Backlog 2

Yesterday I posted a number of interesting business articles that I had saved away for a rainy day. Today I give you a backlog of “weekend reads” to peruse.

  • The Day My Grandfather Groucho and I Saved ‘You Bet Your Life’ by Andy Marx: Fascinating story about one of the first and great all-time quiz shows.
  • The Innocent Man (Part 1, Part 2) by Pamela Colloff: The story of a Texas man who spent 25 years in jail for not killing his wife. Couldn’t stop reading this one.
  • We Are Alive by David Remnick: Bruce Springsteen grapples with the differences between the realities of his song material and his life at age 62.
  • A Life Worth Ending by Michael Wolff: Grappling with end-of-life issues and the nasty trade-offs in US medical care. My grandmother is at this stage so the article really hit home.
  • The Once and Future Liberalism by Walter Russell Mead: Thought-provoking piece on US history. We are a nation built on liberal ideas, he argues, whether Democrat or Republican.
  • Not Fade Away by Robert Kagan: Interesting argument on why the economic death of the US is greatly exaggerated.

Hope you’ve got some time to read this weekend. Some are really long but all of them were fascinating, sometimes thought-provoking articles. If you have time for only one, make it The Innocent Man. Unbelievable article. I guarantee you won’t be able to put it down.

Backlog

I’ve accumulated a number of really good posts that I never seem to get around to posting. I thought, instead of sharing them one at a time, that I will share them in a group here instead:

I have been influenced greatly by each of these articles. In particular the last two, Subcompact Publishing and Augmented Paper, are amazing treaties on the future and design, respectively. Hope you take the time to read them all.

FAA To Loosen Electronics Restrictions

The New York Times reports that the FAA may soon loosen the rules for reading during take off and landing:

According to people who work with an industry working group that the Federal Aviation Administration set up last year to study the use of portable electronics on planes, the agency hopes to announce by the end of this year that it will relax the rules for reading devices during takeoff and landing. The change would not include cellphones.

As someone who takes magazines on a plane just for the twenty minutes during take-off and landing when I can’t use my Kindle, I will be very happy with this change. But as Marco Arment points out, there are an awful lot of questions that hopefully the FAA will answer. By this report there is no distinction between “reading devices” and phones or tablets. And if reading is okay, what about gaming? Marco points out a hundred questions… and then why the distinction.

Once Upon A Time We Were Running Out Of Phone Numbers

Twenty years ago the papers were hawking a phone number shortage scare. Actually, this went on for most of the 1990s. The first part of the problem was resolved, if I remember correctly, by allowing more than 1s and 0s as the center number in the area code. Suddenly we could have more numbers because 305 area (Miami/Ft Lauderdale) could now split to include 954. Even 800 numbers could also be 888.

But even with this change the numbers were disappearing faster then they could be created. Phone numbers were becoming cheaper so families were adding more lines. Then faxing became popular so lines were dedicated to fax machines. Then the Internet came about and people wanted dedicated phone lines for accessing the web. And finally cell phones required another new number.

Then sometime in the early 2000s the trend reversed and the papers stopped talking about it. [1]

Cell phones first replaced multi-landline households and then started eliminating landlines all-together. [2] Fax machines, too, started to go away as scanners became cheap and built into every printer. No need to fax when scanning and emailing was just as easy. Finally DSL, cable modems and FiOS replaced dial-up modems and those already had dedicated “lines” so the extra Internet line could be eliminated. So we are back where we started — or at least close to it — with people having a single phone number aimed at their cell phones. [3]

I’m going to think about this example every time the TV or news calls for something being a total catastrophe if we don’t do something. Yes, sometimes intervention is required. GM needed government help in 2008 or millions of jobs were going to go away, making a tough economic climate even more so. Yes, if we don’t do something about Medicare it will bankrupt my generation. But many of the small issues, the ones the papers and newscasters love to crow about as if it is the edge of the world, are resolved “on their own,” whether because the problem ceases to be a problem or whether innovation resolves the issue.

The trick, of course, is recognizing the difference and acting (or not acting) accordingly.

[1] The only reason I even thought about this is because I am re-reading Microserfs by Douglas Coupland, my all-time favorite book as a 20 year old.

[2] If I built a house today I’m not certain I’d even string phone line through the house. Why bother? I’d rather have terabit ethernet lines.

[3] Yes, I’m ignoring stuff like Google Voice that technically is an extra phone number per person but let’s face it, that’s pretty niche stuff right now. And yes the original way was one line per household but expanding to more than 1s and 0s as the center area code number solved that problem, which in and of itself was a relic of the rotary dial system that was fixed with technology in the 1960s.