We all have lots and lots of stuff. We like to think that it’s valuable because we’ll use it one day. It’s not. It’s worthless.

What I didn’t understand was that the value of some new acquisition wasn’t the difference between its retail price and what I paid for it. It was the value I derived from it. Stuff is an extremely illiquid asset. Unless you have some plan for selling that valuable thing you got so cheaply, what difference does it make what it’s “worth?” The only way you’re ever going to extract any value from it is to use it. And if you don’t have any immediate use for it, you probably never will.

Companies that sell stuff have spent huge sums training us to think stuff is still valuable. But it would be closer to the truth to treat stuff as worthless.

After reading this, I’m ready to go through the house and to start tossing “stuff”.

Visit This Link →

One of the running themes of the economist Robin Hanson’s excellent blog is that arguments like the ones found in these books are actually an elite-status proxy war. They denigrate the one measure of high-visibility achievement—income—that public intellectuals don’t do very well on. Reading “Shiny Objects,” you get the feeling that he is onto something.

Consider the matter of status competition. Mr. Roberts, like so many before him, argues that conspicuous consumption is an unhappy zero-sum game. But this is of course true of most forms of competition: Most academics I know can rank-order everyone in the room at a professional conference with the speed and precision of a courtier at Versailles. Any competition, from looks to money to academic credentialing, both consumes a lot of resources and makes many of the participants feel bad about themselves. Why, then, does the literature on status competition always tell us that we should redistribute capital gains or inheritances and never tell us that we should redistribute academic chairs or book contracts?

Fantastic.

Visit This Link →

TARDIS Eruditorum – A Critical History of Doctor Who Volume 1: William Hartnell by Philip Sandifer

My rating: 4 of 5 stars
Personal Enthusiasm: Loads of Fun

I started watching Doctor Who about 2 years ago. It was a vivid awakening for me. I had been very dimly aware that the show existed but had never been exposed to it. Once I started watching it, I loved it but I always wanted to know more about it. It is a story with a rich and complex history. One that I knew nothing about it.

One can, of course, try using Google to do research. With something as complex as Doctor Who, the results are rather … confusing. So, I just suffered in ignorance, merely enjoying what was on TV in front of me.

Last week, randomly, I became aware that a new book had just been published through Amazon. It was a collection of essays from the blog TARDIS Eruditorum: A Psychochronography in Blue. Up until this point, I hadn’t even known that the blog existed. But, I clicked over and decided to take a look.

This is the story of a story that can never end. This is the story of how a daft idea from the bowels of the BBC in the 1960s changed everything. This is the story of an impossible man, and his magic box, and everything that happened after.

Because there’s something you’d better understand about me. Because it’s important, and one day, your life may depend on it.

I am definitely a mad man with a blog.

Okay, so Philip Sandifer (“a hopeless geek with a PhD in English focusing on media studies”) is an entertaining writer. After a few hours of reading through blog entries, I was also convinced that he knew Doctor Who, he knew British culture, and he knew literary criticism. So I bought the book.

From the book’s description:

TARDIS Eruditorum is a sprawling and very possibly completely mad critical history of Doctor Who from its first episode in 1963 to the present. In this first volume, we look at topics like how acid-fueled occultism influenced the development of the Cybermen, whether The Celestial Toymaker is irredeemably racist, and whether Barbara Wright was the greatest companion of all time. This book aims to be the most staggeringly thorough look at the evolution of Doctor Who, Great Britain, and the world from 1963 to 1966 ever published.

Revised and expanded versions of every entry from the acclaimed blog TARDIS Eruditorum from the start to finish of William Hartnell’s tenure as the Doctor.

It was utterly fascinating and has already given me a lot of insight into the show and how it works. I’m eagerly awaiting the publication of future volumes and have every intention of purchasing them as they’re released. Why not? I’m a sucker for really good literary criticism and a sucker for Doctor Who.

I hated all my toil in which I toil under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to the man who will come after me, and who knows whether he will be wise or a fool? Yet he will be master of all for which I toiled and used my wisdom under the sun. This also is vanity. So I turned about and gave my heart up to despair over all the toil of my labors under the sun, because sometimes a person who has toiled with wisdom and knowledge and skill must leave everything to be enjoyed by someone who did not toil for it. This also is vanity and a great evil. What has a man from all the toil and striving of heart with which he toils beneath the sun? For all his days are full of sorrow, and his work is a vexation. Even in the night his heart does not rest. This also is vanity.

There is nothing better for a person than that he should eat and drink and find enjoyment in his toil. This also, I saw, is from the hand of God, for apart from him who can eat or who can have enjoyment?

(Ecclesiastes 2:18-25 ESV)

Steve was richly blessed by God and we were all richly blessed by what he did, here on the Earth.

My daughters routinely watch Pixar films. Every night, they sleep in sleeping bags decorated for Pixar characters. Tonight, my daughter took a Cowboy Woody doll to bed with her. They both clamor to play games and watch movies on our iPad.

My life has been enriched by my iPod touch and everything that it allows me to do. I’m typing this on my MacBook Pro and I’m eagerly awaiting the day I can upgrade my phone to an iPhone 4S.

All of these products have been personally overseen by Steve Jobs and have been built according to his vision and his values. And they are all that there is. Apple will live on and will continue creating great products. But Steve’s personal vision and creativity ends here. It seems sudden and too soon. I had no idea he was this sick and this close to the end.

He will be missed.

I’ve learned over the years that the simplest way to judge gray areas in the Christian life like movies, television, and music is to ask one simple question: can I thank God for this? (We are to give thanks in all circumstances, right? )Not too long ago my wife and I went to the movie theater to watch one of the summer blockbusters. It was a fun PG-13 movie, and you’d probably say it didn’t really have any bad parts. But it was very sensual and suggestive in several places. I got done with the movie (yes, I watched the whole thing) and thought, “Can I really thank God for this?” Now, I’m not a total kill-joy. I like to laugh and enjoy life. I can thank God for the Chicago Bears, Hot N’ Readys, and Brian Regan. But I wonder if after most of our entertainment we could sincerely get down on our knees and say, “Thank you God for this good gift.” Something to think about.

Visit This Link →

(When time has given us perspective to write really good cultural histories of the 20th century, Heinlein is going to look implausibly gigantic. His achievements didn’t stop with co-inventing science fiction and all its consequences, framing post-1960s libertarianism, energizing the firearms-rights movement, or even merely inspiring me to become the kind of person who not only could write The Cathedral and the Bazaar but had to. No. Heinlein also invented much of zeitgeist of the 1960s counterculture through his novel Stranger In A Strange Land; it has been aptly noted that he was the only human being ever to become a culture hero both to the hippies of Woodstock and the U.S. Marine Corps. I am told that to this day most Marine noncoms carry a well-thumbed copy of Starship Troopers in their rucksacks.)

Visit This Link →

• 5 Stars: Breaks new ground in some fashion.
• 4 Stars: The people involved know what they’re doing and have done it. A success.
• 3 Stars: Flawed, but still enjoyable.
• 2 Stars: A misfire. Major flaws preclude enjoying the work as a whole.
• 1 Star: Egregiously misguided, even evil. Fire someone.

I initially told Adam that his “4 stars” is roughly equivalent to my idea of what “3 stars” should be. When he told me that I was a tough audience, it caused me to think more about where I was going with my rating system.

I consider 3 stars to be my default rating. That is, I expect every book / movie to earn at least a 3 star rating. I reserve 4 stars for things that are unusually good and 5 stars for entertainment that is truly defining.

The more I thought about, there really isn’t anything I want to remove from Adam’s rating system. I just think my system needs 6 stars instead of just 5. Or, put another way, I’d like to give things 0 stars instead of always giving them at least 1 star.

Here’s how I’d put my own rating system:

• 5 Stars: Defines an entire class of entertainment.
• 4 Stars: Breaks new ground in some fashion.
• 3 Stars: The people involved know what they’re doing and have done it. A success.
• 2 Stars: Flawed, but still enjoyable.
• 1 Stars: A misfire. Major flaws preclude enjoying the work as a whole.
• 0 Stars: Egregiously misguided, even evil. Fire someone.

Essentially then, my rating systems splits the 5 star category into two sections: something new in an established genre versus creating an entirely new genre. For instance, Lord of the Rings would definitely be a 5 star work. Almost by definition though, few things are going to earn 5 stars.

I’m not sure that this is the last word in my rating system though. For instance, what do I do with books or movies that I personally don’t enjoy all that much but that I recognize as having true excellence? In all fairness, they should probably earn 3 or 4 stars but I don’t like giving a high rating to something that I didn’t personally enjoy and might not always recommend. I’m considering adding an enthusiasm ranking to each review: Enthusiastic, Meh (Neutral), and Don’t Bother (negative).

What do you think? Am I over thinking things here?

When Gov. Mark Dayton and state lawmakers announced that the outlines of a new budget deal were in place, the Minnesota Vikings were hoping that the door was finally open to discuss their plan for a new $1 billion stadium in the Twin Cities suburbs.

It may not be quite that simple.

Vikings owner Zygi Wilf spoke with Dayton on Friday, telling him in a phone conversation that the team wants a stadium bill to be considered in a special legislative session expected to begin next week, according to Vikings vice president for stadium affairs Lester Bagley.

“He made the case that now is the time,” Bagley said. “We’ve done everything that has been asked of us. It’s time to do it. We’re down to months left on our lease and every day that goes by, the cost of the project goes up.”

… Arden Hills is about 10 miles north of the Metrodome in downtown Minneapolis. The new facility would be located at the site of a former Army ammunition plant with plans to open in spring 2015.

Wilf and the Vikings have pledged more than $400 million to the project, which also calls for a half-cent sales tax in Ramsey County that would contribute another $350 million and $300 million in state money.

This is just disgusting. Depending on where you Google, Zygi Wilf is worth somewhere around $300 million and the Vikings franchise itself is worth around $700 million. If he wants a new stadium, he has several options:

1. invest more of his own fortune and the team’s worth into the new facility
2. ask the team’s fans to invest into the facility in exchange for benefits (priority access to available tickets? special access to memorabilia?)
3. Get banks or investors to loan or invest the needed funds

The Vikings are a cash generating franchise. If a new stadium is a good investment, Wilf shouldn’t have any problems obtaining the funding he needs. If a new stadium isn’t a good investment, Wilf shouldn’t be demanding that the Minnesota taxpayers fund his boondoggle.

It’s disgusting the way that he’s demanding that a state that’s struggled to close a $5 billion budget hole turn around and give $300 million in state money and $350 million in county money to his privately owned business. I hope the state legislature smacks him down and shuts the door on his demands.

5 Reasons Why:

1. To Avoid an Early Grave
2. To Lose Weight
3. To Save Your Back
4. To Increase Your Focus
5. To Gain a Satisfying Tiredness

Visit This Link →

Taking old World War II photos, Russian photographer Sergey Larenkov carefully photoshops them over more recent shots to make the past come alive. Not only do we get to experience places like Berlin, Prague, and Vienna in ways we could have never imagined, more importantly, we are able to appreciate our shared history in a whole new and unbelievably meaningful way.

Really, really cool.

Visit This Link →