tales of two cities, special edition - superbowl preview

Bike riding and NFL football. Unrelated topics? Wrong.

One thing I've noticed over two-plus years of city cycling is just how much a good bike rider has in common with a good NFL player. This isn't just a surface analogy, reader, this isn't your local high school coach saying his fastest players have good wheels or a passing observation about how bike riders sometimes use hand signals just like helmet football players do.

No, reader, this goes much deeper, right down to the basic skills and motivations central to the respective crafts. These observations are the Venn diagram of philosophy and action, the result of a thinker taking a doer out for a long lunch. I think the following observations understood in full - and taken with the appropriate degree of seriousness - will help helmet football players learn from the city bike rider, and vice versa.

So, as the Super Bowl - aka The Annual Last Patriots Game Of The Year - approaches, we here at TOA tip our cap to another successful helmet football season by looking ahead to the start of the city cycling season through the lens of this somewhat pointless sport. Below, I've organized a few of my favorite insights from over two years on wheels by helmet football position.

Enjoy, and good luck.

Tim

Quarterback: A one way street is easier to bike on

My first city cycling experience came in New York. My friends and I rented bikes from the Big Apple's version of Hubway, Citibike, and we spent the day cruising through Manhattan and Brooklyn.

I was surprised by how easy biking in the city was. I expected the traffic and the pedestrians and those famous cab drivers to turn the biking experience into a death trap. But no, it couldn't have been any easier if I'd had a police escort. I encountered nary an issue on that fine September day.

When I returned to the game a few months later in Boston, I found my expectations were more accurate. Drivers and pedestrians found inventive ways to cut me off and my fellow bikers were no help. Was Boston a far worse traffic town than New York?

The answer came to me the next summer when I was biking in Washington DC. Many of the streets there are - like New York - one way. And one way streets are simply easier to bike on.

The key difference is how threats are only coming from one direction. This makes it far simpler to keep track of traffic. In two-way traffic, I'm constantly worried by what's coming at me as much as what's going by. Do they still teach left turn technique in driving school? And in looking down the road or across the street, I sometimes miss a more imminent threat directly in front.

This applies to young NFL quarterbacks as much as it does to new bikers. Teams often design simplified plays for new players which require the quarterback to only look at one part of the field. For those not up to date on their helmet football tactics, it works a little like politics - in a simplified offense, the quarterback looks to the left or to the right.

An inexperienced quarterback forced to scan the entire field looks a lot like yours truly trying to sort out the intersection in Porter Square. By cutting down the field of vision in half, there is less to worry about and safe decisions are easier to make for bikers - or quarterbacks - of any experience level.

Full back: Hit the holes hard...

The full back is often assigned the job of blocking. The role is to find the blocking opportunity and step up immediately. By doing this, the player is out of the way while also preventing an incoming threat from endangering a teammate.

Cyclists have this responsibility, particularly in complex city intersections. A tentative rider can confuse following cyclists or invite others into the riding path. The resulting chaos might lead to accidents. A good rider, once the path forward is obvious, must not hesitate.

Running back: ...but be ready to bounce outside

The running back often follows the full back into the thick of the action. The optimal strategy is generally to trail the full back and wait for the right moment to break past him. However, in some cases, the running back must ditch the original design and find a better path. This move is often referred to as 'bouncing outside' because the running back will vacate the center of the field and sprint into space on the edges.

A city cyclist often makes the same calculation. The painted bike lanes and the subtle pull of the rider ahead suggest the best course. But sometimes, reality changes quickly and a shift in another direction is required. Whether to avoid a suddenly opening car door, getting around a parked bus, or passing a wobbly rider, the need to 'bounce outside' is a feeling familiar to anyone who has navigated a city on two wheels.

Wide receiver: Always remember the job description

Pundits, coaches, and even the athletes themselves like to complicate the job description for this position. How fast does he run? How high does he jump? Does he have big hands? Did his dad play in the NFL? Is he on Twitter?

The reality is far simpler. Good receivers in the NFL do two things:

1) Run a route to get open
2) Catch the ball thrown to them

In summary, wide receivers run routes and catch balls. Fail at one or the other and the player does not succeed.

Drivers, pedestrians, and even the riders themselves like to complicate the job description for cyclists. How fast do they pedal? Are they wearing helmets? Do they stay on the sidewalk? Do they stay off the sidewalk? Do they use hand signals? Are they on drugs?

The reality is far simpler. Good riders do two things:

1) Never pass on the right
2) Always be ready to stop

In summary, a good bike rider never passes on the right and is always ready to stop. Fail at one or the other and the rider is destined for failure.

Offensive line: have a plan for traffic

Most football plays start many seconds before the ball moves. During this time, the offensive line studies the defensive formation. Is the linebacker backing away? Does the lineman directly in front have all his weight on one leg or the other? Are the defensive backs responsive to motion or holding their ground?

After identifying the threats, the linemen make adjustments to maximize the play's chances of success. Then, the play starts and they give it their best shot.

Bike riders must do the same at a traffic light. A successful trip across an intersection starts long before the signal changes. While idling at the red, a cyclist must study the pattern and identify imminent threats. Is the car in the left-hand blind spot angled for a right-turn? Does the oncoming car have a left turn signal on? Are there any special arrows or crosswalk features? Are any fellows riders lurching out into the intersection, doing that weird thing where they move their legs back and forth on the pedals, as if the very act of touching the pavement with their foot would immediately cause a lightning bolt to strike them square on the forehead?

All of these factors must be studied and considered to ensure the safest possible passage across.

Defensive end: one move and go...

The end is often assigned the job of pressuring the quarterback. This is a difficult task; the end must cover several yards of ground in just a couple of seconds to get to the opponent before the ball is thrown. Further complicating the job is the presence of one blocker (or more) whose sole job is to prevent the end from reaching the quarterback in time.

Given the constraints, the end cannot dance, bob, or weave. Instead, a good end makes one move - perhaps a bull rush, maybe a spin move, sometimes just a dead sprint around the opponent - and goes for the gold.

City cyclists often get into trouble when they do not commit at an intersection. The approach should always be to get to the other side as quickly as possible - one move and go. Those who coast through without pedaling, drift to one side of a lane, or fail to assert their right of way run the risk of the light changing while they are in the intersection. This leads to possible collisions with clueless pedestrians or distracted drivers whose collective grasp on basic intersection jurisprudence is, at best, self-serving.

Defensive tackle: ...but hold your ground, too

The fastest route from point A is a straight line to point B. In football, point A is the line of scrimmage and point B is the end zone. Most defenses account for this by positioning their biggest players - the defensive tackles - directly in front of where the football starts on each play. The jobs of these players are relatively simple in the sport - engage the blockers in front to prevent the opponent from taking the easiest path forward.

Bike riders are often put into a similar position, usually as a result of sloppy infrastructure decisions. A street with no bike lane or excessive on-street parking often squeezes drivers and riders together into the same sporadically paved space. Like a defensive tackle, the cyclist cannot give in to pressure from drivers employing the 'A to B' theory outlined above. Drifting to one side in order to allow passing is a high-risk tactic. The law is clear in these situations - share the road. A good cyclist holds ground by getting right in front of the trailing car so as to leave no room for confusion.

Linebacker: hit rather than be hit

A linebacker's mentality is vital to the success of the defense. He must find the quickest route to the where ballcarrier is going amidst the traffic created by falling linemen, overzealous teammates, and the sleight-of-hand employed by the opposing quarterback. A good linebacker is often in the thick of the action and usually leads the team in tackles.

Sometimes, though, things go wrong. Often, the linebacker must sacrifice himself to allow a teammate to make the play. This happens very suddenly, like when a ball carrier and a blocker emerge together from a pile and converge on the linebacker. In this two-vs-one scenario, the linebacker must hit the blocker and hope to win the collision in time to get to the ball carrier. If he fails, at least the blocker is unable to hit a teammate.

A cyclist sometimes gets caught in the same trap. It's all going well but suddenly, a car pulls out in front or a parked door opens up in the riding path. What to do? The preferred action is to swerve, of course, and avoid the collision. But a biker can only do this when there is full knowledge of a safe space to the left or right. Otherwise, swerving might bring not safety but greater harm - an unsighted car in the left-hand blind spot or a hard-charging cyclist coming in from behind is a bigger threat in most cases than an angled collision into sighted obstacle ahead.

The move here is to hit the car first. Crashing into a visible car or a door is preferred to being hit from behind by a fast-moving threat. If the rider controls the collision, there is little risk of being thrown into the street and being dragged underneath a moving car. The best way to do it is to get low, if possible, to lower the risk of flipping over, and aim for the back end of the vehicle if possible to limit exposure to the wheels.

Cornerback: don't get caught looking

The corner back is responsible for staying with the opposing wide receiver or covering a specific area of the field. Often, they get into trouble when they are distracted by looking at the quarterback instead of focusing on the player they are assigned or the zone they are overseeing.

Bike riding presents the same temptations. The responsibility is to remain vigilant to threats and keep the eyes on the road. But look, the Charles River! What a view! And is that a new ice cream place on the left? Wait...who's THAT jogging by?

Don't get caught looking, kids. Keep the eyes on the road.

Safety: never commit too early

The safety is often the last line of the defense. A good safety keeps everything in front of him. Only until the ball is upon him does the safety move upfield to nullify the threat.

There are many times when cyclist must adopt this mentality. The best case is when a car ahead is turning into the bike path. It is true in most of these cases that the bike rider has the right of way but I'm not sure if anyone hanging out up there by the pearly gates is going to be very interested. The approach here must be cautious - when in doubt, the cyclist should wait to proceeded until the driver makes it clear that the right-turn is not imminent.

Punt returner: fair catch judiciously

Punts are among helmet football's least predictable plays. Sometimes, the ball is kicked straight out of bounds; other times, the booming ball lands right on the spot where the return man has been waiting all long.

By contrast, if the ball is caught, the scene is pretty predictable - the ball is returned just a few yards before the ball carrier is tackled by half the opposing team.

For such small gains, the risk of losing the ball is not worth it. This is why many returners opt for the fair catch if the punt is not kicked to their liking. The fair catch allows the returner to catch the ball safely without being hit. The play ends as soon as the ball is caught, however, meaning there is no opportunity to gain those extra seven feet described above.

The cyclist often makes a similar trade-off. In many cases, a small gain is possible if a larger risk is taken. The best example is zipping through a red light at an unknown intersection. This could also happen while making a left turn across multiple lanes of oncoming traffic. I can see why the rider might want to make these moves, of course, but when the reward is so small, why not just play it safe? Stick a foot in the ground or use the left turn box instead.

Kickers: practice!

A kicker is a strange creature on the football roster. Though these players rarely get involved, their success often determines the winner or loser of a close game. To do the job effectively requires constant practice in preparation for all kinds of different scenarios. When called upon, the prepared kicker is ready to complete the job.

A cyclist should do the same. On lazy mornings with little else to do, find a good place to practice those problem techniques. If left-turns are difficult, get to an empty street and do left turns over and over until it makes sense. Do the same if using the bike lane on a bridge is intimidating - get out there when the traffic is light and put some time into the craft. On empty streets, practice going as fast as possible - and then suddenly stopping. If you have access to a grassy area, do the same thing but include falling, too.

Trust me, rider, when it comes down to crunch time, you won't know what's coming but you'll be grateful you practiced.

Punters: if it isn't going to work, get out there with plan B

You know what, reader? Sometimes, it just doesn't happen. The rooster forgets to crow, the bread fails to rise, the belt refuses to buckle, and life just goes on, whether your pants are on or not.

In these cases, the good cyclist knows to head for the subway or pulls up the ride-share app. And the helmet football player? Well, mock the punter if you must, but he isn't getting the kick away without your help...

So, do block hard and come back ready to fight - or pedal - another day.

the business bro presents: the how-to book i'm not working on

Hi all,

Let's take another brief break from my 'not writing this book' series.

For today, I asked The Business Bro to step in and offer his perspective.

Back next week with more of the usual crap.

Tim

Genre: How-To / Business Parody

Title: The Daily Micromanager

Estimated publication date: Posthumous, hopefully

I was wandering around a bookstore last April and noticed a plethora of books offering up one-page prompts for budding creators. One book was filled with topic suggestions for journal entries. Another challenged the reader to draw something based on the description atop the otherwise blank page. These were books written by an author...sort of...but to me it appeared as if the reader was doing all the actual work.

Or to put it another way, it seemed like an easy way to get my name on the cover of a book without actually writing a book. Pure brilliance. But how would I do this?

The micromanager was the best idea I came up with. For some reason, these days micromanagement is getting a bad rap (1). I could take up the cause and try to repair this unfair assessment, of course. Perhaps I could even write a book about it.

But wouldn't it be easier to just have everyone else repair the assessment for themselves by showing everyone the way to micromanage properly? If the full-length book is like the dentist with the drill, what I'm proposing is akin to having people teach themselves how to brush and floss properly.

Now, to details. The title plays a little bit on the word because the book would offer one small prompt (editor's note: micro) for budding leaders (editor's note: manager) to implement immediately. I would start on January 1 because business never rests with something like the following:

Think of one way to reorganize the office layout to improve your ability to supervise direct reports...

Of course, I'm not completely lazy. Remember, reader, micromanagers are usually the hardest working people in the office. It takes time to control everyone! So, I'll offer up a solution or two in the back of the book just in case it's one of those days and everyone would benefit from speeding things up.

For the prompt above, I might include this answer:

Build a standing desk for yourself directly behind EACH of your direct reports!

But really, reader, the idea here is for YOU to become a micromanager, not me. So buy a bunch of standing desks and get back to work!

Once I've properly set the tone, the book would settle into a pattern. Early in the week, the prompts will be more direct. Here's one example:

Criticize a colleague with a sentence that starts with the words 'I liked...'

As the week goes on, the prompts will start to look long-term. This is one I just came up with:

Devise an incentive scheme which will force your team to work longer hours in a desperate attempt to win a trivial prize.

The weekend and holiday prompts would encourage some form of work-home cross-pollination:

Identify one process in your personal life which could benefit from a regular biweekly touch-base.

I like the potential for this book (2). Let me know if you want to pre-order!

Signed,

The Business Bro

Footnotes / a finger point here, a spin-off there, and please don't sue me...

0. Parody?

The Daily Drucker is one example of the many similar books to this one. Since my title plays off his, I'll go so far as to say it is the best example of the book I'll attempt to mock/mimic here.

1. Blame game...

And who is voicing these criticisms? Surely, the incompetent employees in your company, the ones who are so dependent on direction, the ones you worry might forget to breathe if you weren't around to remind them! In other words, I'm sure those criticizing micromanagers are the very ones who need micromanagement!

2. Sequel?

Hardly. I suppose this one would translate so easily to one of those 'page a day' calendars that I would just coast off reprinting it in such a form for at least one more year.

leftovers: madness

The battle to exert influence, even minimal, on the disorder of life is one of the basic human instincts.

Marie Kondo pointed this out in The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up. Many are overcome with an urge to tidy whenever faced with a major task.

Initially, I dismissed this idea. But just a couple of months afterward, I caught myself doing this exact thing before I started preparing for a job interview.

Reader, if you need to clean your apartment, I recommend (a) assigning yourself a daunting mental task to accomplish and (b) giving yourself all day to do it.

the bb book club: the mythical man-month

The Mythical Man-Month by Frederick P. Brooks (August 2017)

Good morning,

Welcome back for another round of the Business Bro Book Club. Today’s feature is The Mythical Man-Month by Frederick P. Brooks.

The last time I rolled out the book club concept, my counterpart here got all sniffy about my initiative. For some bosses, I guess 'coming up with a good idea' really means coming up with a good idea they would have come up with.

So, for this week, I invited him over in the spirit of a book club to have a conversation. Hopefully, no feelings get hurt in the process. Please enjoy our TOA-BB collaboration below.

Signed,

The Business Bro

*********

TOA: So, want to summarize the point of this book for the readers?

BB: What, no hello? No how you doin', how you beens?

TOA: I thought you'd prefer to get straight to business? Well, in that case, I've actually been kind of bored, you see-

BB: Ah, no, you had it right the first time, my mistake. Anyway, specifically, Brooks writes for managers of large-scale software development projects.

TOA: Right. Well, having never held such a position myself, I can only speculate on the book’s value for these managers. And since I know you've never-

BB: Quiet, right, I had a good feeling about it. The reviews from other readers were consistently glowing and a lot of what Brooks wrote matched up with my own intuitive sense of the topic. I am comfortable suggesting this book is required reading for those looking to deepen their understanding of this particular role and a decent bet for anyone who wants to learn more about running a project.

TOA: I see. What makes you suggest this book will have appeal beyond just a software project manager?

BB: Well, I think a lot of what Brooks covers is applicable to managers in general. He gets into concepts like growing rather than building a team, for example, which will appeal to anyone with an eye on the long-term challenges of leadership.

TOA: That’s surprising to hear about a book focused on project management.

BB: Why are you surprised?

TOA: Well, I kind of assumed project management was a short-term thing, at least in terms of teams. Once the project is over, everyone goes to do something else.

BB: Wait, well, I’ll get back to that, but I meant why are you surprised to learn this? Didn’t you read the book?

TOA: Why would I read the book?

BB: This is a book club, man, you’re supposed to read the book!

TOA: Still with the book club? Sundays are for reading reviews, I told you to stop with this book club nonsense.

BB: So what did you think the point of coming over was?

TOA: I thought you were gonna talk about the book.

BB: I was, with you!

TOA: Hmmm, I was expecting more like a business meeting, where we talk in clichés and generalities and analogies-

BB: Right, analogies, like how half your posts are written, in analogy, so you can pretend to know what you are talking about.

TOA: Interesting to hear that from you! Actually, not knowing what you are talking about is the only thing you might have any expertise in-

BB: OK, well, whatever, we can have it your way, it's too bad though, since you missed out on some pretty good analogies Brooks was kind enough to include for the clueless reader.

TOA: Why would anything for a clueless reader interest me?

BB: Ha, I see, well, better to never read at all than be clueless, eh? Well, anyway, I was referring to how software projects are prone to being scheduled by your demographic and therefore-

TOA: What demographic?

BB: Clueless customers, clueless workers, cluessless people, clueless. Stop interrupting.

TOA: Whatever.

BB: As I was saying, it’s a lot like going into a seafood restaurant and asking for the meal right away. The chef can tell you to wait or the chef can serve it up raw. A software manager might hem and haw and even arrange a meeting to talk it over with the most sociable guy in engineering.

TOA: Fine with me, I like sushi.

BB: Yeah, right. People like you with no technical savvy don’t get the distinction. Two months later, guess who comes back to complain about a shoddy product?

TOA: That was a stupid analogy. People like you with more suits than knowledge should know better than to serve up a raw meal. If a chef ever screwed up like that, he’d end up fired.

BB: Well, the point is that people who don’t understand the natural schedule shouldn’t try to change the timelines. It’s like how it takes nine months to bear a child. Assigning more women to the job doesn’t bring the baby along any faster.

TOA: That’s the dumbest analogy yet. Only a business bro would even think of using the expression ‘assigning women’ in the context of childbirth.

BB: Whatever-

TOA: Plus, doesn’t that contradict the whole ‘both of us read the book for book club?’ idea? It isn't like if the two of us read it at the same time, it's gonna get read any quicker-

BB: The point is that software projects suffer whenever leaders assume time and manpower are interchangeable. New hires don’t necessarily make the project finish any faster.

TOA: Why would that not be the case?

BB: It’s the nature of software projects, especially large ones. Adding people to the team might reduce the time spent on one part of the assignment. But the new people will have to communicate with the rest of the team. It’s the increased communication burden that slows down the project.

TOA: You don’t need to tell me.

BB: What?

TOA: Never mind.

BB: Right, well as I was saying, if the scope of the project is large enough, the higher communication cost will offset the positive gains from adding manpower.

TOA: Huh. So it’s like having too many cooks in the kitchen?

BB: Sort of, I suppose.

TOA: As long as they don’t serve up raw meals?

BB: Maybe.

TOA: Maybe?

BB: Well, it’s not a bad understanding coming from...an illiterate...

TOA: Excuse me?

BB: I mean, what's the difference if you don't read? Why even know how?

TOA: Oh please, like you ever bother-

BB: Never mind, this is going on too long, anyway, but the problem, I mean, is that cooks generally get involved early in the process. What Brooks really looks at is toward the end. Maybe too many servers at the tables is the better comparison.

TOA: Your analogies need work because you take them too literally.

BB: Your analogies need work because you don’t understand the comparisons.

TOA: You need work.

BB: You can say that again.

TOA: You need work.

BB: Are we done here?

TOA: Wait one second, I did actually want to clarify something else. So this book then is saying - don’t add anyone to projects? Seems simplistic, and a recipe to get sacked.

BB: No.

TOA: But that’s what you said.

BB: I didn’t say that.

TOA: You did.

BB: I said adding people can cause the communication burden to go up.

TOA: That’s the same thing.

BB: What?

TOA: It’s the opposite of the other side, which makes it the same thing.

BB: No, it isn’t. You’re working with a false duality. This is a continuum.

TOA: False duality? Continuum? Are those your words of the day?

BB: I’m saying it’s not like you do the opposite of adding people, what you do is structure the project so it can accommodate more people later.

TOA: And how would you do that, you old business bro, you?

BB: I’m getting there. One way is to add people only to parts of a project where the task is divisible without extra communication.

TOA: That’s obvious.

BB: Right, obvious. I’m stunned by how many concepts you dismiss as ‘obvious’ despite never coming up with any ideas yourself.

TOA: But all you are saying is less talk, more walk?

BB: Well…

TOA: Then it’s obvious.

BB: I think it’s about time you walked.

TOA: Yeah, I’m thinking along those lines, enough talk for now. Same time next week?

BB: What?

TOA: I’ll read the book and come back, I promise.

BB: Oh, don’t bother. I’m going to write my own thing about this book.

TOA: Hmmm, sounds almost like an application of this book.

BB: How?

TOA: Well, by not communicating anymore about it, it’s easier for you to get more ideas across.

BB: Yeah, maybe that’s true, but it's irrelevant.

TOA: I mean, it’s what you just said.

BB: There’s no substitute for the reading.

TOA: OK, fine. I’m gonna do my own review when I finish reading.

BB: That sounds good. We'll need content in 2023.

TOA: How should we split up the topics?

BB: Doesn’t matter to me.

TOA: Well, how about I write my post and you just cover the rest?

BB: You’re the boss, boss.

TOA: OK, then, until next time.

BB: See you later.

i read night so you don’t have to

Night by Etel Adnan (September 2017)

Despite being just sixty-four pages, I read this book over a number of nights days. Each time I got started, I renewed the feeling of having just missed the point. I would stop after a few pages and resolve to try again later when I was in a better frame of mind to absorb the work. I repeated this process several times. After one such time, I looked at the next page and saw nothing. The book, I realized, was over.

My apologies, reader, but sometimes I just don’t have my fastball.

Those curious about this book and seeking a thoughtful reflection should follow this link to a post about Night from Brain Pickings. Surely, if someone with a much sharper head on her shoulders could write such a post about this book, it must have some deeper value. It just didn’t click for me, I guess.

Tim

Footnotes / ongoing blubbering / is that Moya?

0. A distracting title?

I’m sure at least one reader saw the title of today’s post and thought I was going to write about Eli Weisel’s famous account of his experiences as a Holocaust victim. Nope…

My apologies to anyone fooled by the title of this post.

0a. So, you read a book but provided no review and your only ‘footnote’ is really an endnote and it's pointless anyway since it just says the title of the post was probably misleading which is what labelling an endnote a 'footnote' also is and so is this the worst TOA post of all time, I would certainly think so, except for all that other rubbish I've seen around these parts...

As all baseball players know, when you don't have your fastball, it might be a good idea to hit the showers a little early.

Plus, who could argue with this post being the official 'worst TOA post ever'???

See you tomorrow!

the TOA guide to playing the sims

This unofficial user guide has been honed over the past several holiday seasons…

I. Build the tiniest possible house for yourself.

It should have three rooms and the following items to take care of the eight basic needs: a refrigerator and stove (hunger), a comfortable chair (comfort), one window (room), a bed (energy), a toilet (bladder), a shower (hygiene), a phone (social), and a bookcase (fun). A smoke detector and burglar alarm are also good ideas – put the smoke detector directly above the stove and the burglar alarm on the inside wall next to each door accessing the house from outside (at first, you should only have one door). Put the bed in one room, the toilet and shower in another, and the rest of the stuff in the third. Buy the cheapest possible version of each product to save money.

II. Get a military job right away because it pays the best and the hours are good (editor's note: there are no wars going on in The Sims).

Jobs are in the newspaper, delivered two hours after the game starts (and at 9am every day thereafter). If there is no military job available, take the highest paying job on offer and look every day until the military job is posted.

III. Learn to cook by reading a book about cooking from the bookcase.

Once a couple of skill points are acquired, your character should be able to cook dinner without burning down the house.

IV. Build your character’s basic skills, one by one, unless a specific skill is required for a promotion.

If one of the eight needs drops far enough, address the need first, then resume skill building. At this point in the game, treat a friend like a basic skill (so only make friends when required for a promotion).

V. Rinse, wash, repeat…

Eventually, your Sim is going to be free from the tyranny of waking up every morning and going to work. At this point, have a look around and decide what you want to do...

Footnotes / must we state the obvious every time?

0. Mirror mirror on the wall, is this game the stupidest of 'em all...

As I look over this ‘how-to’ guide, I’m struck by how similar it is to my own life.

the haiti rule

One of my favorites songs from Arcade Fire’s highly regarded 2005 album, Funeral, is ‘Haiti’. At the end of the track, the drum beat slowly transitions into the start of the next song, ‘Rebellion’. The way the tracks are cut up on the album allows ‘Rebellion’ to sound just fine when played alone. For ‘Haiti’, however, the effort to make ‘Rebellion’ stand alone comes at the cost of a rather abrupt ending. If someone listening to ‘Haiti’ for the first time did so using a music streaming service and the next song on was anything but ‘Rebellion’, this listener would be forgiven for wondering if someone had prematurely stopped ‘Haiti’.

I first noticed this a few years ago when I heard ‘Haiti’ played over the speakers in a bar. As the song approached its end, I prepared for the transition into ‘Rebellion’. The song slowed, then the drums for ‘Rebellion’ kicked in, then…

Nothing! Or I should say, a new song by a different band. This was ridiculous (though no one around me seemed very concerned). How could it be allowed in the 21st century for a two-part song to be played without its better half?

Is there a (reasonable) solution? There is not, at least to my knowledge. I suppose in these cases regulation sometimes comes in (though regulation tends to focus on more petty matters such as life and death, health and wealth, etc). Still, I hold out hope one day for ‘The Haiti Rule’ - it would declare no two songs with a ‘swerve lane’ are allowed apart when played in public.

Who knows? With this current administration, anything seems possible. Maybe someone can convince President Trump that ‘The Haiti Rule’ would be an important foreign policy accomplishment? I'm sure he could work it into his next tax cut if absolutely necessary...

Until the happy day when the federal government intervenes, however, I suppose the onus falls to our musicians. Bands could get around this problem by refusing to split linked tracks on albums. If the rumors are to be believed, the album is dead, anyway. The time for Funeral is almost gone, the time for a funeral is almost here...

So, bands of the 21st century, why not record longer tracks on your upcoming albums? No one believes those 'play count' tallies, anyway, and this way, everyone wins: if bands start recording album-length singles, we can all start listening to albums again without sacrificing our coolness factor on social media...

the 2017 toa awards - music

Hi all,

At the start of the month, I mentioned that I was working on my 2017 ‘books of the year’ list. Well, I’m still working, reader! Keep an eye out for the final list sometime in the next week (month) or two.

In the meantime, here’s my annual music review. I’ll follow the general outline of the ‘podcast awards’ post from a couple of weeks ago. Specific song links are tucked away into the footnotes.

Thanks for reading (and possibly, listening).

Tim

2017 TOA Music Awards

Last year, I included my music concept as a little footnote on one of the 'books of the year' posts. Let's blow it out a little bit this year and see what happens...

Rookie of the Year: Chvrches

Chvrches, a synth band from Scotland, has always been among a shortlist of common recommendations (others including Mumford and Sons, Alt-J, Elton John, The Alabama Shakes, Norah Jones, The Dubliners, etc). For the most part, I’d listen to these artists, bob my head a little bit, and plug my headphones back into what I already knew as soon as I thought I'd sufficiently proved my acknowledgement of the recommendation.

Chvrches finally broke through to me this year when I came across a Muse cover of their song ‘Lies’. As far as getting into a new band goes, this is about as indirect as it gets (1). But once I was in, I was in. As I explored more of their music, I discovered Chvrches does a lot of covers and this feature is a big reason why I have them winning the ROY ‘honor’ (2).

Chvrches has released two albums to go along with their many borrowed performances. Both albums were good, just fine by me, but I don’t have much insight to add. I’ll instead note that the first time I heard ‘The Mother We Share’, I burst right into tears, but this type of thing has never happened before (and probably will not happen again).

I’m not really sure what to make of it.

Let's move on.

Honorable Mention: vkgoeswild

The reality of the ROY ‘honor’, reader, is that this was a two-horse race between Chvrches and this artist I know solely through her Youtube channel. I just didn’t get into much new music this year, perhaps the surest sign of my recent move into my thirties or, as I call it, The Middle Ages.

‘VK’ has uploaded a near endless set of piano covers on her channel. Her twist on the ‘genre’ is a little unusual because most of her performances are adaptations of famous rock songs. I find piano covers a little difficult to sort out in terms of who is playing well but whenever I find myself on Youtube comparing a 'VK' cover to another's effort, I almost always find myself preferring ‘VK’ and her performances (3).

In terms of her career, well, I’m not sure exactly what VK does for a living but it does appear like her Youtube presence has created some good opportunities for her - the channel turned ten recently and, from afar, it looks she is receiving plenty of positive attention for her performances.

Good luck in 2018, VK.

Lifetime Achievement Award: Yeah Yeah Yeahs

The YYYs are the strangest inclusion in my favorite band list. Their sound is very different from almost every other group I prefer. They do NOT cover other songs and they are NOT great live performers. Honestly, reader, I sometimes go months without thinking about the YYYs (and since they were recently on a bit of a hiatus, I suppose it's possible the YYYs went months without thinking about the YYYs). Given those circumstances, I can’t imagine I count as one of their biggest fans.

But there was a point a few years ago when I listened to them all the time. In my current iTunes file, six of the top twenty most played songs are from the YYYs. When I heard recently that they were resuming touring after a three-year break, I immediately checked out their concert list to see if anything in the area was planned.

I guess for me this band is like certain long-lost friends - I'm perfectly content to remain friends forever, accept that I might never see them again, but ready to catch up on old times in the unlikely event they pop up on tour somewhere along the Green Line.

Most Improved: Of Monsters and Men

I guess I use the term ‘improved’ loosely here. I’ve always liked this Icelandic band. However, I found it hard over the past couple of years to listen to them because OMAM was the only musical experience directly impacted by my mom passing.

I suppose I first recognized this two months after she died. I was having a few beers with my brother on a Friday night. I knew the band was performing in town but I had no interest in going. This was a little strange because in May - two months prior to her death - I was deeply disappointed to be out of town during the weekend they played a show in Boston. Something in me had flipped in those four months, I guess.

The process likely started the day my parents and I listened to their debut album, My Head Is An Animal. We listened as I drove us all home from the Longwood Medical Area. That day, both parents were groggy due to the aftereffects of separate medical procedures. I remember taking great care to maneuver the car around every bump, crack, and pothole on the ride home. Throughout the journey, OMAM set the soundtrack with songs about the wolves and the woods and the world of lurking monsters. As we glided home, my parents agreed on how much they liked the album (4).

It took some time for me to flip the switch back to its original position. It took over a year, at least, because I remained unmoved when OMAM returned many months later for another local show. But it wasn’t much longer than a year, either. For whatever reason, today the difficulty of plugging into their sound is gone. I suspect a new album is out there, somewhere, and hope to get a chance to see them perform in 2018.

Honorable Mention: The Head and The Heart

Like with the YYY’s, this band once was among my very favorites. The momentum faded a little bit after their first album, though, and once my interest started to slide, I found the downward trend difficult to arrest. It didn’t help that their subsequent albums got away from the sound of the first album or that I grew less interested in their genre of music. When they came around on tour recently, I admitted I didn't care, and that seemed the end of that.

Of late, I’m finding my way back into them a little more. I’ve done it with subtraction rather than addition - instead of worrying about recent performances, I’ve just ignored those and gone back to the first album. In other words, I've become the old guy who ignores the new stuff.

But hey, in my defense, I say the facts of those early days remain unchanged. I liked the band on their first album. When you can’t hear something as clearly anymore, one way to improve the acoustics is to block out the surrounding noise.

TOA 2017 Band of the Year: Rubblebucket

Let me tell you, reader: it was a slow music year for me (not Slow Club slow – just slow). Celtic Social Club made my shortlist due to a solid core of songs I listen to regularly (and their excellent concert I attended in September helped, as well). U2 snuck onto the list more so for a year of consistent appearances in my headphones than for any especially fevered stretch of listening. I gave some passing thought to Chvrches or Lake Street Dive but concluded they were significant only for portions of the calendar year.

In the end, Rubblebucket proved a logical choice. They were a relatively new band for me and thus benefited from curiosity and novelty factors other groups did not get to enjoy. However, I cannot deny how much I’ve enjoyed many of their live performance clips and did spend a few library sessions digging deep into their archives for any hidden gems. In a musical year I could best sum up as The Year When Almost Nothing Happened, Rubblebucket did just a little more than everyone else to inch into a deserved yet uninspiring first-place position.

So, congratulations to Rubblebucket...

(Well...sort of, I guess...)

(Better than not winning, we can all agree?)

The Year Ahead...

Let's wrap up with a prediction or two about things I am 100% in control of, shall we?

Since I've never been one to stray too far from my beaten paths, I could see further consolidation freezing my preferences into place as I gain a foothold on The Middle Ages. I’m too old now for new music, you know? But as is the case with all new interests, I suppose I wouldn’t know much about them now, anyway, right? I suppose we’ll just have to see.

What might the awards look like in 2018? In the early weeks of the year, it looks like it could be the year U2 returns to claim another one of my critically-ignored 'band of the year' awards. Lately, I’ve found myself digging deeper into U2’s archives. This could work together with their new album (editor's note: surprisingly good) and my projected first U2 concert to push the band atop the pile at this time next year. For now, let's install them as the favorites to win my band of the year ‘honor’ in 2018.

I’ve also found more to like from Chvrches of late and I could see them making a Rubblebucket-style surge to surprise pundits at next year’s awards. New albums from Lake Street Dive, Of Monsters and Men, or Courtney Barnett could see a resurrection for these former favorites.

The dark horse, again, might be Celtic Social Club. As mentioned above, I enjoyed this band in person and I have a suspicion they might make a return trip to the area in the fall. This year, their limited discography hurt their case but I'm starting to see some promising new work from this group (5). If they churn out a couple more hits in 2018, who knows where it will take them?

Footnotes / musical interludes

0. Coming...sort of soon...

I think a ‘song of the year’ shortlist is in order this year. Just don’t expect to see it anytime soon...

As part of the proofreading step, I separated out my remarks on the concerts I did (and did not) attend in 2017. Those are coming, perhaps a little sooner than the song list.

0a. My updated band of the year list...and foster the what?

1987 - 2006: Eminem (Nelly, Nirvana)
2007 - 2009: U2 (Counting Crows, Passion Pit)
2010: The Killers
2011: Muse (Arcade Fire)
2012: 'Podcasts' (sorry)... (Oasis, Foster The People)
2013: Yeah Yeah Yeahs (T.I., P!nk)
2014: The Head and The Heart (Sara Bareilles, Yeah Yeah Yeahs)
2015: Lake Street Dive (Of Monsters and Men, U2)
2016: Slow Club (Courtney Barnett, Lake Street Dive)
2017: Rubblebucket (Celtic Social Club, U2)

1. For the record, I think Muse plays ‘Lies’ better than Chvrches does...

I suppose the process I describe here is not all too different from a friend making an introduction to someone new. So, thank you for the connection, Muse!

Covers, in general, have always been an important feature for me. I like it when bands pay homage to their influences through a well-thought out interpretation of a favorite song. If I find a band can play a cover well, I would say it increases the chances I continue listening by somewhere between five and five hundred percent.

Anyway...

Here are the links to ‘Lies’ – this one by Muse, this one by Chvrches.

And while on the topic, here is my favorite Muse song of the year – a cover of Prince’s Sign O’ The Times.

2. Chvrches covers

I'll give my approval to 'Do I Wanna Know' by the Arctic Monkeys and 'Team' by Lorde.

A notable feature of these covers is how the performances only vaguely resemble the original version. I'm sure some love it and some hate it.

3. The vkgoeswild awards...

This year, my favorite ‘VK’ performance was the Muse song ‘Madness’.

I also really liked ‘Landslide’ by Fleetwood Mac.

In terms of pure rock songs, perhaps “Summer of ‘69” by Bryan Adams is the best example from her extensive catalog.

4. The runner-up explanation...

Or...maybe it’s because so much of their work sets itself limp in the face of suffering...?

My favorite song from OMAM is ‘King and Lionheart’, a beautiful song about being with a dying parent. My Head Is An Animal in its entirety feels like a futile attempt to outrun shadows in the dark and never-ending forest.

The second album, Beneath The Skin, is like a long meditation on depression set against the ever-present backdrop of the bone-chilling sea.

The only cover I’ve heard them perform is ‘Skeletons’, a YYY’s song appropriate for wakes, funerals, and memorial services.

the comic book i'm not working on

Genre: Comics

Title: No working title

Estimated publication date: How long does it take to learn how to draw?

I suck at drawing. This is why my blog posts are never accompanied by illustrations. But, like I've done with some other skills I'm too lazy to develop, I made myself good enough at drawing to be able to draw one thing well - a cat (1). This is similar to how some people, aware of the potential deadly effects of their singing voice, only sing one song at karaoke (but learn to do it well). Another analogy is for the person in your life who cannot cook, except for that one dish which could be served with a Michelin-star.

As they say, exceptions prove the rule.

The cats I draw are very basic. They are seated with front paws extending straight down in front of bent hind legs. The ones I draw are always two-dimensional. The rare cartoons I've drawn over the years involve these cats. The felines remain fixed in place from panel to panel with only changing facial expressions accompanying occasional thought bubbles. A common cartoon I draw shows a cat observing a situation, making subtle changes to its expression, and conveying some sarcastic insight to the reader.

The best idea I could come up with this litter box of a book would be a cross of Dilbert and Garfield. It would be something like Garfield set in an office or Dilbert with a cat sitting in the foreground. There are plenty of similar concepts already out there - namely, Dilbert and Garfield - but I'm less concerned about competition here than in other genres. In the comic strip field, it seems like most comic strips already resemble one thing or another. I'm sure my blended-plagiarism will go unnoticed (2).

Footnotes / I can fold a recipe into a crane / ways to rip me off

1. Or maybe I'm just only now becoming aware of how to make a hockey puck?

A good example is baking. I can bake up a pretty solid banana bread. Ask me to bake anything else and you will get a hockey puck.

Origami works here, too. I can fold a paper crane. Don't ask for anything else.

2. The losing battle against loneliness and depression...

Actually, something like this would be the best case scenario for my comic...

leftovers: who wants my advice?

These posts explored how people never really get advice from just one person. Instead, they collect bits from all the people around them and slowly arrange the pieces together. Over time, the result is a unique fusion of experience and understanding. (1)

I think this is the goal with my reading. I read several books that look at a particular idea from many different angles. After reading them all, I'm able to sift and sort all the information to form my own unique understanding of the idea.

Some are kind enough to call these understandings 'blog posts'.

Footnotes / is that an Asian restaurant?

1. The unique fusion...so what is this called? The soul? 

Who knows? Who cares?

reading review: fifty inventions that shaped the modern economy

Fifty Inventions That Shaped the Modern Economy by Tim Harford (October 2017)

Longtime TOA favorite Tim Harford guides readers through the fifty inventions he feels are currently exerting significant influence on the economy. Each chapter is short but filled with plenty of information. And as always, Harford’s blunt yet playful insights made the book a pleasure to read.

It seems like Harford collaborated a great deal with the BBC in putting this work together. Back in 2016, he debuted a podcast series through the network titled 50 Things That Made The Modern Economy where he examined the inventions he writes about in the book. Each of the fifty episodes is around ten minutes long. I’m not sure if he simply reads the chapters aloud or if he goes into new directions.

Perhaps this explains why Fifty Inventions That Shaped the Modern Economy reads more like a series of articles than a book. Outside of the general organizing concept described perfectly by the title, the chapters do not rely much on one another. This might mean the best way to read the book is one or two chapters at a time.

However, just because a book can be read a certain way does not mean it needs to. Those familiar with Harford’s past work will know his style makes his books hard to put down. This most recent work is no exception.

One up: One of the final comments in Threads (a book I recently reviewed about the refugee crisis) mentioned the inevitability of open borders. Harford makes a similar point over the course of several sections. He does so in his own way – by filtering the present through the lens of basic economic principles and making the best prediction he can about the future.

First, Harford notes how output rises whenever the factors of production follow demand. This reduces the idle time associated with any production process. A firm able to dynamically adjust its workforce based strictly on market conditions will always fill quotas and meet orders. In human-intensive work, the easier it is for prospective workers to migrate to a worksite, the easier it will be for the firm to hire for open positions. Over time, workers seeking work and workplaces seeking workers will pressure governments to make migration easier. A policy favoring immigration is among a host of options that would accomplish this goal.

Second, he mentions that in wealthy countries immigration works to directly benefit five out of every six people. The trend, again, suggests voters will push for policies that make it easier for immigrants to come into the country. However, the one in six not directly benefited will bear a cost disproportionate to the benefit gained by others. Without the right mixture of public spending and tax policy, those hurt by the process will see their own career prospects diminish. The communities that depended on these people will stagnate. The wrong policies also create the risk of fewer than five in six benefiting if the gains in wealth accumulate near the top. These dynamics might sway voters into supporting anti-immigration candidates and temporarily halt progress toward a more open border policy.

The final thought on the topic comes in his analysis of international travel. Travelers today expect a freedom of movement across borders that is, historically speaking, highly unusual, but this is the exact mentality exemplified by the open borders concept. The way the nature of passports has subtly changed over the years reflects this idea.

At a basic level, the passport is a threat: let this person in – or else. The dynamics of international relations have changed a little bit, however, and now the passport represents something a little different: let this person out – or else. The shift is subtle but significant. Governments tell their citizens to avoid certain destinations not because they will be unable to get in but because they might have trouble getting out. It reflects the importance of economic value in border calculations and illustrates the role a traveler's nationality plays when governments crunch these numbers.

However, the passport is also a form of discrimination based on nationality. In general, societies want governments to abolish discrimination based on accidentally determined characteristics. Nationality is, at the present moment, the sole exception. Perhaps the open borders will concept will really kick on once societies reconsider the passport as unethical for the way it is used as a legal form of discrimination.

One down: A lesser theme of the book is how inventions change the roles groups of people play within societies. At times, Harford looks at how the roles of women in Western societies have changed by analyzing the impacts of inventions like the washing machine or the contraceptive pill. He acknowledges the progress made in the wake of these changes yet also points out how much work remains.

One study he cites to support this point found the gender wage gap in MBA graduates opens up around the time of parenthood. Apparently, the study concluded that women take time off and are paid less for doing so while men barely adjust their work habits when becoming fathers.

I was a little annoyed by this study. I didn’t understand the need for the complexity. Did it really need to look at specific subset of MBAs to reach these conclusions? What a ridiculous use of time.

The core of the issue is far simpler. Organizations either adhere to the ‘equal work for unequal pay’ ideal or they do not. That's all there is to it. These studies fail us all every time they make data-backed excuses for what is blatant discrimination. A person's childcare decisions don't come into the equation if an organization pays equally for equal work. The academics running this study should stop using their diplomas to rubber-stamp excuses and instead just give us all a list of which employers can’t figure out how to pay appropriately.

And if the work output is unequal? Well, I would like to know why anyone would expect equal pay in that case. If the issue is how certain fields pay according to accumulated experience – which is my assumption given the use of the phrase 'gender wage gap' in conjunction with reference to extended childcare leave – then these academics need to stop wasting everyone’s time and just give us all a list of which employers use proxy measures like years of experience, number of diplomas, or past childcare decisions instead of figuring out how to pay appropriately for performance.

Some problems require extensive analysis and some problems do not. The problem of the gender wage gap does not. The solution is to figure out what someone produced and pay accordingly. Maybe some academics find this simple solution boring; I suggest they find more complex problems to study.

Just saying: The way the book is organized made it more challenging than usual to identify general themes. However, eventually I was able to group a few of my notes together. Whatever I did not cover today is coming up soon in a 'part two' post. Let it into your inbox, or else...

One thing this book did not do was consider the relative value of these inventions. Harford himself admitted finding fifty good stories was more important than identifying an official list of the top fifty inventions. But surely, reader, someone should at least go ahead and try to figure out the relative value of these fifty selections? Perhaps if I get bored enough in 2018, I’ll run out another TOA bracket in the style of the infamous Lost In Translation word breakdown…keep your eyes peeled, reader…

i read the wayside school trilogy so you (or your ten year-old niece) doesn’t have to

Sideways Stories from Wayside School by Louis Sachar (September 2017)
Wayside School is Falling Down by Louis Sachar (September 2017)
Wayside School Gets a Little Stranger by Louis Sachar (September 2017)

Sachar, perhaps better known for writing Holes, also wrote these collections of zany stories about a fictional school. The book starts with a description of the construction mistake that made Wayside School a sideways reality: instead of building a one-story school with thirty classrooms, the construction team built a thirty-story school with one classroom on each floor. Since the school has thirty stories, each book in the series has thirty chapters.

The first book focuses mostly on the class at the top floor. There is just about one chapter devoted to each student (except for 'The Three Erics' who, like they do with their first name, must also share a story). The sequels take a wider focus and cover more about the school. In all three of the books, each story is a little crazier than the last.

I remembered all of this before I started re-reading these books in September. What I was not prepared for was how Sachar continuously made small attempts to challenge the young readers (and widely ignored bloggers) he surely expected to read his books. For the most part, these challenges came in the form of clever wordplay. One example is the story about pet day. It read like a wildly confusing version of "Who's on First" thanks to all the students who named their dog Cat, their cat Dog, and so on.

In some other cases, he wrote stories about topics likely beyond what the typical ten-year-old thought about. The aforementioned ‘Three Erics’ story is a good example.

Each Eric, sharing a name with two classmates, is given a nickname by the rest of the class. Since two of the Erics are very unathletic, the kids assume all Erics are unathletic. Thus, the third Eric is nicknamed ‘Butterfingers’ despite regularly performing great athletic feats on the playground.

This logic is applied to the other two Erics. The second Eric is the nicest kid in the school but, because the other two Erics are mean, is nicknamed ‘Crabapple’. The third Eric is nicknamed 'Fatso'. Guess which kid was the skinniest one in the class? The 'Three Erics' story is delightful and charming and cute in the way many of these stories are, of course, but it also seemed like a well-crafted parable about discrimination for young readers to learn from about the dangers of labels, comparisons, and assumptions.

I’ve brought up this idea of ‘challenging’ young readers because it reminded me of a comment I heard on Tim Ferriss’s podcast. In an interview with Maria Sharapova, Ferriss mentioned how he was noticing a trend among parents who raised world-class performers. These parents, Ferriss thought, found ways to constantly share with their kids ideas that were just beyond their understanding. The process of these kids then accelerating their mental development to ‘catch-up’ to these ideas and taking the next step forward in their growth seemed to push them ahead of their peers who were merely making the team, passing the test, or ridiculing their local Eric.

leftovers: the 2017 toa awards – podcasts

Hi all,

As promised at the start of the month, here is my current podcast lineup.

I originally had these in ‘tiers’ but then I thought – why bore everyone? So I went ahead, renamed the tiers after the general structure of a world football team, and organized the shows to fit into the extended analogy of how a team might be constructed. The result demonstrates what shows I rely on, what shows I’m expecting more from, and the compromises I’ve made to get the most out of the shows that don’t quite fit my preferences.

In parentheses, I’ve included the show’s overall rank on my list (top ten only). The ranking is based on just one criteria  – what show do I expect the most out of for a given episode?

The First XI

-The Football Ramble (2)
-The Bill Simmons Podcast (3)
-Men In Blazers (4)
-More Or Less (6)

It’s not quite eleven (though if we counted it by episodes per week, it would be close). These four represent the core of my podcast lineup over the past few years and I think any new show seeking to break into the group would need to be extraordinary in some way.

Substitutes Bench

-Common Sense (1)
-'GM Street' via The Ringer NFL Show (5)
-EconTalk (7)
-On The Continent

Common Sense is the best show I listen to but falls to the bench for its inconsistent production schedule. I’m keeping a close eye on the rumors swirling about the possible end of the show, in fact, and at the moment I am not optimistic about its future. The likely end of Common Sense will be a big loss for my podcast lineup.

As mentioned above, 'GM Street' had a great year but it comes on too inconsistently to make it a regular starter. If the show sticks to a weekly format in the helmet football offseason, I’ll probably promote it to the first team.

EconTalk is like a dependable utility player – content to wait patiently for its turn, always reliable on when called upon, and ready to carry the load for a short time if the starter goes down (which always happens during a time of the year known as ‘The Summer’, mostly because my sports podcasts all produce fewer episodes during this time).

On The Continent is a four-month old podcast that covers football in Europe and it is off to a good start for me. Two of the hosts are from The Football Ramble, my #2 ranked podcast. However, I’ve done shows like this before – notably Football Weekly – and I’m starting to remember why I stopped listening to shows that cover just the news from sports. I’m increasingly skeptical of its future in the lineup.

Reserve Team

-Hardcore History (8)
-Revisionist History (9)
-The Tim Ferriss Show
-Against The Odds

Hardcore History is the most highly regarded show on this list. However, it really is not my type of program at all. The shows are too long (sometimes over five hours) and the topic – history – is not really to my interest. Episodes are posted two or three times a year. I find it’s a great podcast to get involved in very specific, unpredictable situations but – solely in terms of this analogy – the show is completely unreliable.

Revisionist History is Malcolm Gladwell’s show. It’s very good but with only ten or so episodes a year does not come on often enough for a higher position in the team.

The Tim Ferriss Show and Against All Odds are shows I listen to about once or twice a month. I download anytime a guest they bring on is someone I know. If this is not the case, I skip it because I've found over time the shows are not nearly as interesting with an unknown guest.

Youth Team

-Book Fight (10)
-Call Your Girlfriend
-House of Carbs
-The Luke and Pete Show

As highlighted a couple of weeks ago, Book Fight was a major addition to my roster in 2017. I’m not sure of its long-term future, however. Two months ago, I thought it was a cinch for my 2018 substitutes bench; now, I’m wondering if I should limit episodes only to the books or writers I know about.

Part of the reason for this is the performance of Call Your Girlfriend. This show does not really cover anything consistently. Fortunately, the hosts, Aminatou Sow and Ann Friedman, are very well-suited to the challenge of an unstructured show. The potential here is limitless – it could be in the First XI at this time next year. But as the case is with most such things, the downside is also evident – it could just as easily be in the discard pile.

House of Carbs, a podcast ‘for the hungry people, by the hungry people’ is a food-centric show hosted by Bill Simmons’s friend Joe House. It grows on me each week but I must admit the topic is likely going to lose appeal for me eventually. We’ll see if he can keep up the momentum achieved over the show's first six months.

The Luke and Pete Show is, in some ways, exactly like Call Your Girlfriend. I’m familiar with the two hosts – they are half of The Football Ramble quartet. But as also is the case with On The Continent, the challenge of hearing two different shows from the same people each week is significant. It’s been a strong start for Luke and Pete, no doubt about it, but I think I’ll need to see more from the show if it is to remain on this list in a year's time.

Footnotes / retirement party

0. 2017, in memoriam...

While we're here, let’s tip the cap to some departing members from the roster, shall we?

Former Players

-The Memory Palace
-The Moth
-Dear Sugar Radio
-Reply All

The Memory Palace is my surprise cut – the show was, at a time, my favorite podcast. There are no obvious admin reasons (length, host, episode frequency) for its removal from my list. It just simply stopped moving me and, as it turned out, this was important.

I temporarily stopped with The Moth and Dear Sugar Radio when I noticed that repeat episodes were becoming more frequent. During these breaks, I realized something important – I didn’t really miss them. I thank both shows for their years of insight and entertainment and recommend they stop playing so many repeats.

Reply All went through an unexpected decline. This show is the reincarnation of TLDR. Both podcasts are, by mission statement, about the internet. But unlike TLDR, Reply All got distracted by real life. The name difference feels appropriate: TLDR isn't interested enough to care about what anybody thinks while Reply All often gets sucked into trying to please everybody.

I decided to take a temporary break during a particularly dull four-episode mini series about a convicted felon who was (sort of) blogging from prison. And during this time, I realized I didn’t care about a show so interested in story telling, I didn't care about a show that took so long to produce, and I definitely didn't care about a show that sometimes failed to cover its own topic.

they say…

They say practice makes perfect. They say if you do something, every day, you’ll eventually get really good at it. They say an expert is someone who does something for ten thousand hours.

They say.

Whoever said these things did not just emerge from a port-o-jon. Every time I enter one of these modern marvels, I’m struck by the huge mess it is inside. Does anyone look? Does anyone aim? Does anyone care? Maybe these toilets burp.

now, I’m no scientist

In 1847, doctor Ignaz Semmelweis of Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic proposed a revolutionary new safety technique. The Hungarian’s idea helped his team significantly reduce the transfer of germs and bacteria from sick patients to vulnerable new mothers. At the time of his recommendation, doctor's wards had three times the mortality rate of midwives' wards; once his practice caught on, this difference disappeared.

Today, this practice is known as 'hand washing' and it is considered both basic and necessary hygiene for all medical personnel. For situations where the traditional ‘soap and water’ option is unavailable, alternatives such as hand sanitizer have been developed. The technique’s success has led to its adoption outside medical facilities.

But despite the obvious benefits, some contend we have gone too far in the direction of cleanliness. They point to over-sterilized environments as explanatory variables for the incidence of rare allergic conditions. The broader point is whether what applies to newborns and recovering mothers does so for healthy people going about their everyday routines.

The debate follows a fairly general pattern seen whenever a new practice is adopted. First, an idea is developed to solve a significant yet specific problem. Second, general principles are discovered and applied on a wider basis to similar issues. Third, new problems emerge which may be direct results of the application of these principles. The backlash against the original idea is the fourth and final step.

I’ve ranted and raved in the past about the ‘debate club mentality’ for fostering this idea of ‘allowing everyone their say’. Debates are healthy (and fun) ways to understand a topic better and work out answers to tricky questions. But if everything is subject to debate, I worry. A debates reframes the question - is this true and, if so, how should I live in harmony with this fact? - becomes - did my opponent convince me? or can I trust my opponent’s conviction?

Put another way, the ‘debate club mentality’ becomes dangerous when facts are framed as opinions and winners are determined not by the validity of the position but by the force of the argument. Rather than tying us all into a unified progression of building knowledge on shared foundations, it forces people to act individually because they “always know what’s best” for themselves and their families.

Footnotes / imagined complaints

0. Can we have an example?

Step one - The debate club is created to help students learn how to make arguments.

Step two - People begin to ‘debate’ outside of debate club.

Step three - Insightful bloggers notice debates occurring about topics not obviously suited for debate.

Step four - A backlash against debate clubs…

the novella i'm not working on

Genre: Short story / novella

Title: 'Riptides' / Riptides

Estimated publication date: Hey kid, I send this to The New Yorker every Friday. So go ask them.

In October of 2016, I had the opportunity to dig up a number of my college notebooks, binders, and textbooks. One of my discoveries was the portfolio from my sophomore year creative writing class. It was a crystal ball of sorts predicting the future known as TOA: self-indulgent critiques of other people's work, pompous reviews of stories I barely understood, and even a diary-like entry about a day I (apparently) spent entirely apart from all electronics.

There were also my first two proper attempts at short fiction.

The first story seemed like something I would write if I were imitating my conceptualization of a short story. The story involves A Ho-Hum Event leading to A Bad Thing. As the narrative progresses, the protagonist struggles to do The Right Thing. We readers see through key passages that the protagonist is A Good Person who is also A Flawed Person, or just human. The story concludes with an event which may or may not represent The Growth Of The Protagonist.

I thought my professor's comments were perfect: 'Tim, this story has a beginning, a middle, and an end.' I returned this work to its rightful place at the bottom of the storage box.

The second story was a different...er, story. The basic plot involved a kid just younger than my age at the time, around eighteen, struggling to determine if his late father was a heroic or a tragic figure. He does this as he kills time during the summer before leaving for college.

There was also a slow-dawning of understanding here, a subtle undercurrent if you will, regarding the mediocrity expected of him by his world: get a degree, get a job, get out. Is that all success means? He tries to put these two parallel threads together and the result is a meditation on the wisdom of swimming when there is a great risk of sinking.

The process of recently reading the story was a little shocking to me because I have no idea how I wrote about those ideas. What experience was I drawing from? What observations did I base it on? Still, that's what the story was, and that's what I'm currently not working on at the moment.

I was not shocked at all to see how wildly different the first and second drafts were. In fact, only the title survived the first revision. I might not have been a good writer by any stretch in college but I did give this class the same huff-and-puff I brought to the coursework in my majors.

I bet all my effort led to this real critique from my professor: 'Sit on this one for a while.'

It's been a decade, and counting.

leftovers: elements of style

I was further reminded of 'omit needless words' when reviewing a Q&A featuring Dr. Richard Hamming.

In response to a question asking him to weigh the relative effectiveness of talks, papers, and books, Dr. Hamming first acknowledged the necessity of each medium before concluding - in the long-haul, books which leave out what's not essential - will be the most valuable.

Knowing it all is well and good but most of the time capturing the essence of the topic is enough.

Footnotes / well, it's actually an endnote, but who cares?

0. Link to the talk...is...

Here!

reading review: impro, part three

Hi all,

Today’s post will be like last month's post about teaching lessons from Ken Johnstone’s Impro. The focus will be on his insights into education.

Good luck, reader.

Tim

*********

Insisting on categorizing and selecting is a form of violence. Is one flower out of many more beautiful than any other?

An intriguing insight. I suppose most people go through life perfectly unconcerned about their insistence on creating and sorting people, places, or things into wholly arbitrary categories. It’s perfectly natural, they might say, before going on to apply another needless label. Then, one day, they are shocked when acts out of its nature.

They also find it difficult to grasp The Advanced Concept of not making comparisons. It’s perfectly natural, they might say, before going on to make another needless comparison. Then, one day, they are shocked when something better is still not good enough.

I always resist whenever someone places me into a category or compares me to something. I’m not sure exactly why I respond in this way. Though I never feel like I’m under attack, I do wonder now if my response is partly related to this idea of violence Johnstone brings up.

*********

Being an artist is difficult because it requires going against the instincts honed through education.

I often hear variations on this theme. It makes sense to me. I’m not sure why any of what I learned in school would help me in writing. I know less about other creative pursuits but feel a similar dynamic applies for musicians, painters, and so on.

But is the statement true for professions? I think all working people learn on the job; not everyone applies their lessons from school.

There are also a host of life skills that do not benefit from classroom instruction. It does occur to me, however, that these skills like saving money, optimizing health, or building relationships might benefit simply from better classroom instruction. I guess this area remains an open question.

There is a degree to which going against instinct is essential for survival in modern society. When I woke up this morning, my instinct was to remain in bed. When I walk past the ice cream stand later, my instinct will be to go inside. I’m sure married people sometimes have ‘instincts’ about new people they meet.

The difference between people and all other animals is our ability to acknowledge instinct before doing something different.

*********

Watching someone come up with a spontaneous response reveals the degree of education’s influence. Instead of just saying the first thing to come to mind, this person will pause until a context for naming 'the right answer' is created. This is, after all, how the concept of 'answers' has been taught in school.

This one seems to go pretty well with the prior quote.

I recall struggling with various versions of this over the years. I remember trying to write a short story in third grade and worrying about the effects of using certain friends’ names for characters. Would I offend the friends I left out? Or would I perhaps reveal which friends I thought most of through their relative prominence in my nonsensical tales? (Back then, I assumed everyone I knew would read my stories.)

I think a lot of people worry about others reading into their innocent answers. If someone asks me to name a color and I say ‘orange’, well, does this mean I’m about to order orange juice? Or perhaps this is a subtle hint that I want a new basketball for Christmas? Somewhere way down the list is the reality: I was asked for a color and I said orange. Next question.

*********

Are children immature adults? Or are adults atrophied children? It is worth questioning whether the bitter, uncreative, or hostile adult is a natural result or merely a person damaged by upbringing and education.

This quote brings to mind an insight I read earlier this year about how adults interact with children. The basic idea said a lot of adults act warmly towards children because they do not fear a child’s ability to hurt them. I absorbed the idea and considered how it applied to me.

I decided to ask myself anytime I wasn’t automatically warm with another person - a 'fellow adult' if you will - whether my demeanor hid an underlying fear of being hurt. I found much to my surprise that this indeed was almost always the case.

If I consider this above quote in reverse, what it seems to suggest is that adults who are hostile towards me fear the possibility of imminent hurt. Hostility is a defense mechanism.

My role in these interactions becomes creating an immediate sense of safety. If I fail to do this quickly, the conversation is going to peter out.

*********

The more direct or obvious someone is, the more original it appears to be. Trying too hard to be ‘original’ often shows someone who is worried about perception. These people should simply say what first pops into their head. The key is to stay true to the self. From the self, originality follows.

I’m reminded of the storytelling insight I shared in my first reading review for this book. A good story, Johnstone suggests, explains how a routine was interrupted. A good storyteller focuses on the interruption while a bad storyteller gets caught up in trying to make the routine more interesting.

I have some friends I consider authentic. These people have a directness to their approach that brings out their originality or creativity. When they tell a story or share a funny anecdote, they talk about an interruption in their otherwise mundane or obvious routines.

reading review: the hard thing about hard things, part four

Over the past couple of months, I've shared examples highlighting Horowitz’s ability to cut straight to the core of an issue. Here are two other examples of the same from The Hard Thing About Hard Things.

The first example addresses contingency planning. A lot of business leaders have clear-cut contingency plans for worst-case scenarios. They know, for example, just what they would do to save the company if it were about to go bankrupt.

Well, if the best move is so obvious, why not just do it now instead of waiting to go bankrupt? In a lot of cases, figuring out how to make the move prior to reaching a true crisis is a lot better for the organization than waiting for rock bottom. And if things go well, there will be many more resources available to execute the plan than there would be if the company was running out of money.

The second example applies to firms who employ 'at-will'. Sometimes, an employee will get a new job offer and announce his or her intention of leaving a company. If the employee is a star, there will be a temptation to present a counter-offer and convince this person to stay. Deciding whether to do so is a decision that largely comes down to the individual in question and the organization’s ability to quickly fill vacated positions.

However, if a counter-offer is made, it comes with the likelihood of leaks. The employee has probably told a number of people in the organization about the new job; suddenly, things have returned to normal. Even if the employee keeps quiet, others will probably guess what happened and understand the best way to get an off-cycle raise is to generate an offer from a rival firm. As Horowitz himself points out, when a company publicly responds to squeaky wheels, it should prepare to start using a lot more grease...

true false racist!

Hey all,

This is very much a 'part two' from Tuesday's post. Please refer back to it before proceeding...

Thanks for reading,

Tim

*********

Let's play a round of true-false-racist...Miso Hungry, reader, is it true, false...or racist? Let's break it down, one option at a time, and see if we can't reach some sort of a conclusion.

There is not much of a case for 'false' here. The use of the expression involves Japanese food and a description of hunger level, both appropriate when used separately by a restaurant seeking to draw in customers. The factual accuracy here rules out 'false' (1).

So, is it true? I suppose a hungry person with a particular hankering for soup might say 'yes' without malicious intent. It's a pun and puns are in good fun, right? And the 'Me so...' opener is commonly used in mimicking or parodying 'the hungry brute'. The 'me so hungry' line would not be out of place in a caveman movie. There is certainly a kernel of truth here (and definitely an escape route for anyone looking to deflect the question I'm posing here).

But I think the racist argument is solid. 'Me so..' is not just Fun For The Neanderthal Family. It's a cruel imitation of broken English. Is it coincidence that the way a native Japanese speaker might describe their hunger sounds an awful lot like this expression?

Perhaps.

But do coincidences excuse racism?

Verdict: racist

Footnotes / the internet is judge, jury, and...

0. An article I was unaware of at the time I started writing this post...

Could the 'Miso Hungry is racist' position be strengthened if others used the expression without the word 'Miso'? I searched Google for such an example and found one out on the west coast. A food truck in the Bay Area called 'Me So Hungry' serves burgers and fries. Well done, Me So Hungry, for at least attempting to sidestep the issue...and perhaps, for sealing the fate of Miso Hungry today.

By the way, I'm not here to suggest 'Me So Hungry' gets off the hook - this story is perhaps a crystal ball into the food truck's future...

1. I think we need a better expression but for now, it'll do...

I'll use the expression 'factual accuracy' in the book quite a bit, I think, at the risk of offending lazy readers, since it seems to best describe cases where I've ruled out 'false' but have yet to decide between 'true' or 'racist'

but do we pay the sticker cost?

In last week’s post (if you missed it, this covers the basic idea), I casually mentioned how vendors in Cambridge are required to charge ten cents at checkout for each bag used by shoppers. This is a well-intended policy aimed at reducing the city’s use of disposable bags but, like any such policy, creates some interesting consequences I’m sure nobody anticipated at the time the law was passed.

This new law challenges retailers to consider the way they separate customers who already bought something from those who are carrying an item to checkout. This is especially important, I suspect, for stores where the registers are located away from the exit. Shoppers who check-out but decline a bag will need to carry their items right through the front door, perhaps in the process resembling a bold (or dumb) shoplifter.

The HMart addresses this concern by placing ‘PAID’ stickers on items as they are paid for at checkout. I suppose the idea is for me to wave my bag of frozen dumplings at security, sticker plainly visible on the packaging, as I walk out? It doesn’t seem a bad plan.

It does make me wonder, though, how much a sticker costs. If it costs more than ten cents (unlikely) I wonder if the HMart will start charging for those, as well? And what about the cost to the environment? Reducing the number of bags helps but only if nothing else replaces the litter. Plus, since stickers are sticky - aren't you glad I’m here to clear this up - cleaning up discarded stickers might in some cases be a little tougher than just scooping up loose bags.

hustle is hard work

Good morning,

A few days ago, I posted a short blog about how my college basketball coach approached feedback. One thing I left open at the time was the question of how to apply the lesson I learned over my four years on the team to the challenges I might encounter as a budding Business Bro.

I thought Ben Horowitz shared a good example of how to approach this task in The Hard Thing About Hard Things. He helped his product managers better understand his expectations for their role with a document called ‘Good Product Manager, Bad Product Manager’. (Those interested in reviewing the document before continuing with this post should CLICK HERE.)

There are a few things that immediately stick out about the document. First is the lack of explicit instruction. This document is not designed for someone just starting out in the job – it is targeted at the seasoned professional who has mastered the basics. For the newest members of the team, I’m sure there were more appropriate materials available like process documentation, FAQs, or how-to manuals.

A less obvious but perhaps equally important feature is the way these examples do not refer to critical functions of the team. Horowitz describes how to break down a problem, the right way to communicate, or the definition of success. The direction he gives helps his team understand how to do the work, not what to do, because the question of how is really a cultural one and the challenge of creating the right culture is giving it the appropriate amount of space and time to grow.

The final feature I noted was how his notes all seemed to generalize from very specific examples yet never included the detail required to identify a specific incident or individual. It's a good example of the idea I explored in my post last week - direct criticism to the team rather than to an individual. Instead of berating a specific person for getting a report in late, the document mentions the importance of discipline and notes how getting a report done on time exemplifies a disciplined approach.

I once wrote a similar document to help set expectations for a team of analysts. It was not the polished piece of writing I aim for around even these parts (and I don’t plan on posting it any time soon). At first, the document was met with dull stares and confused follow up questions. For the newest members of the team, my effort did not make any sense because the generalized references to past errors did not resonate with them.

But I think the overall result was very effective. By creating my own version of the document, I demonstrated my resolve to set clear expectations rather than micromanage performance. The document set guidelines and defined the decisions I wanted others to make on their own. The team was a little more inclined to try and resolve their own problems and a little less likely to waste time worrying or complaining about forces beyond their control.

I struggled to describe what I saw as the most important effect from the document for a long time. I finally found the wording I needed in Fred Brooks's Mythical Man-Month. A strong team, Brooks points out, values hustle, a trait he defines as moving a little faster than necessary. Teams that do this, he points out, create cushions to absorb the impacts of unforeseen events and try to resolve errors or make up lost time on the day of the problem rather than waiting until later.

In the weeks and months after I finished the document, I noticed we were getting our error rates down and our throughput up for our various reports and data products. Although I did think the document was partly responsible, I didn’t understand exactly what the connection to it was. Brooks using the word hustle helped me see it in hinsight. Hustle is a concept I understand better.

Hustle isn’t the same thing as working hard. We were all working pretty hard. No, hustle is doing something as soon as it becomes evident it must be done. Hustle is chasing down lost causes just in case something changes during the pursuit. Hustle is setting a standard, just because, and holding ourselves to it when others would accept less.

This wasn’t always happening in my team, I thought. Perhaps our lack of hustle explained how sometimes work piled up at the back-end of a process. Or, maybe a little extra hustle would finally prepare us to work around the server-induced delays we had experienced many times before.

So, how did I go about defining hustle? I mimicked the layout of Horowitz's document and tried to list pairs of behaviors where one behavior demonstrated hard work while the other demonstrated hustle.

Getting a group together and thoroughly discussing how to change our process in response to a new contract, for example, is hard work. But reading the contract before the meeting is hustle.

Sending a professional and timely email to ask a colleague for help with an urgent issue is hard work. Picking up the phone or walking over to someone’s desk to get help right away is hustle.

Working through lunch, asking out of meetings, and turning up the headphones really loud to finish up an important project is hard work. But coming in early to do it before all the other demands of the day have sapped the energy level or sticking around later after you've kept your commitments to your colleagues is hustle.

The difference between hard work and hustle, I think, is humility. The hard worker is driven forward by a sense of agency. For this person, each reward is fully earned. Hard workers reap what is sowed. If something comes up and the work doesn’t get done, well, hey, not my problem! If everyone worked as hard as ME...

The hustler is a lot like the hard worker. But the difference is a humble acceptance of what is beyond control. Hustlers do not know any better than the hard workers what the delay is going to be. But instead of throwing up their hands and saying ‘not my fault, I worked hard!’ hustlers focus on what little remains in their control. They get the work done as early as possible so the work isn’t compromised by unseen delays. They never have a Plan B because Plan A accounts for all the contingencies.

Good teams need both of these qualities to succeed. But of the two, hustle is a much harder quality to instill in the team. This is the power of a document like ‘Good Product Manager, Bad Product Manager’. It doesn't blame an employee for being late to the meeting – it just points out how some people in the same situation, somehow, managed to arrive on time. It forces people to identify what they can’t control and makes them work on minimizing the effects of those things rather than worrying about the unpredictability of unknown events.