Quotulatiousness

May 19, 2010

Haute stoner cuisine

Filed under: Economics, Food, Randomness — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 09:00

There are so many restaurants now that some of them can even specialize to serve tiny demographics . . . like “restaurants created specially for the tastes of the slightly stoned, slightly drunk chef after work.”

Even preschool teachers unwind with a round of drinks now and then. But in professional kitchens, where the hours are long, the pace intense and the goal is to deliver pleasure, the need to blow off steam has long involved substances that are mind-altering and, often enough, illegal.

“Everybody smokes dope after work,” said Anthony Bourdain, the author and chef who made his name chronicling drugs and debauchery in professional kitchens. “People you would never imagine.”

So while it should not come as a surprise that some chefs get high, it’s less often noted that drug use in the kitchen can change the experience in the dining room.

In the 1980s, cocaine helped fuel the frenetic open kitchens and boisterous dining rooms that were the incubators of celebrity chef culture. Today, a small but influential band of cooks says both their chin-dripping, carbohydrate-heavy food and the accessible, feel-good mood in their dining rooms are influenced by the kind of herb that can get people arrested.

May 18, 2010

QotD: Time to kill the “information wants to be free” meme

Filed under: Economics, Media, Quotations, Technology — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 12:06

“Information wants to be free” (IWTBF hereafter) is half of Stewart Brand’s famous aphorism, first uttered at the Hackers Conference in Marin County, California (where else?), in 1984: “On the one hand information wants to be expensive, because it’s so valuable. The right information in the right place just changes your life. On the other hand, information wants to be free, because the cost of getting it out is getting lower and lower all the time. So you have these two fighting against each other.”

This is a chunky, chewy little koan, and as these go, it’s an elegant statement of the main contradiction of life in the “information age”. It means, fundamentally, that the increase in information’s role as an accelerant and source of value is accompanied by a paradoxical increase in the cost of preventing the spread of information. That is, the more IT you have, the more IT generates value, and the more information becomes the centre of your world. But the more IT (and IT expertise) you have, the easier it is for information to spread and escape any proprietary barrier. As an oracular utterance predicting the next 40 years’ worth of policy, business and political fights, you can hardly do better.

But it’s time for it to die.

Cory Doctorow, “Saying information wants to be free does more harm than good”, The Guardian, 2010-05-18

May 11, 2010

Android alert!

Filed under: Economics, Technology — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 12:24

Apple fanboi faithful must be having mass cases of the vapours with the news that Android sales are eating everyone’s lunch:

I’ve written before that I think Google has been running a long game aimed against the telecomms carriers’ preferred strategy of customer lock-in, and executing on that game very well. Against the iPhone, its strategy has been a classic example of what the economist Clayton Christensen called “disruption from below” in his classic The Innovator’s Dilemma. With the G-1, Google initially competed on price, winning customers who didn’t want to pay Apple/AT&T’s premium and were willing to trade away Apple’s perceived superiority in “user experience” for a better price. Just as importantly, Android offered a near-irresistible deal to the carriers: months, even years slashed off time-to-market for a state-of-the-art cellphone; a huge advantage in licensing costs; and the illusion (now disintegrating) that said carriers would be able to retain enough control of Android-powered devices to practice their habitual screw-the-customer tactics.

In Christensen’s model, a market being disrupted from below features two products, sustaining and disrupter, both improving over time but with the disruptor at a lower price point and lesser capabilities. Typically, the sustaining company will be focused on control of its customers and business partners to extract maximum margins; on the other hand, the disruptor will be playing a ubiquity game, sacrificing margin to gain share. The sustaining company will gold-plate its product in order to chase high-end price-insenstive customers; the disruptor will seek out price-sensitive low-end customers.

I have to admit, I didn’t see this coming . . . I thought Google was mistaken to put so much development effort into the mobile phone market. I was clearly wrong about that.

In the smartphone market I have been expecting a disruptive break that would body-slam Apple’s market share, but I expected it to be several quarters in the future and with a really fast drop-off when it happened. Instead, it looks like Apple took a bruising in 4Q 2009 and has failed to regain share in 1Q 2010 while Android sales continued to rocket. Android hammered market-leader Blackberry just as badly, a fact which has gooten far less play than it probably should because the trade-press loves the drama of the Apple-vs.-Google catfight so much.

What actually seems to be going on here is that Android is successfully disrupting both Apple and Blackberry from below; together they’ve lost about 25% of market share, not enough to put Android on top but close enough that another quarter like the last will certainly do that.

I’ve heard several comments from folks that Apple’s iPhone sales are probably lower because of the widespread interest in the “next” iPhone model, which is likely to be announced in the next few weeks. Apple has followed this pattern since introducing the original iPhone, but there’s no rule saying they can’t break the pattern.

I’ll be interested in the announcement, as I’ll have a year left in my Rogers contract, so if the next iPhone isn’t a block-buster, I’ll be considering other options for when I’m out of contract.

A trillion dollars doesn’t buy as much as you’d expect

Filed under: Economics, Europe — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 07:54

It doesn’t, for example, buy exemption from the laws of economics:

European Union President Herman Van Rompuy said European governments need to consider pooling their national powers and create a joint economic government.

“We can’t have a monetary union without some form of economic and political union and that is our big task for the coming weeks and the coming months,” he said.

He said he would draft tougher rules for EU leaders to discuss in October that go beyond current EU limits on debt and deficit.

The core problem is near-zero economic growth, high unemployment and governments unwilling to take painful steps to get people to work more and longer.

Simon Tilford, an economist at the Center for European Reform think tank, warned that EU governments so far haven’t come up with anything “game changing.”

“What Europe needs is a growth pact because without growth, public finances aren’t going to be sustainable,” Tilford said. “The bond markets are going to be forcing them to make those kind of changes.”

Even EU president Van Rompuy warned that the bloc risks irrelevance and the end of its expensive welfare programs if it can’t speed up economic growth, forecast to expand by just 1 percent this year.

“With 1 percent growth we can’t finance our social model any more. With 1 percent structural growth we can’t play a role in the world,” he told the World Economic Forum in Brussels. “We need to double the economic growth potential that we now have.”

So even with a trillion dollar injection, you still can’t spend more than you make, year after year, and hope to carry on as if there wasn’t a problem. Who knew?

May 7, 2010

QotD: The HST only looks good on paper

Filed under: Cancon, Economics, Government, Quotations — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 09:47

I know all the reasons why sales taxes — i.e. consumption taxes — are to be preferred to income taxes. Every economist I respect believes consumption taxes are better because they let the taxpayer control the amount of tax he pays. Don’t want to pay as much? Don’t buy as much.

But to an ordinary person, this is a silly argument. Everyone has to buy stuff — school clothes for the kids, a new car, a laptop. If your washing machine breaks down, you have to buy a new one or pay for repairs. There is no alternative but to pay the sales tax.

To consumers, a sales tax looks like the least avoidable kind of tax. For most people, the only true way around a consumption tax is to hid their spending by switching to cash, barter or the black market.

On paper, I agree with my economist buds. And if we lived on paper, I might try to convince you to learn to love the HST.

Lorne Gunter, “The HST is fine on paper. It’s only painful in real life”, National Post, 2010-05-07

May 3, 2010

The end of a monopoly

Filed under: Economics, Europe, Science, Wine — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 12:00

Wine bottles have been sealed with natural cork for hundreds of years. It is an extremely good, natural product that has been used by almost all wine producers because it was better than every other economic sealant available. But cork has a problem that, as a natural product, it is subject to certain risks, the worst of which from a wine viewpoint was contamination with the chemical compound called 2-4-6 Trichloroanisole (usually abbreviated as TCA).

It only takes a tiny amount of TCA to ruin a bottle of wine: and it occurs naturally in the trees from which the cork is harvested. Wine producers and consumers were demanding a solution (wine writers have estimated that between 10% and 15% of all wines suffer from TCA tainting). As monopoly suppliers, however, the cork producers did very little — where else were wineries going to get their bottle closures?

Enter the competition:

By the 1990s, retailers and wineries were clamoring for a solution to wine taint but the cork industry didn’t respond. “No industry with 95% to 97% market share is going to see its propensity to listen increase —and that’s what happened to us,” says Mr. de Jesus from Amorim.

The outcry was just the opening needed by Mr. Noel, a Belgian immigrant who in 1998 began making what he calls “corcs,” he says in part to avoid lawsuits from cork producers, in his North Carolina plastics factory.

Mr. Noel, whose company had specialized in extruded plastics such as pool noodles, named the new business Nomacorc LLC. He eventually built a new, highly automated factory that does nothing but churn out the plastic stoppers, 157 million a month.

The business took off as wineries, desperate for closures that wouldn’t cause cork taint, lined up to buy his product. Nomacorc now has plants on three continents, which produce 2 billion corks a year.

I’m not a big fan of plastic corks — I’m starting to prefer modern Stelvin twist-off closures — but at least with a plastic cork, there’s almost no chance of TCA contamination. I don’t buy very expensive wines, so the most expensive wine I’ve lost to cork taint was only about $60, but that’s still more money wasted than I’m willing to put up with.

If you’ve ever had a glass of wine that smelled of mouldy cardboard, you’ve had TCA-contaminated wine.

April 30, 2010

The revolution is almost complete . . . hold on tight

Filed under: Economics, Technology — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 16:25

Charles Stross thinks he understands why Steve Jobs won’t allow Adobe Flash on to the iPhone and iPad:

Steve Jobs believes he’s gambling Apple’s future — the future of a corporation with a market cap well over US $200Bn — on an all-or-nothing push into a new market. HP have woken up and smelled the forest fire, two or three years late; Microsoft are mired in a tar pit, unable to grasp that the inferno heading towards them is going to burn down the entire ecosystem in which they exist. There is the smell of panic in the air, and here’s why . . .

We have known since the mid-1990s that the internet was the future of computing. With increasing bandwidth, data doesn’t need to be trapped in the hard drives of our desktop computers: data and interaction can follow us out into the world we live in. Modem uptake drove dot-com 1.0; broadband uptake drove dot-com 2.0. Now everyone is anticipating what you might call dot-com 3.0, driven by a combination of 4G mobile telephony (LTE or WiMax, depending on which horse you back) and wifi everywhere. Wifi and 4G protocols will shortly be delivering 50-150mbps to whatever gizmo is in your pocket, over the air. (3G is already good for 6mbps, which is where broadband was around the turn of the millennium. And there are ISPs in Tokyo who are already selling home broadband delivered via WiMax. It’s about as fast as my cable modem connection was in 2005.)

[. . .]

This is why there’s a stench of panic hanging over silicon valley. this is why Apple have turned into paranoid security Nazis, why HP have just ditched Microsoft from a forthcoming major platform and splurged a billion-plus on buying up a near-failure; it’s why everyone is terrified of Google:

The PC revolution is almost coming to an end, and everyone’s trying to work out a strategy for surviving the aftermath.

Read the whole thing. I don’t see any obvious flaw in his line of thought. It may not happen the way he predicts, but it is consistent with what we know, and it should frighten the heck out of Apple’s competitors.

QotD: A notable unintended consequence

Filed under: Economics, Quotations, Space, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 09:14

Hardly a day seems to go by nowadays without somebody with approximately the same kind of political attitude as me scratching his head, publicly, in writing, about President Obama’s bafflingly sensible space policy, which sticks out like a healthy thumb in an otherwise horribly mutilated hand of policies.

Critics are disturbed by the large and unprecedented role Mr. Obama sees for the private sector in space exploration. For a president who is often accused of being a socialist, he has more faith in the ingenuity of the private sector than his detractors do.

Brian Micklethwait, “On the unintended consequences of President Obama”, Samizdata, 2010-04-28

April 29, 2010

Parents, don’t let your kids grow up to be fiction authors

Filed under: Economics, Media — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 12:26

Charles Stross lays out the miserable truth about the practical issues when you try to write fiction for a living:

Most people have a very romanticized view of what it is that authors do. Firstly, there’s a widespread perception that the workload involved is relatively easy — in modern western nations, the level of functional literacy is high enough that a majority of the population can read a book, and write (at least to the extent of thumbing a 160-character text message on their phone). Because there is no obvious barrier to entry as with music (where proficiency with musical instruments clearly takes practice), most people assume that writing a novel is like writing a text message — you put one word in front of another until you’re done. The skills of fiction composition are largely invisible, until you try to actually do it. Secondly, many people harbour peculiar ideas about how much money there is in commercial publishing — and when disabused of the idea that selling a first novel is a road to riches, they assume it’s because the evil publishers are conspiring to keep all the money to themselves (rather than the unpalatable truth — publishing commercial fiction is hard work for little reward). Finally, there’s the Lifestyle chimera.

In short: it’s actually work to write for a living. The pay sucks for the vast majority of fiction writers. You face all the risks of a start-up business, but the potential pay-off is lottery-odds unlikely to come your way. Unlike other work, creative writing can’t be done (for most authors) in a predictable regular way:

Putting words in a row is wearying work. When they’re flowing fast, I can sometimes reach a dizzying peak output of 2000 words per hour for a couple of hours — not in fiction, but in a blog entry or a non-fiction essay. I’ve occasionally had death march sessions in which I pumped out as much as 10,000 words in a day. But such Stakhanovite output isn’t sustainable; a 10,000 word day is usually followed by a three-day-weekend to recover from it. A more realistic target for a full-time professional writer is 500-1000 words of finished prose per workday, corresponding to about 1-2 hours of writing, 2-4 hours of polishing, and another couple of hours of thinking about what they want to say, and how to say it. Like anyone else, they need weekends and vacation weeks and time to do the housekeeping. 1000 words per day for a 250-day working year (50 weeks of 5 days a week) works out at 250,000 words per year — or two 320 page novels.

There’s one SF/Fantasy author who seems to publish a new book every month, but he’s extremely unusual. For most authors, one or two books per year is pretty good output.

More wineries to screw it up, er, I mean “on”

Filed under: Economics, Science, Wine — Nicholas @ 12:17

The debate over wine bottle seals may not be quite over, but the evidence is mounting that modern screw-top closures (PDF document) are going to win out over traditional cork and modern synthetic cork closures:

The image above shows the state of 14 bottles of white wine sealed under various closures 125 months (just over 10
years) after bottling. This closure trial was conducted by the Australian Wine Research Institute to assess the relative
effects of cork, plastic and screw cap closures on bottle-aged wine and has unequivocally shown the superiority of
screw caps in aging wine.

[. . .]

The bottled wines were systematically analyzed over a 10 year period by sensory and analytical methods and
photographed (you can see the sequential photographs below). The bottle sealed with a screw cap is positioned on the
far left. While the pictures tell a convincing story, leaving little doubt as to which seal provides the most effective
method of preserving a wine, it is the sensory evaluation results that are most revealing. The wines sealed under screw
cap were still drinkable and showing appealing secondary aged characters while retaining freshness.

In spite of the obvious colour differences, those bottles all hold the same wine, from the same vintage. The bottle at the far right has darkened quite significantly and there’s quite a lot of sediment accumulated at the bottom of the bottle. Just looking at it, you’re probably correct to say it’s dead — don’t even bother uncorking it.

H/T to Michael Pinkus for the link.

All the Senate’s a stage, and Goldman Sachs merely a player

Filed under: Economics, Politics, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 07:19

Although in this case, it’s the Senators as walking shadows, poor players that strut and fret their hour upon the stage and then (if we’re lucky) are heard no more. Megan McArdle isn’t impressed:

The statements from the Senators make it clear that they are not holding this hearing in order to find out what happened; that’s the SEC’s job. They’re holding this hearing in order to be televised yelling at investment bankers. Claire McCaskill’s rant was particularly irrelevant to the actual question at hand, but all of them are mostly trying to express outrage, not make any coherent assessment of the strengths of the SEC’s case.

April 26, 2010

Maxime Bernier: Harper’s successor?

Filed under: Cancon, Economics, Politics — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 17:32

Okay, so Andrew Coyne doesn’t quite go so far as to say that Bernier is the next leader of the Conservative party, but he certainly makes a case for Bernier speaking for an under-represented viewpoint in that party — actual conservatives, even (whisper it) “libertarians”:

Let’s just pause for a moment to consider what an extraordinary thing Maxime Bernier is attempting. The former minister in the Harper government is widely said to be preparing the ground for a future leadership bid. How has he been going about it? Since January, Bernier has been methodically laying explosives beneath the government and detonating them at regular intervals, in speeches and writings that, while not overtly criticizing Conservative policy, point in precisely the opposite direction to that on which the government happens to be embarked.

[. . .]

I cannot think of a precedent for this performance. Bernier is careful not to attack the party’s current leadership — just everything they’ve been doing. Yet he could hardly be accused of heresy. He represents, to paraphrase Howard Dean, the Conservative wing of the Conservative party — the party’s soul, its core beliefs, varnished as they may be under layers of expediency, yet still there. Indeed, so contorted has the Conservative party become that many people insist he is merely giving voice to what the leader himself believes.

[. . .]

Indeed, as a libertarian conservative from Quebec, he may find he has more supporters in the West. I don’t suggest he will be leader, or should. His record in cabinet was decidedly mixed: a fine industry minister, he was a disaster at Foreign Affairs. Though the speeches are thoughtful, it remains unclear whether there is a man of substance behind them, not least after the Couillard fiasco. Yet his willingness to state brave truths openly, to call the party back to its authentic self, marks him as one to watch.

I’ve often asked folks what substantive difference there is between the current Conservative government and the previous Liberal government. Other than the colour of the party signs, there’s not much actual “conservative” governing going on.

April 22, 2010

Tonight’s 1st round of the NFL draft

Filed under: Economics, Football — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 12:11

As in previous years, I have nothing useful to say about the draft because I don’t follow US college football — I don’t know the Heisman Trophy winner from the redshirt freshman at your local junior college. I’m so uninvolved that I won’t even catch the TV coverage.

My favourite team, the Minnesota Vikings, have eight picks in the draft (before the traditional horsetrading gets underway), and were expected to pick a cornerback in the first round (where they have the 30th pick). Yesterday, they signed former Eagle and Jet cornerback Lito Sheppard to a one-year contract, so they’re now expected to pick a defensive lineman . . . or maybe a quarterback (Tim Tebow, anyone?).

Under the circumstances, I did find this Wall Street Journal article quite interesting:

For a league that does many things well, the first round of the NFL draft is a mess.

The league gives its worst teams first crack at incoming college talent in the name of parity, but instead of giving bad teams a leg up, it often forces them to draft players they don’t really need at prices they can’t afford. Many top picks hold out of training camp before they sign, only to end up with enormous contracts that have little to do with their true value to a football team.

What’s more, as this page reported Wednesday, NFL teams have a 50% chance of blowing a first-round pick entirely — the sort of costly gaffe that can set a franchise back for years.

Granted that there is no perfect mechanism available to replace the current draft process, it’s pretty clear that improvements could be made. Gregg Easterbrook has been championing a rookie salary cap for several years, which would move the monster contract negotiations out from initial signing to a later date, allowing teams to pay more directly for demonstrated ability (but even that sort of system could be gamed, of course). As I wrote last year:

The story repeats, draft after draft, as highly touted college stars are taken early in the first round, sign megabucks contracts and then go into the witness protection program. A rookie salary cap would be in the interests of almost everyone: teams, veteran players, and rookies-not-taken-in-the-first-round. The only ones who’d see their situation change for the worse would be the first 32 players taken in the draft (who would now have to prove that they can make the transition to the pro league before being rewarded with big contracts).

Update, 10:45pm: Speaking of horse-trading . . . I just happened to check the New York Times liveblog, and Minnesota has traded their first round pick, #30, to the Detroit Lions. No Viking pick in the first round, but they get Detroit’s pick in the second round, #34 overall, plus a 4th (#100) and a 7th (#214) in exchange. QB Jimmy Clausen had slipped from a speculated top-10 pick all the way to 30, where the NY Times folks were speculating he’d be the Vikings’ pick. Don’t know if he’ll still be there at the 34th pick, or if the Vikings are even interested (the chatter had them interested in Tim Tebow, who went to the Denver Broncos with the 25th selection).

April 16, 2010

Exposing the truth about government-run Ponzi schemes

Filed under: Economics, Government, Politics — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 09:22

Kathy Shaidle is exactly right in her analysis of the key weakness of the Tea Party movement:

The Tea party movement contains the seed of its own failure

It preaches self-reliance and small government, but old people still want their pittance of gubmit cheese, ie Social Security.

If they/we were intellectually honest, we would be calling on the raising of the eligibility age to 90, which is more in line with Bismark’s original plan: a little pension for those who were never expected to live long enough to ever get it.

It was meant to be a “look how generous I am” gesture with no real impact; the original designers never thought we’d live long enough to cash the checks.

Older Tea Partiers (and all of us) should be petitioning the government to write everyone a one time check for the exact amount they were forced to contribute, plus maybe 5% interest if that is do-able.

And then the program should be abolished.

I hope most of my readers are not depending on their “government benefits” to get them through in their retirement years: the economics of the situation almost certainly won’t allow it. There are several problems with government-run retirement schemes, starting with the fact that most of them are not in any sense of the word “funded”. Most governments have been using the contributions as a giant low-interest revolving fund: you contribute, they withdraw and leave a promissary note in the kitty. The promissary note is drawn on you and your children. There is, technically speaking, no money in the kitty.

The people who will be worst hurt by the necessary changes to government pension schemes are the ones who earned too little (or spent too much) during their working lives and didn’t make any private provision for retirement. As Kathy points out, the first government pensions were designed so that most potential recipients would be unable to collect, because the start date of the pension income was set beyond the average lifespan of the population. Looking forward to a pension would be much less realistic today if the official “retirement age” was set to 90!

April 15, 2010

A very disturbing notion

Filed under: Economics, Europe, Government, Politics, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 12:59

The Cato Institute’s Richard W. Rahn speculates about some very disturbing notions:

Politicians in developed countries have found that their citizens often get upset when inflation reaches high levels and then tend to vote out the culprits. You may recall that the less-than-astute Jimmy Carter lost his re-election campaign, in part, because inflation at one point reached 14 percent and the prime interest rate hit 21 percent.

An insightful European banker suggested to me over breakfast a couple of weeks ago that the European political class would use selective expropriation, rather than inflation, to avoid paying back all of the debt. The way this would be done would be that the political leaders would announce they would only pay back those bonds with full interest that were held by labor unions and other “politically correct” interest groups but not the bonds held by “greedy bankers” and rich people. Maturities would be extended and promised interest rates lowered – effectively reducing the value of the bonds.

My initial reaction was that, yes, such a selective expropriation might work in Europe, but not in the United States. As I thought more about it, however, looked at what was happening and heard President Obama’s rhetoric attacking “greedy” bankers and insurance companies, I began to think that not only was my European friend right about Europe, but his scenario was equally valid here.

The Obama administration has already indicated that it’s quite comfortable with protecting unions at the expense of other contracting parties (in the Government Motors case, at the very least), so it’s not much of a stretch to see this as a possibility in larger matters.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress