Category Archives: Random

I don't watch TV but I do watch a good number of videos online, and there's plenty of fascinating stuff out there on bloggingheads.tv, Charlie Rose interviews, The Big Think, fora.tv, and more. I study interviews in particular to view how people at the top of their game carry themselves when they are not in complete control of a conversation.

Recently I watched two videos in which I noticed one person present him/herself in a more polished manner than the other. Both of the more impressive-seeming people stayed cool, calm, and collected throughout the conversation. Sounds basic, but during emotionally tense or argumentative situations, it really is a talent.

First, a 20-minute interview between Noam Chomsky and a TV journalist. Whether you agree or disagree isn't the point and don't interpret this as an endorsement of Chomsky's views. I don't have opinions on these issues until I become more informed. What does matter is how coolly and calmly Chomsky disputes the interviewer's assumptions. The interviewer's early aggressive tone morphs into a stilted, panicked one. Chomsky is relaxed the whole time and occasionally firmly raises his voice but only when it's necessary. Instead of responding to sharp-toned questions with sharp-toned answers, he stays leveled, and it comes off well on-camera.

Second, Jonah Goldberg and David Frum recently did a 65 minute bloggingheads.tv conversation. It is pretty inside baseball to the cause David Frum has taken up about the the state of conservatism, but again, the actual issues aren't the point. There is an interesting contrast in manner and demeanor between the two. Frum is the whole time impeccably polite, calm, and when he disagrees, very professional. Charming, even. Goldberg is no chump either when it comes to polish, but a few times begins his answer with an emotional yelp, bemused face, and "Well….". Frum asks several questions, Socratic-style. Backed into a wall on the definition of socialism, Goldberg stammers a "Look," too many times. "Look…", used rarely, bestows authority. Obama begins many sentences with it. But used too much it sounds overly defensive.

Finally, if you're ever looking for tips and tricks on the rhetoric front, just watch a Barack Obama press conference. The guy's a master, not that this is exactly news. In this most recent press conference — why I ended up watching half of it online is a mystery even to me — he deftly handles a probing question from a journalist with a laugh, smile, and a "Come on, Jackie, I don't know." Again: cool, calm, collected.

#

If you want an example of a talented rhetorical response that's not exactly cool, calm, and collected, but still extraordinary, watch this 50 second clip of Bill Clinton responding to a heckler in 1992 when he ran for president for the first time. Goosebumps.

Gary Kasparov’s essay “The Chessmaster and the Computer” in the New York Review of Books is really excellent.

How has the rise of computers changed the game of chess? This is the focus but there are broader lessons. Here’s an excerpt relevant to my post a few days ago on technological change:

Like so much else in our technology-rich and innovation-poor modern world, chess computing has fallen prey to incrementalism and the demands of the market. Brute-force programs play the best chess, so why bother with anything else? Why waste time and money experimenting with new and innovative ideas when we already know what works? Such thinking should horrify anyone worthy of the name of scientist, but it seems, tragically, to be the norm. Our best minds have gone into financial engineering instead of real engineering, with catastrophic results for both sectors.

I am intrigued by the word “incrementalism.” VCs and other commentators sometimes criticize entrepreneurs for focusing on incremental improvements — a slightly better Facebook app, say — and not enough on revolutionary inventions. But aren’t most revolutions simply the last evolution in a long process?

#

I played a lot of chess as a kid. It is one of my fondest memories of childhood and I wish someday to take it up again. A few reflections:

1. Being good at chess is not a reflection of general intelligence, as Kasparov points out. Like the SAT, chess stresses certain capabilities — mostly ability to work hard and practice — but not the whole picture.

2. Of course the self-discipline to work hard and practice is itself noteworthy. Kasparov: “The ability to work hard for days on end without losing focus is a talent. The ability to keep absorbing new information after many hours of study is a talent.” This is the best reason to encourage your kids to play chess!

3. There is one winner and one loser (barring a draw) in chess. In life you want to create win-win situations. Non-zero sum situations. This is the most glaring reason why chess strategy does not translate to life strategy completely. Although there are still many ideas that do transfer well.

4. Searching for Bobby Fischer ranks as one of my favorite movies of all-time. I recommend it. The most interesting life theme is whether you must hate your opponents, as Fischer did, to win.

Studies paint two contradictory portraits of young people today. On the one hand, we are "more idealistic, more civic-minded, and more engaged with the world than [our] cynical Gen X predecessors," but on the other hand, we are ever-more narcissistic (thanks to the web?) and devoid of empathy compared to generations past.

Ross Douthat on his blog wisely ponders this contradiction:

There’s a kind of humanitarianism that’s more interested in an abstract “humanity” than in actual people, and a kind of idealism that’s hard to distinguish from moral vanity. Perhaps this is the spirit that’s at work among the empathy-deficient world-changers of Generation Y — visible, for instance, in the way that community service has become a self-interested resume-padding exercise for ambitious young climbers, or in the way that Barack Obama’s rhetoric (“we are the ones we’ve been waiting for,” etc.) managed to appeal to younger voters’ idealism and flatter their egos all at once.

On the other hand, this could also be grounds for a defense of narcissism, at least up to a point. Maybe too much empathy is crippling, and a little solipsism is a necessary spur to action. If a little “look out world, here I come” self-centeredness is what it takes to get young people involved in charity work or political campaigning, the theory might go, then so much the better for self-centeredness!

Certainly there’s some truth to the idea that high achievement, humanitarian or otherwise, often goes hand in hand with a certain arrogance and self-involvement, and that the kind of people who change the world in dramatic ways aren’t always the kind of people you’d want as next-door neighbors. (Orwell’s famous line about saints being judged guilty till proven innocent may have some relevance here.) But then again, most of the college students being surveyed in this study aren’t going to grow up to be Charles De Gaulle or Winston Churchill — or Barack Obama, for that matter. The solipsism of great men may be forgivable and even necessary in some cases. But I’m more skeptical of the idea that mass narcissism is the key to a better world.

#

A few years ago I wrote a commentary for public radio's "Marketplace" on generational generalizations.

Classic Robin Hanson:

I attended a memorial service today, for someone I hardly knew. His family was wealthy and full of energy and passion and creativity. At the service folks wore nice clothes, and were pleasant and polite. Nice food was served in a scenic setting, beautiful music played, and idealistic speeches given, talking about family, dedication, caring, bonding, and intelligence. It was noted, for example, that he did the crossword puzzle daily, in ink.

Such services seem designed to affirm the shared far values of attendees, and to affirm the status of those who achieve such values. But the idea of service like the one I attended appeals less to me, since I put less weight on the values it affirmed. So what kind of service might better affirm the values I hold high, raising the status of people like me who most affirm those values?

Well one thing I value greatly is insight. So I’d like it if service attendees would each share an insight they’d had that day, or perhaps in the last week. Anything about themselves or the world around them they hadn’t quite understood as clearly before.

Another thing I value is honesty. So I’d like it to be clear to everyone that they need not say only nice things about the deceased.  Finally, I value grand ambition, so I’d like folks to talk about how exactly they hope to have a huge impact on the world….

The emphases are mine. Here is the best comment on Robin's post, which only regular readers of his will appreciate. Robin is probably the most original thinker I read.

###

Next time you're in an argument, use this line if appropriate: "Your statement is technically true, but I disagree with the connotations. If you state them explicitly, I will explain why I think they are wrong."

Here's a smart way to make a PB&J.

Chris Dixon is characteristically insightful when analyzing Google and Amazon strategy (links within the post are good too).

Tim Ferriss once passed along the advice, “Buy the most comfortable bed and pair of shoes you can afford. If you’re not in one, you’ll be in the other.”

Prioritize comfort if you’re going to be wearing something every day. Only recently have I appreciated the wisdom of this advice. Growing up I wore more or less the same thing: jeans or sweatpants, t-shirt, and if cold (California cold) a hooded sweatshirt. I hated shopping and had no interest in fashion per se so my wardrobe was a hodgepodge of clothes I received as Christmas gifts, whatever my Mom picked up at Mervyns for me, and whatever I purchased at the outlet stores in Vacaville, CA.

It’s still 90% a hodgepodge of hand-me-downs, and I still hate shopping and still wear that combination most days, but in the last few years I’ve made a handful of targeted, strategic purchases of clothes and footwear that have dramatically increased my comfort, style, and by extension, projected self-confidence.

Shoes — I found via the Boulder Running Store Asics Foundation running shoes. I buy the maximum support version of the shoe so I can easily hike in them too. (I wore them all through Patagonia.) I buy a new pair, exact same kind, every year. I used to never spend more than $100 on shoes. These cost me about $120 and they’re totally worth it. Gretchen Rubin says a true secret to happiness is to wear running shoes all day.

Sandals — I upgraded from my usual Nike or Adidas sports sandals and purchased Reef sandals. More durable, more comfortable, thicker base.

Socks — Any brand is fine, but Thorlos are supremely comfortable, easy to get on and off, and absorb sweat.

T-Shirts — I bought a few American Apparel tri-blend basic t-shirts. So so so comfortable, especially if you’ve only worn “free” t-shirts. They look good. I highly recommend having a couple of these in your closet.

Outerwear — What to wear on the outside that’s not too formal (sports coat) nor too informal (hoodie)? For years I wore my San Francisco Giants fleece to all sorts of business meetings. Now I have two better options: The cashmere sweater from Land’s End (a bit pricey but super soft and comfortable and versatile for both formal and informal) and the lightweight Nike Dry Endurance Jacket which is great for walking outside in chilly/crisp weather or trekking outside in light rain environments.

Pants — I have not found anything better than basic, cheap, loose-fitting jeans and basic sweatpants. Same goes with hoodies.

Travel Clothes — I own a couple button down travel shirts like this one which absorbs sweat, dries quickly, breathes in hot weather, and contains two breast pockets which is helpful for storing things. I own two pairs of super light weight and fast drying boxers.

###

Here’s The Onion’s magazine cover Heterosexual Men’s Fashion, spoofing the NYT fashion issue. People who buy fake clothes / merchandise are more likely to cheat in other ways. The end of the hipster? (I hope so.)