Category Archives: Business

A better TODO list

(Sent to Atlassian – makers of Jira – an issue management software application.)

Missing layer — per user task list MyTODO:

MyTODO

I’m sure I could think of a dozen enhancements (as could you).
But basically, a simple personal task list linked to content found in the Atlassian cloud. I’d like it possible to use a Surface or IPad to write/recognize text, but plain keyboard entry is fine. And that’s it.

Sure, things like duration spent per task, may be another task type (but things to do, things to remember, things to ask are really all you need). And priority? It’s either hot or not.

Links between tasks would be nice perhaps. And maybe arbitrary HTTP links. But simple is the key here. If one needs complex entry – add a Trello board or Confluence post or Jira Ticket — right?

I’ll stay on line while you guys create this…
Or do you need help?

Oh, and I checked out the Atlassian marketplace: https://marketplace.atlassian.com/ — all the TODO or checklist or tasklist plugins? Yeah, they all suck.

~~~

I mocked this up in Paint, of all things.

 


Death to Amazon

October 8th, 2018
• Submitted The Gribble’s Eye to Draft2Digital publishing engine.

Days elapse…
• All of the publishing venues approve the submission — ACCEPT Amazon.

Why? No one can say. “BLOCKED” read the publishing segment in D2D. Well, fuck me sideways. Thanks you, you Bezosian troglodyte. No email from the Big ASS, sorry AZZ. No indication as to why. Just “BLOCKED.”

A D2D agent was kind enough to inform me (after my befuddled email) that the Big AZZ had blocked my submission because the story was “already available as a blog.” WHAT? You mean the promotion I tried, in vain, to do months ago — they thought “that” was the part-‘n-parcel of the novel I was publishing? You bloody-fuckin’-lame-ass-toads…

(The CME can NOT come soon enough — centered on northwestern Washington state.)

So… I’ve privatized all the Gribble’s content. “No, CrapAzon, I wasn’t trying to infringe upon some website blog with a year’s worth of work in the form of an illustrated novel. (You idiots!)”

– Oh, Amazon is mostly automated (by algos written by bonobos, (sex crazed chimpanzees)) so they can’t really respond, or realize their egregious mistakes regarding prior content on the web… (Bullshit)

– Oh, Amazon is so large that they can do whatever they please when it comes to content. (NoShit – time to die, Amazon!)

– Oh, Amazon YOU SUCK! (Yeah, we suck, every living dollar from the world’s pocketbooks.)

 

 


An occupied mind

My mind is saturated. So much so that the thought of writing original work seems impossible right now.

I’m just over two weeks into this new gig. The learning-tasks I’ve been told to undertake are manifold: a new platform (Microsoft AX — an ERP), a new language (X++), a new business domain (transportation mfg.), a new scripting language (Powershell), and a new and complex build and deployment process.

Needless to say, my mind is fully occupied. So much so that I have zero desire to sit down to pen fiction. Which leads me to ponder the concept of mental overload. I’m quite content right now with my mind being crammed with newness. It’s as though I had this brain-tank that was running at half full for a few years. Into it I could pour all sorts of fiction fancy. I’d fall asleep fabricating new plots and stories. Now? Now, I fall asleep juggling the new business puzzle pieces that have been dumped into my mind.

And I’m OK with it. I’m not going to try and fight the trend. I figure that once I get acclimated my brain-tank will begin to empty and into it I’ll once again trickle oddities and oblique oscillations of thought.

Do you cycle between mental saturation of workplace or family and story time? Or can you keep them both topped-off and bubbling?

 


Old dog: New tricks

I’ve had to take a “real” work-a-day job.

Up at 7 am. There by 8 am. Home by 5:30 pm.

Sitting (and standing) in a CUBE FARM, ALL-DAY-LONG.

Oy!

So, I’ll be wiped for the foreseeable future.

I’ll be learning Microsoft Dynamic AX & X++ for an S&P500 company — maybe it will delay my Alzheimers for a couple of years.

-AM


Anti-trust: Bust ’em up, or?

Clearly Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and a few others are too big, too market expansive, too monopolistic. Apple less so, but the argument would still hold for them.

Those first three are market behemoths with the power and capital to quash any competition — primarily through acquisition. Don’t like that company competing with your searches, online shopping or online ad market? Buy them up.

That’s how monopolies become monopolies. Price fixing (like Apple and Uber) or price gouging, (like Amazon and Microsoft) which drives out competition (or shrinks the competition down so that they become easy acquisition targets), are all tactics to build monopolies.

The Big Three will get disassembled here in the next few years, no doubt about it. The DOJ, once the IBI* in Chief is out of the picture, will get back on track working for the U.S. Citizens.

But what about eliminating the problem created by such companies in the first place?

The below linked Senate Bill tries to do just that. But I wonder if there’s a simple rule that could be put in place that would kill the M&A practice like the evil corporate consolidation game that it is.

What if we use the market capitalization of any company as a filter to determine which companies can buy other companies?

Surely a $Trillion dollar company like Apple has so much cash they could buy nearly any other company they coveted. Apple Buys Uber and then becomes a massive captive distributed transportation monster. Obviously, we’d want to stop that.

So, at what size does a company become too big to allow it to swallow up competition (or expand sideways like Amazon’s purchase of Whole Foods)?

Here’s a simple concept to limit monopolies:
A company that sits at the 90th percentile or higher of market capitalization as ranked on the S&P500 — is banned from ANY and ALL acquisitions.

Right now that would take the top 50 companies out of the possibility of buying other companies. Right now that’s a market cap of about $100B. As this is a percentage, it wouldn’t matter how big or small the actual market cap would be. A simple rule that would severely limit monopoly creation (It might be that the 80th percentile would be better, but you get the point.)

Here’s that senate bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1812/text?r=22

And here’s the list of FINDINGS that were listed in that bill:

(1) competitive markets are critical to ensuring opportunity for all people in the United States;

(2) when companies compete, businesses offer the highest quality and choice of goods for the lowest possible prices to consumers and other businesses;

(3) competition fosters small business growth, reduces economic inequality, and spurs innovation;

(4) concentration that leads to market power and anticompetitive conduct makes it more difficult for people in the United States to start their own businesses, depresses wages, and increases economic inequality;

(5) undue market concentration also contributes to the consolidation of political power, undermining the health of democracy in the United States;

(6) the anticompetitive effects of market power created by concentration include higher prices, lower quality, significantly less choice, reduced innovation, foreclosure of competitors, increased entry barriers, and monopsony power;

(7) monopsony power— (monopsony means only a single BUYER is available)

(A) allows a firm to force suppliers of goods or services to cut their prices to unreasonably low levels, resulting in reduced business opportunities for suppliers and reduced availability and quality of products and services for consumers; and

(B) can result in workers being forced to accept unreasonably low wages;

(8) horizontal consolidation, vertical consolidation, and conglomerate mergers all have potential to cause anticompetitive harm;

(9) unprecedented consolidation is reducing competition and threatens to place the American dream further out of reach for many consumers in the United States;

(10) since 2008, firms in the United States have engaged in over $10,000,000,000,000 in mergers and acquisitions;

(11) between 2010 and 2015, there was a 50-percent increase in the number of mergers and acquisitions reviewed by the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice;

* Incoherent Bloviating Imbecile

 


Warning: You look nice

Gender differentiation has come to an end in the office.

WarningYouLookNice

Hi Sally, you look nice today.

HOW DARE YOU OBJECTIFY ME.
I’LL SEE YOU IN COURT!

The end of any, and I do mean any, kind of attribute acknowledgement: hair length, skin tone (tan), clothing length (or curvature, or clingy-ness, or plunge, or exposure, color, material), weight, height, eye color, anything that is a physical attribute — is over!

Do not comment on ANY work-mate’s attire or appearance. Do not compliment them. Do not acknowledge any change (good or bad) in their physical appearance. If you would not say it in-gender then do not say it out of gender. In summary:

DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THEIR HUMANITY!

You must treat every team member in your office as though they are a robotic member of your team. They have a mind and produce results. THAT IS IT!

This is the world we have created. Never mind that you’re an animal with hormones and desires and reactions and turn-offs and attractions. You WILL NOT EXPOSE YOUR HUMANITY IN THE OFFICE!

Maybe this is as it should be. Every fellow worker is there on their merit solely (right?). They are there to do a job — as are you. Physical attributes of team members should not enter into any of your conversations as you discuss your job.

Unfortunately, gender bias is part of our culture. Men have traditionally been dominant, women subservient — in the workplace. I don’t agree with this historical fact, but it is a fact. The notion that it can be instantly wiped away — is a fallacy. It will take time for the business world to eliminate all forms of gender expression and the corresponding biases.

If you’re a man — stop thinking of women as women. They have a mind and can type ideas into computers or perform technical or tactical work tasks.

If you’re a woman — accept that men are dumb as fuck and will take generations to learn this lesson. So, if you could, do us the courtesy of dressing in man’s clothing while you’re in the office rather than the drop-dead sexy strip-tease shit you wear and then complain when men leer at you.  Kindly wear business appropriate attire while you are working.

Thank you,
The [temporarily-male-dominant] Management.

 

 


Taxes = Happiness

Name the happiest people in the world.
Name the highest taxes paid by people and corporations in the world.

Guess what? They (tend) to be the same people.

This is a simple plot (R code below) of 108 countries plotted by their “happiness quotient” in relation to their combined personal and highest corporate tax rate.

happytax

That line means that, in general, the higher the tax rate, the happier people reported to be (see cite below). This has been documented before. And a new report is due soon that will further elucidate this relationship.

The bottom line? If you take the recent US Republican tax bill that passed (Dec 2017), then what these fools have done is slid the United States BACKWARDS on that line. By reducing taxes (they say) across the board, they effectively want the Citizens of the United States to be more miserable than they are now.

Happy Holidaze!

[R Code]

lmod <- lm(happiness ~ taxrate, data = happytax)
plot(happiness ~ taxrate, data = happytax, pch = 19, 
 main = "happiness vs. taxrate", 
 xlab = "taxrate",
 ylab = "happiness")
abline(lmod)

[Cite:]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/personal-income-tax-rate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report