Growth

 

I’m A Loser

What have I done to deserve such a fate?
I realize I have left it too late
And so it's true pride comes before a fall
I'm telling you so that you won't lose all

I'm a loser
And I lost someone who's near to me
I'm a loser
And I'm not what I appear to be

Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone was a winner.

In a zero-sum game there are always winners and losers. A winner has more than 50% of the sum and a loser has less than 50% of the sum. In a game that is more than a zero-sum game, a game which allows growth, that does NOT have to be the case. The growth can be shared by both players of the game. In that case, they can both be winners. The previous winner can have all of his previous share and a percentage of the growth. Because that player has more than what he had previously, he is a winner. The previous loser can have all of his previous share plus the remaining share of the growth. In that case the second player is better off than he was before and is no longer a loser and is also a winner. Only if the previous winner takes more than his share of the growth plus his share of the previous sum will there be a winner and loser. If each player retains his previous share and gets a share of the growth then both players have more than their previous amount and they are both winners.

That is a reason for being against any zero-sum game. In a game where the previous share is retained and the growth is shared among the players, there are only winners with respect to the previous value. It is only if the growth is also considered to be a zero-sum game are there winners and losers. If the previous share is applied to growth then everyone is a winner.

The problem is if the game repeats and on each successive round the share of the growth is the share from the previous round, not from the initial round. Eventually all of the new growth  will belong to the “winner” and none of the growth will belong to the second player and thus that player will be a loser. But it is by definition NOT a zero-sum game because there was growth. The only way to resolve this contradiction is to assume that from the start it is NOT a zero-sum game.

Branding

 

Horse in Striped Pajamas

Look there daddy, do you see?
There's a horse in striped pajamas
No, that's not what it is at all
That's an animal people call a zebra
I see, but it still looks like a
Horse in striped pajamas to me

Whether you call it a "zebra" or "a horse in striped pajamas", it  is only branding!

I just completed a business meeting as a result of the 2024 Presidential election.  It was about rebranding the work to be marketed by our firm.  What was our firm's Resiliency and Sustainability work became rebranded as Redundancy and Emergency Planning.  Same work, just a different name.  What had been our firm's DEI, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, work became rebranded as Increasing Economic Opportunity.  Again same work, just a new name.  This is nothing new. What had been End-of-life Discussions became rebranded as Death Panels.  What had been an Estate Tax became rebranded as a Death Tax.  What had been Anti-Abortion became rebranded as Pro‑Life.  And that rebranding changes the perception of the action.  Who isn’t opposed to death and in favor of life!

When I was a state official, the state had agreed to pay for transportation improvements around the then new Gillette Stadium where the New England Patriots would play. I had to keep reminding the Chief Engineer to say the state was NOT adding new through highway lanes. Those would have been prohibited by the funding source.  But if we were merely adding auxiliary lanes, that would be allowed.  So whether you call him Father Zeus, or call him Jupiter (Zeus Pater?), what is in a name? A rose by any name would smell as sweet.  A name is NOT the attribute.  A name is a just the branding of an attribute.

Random

 

Stormy Weather

Don't know why
There's no sun up in the sky
Stormy weather
Since my man and I am not together
Keeps raining all of the time

Everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it.

Weather is a random event. Climate is a series of weather events. We can’t do anything about the weather. We can do something about the climate. It is like a card game at an honest casino. The casino has no control over the outcome of the next deal of the game. They do, however, and get very rich, in setting the house rules and odds for that game.

Everything is random. As much as we world like certainty, an honest person will realize that everything is random, and is not certain at all. And that should be liberating, not upsetting. If everything is random then your winning is not destiny or because you are good. It is because you were lucky. Similarly if you lose, it also is because it was random. It was not destiny or because you were bad. It is because you were unlucky this time, but maybe you will be lucky the next time. Things being random should make you humble, make you accepting, and make you hopeful. Go forth, play the game, and be lucky.

Commandments?

 

Don’t Stand to Close to Me

Loose talk in the classroom
To hurt they try and try
Strong words in the staff room
The accusations fly
It's no use, he sees her
He starts to shake and cough
Just like the old man in
That book by Nabokov
Don't stand, don't stand
Don’t stand so close to me. 

Is this a commandment or a warning? 

When a toddler hears “ Don’t touch the hot stove”, he may interpret that as a commandment. If the statement is given with the toddler’s safety in mind, with love, it can be a warning that the toddler will not like the consequences of touching a hot stove. The salient point is the consequences of the action. If touching the hot stove will cause harm to the toddler, then it should be taken as a warning, not a commandment. If touching the hot stove will cause no harm to the toddler, then it is correctly taken as a commandment. On this basis the Ten Commandments are more properly the Ten Warnings. No harm can befall an absolute by the action of a human who is far less than an absolute. Killing, stealing, lying, oath breaking, coveting, etc. do NOT cause harm to the absolute, thus they are more properly warnings rather than commands. Do not eat from the tree of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden which would make you an absolute and there is only one absolute, and you are NOT an absolute is a warning because of the consequences, not a commandment. Don’t stand to close to an absolute is a warning, not a commandment, because of what may happen when you do. A commandment is meant to control. A warning is NOT meant to control. Grow up and listen.

Patience

I Want It All

It ain't much I'm asking, if you want the truth
Here's to the future
Hear the cry of youth (hear the cry of youth) (hear the cry of youth)
I want it all, I want it all, I want it all and I want it now.

But some things take time

Wanting it all and wanting it now is childish.  Patience (not expecting that you CAN have it all and have it NOW) is something that we try to teach our students.  The rule is that it takes 10,000 hours to become an expert at anything.  There is an old joke of a pedestrian asking for directions on the streets of New York, ” How do you get to Carnegie Hall?” The punchline is “Practice, Practice, Practice.” The joke being mistaking being on the stage with being in the audience. The original construction of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris began in 1163 but it was not completed until 1260 almost 100 years later.  An oak tree requires almost 40 to 60 years to mature.  A baby takes years to reach adulthood.

If someone, a con man, promises you an easy way, a shortcut, he may not be telling the truth, and may be only trying to take advantage of you. If you want it all, and you want it now, you may find that you get nothing at all and the cnon man may get what you do have.  And that IS the Truth even if it is inconvenient.

Post Election 2024 II

 

A Day in the Life 

I read the news today, oh boy
About a lucky man who made the grade
And though the news was rather sad
Well, I just had to laugh
I saw the photograph 

Which news did you read? 

I made a prediction according to Game Theory, that in the Nov 5th election that  2/3 of the voters would be able to determine the winner in “regulation time”  and would favor Republican policies by 60% to 40% and 1/3 of the voters would go to a tie breaker which would be the character of the candidate. Given that the total popular vote was 50.3% for the Danaid Trump, the Republican candidate, that means that tie breaking voters preferred the character of that candidate over any opponent by 30.9% to 69.1%.  Given that this candidate was a convicted felon, was fined because of racial bias in renting his apartments, has filed for bankruptcy multiple times, his charities were suspended for being used for personal use,  swindled those attending his University, was a civilly convicted as being a rapist,  opposed by those who served with him, etc., it is surprising that this was as high as 30.9% and not 0.0%. 

The problem is that the voters depend on the trusted opinions of others to judge character when they vote.  Many of those trusted sources either did not carry news applicable to the candidate's character (Fox News, News Max, One America News, Breitbart, Sinclair, etc.) or if they did carry the news of behavior applicable to the candidate’s character either “sane-washed” his statements, or because of fear of reprisals,  a misplaced sense of politeness, or taking the “high” road,  put that behavior in the best possible light. When the news goes dark, is it any wonder that darkness results.

Post-election 2024

 

I Will Survive.

No, not I, I will survive
Long as I know how to love
I know I'll stay alive
I've got my life to live
And all my love to give and
I will survive
I, I, I will survive

Sing it loud.

Before the November 5^th election I was prepared to start a blog post with the lyrics of Easter Hymn, The Strife is O’er. In the aftermath of the election I was prepared to start a blog post with lyrics of the Doors, This is the End. But that is behind me and I have calmed down. There is a difference between marginal and effective, relative and absolute, certainty and dominance, free and unpriced. Just because a majority of those voting got confused does not mean that there is no difference. But we will survive.