Paralysis by Analysis

Conventional wisdom dictates that when making a decision the more options we have, the better.  And I admit immediately that I subscribe to this philosophy.

But I am beginning to question the universality of this idea.

Enter Analysis Paralysis.  The gist is that having too many options actually stifles decision-making. 

But wait.  How can more options be worse?  It does seem to defy logic.  But as we look at some examples, like those included in the Wikipedia article above, it becomes clear.

We see it in the real world all the time.  My old fallback, Gladwell, discusses the example of 401k participation in the workplace.  Everybody wants control over their own retirement investments.  However, as the number of available 401k investment options increases, participation in the program actually decreases.

He also discusses a more everyday example: that of jelly.  Studies were conducted in which free samples of jelly were given to shoppers at a grocery store.  One group was offered 6 types of jelly, the other 24.  The group offered 6 types ended up purchasing statistically more jelly than the 24 group.

So what happens?  We face too many options.  We become paralyzed by the abundance of choices before us and we choose to do nothing. 

Why?

It is not the options themselves that pose a challenge.  It is the fear of choosing the wrong one. 

Think about it: if you have just 1 option, your odds of picking the right one are 100%.  No problem! 

If you have 2 options, now the chances are 50% that you will pick the optimal one.

If you have 24 options (like the jelly), now you only have a 4% chance that you will pick the best one.

This is exactly what causes the paralysis.  It's great to have so many choices, but now you face the problem of how to pick the best one.  As free people we would normally balk at the idea of someone limiting our choices.  But in actuality, a little limiting may be exactly what we need.

Let's go back to our 401k example.  Say you have 100 options for your plan.  Now you have only a 1% chance of choosing the best one.  Paralysis.  So you sit down with your financial planner, and what do you do?  Do you ask him for more options?  Of course not!  You ask him which ones he recommends.  Why?  Because you are trying to get him to limit your options for you.  You want him to pick the best 1 or 2 or 3 to make it easier for you to decide.

Of course, in reality, this is not limiting your options.  You still have the 100.  But you are removing the fear of making the wrong choice by invoking the advice of an expert.  Maybe the expert is wrong.  It doesn't matter.  The fear has been removed, or at least mitigated.

The point?  Fear of making the wrong choice leads to paralysis.  So we need to remove the fear.  As in the above example, this can often be done with information.  But in some cases it may not be possible or practical to accumulate all the needed information about each option.

So, back to our opening statement.  Yes, options are great.  But we have to pare them down to a manageable amount.  How do we do that in the general case?  Where is the balancing point?  These are excellent questions.  And I certainly don't have the answer.

But as I've said before, you can't solve a problem if you don't know what it is.  Now we know what the problem is.  That's a step in the right direction.   

Perception

I wrote a post about Behavorial Context Projection some time ago.  Soon after, I read a quote that summarizes it oh-so eloquently:

We don't see things as they are.  We see things as we are.

Flawless!

If You Only Knew the Power of the Jerk Side

This post is kind of a continuation of some previous posts on this subject.  Let's review some quotations, shall we?

"Man, you really don't care!" - Carlitos (The original one... still one of the best)


"Nobody is gonna hate you as I hate you.  Because they are afraid of you kill them with your ice feelings! :p" - Fernan

"I don't drink warm beer." - Me
"Right, you like beer the same temperature as your heart?" - Dom
"No, it would freeze." - Me

"You have no feelings!" - Noelia

"I can't understand how much you don't care.  It's like trying to understand how Jehovah has always existed." - Chris

Well, that was fun!

The C.A.B.A. English Congregation

Wednesday was the day we have all been waiting for... some of us for years.  Our little English group was approved to become a congregation!  And there was much rejoicing!

March 1st will be our first meeting as a congregation.  Brings a tear to me eye...

The group has worked very hard for this.  We have had a lot of growth, including families moving in, Bethel couples moving in, and a student getting baptized.  It was time to form a congregation. 

There is much more work ahead, but everyone is excited and ready to roll.

The Fall of Keynesianism

Those of you who know me also know that I think the world economy is going to collapse soon.  It will start with the US.  Here's a peek at the current US debt.  Notice the amounts owed by every single taxpayer, especially at the lower right:

http://usdebtclock.org/

It will get the point where the US won't even be able to pay the interest on the money it owes.  And that $14 trillion figure doesn't even take into account private, business, and especially financial sector debt.  All of these total over $100 trillion.  Unsustainable.  And when the camel's back breaks, it will take the liquidity of the world down with it.

It will be, quite literally, insanity.   

This is of course a highly charged idea, and I don't want to get involved in the politics of it... at least not yet.  But I saw this great quote today that I just had to share:

The first lesson of economics is that we live in a world of scarcity. There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to ignore the first lesson of economics.

— Thomas Sowell

Enough said.

Broken Windows

Broken Window Theory is an extremely powerful concept.  Here's a short article about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory

And here is the original article that started it all:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/4465/

It was first developed with respect to criminology, but it has very far-reaching implications.  Malcom Gladwell expounds on the sociology of it in The Tipping Point.  And Steve McConnell applies it to Software Engineering in Code Complete, mentioned last time.   

Why is it so powerful?  If you read the above Wikipedia article I'm sure you can see why: small changes to an environment invoke large changes in the minds of the people therein. 

I don't want to repeat what the article says (please do read it) but in short, here's the point:

An investigation of urban areas was performed to determine what transforms a good neighborhood into a bad neighborhood.  The answer: broken windows. 

When people see broken windows in buildings, it sends them a signal that nobody cares about that area.  So vandals come and break more windows, in addition to other types of destruction.  This is now a stronger signal that nobody cares and that disorder rules.  So crime escalates.  It is a self-perpetuating downward spiral.  And it all starts from broken windows.

The solution is clear: fix broken windows.  New York City tried exactly that starting in 1985.  It first applied the principle to the subway system and then the city in general.  The results were striking.  Changing this small signal drastically improved crime rates.

Again, you can see the import of this.  The broken window is simply a metaphor.  What matters is the signal.  If we want people to follow some norm, we need to ensure signals are in place to encourage such behavior.  Perhaps even more importantly, we need to remove signals that encourage the opposite behavior.

Here's a really simple example.  Let's say you have some roommates and you want them to keep the place clean.  If they see "broken windows" (again, a metaphor here: perhaps a few unwashed dishes, or a dirty floor) what signal are you sending?  That you don't care about cleanliness!  Which is the opposite signal that you want to send.

So anytime we want to encourage a certain social norm, we need to fix broken windows.  They may seem like little things, but that is exactly the point!  The little things are always noticed, at least on some level. 

After learning about this, I started to see broken windows everywhere (especially in code we were writing).  It is worth the time investment to fix them.

The Cost of Fixing Defects

Steve McConnell wrote a great book about Software Engineering called Code Complete.  If you're not a Software Engineer, I wouldn't recommend it.  But if you are, read it now!

But there are 2 really excellent points in the book, even if you are not into Computer Science (really!).  The first is the subject of this post: the exponentially increasing cost of fixing defects as you progress into the development cycle.  It looks something like this:

Along the bottom are the various phases of developing a piece of software.  The far left signifies the early stages and the far right, the stages after deployment.

The chart above actually leaves out a preliminary stage that I always start with: the problem statement.  You can't solve a problem unless you know what it is.  This fundamental truth is all too often forgotten as people rush into a "solution."

The idea is that if you catch a problem in the first stage, which is simply the conceptual defining of the software, it costs 150 times less to fix than if you wait until the final stages.  150 times! 

The idea makes intuitive sense.  What is surpising in the scale of the difference. 

Now, I promised this would be interesting outside the scope of Software Engineering.  I think you can see how:

This same principle applies all around us.  Often we rush forward into something, only to realize a flaw in the early stages of the venture that is now costly (or difficult, or painful, or annoying... or impossible) to fix.  Or if the flaw was in the very definition of the problem, we have now wasted a tremendous amount of energy pursuing a "solution" to the wrong problem. 

I have most often observed this in discussions that turn into arguments.  A simple misunderstanding of a term or idea initiates a useless argument.  One party says something and means one thing.  The other party thinks he meant something else, and off we go!  Hopefully the one with a cool head eventually realizes they are talking about different things and the whole thing is passed off as an exercise in futility, getting nowhere.

So let's now apply our SE principle.  If, at the outset of this discussion, one could actually take a step back and define the nature of the disagreement, likely they would realize it was a simple misunderstanding and no argument would take place.  

How do we do this?  The Bible writer James tells us to be "swift about hearing, slow about speaking."  Oh, if we could only apply that!  Instead of being so quick to support our case, why not ask a question to clarify the other side?  And then listen to the answer!  

I can't tell you how many times this has aided me at my former job and even now in casual discussions.  So often we find that there is really no disagreement at all.  Or, equally importantly, that the disagreement is completely different than we initially understood it to be.  In either case, we save ourselves a huge amount of effort and time.   

Again, we cannot solve a problem if we do not know what it is. 

Now, I mentioned there were 2 great points from this book.  We just talked about the first.  The second is Broken Windows.  I will save that for another time. 

The Quasi-Naïve Democratic Approach

... and why it doesn't work.

Recent events have inspired this post.  But this is just a placeholder, because said events were not sufficient to inspire the body of the post. 

Hopefully other events will take care of that, and I'll return here to fill in the details.

Retrospective Dynamic Inconsistency

Or "The Present Bias"

(I'm using these terms a little liberally until I can come up with a better name for this phenomenon.)

The idea is very simple: people bias the present.  Netflix shows us this very clearly...

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/10/27/procrastination/ 

But the bias extends its reach much further, even to the point of being considered dangerous.  This is especially so when the bias is against the past, not the future.  And this happens all the time.

You have probably noticed this.  For example, when a new version of software, device or even a car is released, we automatically assume it is better.  Only if there is solid evidence to the contrary do we change our view.   

But that's not really dangerous, is it?  The danger is when this is applied to theories, or even our very mode of viewing life.

How?

As a society, we tend to be slow to accept new models of our universe.  Just look at the initial backlash against the heliocentric model.  But once that model has taken hold, we laugh at the old views.  "How could anyone have believed that?" we quip.

In other words, we bias the present view.  Of course, the heliocentric view is the correct one, so what's the problem?

The problem is that new is not always better.  Here is what can happen:

1) A new view arises 
2) Even if it not a complete theory, it takes hold for some reason (we won't get into those reasons right now)
3) It becomes the de facto standard view
4) But there are still missing (or broken) pieces of the view, which are now ignored because it has become the present view
5) We only ever hear of those missing or broken "subviews" when they themselves have been replaced by a more modern subview

For example, let's take Evolution.  It has become the dominant theory today.  Of course, it has plenty of holes, but the only time we hear of one of them is when it has supposedly been filled.  It goes something like this: "For a long time it didn't seem possible that [insert something here], but now we know better!"  Or: "There was a fatal problem with [whatever], but today we have a new theory about it!"  Errors only exist in the past.  What we now believe is perfect.   

In other words, problems with the present, dominant view are ignored because it is the present, dominant view.  Or maybe they are not ignored entirely, but somehow the evidence is made to fit the view.  As they say, "all observations must fit the prevailing paradigm."  That is exactly the kind of thinking we are talking about. 

So what's the point?  It is easy to bias the present.  But like all biases, it can lead us to wrong conclusions.  We can't let it.

Red Bull

At the English Convention in September, I met some friends from Santos who invited me to help in the ministry there.  As you may have noticed from previous posts, Brazil is very cool.  So I jumped at the opportunity.

Santos is an island south of Sao Paulo.  And the beach there is gorgeous.  It is lined with a huge garden, including statues and fountains.  I just realized I don't have any pictures of it during a nice day, so here are some night shots:

Ah wait, here's a shot of the coastline:

The ministry there was also nice.  Santos is a huge port so there are many cruise ships that stop there.  Often, the crew enjoy reading about the Bible.  So we spent some time talking with them.

I also met an awesome Nigerian man who so very much appreciated the Bible.  We quickly became friends as we studied the scriptures and I was sad to have to leave him.  He even gave me a shirt!

I stayed with a lovely couple, Agenildo and Isabel, who, like the entire group there, were very hospitable.  They knew I like to eat, so they lined up some nice places to go to... including a place that has Filet Mignon Pizza.  I am not making this up!

It was excellent!

The weather fluctuated between wickedly hot and rain.  When the rain wasn't too bad we went to the beach anyway.  And when it was, well... Law and Order marathons!

On Saturday we went to Guaruja, which is a magnificent beach.  Check it out, although pictures really don't do it justice: 

You may be wondering why the title of this post is Red Bull.  Well, if you visit Brazil you'll find out...