Category think

Jun 22 2013

What I learned… Dr. David Victor

ImageDr. Victor is one of the four favorite teachers I’ve ever had — and one of the 3 I’ve had in college so far.  His candor, honesty and frankness are very refreshing.

When I was accepted into the Honors College at EMU, the head of the Honors College kept telling me “Take Victor,” “Victor is the one you want,” “Everyone likes Victor,” “You should REALLY take Victor.”   So, looking at the available classes and instructors, I said “Hmm, something is telling me to take this guy.  So… Victor?

Summer went by, and I talked to a couple of people in my department who had taken him.  “Victor’s awesome, dude.  Bit of a hardass, but awesome,” said one person.   Another echoed his sentiments.  “You’re not going to get through his class without reading the book — he sets it up that way on purpose, but if you do, and show up to class, you shouldn’t have much of a problem.”

So came the first day of school.  I met the other teachers I had that semester, which all seemed pretty okay.  The last teacher I met was Dr. Victor.

I figured out right away that I would learn more than explicit knowledge from him — one of Dr. Victor’s strong suits is he’s able to communicate a lot of tacit knowledge over the long term, that is – stuff that you can’t specifically “explain” – but you put together over the whole course.

465667_10151140665271817_1912544928_oWe did a semester-long project to satisfy the Honors portion of the class, that was worked on over the term, and then due and presented during the last meetings of the class before the Final Exam — which I think was the most enjoyable part.  Having time to actually look at the customs and culture of another nation, without the pressure of “getting it done” that comes with having an assignment due a month later is a lot more informative.

His feedback, while not only humorous sometimes, provided value and was well-received by everyone.

For instance, after we gave our presentation, we took our seats.  Dr. Victor happened to be sitting at a student desk that was next to mine — and helped answer questions that we weren’t able to — or that he felt he wanted to contribute to as well.  Being an Honors Class, people were actually interested in what other people were presenting.  Just as I had crossed my legs, someone asked “What do they mean by ‘Don’t point your feet at someone?  Do they mean like, when standing?”   Dr. Victor took this question and made a point of it:

quote-open“They mean more along the lines of sitting.  Pointing the soles of your feet at someone in the U.A.E., such as what Samuel is doing to me right now, is a sign of disrespect.  Were I an Emerati, I would be highly offended.”

Feeling foolish for a split-second, I immediately put both my feet on the ground, while everyone, including myself, laughed — but it was a point that was not only well made with practicality AND humor, but it was something that I remembered, and will continue to do so.

Another example was a little more discrete, but just as effective.  Having asked a question, I put my had up to answer it, stating something along the lines of “Well, businessmen generally prefer an atmosphere of formality and composure.”

He cocked his eyebrow, and at first, I thought he disapproved of my answer.

quote-open“By ‘Businessmen” — I assume you mean both men AND women?”

 

Again — a split-moment where I felt kind of stupid.  A faux-pas of epic proportion, but it’s something I’d never considered before.  I’d used the term throughout my entire professional life, and nobody had given it a second thought.  I certainly hadn’t.

While I didn’t get the best grade in his class (a “B” — his tests were tough!) — I took a lot more away from the Honors Global Business class than just being able to regurgitate print from a book.  I left with a new advisor and someone who, while mindful of your feelings — will make a point; even if it’s not what you want to hear.  He genuinely cares about what his students take away from your time together.

If you go to Eastern… take Victor.

Recommended Reading:

– International Business Communication – David A. Victor.  1997.
– Class 3 – LESCANT (kelmglobal.wordpress.com)

Jun 21 2013

Trans-Pacific Partnership — what’s the deal?

Seal of the Office of the United States Trade ...I’m deeply disturbed by something Senator Elizabeth Warren has brought to the floor of Congress just recently.

The US Trade Representative is currently conducting negotiations on renewing a trade agreement with several allied nations, called the “Trans-Pacific Partnership.”  Historically, and even under the Bush Administration, this had Congressional oversight.  Apparently, under the Obama Administration — the Administration who’s buzzword is ‘Transparency,” that’s no longer the case.

The US Trade Representative is REFUSING Congressional requests for review — in any capacity, including “scrubbed” versions, with individual country names redacted, but the policy proposals visible.

Why would a treaty involving commerce, and indeed, including representatives from companies like Bank of America, Comcast, TimeWarner, be so secretive?

Indeed, the only Representative in Congress who’s SEEN the agreement, has said the following:

Florida congressman Alan Grayson.

“There is no national security purpose in keeping this text secret.”
 — Represenative Alan Grayson (D-FL)

Repeatedly asked for the text that Senator Warren refers to, she, and Congress, have been categorically DENIED.  Why is the US Trade Representative not allowing for either a) Public transparency or b) Congressional transparency when the only member of Congress YET to review it, says there is no concern for National Security?

“…’transparency would undermine the Trade Representative’s policy to complete the trade agreement, because Public Opposition would be significant.’   In other words, if the Public knew what was going on, they would STOP it.”
 — Senator Elizabeth Warren, quoting the US Trade Representative

“If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States.”
— Senator Elizabeth Warren

See her speech to Congress here.

Related articles
Jun 3 2013

“Are you out there?” Maybe — but not so fast…

Image

An Asgard, from Stargate SG-1

We’ve transmitted friendship messages, we’ve sent satellites, we’ve scanned the heavens… but we’ve found no clues as to ET or Supreme Commander Thor’s wearabouts yet.  Or have we?

Think of the Internet.  When we send an email, we click “Send” and the email is broken apart into bits and bytes, going through several [if not dozens of] separate servers and paths all over the internet, until it finally arrives at the server address you designated, where it’s reassembled, and readable to the receiver.

Now, to you and me, that’s no news.  No news at all whatsoever.  But imagine intercepting just one piece of this email.  It’s broken apart from the other parts of it; and because it is, it makes no sense to anyone.  You know something is here — but what?

That could be how an advanced alien culture is communicating — but instead of using different wires and communications steams, they could be using different frequencies and technologies all at one time; just as we use several different data pipes to move our information around the world at the same time, even just in email.  We haven’t quite figured out how to map frequency spread communication past hydrogen-based frequencies, which is what we scan for the most often (programs like SETI, etc.)

Michio Kaku, my favorite theoretical physicist, likens this to an Ant, versus a superhighway.  “Imagine you’re an ant,” he says.  “You’re going about your business, doing what ants do…” and meanwhile, you have NO idea that other more complex creatures are building an eight-lane superhighway a few feet away from you.  Now, a few feet in ant-size is the equivalent of several MILES away from you.  However, one of these creatures, a human, approaches you.  He looks down at you and says “I bring you this superhighway.  I bring you the internet.  I bring you nuclear medicine.  Take me to your leader.”

Unfortunately, we have a problem here.  One, not only are you able to understand this human, but two, you have no CONCEPT of what any of this is.  Let’s assume this language barrier doesn’t exist — and that you are now the human, looking down at the ant, saying “I bring you all of this.”  How do you explain to an ANT the basics of a superhighway?  Much less, how do you explain the benefits of nuclear medicine, or the internet?  It’s mind isn’t able to understand these things.

Dr. Kaku states, which I believe, that at this point, we haven’t evolved to an understanding of how things at that level work yet.  Sure, the ants can see us, and may be aware of us… but if you were to walk up to an Ant, and say “Hello…” how could you two break that barrier — not only the language barrier, but communicate so that you both understand each other.

Related articles
May 25 2013

2700 Planets so far…

An artist's depiction of an extrasolar, Earthl...

An artist’s depiction of an extrasolar, Earthlike planet. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

NASA’s Kepler Observatory satellite has discovered over 2700 exoplanets so far…  and counting.  Most of these are super-earths — however, there’s a lot more there, according to the people who run it.

Ames Research Center scientists have the Observatory’s Photometer observes 145,000 Main Sequence stars simultaneously, looking for the slightest dimming of the stars that indicate an orbital body.  Of these, 114 have been actually confirmed and observed, one of them is a Mars-sized planet.

Ames also believes that, based on the observed planets, with the confirmations in mind, that the galaxy is full of Earth-sized planets.

Yale Astronomy Professor Debra Fisher, who has worked on improving the planet-detecting technology we have today to detect Earth-sized planets, says it’s only a matter of time before we detect life on other planets; specifically, those in the ‘habitable zone‘ of the stars they observe — that is, the area that’s “just right” in light and temperature, for life to flourish.

Do you think we’ll find alien life in our lifetime?

Related articles
May 22 2013

Gay bashing… what would Hobbes and Locke say?

English: Thomas Hobbes Македонски: Томас Хобс ...

English: Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Being a theorist, I like taking time to think about the world today… and what those who helped shape the thoughts and philosophies we study as a science today would think about them.

With a recent rash of gay beatings and bashings, I’m often taken back to two of my favorite  founders of western political thought, Hobbes and Locke; and often think about what they would say about it, among other things going on in the world today.

quote-open“In Locke’s state of nature, things aren’t so bad!  In Hobbes’ state of nature, it’s DEADLY.”
        — Professor Laurel Sprague

 

I come back to the ideology of each theorist’s state of nature — where, in all things being equal, Man is at his most primal when it comes to social governance.  There’s no government to tell them what to do; Man, essentially, has all the rights one could ever want.

Locke’s State of Nature is a pretty laid back utopia of “I respect your boundaries, you respect mine, and we’re all happy.”  There are a few commonly understood rules that society in and of itself lives by.  Hobbes, however, it a bit more of a free-for-all.  Things are a lot more “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” to coin a phrase from The Bible.

In a Lockeian State of Nature, I don’t see such a thing happening.  It would go against the very point of Locke’s theory of Nature in and of itself.  People don’t inherently harm others in his world.

Hobbes, on the other hand, is dramatically different.  If a group of straight guys were to beat up on a gay guy, Hobbes would be the first to say that it’s quite likely a group of gay guys would want retribution and blood for the blood spilled of their brother… either the guys who committed the bashing itself, or just a target to prove a point.

What’s the most likely to occur if we were thrust into a State of Nature today?

Related articles
May 14 2013

DUI at 0.05 as opposed to 0.08 justice or overreaching?

drunk-driving-stop-293x300The National Transportation Safety Board (“the NTSB”) wrote a report today recommending all 50 states in the United States lower the level of driving under the influence from 0.08 to 0.05 Blood-Alcohol Content.  The responses from each side of the argument have been interesting to say the least. Swift action, including the revocation of driver licenses was also indicated as a punishment to those to keep repeat offenders from becoming habitual drunk drivers.

The report published by the NTSB also noted that lowering the intoxication threshold would save anywhere from “500 to 800 lives per year.”

Indeed, there is precedence for this figure.  A decade ago, the laws were changed to criminalize driving under the influence at 0.08 BAC.  Alcohol-related deaths on the road plunged from 20,000 in 1980 to 9,878 in 2011.

Even the lowest levels of alcohol seem to impair drivers, the NTSB has said.  In an NTSB study, people were given alcohol and drove in simulators.  At 0.01 BAC, drivers in simulators demonstrate attention problems and lane deviations. At 0.02, they exhibit drowsiness, and at 0.04, vigilance problems.

quote-open“This recommendation is ludicrous,” Sarah Longwell, managing director of the American Beverage Institute, said in a statement to CNN.

“Moving from 0.08 to 0.05 would criminalize perfectly responsible behavior. …A little over a decade ago, we lowered our legal limit from 0.1 percent after groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving assured the country that, based on all the science, 0.08 BAC was absolutely, unequivocally where the legal threshold should be set for drunk driving. Has the science changed? Or have anti-alcohol activists simply set their sights on a new goal?” Longwell asked.

Related articles
Apr 28 2013

Signs of a failing infrastructure?

Livonia Water Tank Explosion

One of the things I’ve started to notice is the failure or sheer disasters associated with infrastructure or other related items lately.  A ten million gallon water tank in my neighborhood explodes, dousing the neighborhood in massive amounts of water — which, due to the pressure blew water mains all around, the Texas fertilizer plant explodes, a refinery in Detroit on Fort Street catastrophically fails and blew its top off last evening, causing evacuations around the neighboring city.

Fort Street Refinery Fire in Detroit

The sudden apparent-surge in explosions in things that one would think are regulated makes me wonder if we have a serious two-fold problem: a lack of oversight, and a failing infrastructure.

Infrastructure isn’t just roads, highways and avenues…  It’s pipes.  It’s tanks.  All of these things, particularly when they’re related to anything hazardous.  All of this stuff requires oversight and inspection.  Is it just a freak occurrence in quick succession, or is it a symbol of things to come?

Related articles
Apr 24 2013

Are Athlete Fraudsters Liable for Reimbursing Funders?

Lance Armstrong finishing 3rd in Sète, taking ...

Lance Armstrong finishing 3rd in Sète, taking over the Yellow Jersey at Grand Prix Midi Libre 2002 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Late Tuesday afternoon, the United States Government filed a lawsuit against former Olympic-Gold Medalist cyclist Lance Armstrong, citing the fact that he defrauded them out of millions of dollars in his doping campaign.

The Government, citing the False Claims Act, state that he defrauded the United States Postal Service by doping, and under that law, the USPS is, technically entitled to triple the amount of funds spent, or money in excess of US$120 Million; as the Government is contesting US$40 Million.

The United States asserts in its suit that a use of performance enhancing drugs is a violation and breach of contract of the agreement he signed with the USPS, originally in 1998 – through 2004.

Should any entities who chose to fund people be entitled to collect monies if they were unable to  prove during that time that the athlete/etc in question was doping, or taking other performance enhancing drugs?  While I agree it’s a great deterrent, when people make bad investments, often they are told they “are out of luck.”

Could such a ruling, for instance, be worked into such a precedent as Bankers and Executives for financial companies making and funding bad loans to be held responsible for them; and repayment as well?

Related articles
Apr 22 2013

Why I am a Tibetan Blue Book Holder…

English: Emblem of Tibet, used by the Tibetan ...

Tibet is a very special place.  It’s not only home to the top of the world, it’s got a rich, deep, incredible history, including that of a mainstream branch of Buddhism.  It’s also smack in the center of what will arguably be the future hub of the world: Asia — almost exactly between China and India; the two major commerce centers of the future world.

Tibet was taken over by the People’s Republic of China in the 1950s, following the Chinese civil war, and has since maintained a death grip over the region.  As a province-level government, the Tibet Autonomous Region is managed by a Chairman that is subordinate to the Communist Party of China.  Indeed, any attempt at any form of full autonomy or separation from the PRC has met with the PRC government’s full force to quash.  Pro-independence arguers state that Human Rights abuses commonly associated with China take place in Tibet as much as anywhere else in the authoritarian nation.

Dalai Lama

Dalai Lama (Photo credit: Joi)

I’ve always been a believer in self-determination — in that the people of a region have a right to determine whether or not they are aligned with a government, or not; particularly if the government in question is particularly oppressive or does not hold the best interests of its people in mind.  Knowing China’s repression of civil and political freedoms as well as I do, I decided to financially support the Tibetan Government-in-Exile and accept a Blue Book from their Government.

Similar to that of a passport, the Tibetan Blue Book shows that the holder has officially become a “friend” of the Tibetan government and people, and have pledged to support their cause; as I had when I was invited to become a friend to the Tibetan people.

Lead by the spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, the Central Tibetan Administration is effectively the Tibetan government-in-exile, operating out of Himachal Pradesh, India with the 14th Dalai Lama as the Head of State.  The Buddhist philosophy of non-violence and spirituality has always served as a source of inspiration to me — and their political [if none other] oppression at the hands of the Chinese government has always served to me as a reminder of what complacency can do if we allow ourselves to serve the interests of a government, rather than the government serving the interests of US.

I am a Friend of Tibet.

Related articles