Minor Thoughts from me to you

I'm always fascinated by the type of analysis that Scott Winship does here. There can be a huge difference in results, depending on how you look at things. This is one reason that I don't like to trust "common sense" all that much.

A couple of posts ago, I showed that when analyzed properly, hourly pay has risen just as much as productivity since 1947. The keys to getting the analysis right are to

• Compare mean hourly compensation (not median compensation, and not wages net of fringe benefits or household income) to productivity,
• Compare the same workers and sectors of the economy when computing compensation and productivity,
• Look at the nonfarm business sector to exclude the housing sector (where imputed rent to homeowners is counted as income) and the government sector (where indirect taxes are counted as income) so that income sources that do not reflect the value of what workers produce are excluded from productivity,
• Use net GDP to compute productivity rather than GDP, so that income taking the form of depreciation–which does not go to workers or owners but will simply affect future productivity–is excluded from productivity, and
• Use the same inflation adjustment for both compensation and GDP.

I should have added to that list that proprietors’ income (income from one’s business) should also be excluded, as it is not at all clear how to allocate that category into income from labor and income from capital. I have updated the earlier post (and chart) to take this into account. When these guidelines are followed, the results indicate that hourly compensation is almost exactly where it should be if we expect it to rise with productivity:

∞

Farhad Manjoo:

The Bay Area has become a hotbed for some of the most innovative retailing start-ups.

With Instacart, you can get groceries delivered instantly from big and small supermarkets. With Google’s Express delivery service, you can get household goods from big-box stores delivered on the same day you order. The app Curbside lets users order items from Target, and have them ready when they drive up to a store. And with Postmates, it is possible to order takeout, and pretty much anything else, and have it delivered directly very quickly.

These services all have in common speed and convenience: Because they route purchases from stores, they can often shuttle goods to buyers faster than they are available from Amazon. The prices are even competitive with Amazon, which delivers most of its products, even groceries, from warehouses that are a few hours away.

∞

I think almost everyone agrees that all levels of government underinvest in infrastructure and maintenance. Here's an argument for turning infrastructure over to a competitive private sector.

No, what makes Disney invest in infrastructure is not happy thoughts. Johnston is in fact clear about this:

The Walt Disney Co. invests in infrastructure because it makes the company money.

The problem with America is that our public infrastructure has been turned over to a fickle political process that is not governed by a rational calculation of cost and benefit, market test and experimentation but by a pursuit of power, glory and advantage that only rarely coincides with the public interest.

America should be more like Disneyland and to do that we need to develop institutions that allow more infrastructure to built by the private sector. Most ambitiously we need more cities as hotels, more proprietary cities.

∞

Part-time Staples workers are furious that they could be fired for working more than 25 hours a week. 

The company implemented the policy to avoid paying benefits under the Affordable Care Act, reports Sapna Maheshwari at Buzzfeed. The healthcare law mandates that workers with more than 30 hours a week receive healthcare.

If Staples doesn't offer benefits, it could be fined $3,000 in penalties per person.

Buzzfeed spoke with several Staples workers who revealed their hours have been drastically cut over the past year. Many reported working as few as 20 hours. 

Obamacare sure has been good to low-income workers, who are struggling to get by.

∞

I did not know this.

With the debate over U.S. policy toward Cuba raging, I came across this information from my friend Steven Hill this morning. He makes a few important points:

Keep in mind that the broad commercial embargo is codified in law and would require a Congressional enactment to undo. At the same time it’s interesting to note–and many people do not realize this–the US is actually one of the largest importers into Cuba, mostly agricultural, pharmaceutical, and medical devices that can be exported via carve-outs that Congress created in 2000. That’s probably why there has been no great commercial lobbying pressure to do away with the embargo.

∞

Now that I've established my kindle owner bona fides, here's my primary complaint about the Kindle.

To: kindle-feedback@amazon.com Cc: jeff@amazon.com Subject: Kindle Voyage—Use book cover art as screensaver

Hi,

Please give me an official way of allowing me to use my current book's cover art as my Kindle screensaver. If not that, give me a semi-supported way to use 3rd party modifications on my Kindle, so that I can install someone else’s code that will allow me to use my current book's cover art as my Kindle screensaver. I'd prefer a solution directly from Amazon, but if you're unwilling to provide it, I'm willing to look for a solution somewhere else.

Mostly, I love my Kindle Voyage. My biggest complaint is that the Kindle doesn’t have a feature allowing me to use my book’s cover art as the screensaver image. I read. A lot. I think the cover art of each book is an important part of my emotional connection to each book. But the Kindle almost never allows me to see that cover art. I see it when I’m selecting a book from the home screen, and that’s pretty much it. When my Kindle is on, I see the text of the book. When my Kindle is off, I see a random image from a collection of boring stock art screensavers.

In the past, I’ve jailbroken my Kindle devices, just so that I can install a hack that will use the cover art of my current book (or magazine, or personal document) as the screensaver for my device. The Lab126 team has gotten too good at preventing jailbreaks and now I can no longer see book cover art as my screensaver. This is very disappointing and is the biggest thing I don’t like about my new Kindle Voyage.

Thanks, ~Joe

About 24 hours later, I got a form response from the Kindle development team.

I'm sorry; currently the option to set the Kindle book’s cover art as the screensaver image isn't available on Kindle device. It is certainly not our intention for our customers to have anything but a pleasant experience using Kindle.

I completely understand that this feature (To set the Kindle book’s cover art as the screensaver image) definitely would be of great help to our customers. It's unfortunate that this feature is not available right now.

Although at this time there is no option for this, we'll be sure to consider your feedback as we plan for further improvements. Rest assured that I have passed along your comments to our developers. We definitely value your opinion and will continue to listen and respond to our customers' concerns. We will make every effort to evaluate the information you have provided, and try our level best to lead it to program changes or enhancements.

About 24 hours after that, I got a chiding response from one of Bezo's minions.

I'm Elizabeth King of Amazon.com's Executive Customer Relations team. Jeff Bezos received your e-mail and asked me to respond on his behalf. I'll be sure to include Jeff’s office with this correspondence.

Thanks for taking the time to share your feedback on allowing Kindle users to download third party software to devices for custom screen savers.

Customer feedback is very important to us as it allows us to continue to improve the services we provide based on what our customers are looking for. I've forwarded your comments to the Kindle team. In the future, if you'd like to share any thoughts you have about Kindle with the Kindle team directly, please feel free to send them to kindle-feedback@amazon.com.

Please keep in mind we're unable to provide any troubleshooting for your Kindle devices if it appears the device has been rooted.

Please refer to the Kindle License Agreement and Terms of Use for information regarding the proper use of Kindle software:

http://www.amazon.com/kindlelicense

Because I almost exclusively read e-books, I occasionally offer criticsm of the Kindle and suggestions for enhancements. I'm not just offering drive-by criticisms. I've been a loyal Kindle owner for over 6 years now. My opinions are informed by my long experience using the devices and by my observations of what has—and hasn't—changed over the years.

Here's my experience as a Kindle owner.

• Original Kindle: Purchased in August, 2008.
• Kindle 2: Purchased in December, 2009, after my Kindle was stolen.
• Kindle 3G: Purchased in December, 2010.
• Kindle 3G Graphite: Purchased in January, 2012, on the promise of the higher quality eInk Pearl screen.
• Kindle Paperwhite 3G: Purchased in September, 2012, on the promise of a brighter, whiter screen.
• Kindle Voyage: Purchased in September, 2014, on the promise of a 300-dpi screen, better backlighting, and the return of physical page turn buttons.

With each edition, I've tried to buy the top-line model. Once the 3G wireless was available, I bought that with each new model. I always wanted to be able to get new books delivered, no matter where I was and whether or not I had WiFi. When Amazon introduced ad-supported models, I made sure to always buy the ad-free model. (Books are too important to be forced to look at an ad each time I want to read.)

I read e-books because I read. A lot. When I was in middle school, I'd bring home a stack of at least 20 different library books, which was usually enough to last the week until my next library visit. As I got older, I brought home fewer books but the number of pages per book increased. The height of the stacks stayed about the same, but each book was larger (and heavier!) than before.

Because I was homeschooled and did most of my reading at home, the size and weight of the books didn't bother me that much. Once I went to college and started carrying books around in a backpack, the size and weight of each book started to matter a lot more. I was fascinated when I first discovered e-books, looking at titles from Project Gutenberg and Baen Ebooks. E-Books offered the promise of carrying around as many books as I wanted, of any length at all, without any size or weight penalty.

I did my early reading on Palm devices. I believe the first was a Handspring Visor Pro, later followed by a Sony Clié. I read books using the original Mobipocket software. I started out with a 160x160 display, giving all of the books a pixelated, low-quality look. It didn't matter. I was happy just to be able to carry multiple books around in my pocket.

I first head of dedicated e-readers, based on the eInk technology, when I started hearing about the Sony Reader, called the Librie. The initial version was only available in Japan and the interface was Japanese only. But it was book sized, had longer battery life, and a better display. I wanted one so badly.

I still remember how surprised and excited I was when Amazon announced the first Kindle. It was announced in November, 2007, but sold out almost immediately and wasn't widely available until mid-2008. I finally bought one for myself in August, 2008. I've since owned almost all of the Kindle models.

From the Handspring Visor to the Kindle Voyage, I've seen a lot of change and improvements in e-books. From having almost nothing available as e-books to having millions of e-books available. It's been an expensive hobby, but one I've been utterly happy to indulge. I love reading and I love the fact that I can carry a multitude of large novels, several magazines, and a variety of non-fiction books around with me, everywhere I go. The future is here and it keeps getting better.

Coda: Aren't Physical Books Better?

There's a longstanding argument about whether or not e-books are as good (or better) than physical books. The argument goes that physical books are better because of the feel of the paper, the unique scent of books, the look of the text on the page, the memories associated with the physical object, etc. These arguments aren't wrong. Physical books do offer a lot of sentimental value that e-books may never be able to match.

I understand people that prefer physical books over e-books, but I don't feel the same way. Growing up, I read a prodigious amount but I didn't actually own many books. Almost everything I read came from either the Virginia Beach library system or the Norfolk library system. I didn't own them, so I couldn't dog-ear the pages, write notes in the margins, or develop an emotional attachment.

When I think of a book, I think of the ideas and people contained within the pages. I don't think of the pages themselves. "My" books were rentals. Someone else had them before me, I had them for a short while, then I gave them back, for someone else to have after me. The paper and ink were merely transient residents, passing through my life. An e-book carries the ideas and people just as well as paper and ink does. I sympathize with those who are attached to paper and ink, but I do it from a distance.

Throughout my reading life, I've loved stories and developed emotional attachments to various characters, places, and events, but I never loved the physical book itself. I don't miss what e-books don't offer, because I never really had it to begin with.

There are two kinds of Super Bowl parties: Super Bowl parties and Super Bowl parties. A Super Bowl party is about getting together to watch the Super Bowl. This is not the commercials. This is the action on the field. It's the heroics (or blunders) of 11 players on offense, 11 players on defense, 11 players on special teams. It's the decisions made by two head coaches, six coordinators, multiple position coaches, ball boys, and water boys. The Super Bowl party is about watching the football game, either while acting as an armchair quarterback or while taking the opportunity to learn more about America's most popular sport.

A Super Bowl party is just a social event. The game's on TV, but it's probably a smaller TV or else the volume is turned down. People pay attention to the TV, but only during breaks in the action, when the commericals are on. The host sets out some snacks and invites some people over. They spend the evening talking, hanging out, and only occasionally watching the TV. The Super Bowl party takes place on Super Bowl Sunday, but it actually has very little to do with the Super Bowl.

I go to Super Bowl parties and I host Super Bowl parties. I'm a football fan and I watch (what should be) the best game of the year. I like to watch with others who are interested in the game and who are interested in critiquing the game or learning about the sport.

Want to come over to watch the Super Bowl?

Since I ripped through The Martian in just a day, I was looking through my reading ideas list to see what I wanted to tackle next. I decided to grab The Shadow of the Wind, since Adam highly recommended it. I hopped over to the Goodreads page and read the description.

To console his only child, Daniel’s widowed father, an antiquarian book dealer, initiates him into the secret of the Cemetery of Forgotten Books, a library tended by Barcelona’s guild of rare-book dealers as a repository for books forgotten by the world, waiting for someone who will care about them again. Daniel’s father coaxes him to choose a volume from the spiraling labyrinth of shelves, one that, it is said, will have a special meaning for him. And Daniel so loves the novel he selects, 'The Shadow of the Wind', by one Julian Carax, that he sets out to find the rest of Carax’s work. To his shock, he discovers that someone has been systematically destroying every copy of every book this author has written. In fact, he may have the last one in existence.

This gave me a bit of a double take. Last summer, I read Cryptic: The Best Short Fiction of Jack McDevitt. This description strongly reminded me of one of McDevitt's stories, "The Fort Moxie Branch". I enjoyed that story (heck, I enjoyed the entire volume), so I'll count that as just one more endorsement for The Shadow of the Wind.

(For National School Choice Week.)

School choice is a hotly debated topic in state capitals around the U.S. I'm not sure why. Oh, I know the reasons that people give, but I don't understand why so many people are so vociferously opposed to school choice.

The truth is, we already have nationwide school choice. We just have the most regressive, anti-democratic form of school choice imaginable. Rich families have school choice and poor families do not. It's simple. If you can afford private school tuition, you can send your children to the private school of your choice. If you can afford to rent or to buy a house in the school district of your choice, then you can send your children to the public school of your choice. Either way, if you don't have the necessary money for tuition or housing, then you have no choice over your children's school.

What kind of progressive person supports a policy like that?

We need a school choice policy that's available to everyone: rich, middle class, or poor. I'm 100 percent in favor of school choice. But I don't support our current regressive system of school choice. I'm for school choice that's progressive. I want everyone to be able to choose the educational environment that's right for their child, regardless of race, creed, religion, or income. I want school choice that's available to every American—rich or poor.

It's a mean attitude that says I'll take my money, I'll take my high income, and I'll use it to bid up the cost of housing in the districts with good public schools. It takes a mean person to do that, but then turn around to tell their poorer neighborhors that you can't rescue your children from a school you don't like unless you can first afford to move out of the neighborhood, out of the house, out of the apartment that you currently live in. It's a mean attitude that says those who have money can move around and pick the best, but those who don't must stay put and suffer the worst.

I want school choice that gives everyone an equal choice regardless of income. I want school choice that's available to all. I don't understand why everyone else only supports school choice for the rich.

Asks the Wall Street Journal. But it seems like they may have buried the most important part about the supposedly surprising survey.

“The preference for the suburbs suggests that future demand will be in the form of single-family homes rather than condominiums more prevalent in cities,” said David Berson, chief economist with Nationwide Insurance Co. “That’s also good news for future suburban single-family sellers, many of whom are baby boomers.”

The survey results, though, could be skewed because they included only millennials who first answered that they bought a home within the past three years or intended to do so in the next three years. That excluded young people who intend to rent for many more years, which is a large and growing group, in part because of hefty student debt and the tight mortgage-lending standards of recent years.

∞

Apparently, it's challenging to make a dress with sleeves that look good.

To designers, sleeves can be frumpy. They also pose design challenges. Sleeve peeves may be rising in part because it is so tricky to make a flattering sleeve that is roomy enough to offer a full range of motion. With more casual styles and the introduction of stretch fabrics from denim to silk, women have grown accustomed to comfort, and they are more likely to revolt against constrictive clothing.

“In the past, the tolerance for uncomfortable clothing was a lot higher than it is now,” says designer Trina Turk.

… But office clothing, with its tailored and more-fitted look, poses a design challenge. Structured construction makes it difficult to add a sleeve that allows complete freedom of movement, unless the fabric is stretchy. Ms. Turk’s ponte-knit “Monarch” dress style has slim, elbow-length sleeves that work because the knit fabric stretches.

So, mostly, dresses are sleeveless because the designers just give up.

Ms. Lepore, known for her curvy, flirty, colorful boho designs, says with each collection she aims to have a balance of sleeved and sleeveless dresses. Sleeves, she says, can make a dress look dowdy.

In Ms. Lepore’s recent resort collection, one tribal-look dress went through several iterations. It started with an elbow-length sleeve. The design team stared at the sample in the mirror trying to figure out why it wasn’t working. They tried a cap sleeve. Still wrong.

The dress wound up sleeveless.

∞

They found that at the right velocity on the right kind of soil (sandy clay works, but sand doesn’t) a falling water drop can trap tiny air bubbles under it. Those bubbles capture molecules in the soil. As the water drop deforms, the bubbles scoot up through the drop and jet out into the air, like champagne bubbles or spray from a crashing wave.

If the drop falls too slowly, it is absorbed; too fast, and it splatters without the bubbles emerging. “The sweet spot has to do with the velocity of the droplet and the qualities of the soil,” said Cullen R. Buie, an assistant professor of mechanical engineering. He and a postdoctoral researcher, Youngsoo Joung, reported on their work in Nature Communications.

∞

Last night's NFC Championship Game, between the Green Bay Packers and the Seattle Seahawks, was very disappointing. It was a game that could have turned around the defensive playoff disappointments of the past few years and proven that the Packers are finally able to beat the NFC's toughest teams.

The Packers scored 16 points points in the first quarter and made the Seahawks offense look powerless. After the lead held up through 3 quarters, I began to think that the Packers actually would win in Seattle. Then, over a 7 minute period, it all fell apart. A 19–7 lead turned into a 28–22 loss.

After it was over, I was tempted to blame the defense for the loss. After all, the Seahawks scored 28 points. After some reflection, I've decided that I mostly blame the offense and the special teams. The defense really has gotten better and everyone should acknowledge that.

I'll quickly discuss the special teams. Mason Cosby kicked five field goals and scored 15 points. The kickoff coverage team recovered a fumble. But that's offset by the field goal coverage team giving up a touchdown and the onside kick "hands team" failing to recover the onside kick. Directly and indirectly, special teams gave up 14 points, more than enough to sink the team.

I reviewed each of Green Bay's 13 offensive possessions. I saw a lot of missed opportunities. The Green Bay defense forced 4 turnovers, and forced the Seahawks into four 3-and-out punts. Six different drives started with a field of 57 yards or less. In spite of these gifts, the offense only managed one touchdown and 5 field goals.

The numbers are stark.

• After 5 turnovers (one from special teams, four from defense), the offense had a chance to score 15–35 points. They only managed to score 6 points and move the ball a combined total of 71 yards.
• The offense put together 3 drives of 48 yards or more. They only scored a combined 6 points off of these drives.
• Off of the four quick defensive stops (forcing the Seattle offense into 3-and-outs), the Green Bay offense had a chance to score 12–28 points. They only moved the ball a total of 133 yards and only scored a combined 13 points.

Throughout the second half of the season, the offense showed a disturbing tendency to stall out. They often had to settle for field goals instead of touchdowns. That sunk the team yesterday as the team got inside the Seattle 30-yard line 5 times, but only scored one touchdown.

The Packers offense could have scored an additional 44 points. Those points could have put the game out of reach and made the Seattle offense completely one dimensional. Instead, those missed opportunities allowed Seattle to stay within striking distance. Russell Wilson, one of the game's best comeback quarterbacks, finally struck—ending Green Bay's season.

I rewatched the trailer for Marvel's Ant Man and I still don't understand the appeal of the character. At the most basic level, I find it hard to believe that shrinking to the size of an ant is all that useful of a super power. Sure, it becomes a lot easier to infiltrate the bad guy's lair. You can more easily act as a spy or sabotage really small things. But you don't magically gain in strength. Ants may be a lot stronger proportionally, but at the end of the day you're still a microscopic speck on someone's wall or kitchen counter.

I get Batman's appeal: a tech powered ninja detective. I see where The Flash can be useful: sprint in and out of sticky situations. Even without super strength, the ability to sucker punch your opponent 30 times in an instant is powerful. But minuscule size? I don't see it. It's not something that intuitively appeals to me as something that would make for a good story or a good movie.

I'm unlikely to see the movie unless it gets really good reviews.

Tyler Dunne, of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, recently profiled Packers left tackle David Bakhtiari.

As a kid, Bakhtiari said energy was always “spewing” out of him. He was the class clown. Rambunctious. His parents called him the “Tasmanian Devil.” And his older brother, Eric Bakhtiari, remembers one freakout in particular when David stood up in a resource class at school and screamed “Ahhh!,” weaved around the desks and left the room.

... As a player, Bakhtiari is a visual learner.

When the Packers’ offensive linemen first met in the classroom last season, Bakhtiari would stammer through empty answers. He couldn’t articulate a blocking assignment. He said left guard Josh Sitton — the player pivoted to his right every play — thought he was “a complete idiot” in the classroom.

“Then we go out on the field,” Bakhtiari said, “and I don’t (expletive) up once. It just makes sense to me out there. But if you ask me to verbalize what we’re doing I’d just say, ‘Dude, I don’t know.’ Let’s just go out on the field and I’ll show you.’”

When he takes notes on specific plays, Bakhtiari doesn’t use words. His notepad is a constellation of X’s and O’s and arrows.

It's a good reminder that intelligence comes in different forms. Football players are frequently derided as neanderthals who's only outlet is violence. And, yet, I'm fairly certain that I couldn't breakdown football plays in real time the way that Bakhtiari can.

∞

I'm always interested when I learn more about the hidden complexities of playing football at the NFL's elite level.

Most of the time, the Packers will meander along snapping the ball on Rodgers' command of "Ready, ready," or the first, second, third or even fourth "Hut."

But with the Packers generally operating from a muddle huddle this season, Rodgers usually has plenty of time to engage in verbal high jinks at the line if he chooses.

"It's not just going on a double count," said Packers tackle Bryan Bulaga. "There's more than just what you hear on the microphone.

"There's some where he'll start in completely different on a cadence. It messes with guys."

Many defensive coaching staffs study TV tapes of previous games in an attempt to find audio patterns of a quarterback's call.

"But if you're playing Aaron Rodgers you can't do that or you're going to jump offsides," [Mike] Trgovac, the Packers' defensive line coach said. "Aaron knows the right situation to use it (hard count)."

There are times during games when the offensive linemen will tell Rodgers the defense is timing his cadence and request a hard count.

"He knows it helps us up front," said Bulaga. "He does a great job mixing it up so those guys can't just tee off."

∞

After reading this, I'm certainly willing to give baby bananas a fair chance. I just don't know if I'll be able to find any around here.

Is America ready for a second banana? For most shoppers, one banana fits all: the Cavendish. A foot long and weighing in at seven ounces, it accounts for at least 99% of national banana consumption. It also causes trouble for people who don’t want to slice a whole banana into a bowl of Rice Krispies.

If only bananas could be smaller. Well, some are. Of the 33 billion bananas shipped to the U.S. in a year, a tiny fraction are exotic cousins often sold as “babies.” That is demeaning; baby bananas are full-grown. At a third the size of a Cavendish, sweeter and creamier, a baby fits without waste into a peanut butter, banana and mayonnaise sandwich. No one slicing a baby banana into a bowl of Rice Krispies ever has to ask, “Who wants the rest of this banana?”

∞

Early last year, MetaFilter had a spirited discussion about SF. Various people were arguing about supposed Progressive bias in the Science Fiction Writers of America (SFWA) and whether an author like Robert Heinlein would even be welcome in SF today. Several people doubted that he could even win a Hugo today.

John Scalzi stepped in to say that not only could he still win, but that he would definitely win today. Scalzi essentially argues that today's SF field is broader than yesterday's. Yes, there are more Progressive voices. But authors are still writing stories in the Heinlein tradition, they still sell well, and they still get nominated for awards.

If we grant that a resurrected Heinlein would read the lay of the land, commerce-wise, could he win a Hugo today? Sure he could -- or at the very least could get nominated. Charlie Stross wrote a homage to late Heinlein called Saturn's Children which was nominated for a Hugo in 2009; its sequel Neptune's Brood is on the ballot this year. Robert J. Sawyer, who writes in a clear, Campbellian style, is a frequent Best Novel nominee, most recently for Wake, which has a clear antecedent in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. James SA Corey rolled onto the Hugo Novel list in 2012 with Leviathan Wakes, which is solidly in the Golden Age traditon, updated for today's audiences. And I can think of at least one recent Hugo award winner who has a thrice-Hugo-nominated military science fiction series, who has been explicitly compared to Heinlein all through his career. So could Heinlein win a Hugo? Hell yeah, he could -- and if he were as commercially smart today as he was back in the day, it wouldn't even be question of if, but when.