The Theme of 2010

The first year of a new decade is met with some optimism. Maybe this is the year we'll finally get out of the banking crisis, the year we turn climate change around, get married, get a promotion, get children. But considering what actually happened this year (locally), I cannot come to any other conclusion that we've had a year of missed chances.

• Lost World Cup Final. Didn't win World Cup hosting rights. Kramer missing his lane switch.
• A government that promised change, really didn't change anything. Even almost turned the clock back to 2002, by almost imploding.
• The economic upturn got a bit sidetracked by a myriad of concerns... like entire countries that actually can't pay for shit anymore.

So I don't think it's strange to take a look around the world how other folks are doing. I'm off!

A Serious Request

I fully support the cause that Serious Request supports. Strangely enough I don't really care which cause that is. This year it's about AIDS-stricken orphans, last years they supported water-deprived people, malaria victims, war refugees, land mine clean-ups... Now I trust 3FM to choose a cause that garners at least some sympathy, but by rotating the cause there's an underlying feeling that the event is more about the event itself, rather than the cause, i.e. I give money regardless which is the good cause du jour.

The money raised is also a contentious point. We need to measure how successful a money-raising event is, and usually the amount of euros is the most clear one to take. It's just so powerful that it can actually influence what people bring in afterward. It makes it important to carefully orchestrate when money is counted to the overall total. It's like voting and polls, if the result is already clear from the outset, subsequent people won't bother showing up.

And what if the goal is to raise as much money, if not more, without the government's support? It just makes the government say, "good, the people give themselves anyway", rather than the government itself deciding on handing a lump sum of tax money without the constituency choosing to do so.

I like what 3FM is putting together each year. It's becoming a tradition that we all look forward to come December. But at this point, is it wrong to feel more sympathy for the guys (and girls) in the house itself and the personal stories of people giving than the actual theme of the event?

This sums up the year for me

... and it happened one year ago.

As it stands, no matter if you are the best athlete in the history of everything ever, the goose with the golden eggs, or a billionaire heiress, Corporate America has no problem kicking your ass to the curb. Don't get caught sleeping around!

(Actually, the actual news item I think sums up the year are the Chilean miners rescue.)

The Movies of 2010

This year's batch of movies has been largely below radar. There were some noteworthy releases, such as Iron Man 2, Tron Legacy, A-Team, the inevitable Potter movies (which they just had to stretch out into two parts) and The Expendables, but the best releases were the indie titles or the titles that gained traction through social media.

In fact one of those movies was about the pre-eminent ambassador of social media (The Social Network). The list of best movies includes Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim, and Inception, which actually provided something new to the mainstream: either a full-on introduction to comic influences in Hollywood storytelling, or a strong plot that surprises, inspires thought, and truly turns your head upside down.

Strangely enough few of those "Best" movies appear on my favorite movies list for the year. Date Night surprised me with a non-annoying Steve Carrell. I liked Kick-Ass more than I thought I would. Of the big blockbusters The Expendables was the most formulaic, and yet the safest bet. I thought Iron Man 2 was a matter of cramming too much into one movie, and was inferior to its predecessor, despite the brilliance of Downey jr. I even liked A-Team over IM2, although A-Team was really far over the top. Plus, except for two cameos and loosely tied characterizations, the movie had nothing to do with the original TV series.

So all in all, very little of which we anticipated greatness, actually was. If it was any good, we didn't hear about it until far later on Facebook (in fact, it probably was the movie about Facebook).

Unless you happen to be a teenage girl with a thing for vampires. Then 2010 went on like gangbusters.

The Games of 2010

Video gaming in 2010 has revolved around just a few things: motion control, 3D and digital distribution. I do have to say only the last one is truly game changing. Motion control is a fad that the Wii started way back when, and only now have Microsoft and Sony caught up a little. 3D is also somewhat of a fad, especially since we haven't really found a good form of entertainment after Avatar that made somewhat good use of 3D.

Digital distribution has taken off now, and for the first time becomes a real threat to traditional brick-and-mortar retail. Only big games and special editions justify going to the stores for your video game content, and even that is getting less and less.

It means that the days of HMV, Free Record Shop are numbered.

Apps and games are now the major digital heavy-hitters. iPods and iPads are truly getting a whole new audience into (casual) gaming. For very little money as well (a buck, maybe two gets you hours of fun). Strangely enough a title like Angry Birds is more well-known than a premium title as God of War III.

It means the days of proper big name games are also numbered.

Gaming-wise we're back to sports games for the season, but other than having a good-looking and solid presentation, I'm still pissed player clipping is not resolved after all these years.

Top 10 Games in 2010

1. Madden NFL 11
2. NBA 2K11
3. StarCraft 2
4. MLB 10 The Show
5. God of War III
6. NHL 11
7. Red Dead Redemption
8. Final Fantasy XIII
9. FIFA 11
10. Gran Turismo 5 (just to spite it for making us wait 5 years for what amounts to Gran Turismo 4 HD)

The Music of 2010

This year social media is truly taking over music. Vidzone, Spotify, Soundhound, Shazam, iTunes, Pandora, Last.FM are transforming the way we discover and listen to music. FM is no longer cool, streaming music over WIFI and through your cellphone is where it's at.

Now this year I'm listening to a varied bunch of tracks. I'm clubbing to urban music (Rihanna, Usher, Flo Rida), rediscovering rock from early to mid last decade (Saliva, Enter Shikari, Bullet For My Valentine), moving to contemporary dance (Ricky L, Yolanda B Cool, Fake Blood). And I have developed an appreciation for world music (Kassav', Malu, Mehad Hamed).

And you really can't get around Katy Perry this year. In some shape or form she's always on the radio this year. Same can be said about Lady Gaga, and Kesha (although the latter in negative connotations). Then there's this rotation of smooth black artists, from Usher, to B.O.B., Jason Derulo, and Flo Rida, who take up the rest of the air time.

I also greatly enjoyed several albums, which as convention I get from iTunes. I don't miss having a physical CD and box, and it saves me a lot of storage space. Now I just have to keep my iPods somewhere. Do You Want The Truth Or Something Beautiful (Paloma Faith), and Deleted Scenes From The Cutting Room Floor (Caro Emerald) are absolutely fantastic, and in a pinch I enjoy Bells (Laura Jansen) and Balloon Over Paris (Elske DeWall) quite a bit as well.

The top 10 tracks this year are extremely hard to qualify. Especially since I've been rediscovering songs from all over and across all decades, not just 2010. I have to limit them somehow, so only songs with regular popular airplay in the past 12 months (give or take) are eligible.

1. The Heavy - How You Like Me Now
2. Band Of Skulls - I Know What I Am
3. Eminem - Not Afraid
4. Robbie Williams & Gary Barlow - Shame
5. John Legend, The Roots, Common & Melanie Fiona - Wake Up Everybody
6. Eliza Doolittle - Pack up
7. Eminem ft Rihanna - I Love The Way You Lie
8. Aloe Blacc - I Need A Dollar
9. B.O.B. ft Hayley Williams - Airplanes
10. Hurts - Wonderful Life

Funny how the top two tracks are prominently featured on MLB 10: The Show.

Honorable mentions: Jurk! - Zou Zo Graag (twee armen vinden, die me lang en lief omhelzen zouden), Undisclosed Desires, I Made It, Little Boots and Lady Antebellum. Also the Black Eyed Peas, but for all the wrong reasons.

Album Du Jour: already the early favorite to album of the year for 2011, 21 from Adele.

Behind The Times

I feel old.

With people now using Facebook, Twitter, FaceTime, IMs to communicate it leaves very little room for meeting people the traditional way: in person, face-to-face. I used to think, and in many ways still think that the relationships we have in person are more valuable than the ones made online, or virtually, or at a distance.

But the generation that comes after me doesn't do things this way. Relationships are not valued in the way that I did. People don't meet each other in person, in depth too much, but they do it more frequently, more rapidly. They broadcast in 140 characters or less everything there's to note about them. And in fact, if you think about it, most conversations you have with your friends and family don't amount to much more than headlines on your iPad or a tweet.

The technology we have allows us to connect much more rapidly with a much wider range of people, albeit at the loss of personal depth, loss of tactile response, and the loss of privacy. Is it worth it? Not sure. But it is inevitable.

I'm so behind the times.

Complaining and Laziness: Bad Combo

A crisis is a crisis. People get laid off, companies go bankrupt. And people can complain about their job losses and wage freezes and so on. But you have no right to complain about there not being any jobs, because there are plenty of jobs. It's just that it's the jobs that you feel yourself to be too good for. It's the jobs that you let immigrants come to the country for. The same immigrants you then berate for taking jobs you had no intention of taking in the first place.

Dude, please.

The Next Major Inflated Title

In the past years titles like consultant, senior, manager have suffered from major inflation: everybody started calling themselves that, even though few actually were skilled, intelligent or savvy enough to actually carry the job that the title implied.

This year's inflated title is Vice President. (Cue recently promoted VPs looking around nervously)

Virtue of Self-deprecation

People who make fun of themselves are usually quite level-headed actually. They know their weaknesses, and thus strengths as well. They are very aware of how they are perceived and can even manipulate that perception.

But it's very easy to go too far. The worst jokes are the ones you make about yourselves.

Rose Tinted Glasses

Augmented reality is getting pretty big now. Being able to see around you details and relevant information that you don't see with the naked eye is getting awfully close to the scifi movies of yesteryear: the Terminator looking around to see if someone's clothing is his size, sensing if someone's stress level reveals if he's lying.

In a few months we'll have iPhone apps that use the camera and screen overlays to depict the world around you as an alien world in a first-person shooter. We already have apps that show you what deals stores around you have at that time.

Now the next step will be something that will integrate into glasses, rather than a handheld device. The Apple iVisor. Make it.

(Actually, don't. Gotta be too distracting for driving. If you think doing phone calls in traffic is bad...)

HHG: 2010 World Series

World Series are times when the Yankees are playing... that's not this year. Now it's the San Francisco Giants and the Texas Rangers who are playing. (what? the Rangers?)

The Head says: Rangers have better offensive production, they win on the road, and with superstars like Josh Hamilton and Vladimir Guerrero they can truly back it up. San Fran can bring only unproven youngsters (Cody Ross anyone?).

The Heart says: Hamilton's story is really amazing, especially in America where they love this kind of come-from-behind situation. Going from drug addiction to baseball's richest price is a very good story. Also the Rangers could win their first title ever.

The Gut says: Giants should claw something out of nothing. Tim Lincecum has been pitching lights out, Ross has been hitting balls out of the park, and they've managed to kick a much more favoured team like the Phillies out of the playoffs.

Where is my iTranslate App?

Now we have the Dragon dictation app and music recognition for the iPod it's only a matter of time until somebody comes up with a proper universal translator: just let your iPod pick up something in a foreign language, it will interpret it and dig up from some obscure cloud database the translation into any language you want.

Obviously the cloud needs to be populated by translation logic that makes sense (i.e. not translate every single word literally). The recognition logic would have to be quite elaborate to do cross-reference between different languages (you might not know the speaker's language). And perhaps it needs to account for context too, the longer the soundbite, the better the translation can pick up nuances, or transliterate common phrases. The app might use the GPS locator to account for local differences in speech (e.g. dialects).

So where is this app? Is it here already? Can I take it on vacation to Japan?

I See Dead People

When Michael Jackson died, his music suddenly went up the charts like nuts. His classic songs were top of the charts for weeks, mainly thanks to massive, massive numbers of downloads, and record sales of his old albums.

Last week Antonie Kamerling - actor, singer, local celebrity - died, and his music, his television shows and movies flew off the shelves en masse. Again it earned him - posthumously of course - another number one-hit billing.

What's the fascination with buying music from recently tragically deceased artists? Especially in the time of the iPod and music downloads it's not like the shop's gonna run out of stock. Of course, there will never be proper new material, but the old material will remain in some shape or form. And it's not like the material magically got better. Songs that in life were barely breaking even, become post-mortem cash cows, just by having the artist shed his mortal coil.

For me indeed either Jackson's or Kamerling's or anyone's demise is tragic. It doesn't automatically make me want to spend money on their work more than when they still trucked along on this earth. I remember them, perhaps a prayer for their loved ones. But their music is not suddenly 100 percent better. If they made sucky movies in life, the movies still suck when they are dead.

Chic beats pragmatism beats boring

The iPhone 4 is a controversial product. It looks good, the retina display is really sharp, and it just feels and operates like a charm. People with iPhones have more sex than people with any other phone. Nevermind that nobody actually owns a phone other than the iPhone...

But the "You're holding it wrong" meme really propelled it into new levels of notoriety. The reception quality for such a high-end phone is disappointing. And with everyone having one, wanting one or getting one, you're not standing among the crowd with an iPhone 4.

Okay, you might get a Windows Mobile 7 phone. Or maybe an Android phone. But you'd be judged a little bit boring. Maybe you should get the next generation iPhone instead. Only this time the lines in front of the Apple stores will stretch across the city.

New Leadership

We're about to have a new government, new leadership. It will be leadership in minority, it will be one in controversy. For me, it's a question how long this thing will last. Some people think this government will disband pretty much as soon as the first difficult topic comes up. Others think the situation is such that they will have to work together - no matter how bad it gets. Because the alternative, having no leadership, is worse.

Time For Sports

This whole overtime question, or lack of overtime in the case of the AFL Grand Final, allowed me to look at a cultural difference between North American sports and sports in the rest of the world.

• North American sports count time down to zero. For sports in the rest of the world time counts up (except apparently in Aussie Rules).
• North American sports are never split in halves.
• North American sports stretch playing time by stopping the clock for penalties, fouls, injuries, booth reviews, commercials etc. Time never stops in sports in the rest of the world.

Counting down to zero is a far more dramatic device than counting up to an arbitrary number, increasing the urgency of the game. When the clock hits zero, it's over, it's done. Bye Bye. It's also clear. No faffing about with extra time, injury time, a referee or an official deciding for the rest of the stadium how long the game is supposed to last. Ideal for Americans who will use any excuse to sue your ass.

Creating more opportunities and artifacts to break the game up in multiple pieces accomplishes several things for Americans. 1) more opportunities to show commercials. 2) short chunks of plays are easier to follow and talk about, rather than long drawn out periods of play. It's better for Americans who have short attention spans to begin with. If it's not good, they switch quickly to something else.

So, the way time is measured in sports is a reflection of the society the games are played in.

Closure

For all the shit the NFL does with the overtime rules, and all the complaining everybody does with penalty kicks or penalty shots at the close of drawn hockey or soccer games, they probably don't think about the alternative...

This is what happens if you don't have a tie breaker at the close of a game. Imagine the Super Bowl ending in a draw after four quarters, and then having to wait another week and to start over. Imagine the World Cup final having to be played again the next weekend. (Yes. THAT World Cup final.) Or the Olympic hockey final. Or the Rugby World Cup final. It's totally ridiculous. Even the players themselves are upset.

I'm sure somebody will be able to make some money out of the situation either way, but a one off final... that deserves to get resolved in the most dramatic way possible, even in a game of chance. Not by making a do-over.

Jobs and sports

In football (both American-style or rest of the world-style) it seems we're heading to work stoppages. Usually about who gets what part of the big pile of cash the audience gives the sport every year. It's also about how to make the pile of money bigger, by putting players in more games.

How quickly those discussions turn to money. When you start out, in fact when you talk to children starting out, they all talk about wanting to play the sport just because. In fact they won't understand why people wouldn't want to play the game the love for free anyway.

Of course, when you actually get to the pros, and suddenly your livelihood is connected to "the game you love", you might want to introduce some security measures. You might want to rake in as much cash as you can. And you might want to do it without an extreme amount of broken bones and torn muscles.

For the owners of teams, sports are a means to an end. Owners support the cause wholeheartedly perhaps, but they are in it to win it, either for cash or for glory. They are not doing it out of charity, and they are not just giving money to players who can barely play. Anything they can do to improve their investment, they will do.

And now we enter the situation where the interests of the one side are vehemently opposite to the other. The speed at which these differences get resolved, depend on how quickly one side is making the other think they are getting a good deal. The players get an extra weekend off. The owners can schedule games on every day of the week. Something along those lines.

Approaching Nervous Breakdown

Here are some telltale signs you're approaching nervous breakdown:

• you think everything you do, is extremely important.
• everybody else is annoying
• what anybody says is annoying
• energy levels? wildly flaying all over the place
• in order to avoid unnecessary discussion, you accept everything: work, gossip, alcohol

How To Be Truly Malicious

True malice requires one of the following:

• intelligence - because you need to be an astute politician and strategist, a psychologist to manipulate your way to reach your goals. Being dumb doesn't typically lead to malice. Usually dumb people end up doing random things, some of them evil, but not by purpose.
• emotion - feelings are basically the great equaliser. Even the most pious of men can go completely berserk when the right wrong buttons are pushed.
• psychopathy - if your moral horizon is skewed opposed to the general public's you might not even believe you act maliciously. But you are.

So generally stupid people, calm people, empathic people don't typically spend their time finding the best way to bring you down.

Toilet Hygiene in the East

In the West we can often make disparaging remarks about the hygiene in third world and eastern countries. How come the toilets over there are always accompanied with things like washlets, shower hoses, while over in the West there's nothing?

I mean here's an example of an installed washlet:

Does the West really think that wiping once is good enough?

Top 5 City Tripping Destinations

5. Hong Kong

It's been a tad long ago since I've been here - back before the Transfer - but Hong Kong remains a highly impressive city to visit. Magnificent skyline, well-connected infrastructure, plenty of destinations and events to go to. It's just that I've always been guided around by family members, rather than discovering things on my own. Probably it was the Cantonese that threw me off.

4. Toronto

Basically an American city, with American amenities and sensibilities, but without the Americans to screw it up. And actually everything is within walking distance (sort of).

3. London

In terms of culture and class London can't be beat. But you do need the Tube to get to wherever you need to go, because walking around or driving around yourself is nigh on impossible.

2. Tokyo

Picking no. 1 was a bit like choosing between your children. Tokyo is the truly insane choice, from Harajuku to Ginza to Roppongi it has to be seen to be believed. Especially if you're a Westerner the masses of people moving around will seem totally overwhelming, while always maintaining a sense of tranquility and humility...

1. New York

... something that New York isn't known for. The brash and loud New Yorker will tell you from the start theirs is the best city in the world. Songs have been written, movies have been made that sing the praise of the self-proclaimed greatest city in the world... and it's actually hard to argue against it. Everything you ever would want to do, you can in the Big Apple. Everything you want to have, buy, enjoy, you can here.

Gender Mix

Because people tend not to be able to do everything and achieve their objectives, all the time, always correctly, by themselves, they form teams. These teams will always have some tasks to do. Some tasks are hard labour, building something tangible, actually producing something. Other tasks are soft, like fostering a productive atmosphere, being a cheerleader and motivator, or just making sure all the conditions are correct for performing at peak conditions. Some tasks are directly related to the objective of the team, like scoring goals for a football team. Others have indirect influence on the outcome, for example a team doctor treating injuries.

For me each team has tasks that are better fulfilled by male roles, and those by female roles. Ideally male roles in the teams are responsible for male tasks, and female roles for female tasks. The number and intensity of tasks for each team varies, but they are better served if those tasks are matched to its appropriate gender.

I argue that all teams have both male and female tasks to fulfill to achieve their objectives. I argue successful teams have the right team member gender mix, and each member is doing their appropriate tasks as well. I posit that unsuccessful teams have not matched their team make-up: so male roles performing female tasks and vice versa, or nobody picking up tasks, because the role cannot be fulfilled correctly.

I do see that while in far and away the most cases men should be filling male roles, and women female roles, it is not necessarily always the case. If a woman is the best person suited to fulfill a particular male role in a particular team, then she should do it. Obviously all teams should have roles to cover all tasks necessary to achieve the desired outcomes.

Ideally I still would see some mix expressed in a men to women ratio, rather than male to female (which is harder to quantify - and would only apply to specific gender-biased situations anyway, e.g. sports teams, fraternities and sororities, religious groups). Probably along the lines of one woman for every four people in a team. If the ratio goes to more women, cliques will form that hurt productivity. If the ratio goes to less women, then there's likely not enough people to fulfill the female roles.

So what do you think is the ideal team ratio in your line of work?

Always An Out

Once you move beyond a certain level in your career, you have to make a choice. Forge a strategy to progress, or don't. The latter leaves it up to whatever higher power you follow, how far you'll get in your career. The former puts you in the driver's seat.

The thing with strategies is that they might not pan out. Depending on visibility or importance of saving face, losing varies from indifferent to severely damaging to one's career. And so strategists will also try to gauge their outs. "What are the possible outcomes of my strategy, and do I need an escape plan should those turn out negative."

Of course, when you really look at the big picture, do you really NEED those outs? Does anybody CARE if you have outs?

The informed strategist can estimate the chances of success, the risks involved, and apply proper actions and mitigations depending on what comes along and what the results are.

The truly enlightened has only one course of action.

Right or Wrong versus the Bigger Picture

Some people want to be right all the time; some people want to prove others wrong. They'll go the lengths of the earth to do that. They'll claw and bite and bitch and moan... and most of the time they are looking at verdicts, acknowledgements, arguments which make sense to them.

But in the end, what does it really matter if you are right or wrong? Are you going to be happy, and will anybody care? Is the world really a better place if you are proven correct?

Too bad the people looking at the big picture always are either self-righteous douchebags, or indifferent bastards.

Questions about success

If you want to be successful, there's a price to pay. There's sacrifices to make. However is losing common sense one of them? Do you need to leave the personal behind? Remove yourself from the human interest, and focus on the business at hand?

Managers always talk about needing to have a helicopter-view, have broader perspective, taking more interests to heart, than just the petty rumours and gripes. Does that mean you also start seeing people as mere numbers? I understand you need to be ambitious and tenacious, but do you have to be ruthless?

Success is a choice. You can make it easier if you are willing to cross some borders, crush all opposition, be business-like, even if it makes you a douche. But success can also be attained while remaining true to yourself. You can be demanding, but respectful. It's a harder path to follow, and not for the impatient. But it is ultimately far more rewarding.

The taste of Japan

Japanese tastes are becoming more popular in Holland. Sushi, Shabu Shabu, teriyaki crisps, but I doubt wasabe Kit Kat will get the same reception.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.4.9

Possession trumps need

Now I do think an iPad is pretty much an iPod Touch on steroids, an oversized iPhone without a phone. In fact when Apple first announced the iPad, their incredibly obnoxious interview reel got parodied almost out of the gate...

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

And yet after seeing those empty shelves at the retailers, it seems now everyone has one...

I'm sure no one needs an iPad, especially if they already have an iPhone... but dammit now even I want one!

I can haz cheeseburger?

plz?

Published with Blogger-droid v1.4.8

Choke Artists

It's probably better the Dutch sports press is nowhere near as poignant as the U.S., because if you get to the championship final three times, and you lose all of these, you get labeled. Scarlet-letter Style.

Instead the Dutch, sober and down-to-earth as they are, go about their business, comforting themselves that "at least they finished higher than Germany", and "we never thought we would reach this far anyway." They also are quick to defer cause to others. "We were beaten by a better team." "The referee had it against us from the start." Not even a hint of self-reflection.

Which is a bad thing. I mean, sure on the whole I personally enjoyed the whole tournament, no matter how Holland played. But some actions during the Final were inexcusable. No, not De Jong's kick to the sternum, which would score major points in an Olympic Tae Kwon Do contest. Not Van Bommel's tripping and hooking, which would put a prostitute to shame.

It was coach Van Marwijk's substitutions, which made no good sense. Basically he took his two hardest working, toughest and most crucial players from the pitch (Van Bronckhorst and Kuijt), and replaced them with a gamble (Eljero Elia) and someone whom I don't remember ever seeing before in any game before this one (Braafheid). Seriously, people around me were absolutely flabbergasted. It wasn't exactly a Dick Advocaat-Portugal 2004-substitution (replace your fastest, most dangerous player, with an old, slow pensioner), but one that definitely warranted explanation...

The most tragic thing is not that Holland came so close to stealing it (ROBBENNNNNEEEE!!), but rather the realization that no matter how Holland plays, beautifully gorgeous or dastardly evil, they still end up losing. At least they can revel in the knowledge they remain the best footballing nation in the world, without winning a World Cup...

...All things considered, I'd rather have them winning.

HHG: World Cup Final 2010

As a Dutchman born in the late 20th century you grow up with the tragic notion that you're never going to win the big one. I guess going to two World Cup finals and losing both by relatively close margins does that to you. Alright... so Holland does have a European Championship title under its belt, but heck even Greece and Denmark can win those...

Now Holland has reached its third Finals against Spain. It's obvious I'm Hoping that this time it does come around their way.

I'm rationalizing though that Spain will actually win the whole thing. Objectively speaking this team has already been to a high pressure situation like this: Spain is the reigning European Champion. They've got important players all over the place, from David Villa, Andres Iniesta, Xavi, Xavi Alonso to Carles Puyol, Iker Casillas and Sergio Ramos. And several big names haven't even hit their stride (Fabregas, Torres). Even though Holland have got several seminal players to match (Robben, Van Persie, Sneijder), they are nowhere near as deep as the Spaniards. And the Iberians have defeated more high profile teams on the road to the final than Oranje (Portugal, Argentina, Germany versus Holland's Brazil).

Still, my gut feeling says the World Cup goes to the Netherlands for the first time. Giovanni van Bronckhorst's final international game (or even final professional game outright, which is it anyway?) would end up with him lifting the World Cup trophy. That's a great story. Arjen Robben's emotional fight back from injury to become one of the stars in the tournament. US sports press calling Holland their dark horse to win the title pre-tournament.

And most telling, Holland have had so many breaks this tournament, if they were to lose, they would have many times over in the past four weeks. Denmark's Poulsen's header bouncing the wrong way into his own net. The misjudged shot against Japan. Sneijder's cross brushing over Felipe Melo's head past the Brazilian's own keeper. The deflection against Uruguay. All these events show that there's simply someone out there who doesn't want Holland to lose this year.

This leads me to my last thought. People always imagine what they would do if something truly remarkable and unbelievable would happen to them. Winning a multi million dollar lottery for example. You think you know the stuff you're gonna buy, the trips you're gonna make, the job you're gonna quit... and when it actually does happen to you, it's completely different and nothing what you expected. You will not react the way you thought you would.

If Holland wins Sunday, I believe it will be much the same.

Bigger Than The Pope

Just what is it that LeBron is smoking?

Holding a "Superstar Summit" like he's Barack Obama in the G20 with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh? (Delusional...)

Getting an hour-long special on ESPN to announce who he is signing with, like he's freakin' Oprah? (Egotistical...)

Signing up for Twitter as King James? (Tacky...)

Look I know and I see he's the best and most entertaining basketball player right now, but for chrissakes can he get more douchier? He better win next NBA Finals, otherwise he's busting up his image for no good reason.

Mutually Assured Destruction

So our apartment complex has two units up for sale publicly. For the sake of argument, both units are the same. Same three-room setup, same area, almost identical location. Both sellers have similar motives to move out (Hint: It's a woman!).

One of the apartments started out at a high asking price some time ago. It was a bit dodgy, but if somebody's buying, why the heck not? Then the other apartment came on the market, and undersold the first seller's asking price. To tell you something, it wasn't by much, maybe three percent in all. But it was enough to start a war. The original price dropped five percent overnight. One week later the second seller dropped its price to match.

A third unit came into the market some week later, albeit privately. The rate this goes, nobody's selling. Maybe they should think about collusion or something?

Two Brands of Football: Differing kinds of Arrogance

If you are an organization that is so powerful it can make governments impose the laws it wants to, how much chance do you think you have forcing them to implement a rule you want, no matter how trivial?

FIFA has made sure you cannot drink any other beer than its sponsor's within the area around stadiums FIFA hosts games in. FIFA can ignore clear goals simply by stating "the referee didn't see it". And because it's their party, they can pretty much set aside any form of criticism. You don't insult the host after all.

I'm quite sure the NFL makes a lot of money, even though its appeal as a sport barely stretches past the North American coast (although as a novelty having a game or two in London or Berlin definitely sells tickets). They implement rules changes when it supports the good of the game. If this means slowing the game down, so be it. If this makes the game 'less human', so be it. I would definitely argue that NFL football is one of the most fair sports in the world. More fair at least than FIFA's brand of football.

Then again FIFA doesn't have the threat of work stoppages every ten years.

Best. Meme. Ever.

"You're holding it wrong."

So many uses for this... Apple, you made my day.

The Inevitable

Told you!

Half Assed: Sony's attempts for a comeback in the Console Wars

You have to feel a bit for Sony. Once they were the king of the video game console hill with their PlayStation 2. They had the best games, the best support, the most happy fans.

It's successor the PS3 doesn't fare as well, getting beat by an underpowered but accessible Wii, and an oft-broken, but ostensibly cool Xbox 360. Nintendo's flagship especially garnered so much success by having a key characteristic none of their rivals in the market have: motion control. Sony was left behind to eat the Wii's dust.

Sony sought to emulate Nintendo's success, so they introduced the Move, their own version of motion control. It looks slick, although you could look at it as just a fancy vibrator with a clown's nose (and if there's something I hate with a vengeance, it's clowns).

Microsoft one upped Sony in the motion control department with the Project formerly known as Natal, the Kinect. It's main selling point: no motion controller to hold. Instead the Kinect is just an infrared scanner that detects your body movement in the room. So you can wave, bend over, nod your head, and your on screen avatar will do the same. Well at least it's something different from the competition.

Sony's other big selling point now is 3D, with games looking all impressive and jumping right at you to grab you by the throat. This is all fine and dandy, except for the fact that you need a 2 grand+ 3D television and a 150 dollar pair of 3D glasses (which I can hardly balance on top of my own glasses, and will tire my eyes out after about an hour).

Nintendo then announced their own 3D proposition, the 3DS. It's main selling point, it has 3D visuals WITHOUT the need of glasses. Frankly it looks damn impressive, and was sure to give some Sony executives a stroke.

So all in all the Sony PS3 has all the same features that its competitors have, but just a little less impressive, a little less innovative, a little more awkward.

Thank god it has Blu-ray support.

How Good Is Good Enough

It is in the nature of man to expect the best, and to not want to deal with mediocrity or worse. Reality is that mediocrity is the average and the median. Reality is that you are not getting the guru, the expert, the savior of your project. If you're lucky you get someone in your team you can live with and doesn't muck about too much.

Art is Confidence

The great works of art we are all in agreement with. The Mona Lisa, the Nachtwacht, Sistine Chapel. However whatever gets called art, and whatever's called a doodle, is a matter of serious discussion. A drawing my little sister makes is not considered art, until she either gets really, really famous, or until she exhibits it and tells all the critics that it is indeed art.

I've seen works of modern art that I could still conceivably make. And my skills as an artist are about as good as my basketball game... way short. However artists have to grow an ability to tell the world that their work is worth it. An artist needs confidence to convince the literati that his work has some thought behind it... even though it's just five paint strokes in three different colours.

HHG: NBA Finals 2010: Lakers vs. Celtics... again

Two years ago I thought the Celtics were too old to compete, although they might be a bit more desperate for a win. In the end Boston won it all, and proved me wrong. This year much the same applies. Pau and Kobe are still in LA, the Big Three are still in New England. Rajon Rondo has grown up into a fully matured star, while the Lakers added Ron Artest, but that's just about it.

Head: Lakers are still the top team in the NBA during the regular season... but when the rubber meets the playoff road, the Celtics switch another gear. Frankly now I don't know who's the better team. Andrew Bynum is probably the best skilled center in the Finals, but he is injured too often to be a factor. The Celtics seemed a little beaten up thanks to Dwight Howard, but the rest between the Conference Finals and the NBA Finals should be enough to recover for this. All the stars match up well against each other; L.A. might have a small edge depending how successful Artest can keep his counterpart from scoring.

Heart: Kobe doesn't mind LeBron having the attention in the offseason and the regular season, as long as he has the titles and rings. I would think that now he is more hungry for a title than the Boston Big Three. He's picturing himself a Michael Jordan, possibly to become an icon, a logo himself, like Jerry West and His Airness before him. That will only be the case, if he wins more titles, at least six or something. I'm hoping Kobe will do it (eventually), but if he pushes too hard, it won't work.

The teams are so closely matched, there's no apparent favorite. Gut feeling is that Boston retains its advantage over the Lakers, simply because they've been doing it forever. The aura of Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce add up to one overpowering trio against Gasol and Kobe. Then again Bryant may have learned a thing or two the past two years, especially winning last year. Let's say the ailing Celtics beat the slightly less ailing Lakers in six.

HHG: 2010 Stanley Cup Finals - Flyers vs. Blackhawks

The Head says the Chicago Blackhawks will win the Stanley Cup Finals this year. Obviously Chicago is the higher seed (2 vs. 7). Chicago has the highly touted talent of Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews. Chicago has been more impressive and a bigger threat to the Cup all regular season.

However the Heart says the Philadelphia Flyers will win. They were the ones who just scratched their way into the playoffs on the final day of regular season with a shootout against the Rangers. They were the ones 0-3 down against the Bruins. They were the team that nobody took notice of until just now.

So what does the Gut say? Couple of clues:

• Marian Hossa is going to the Finals for the third straight year. The past two years he has been on the losing side. He just might be the true Stanley Cup jinx. If Chicago loses this year, I don't see him finding a club to play for next year.
• Michael Leighton replaced Flyers' goalie Brian Boucher after the latter's injury in the second round of the playoffs. Since then, Leighton has been on fire, and was a big factor in Philly reaching the Finals. End of last year Leighton was out of a job. Now he is at the heart of the turnaround story of the season.
• Chicago hasn't won a Stanley Cup since 1961, now the longest title drought in the NHL. Like the Cubbies in baseball, trying to win a title after such a long time takes so much pressure. In fact by now both the Blackhawks and the Cubs retain a big part of their identity because of their droughts... they may not even want to win it all...

So Philadelphia wins the Stanley Cup me gut feels.

UEFA Champions League 2010: Inter - Bayern

A lot of good story lines as we come up to this year's Champions League final. The apprentice and the master square off. No English club makes it back to the biggest club soccer game of the year. A traded striker who can actually win the cup twice in a row. Two Double winners for their respective countries.

And chauvinistically speaking of course, Dutch players and personalities all over the place. Too bad that means Holland will not amount to much in the World Cup, but at least on a club level we've got some winners.

Actually honestly I have no idea who's objectively the better team. Each team has quality, star quality even. Of course Ribery is banned, but there's still plenty to look around for in each team. Milito, Olic, Altintop, Zanetti, Lamm, Eto'o, Schweinsteiger. Of course each team has their token gifted, but injury-prone Dutch player. Maybe I have to look at the coaches then, but even there there's no clear-cut winner. Van Gaal is a big disciplinarian, and as long as the basics are under control, he can beat any team. However, I don't see him making an exceptional coaching move that wins him the game. The most exceptional coaching move he ever did, was a karate kick in the 1995 Champions League final. Mourinho is less a disciplinarian and more of an instigator, drawing away attention from the real danger, the actual players on the pitch. He doesn't have however a signature playing style, that wins him the game either.

So between the two teams, there's little to choose between. Bayern might be the hotter team; after struggling early in the year, they've picked up speed, coincidentally after the return of Arjen Robben to form. Inter has been calculatedly solid throughout the season, and they gained a lot of followers after the dismantling of Barcelona in their own home.

Bayern has already won a Champions League in 2001. For Inter it has been ages. Wars have been fought, people have been born and died since the last time Inter held the Cup.

Inter was actually a league champion coming in to this season, although that doesn't seem to be a guarantee for success. Every other year a non-domestic champion wins the final. Last year Barcelona won the Cup, but wasn't the Spanish league champion of the preceding season. In 2008 Manchester United was a league winner and won the final. In 2007 Milan was not Italian champion coming into the Champions League winning-season. In 2006 Barcelona won the cup, and was Spanish champion coming in.

So if this pattern holds, the league champion coming into this Champions League will win the final, which is Internazionale.

Head: undecided
Heart: undecided
Gut: Inter

Do's and Don't's in Game Design

Making computer games is a departure from the typical "business" software development. It's closer to movie making and general entertainment. However, there are some best practices, and some far too common faults that can make or break your game, just like in normal software development.

• DO Break the Fourth Wall; The best games immerse the player into the game, by having a strong plot, a tight atmosphere, or by acknowledging the player's presence and making him part of the experience. Metal Gear Solid did this famously with the phantom Dual Shock controller; Batman Arkham Asylum turned everything upside down; The Command & Conquer install screen was a direct uplink to GDI. Games that erase the boundaries of the game with reality are stronger, and deserve their WTF moments.
• DON'T Release Crap; this seems obvious, yet somehow IT in all industries falls for this fate. Fatal bugs are death in the gaming industry. It puts me off when a game freezes every two steps, or drops back to the OS. It puts me off when multiplayer lobbies don't work. It puts me off when controls remain unresponsive. It puts me off when progress is broken if you don't do things EXACTLY as the programmer intended (and if you don't, you get stuck). If something isn't working, fix it, or don't bother releasing it.
• DO Have Strong Female Characters; Games with strong, attractive female leads generate sympathy from the player. Male players have something to ogle over, and care for (feeding their nurturing and heroic traits); female players have something to empower themselves with. Lara Croft, how horribly bimbo-ish she could be, she did inspire a legion of women to open up. If that ain't feminism, I don't know what is.
• DON'T Have a Skyrocketing Learning Curve; Games are supposed to be challenging, but still fun. Super Mario ended up as a very tough game, yet it eases you into things in the early going, giving you time to adjust to new challenges. It's also very easy to reward you modestly if you pick things up. How different was the first cycling manager game. There was no tutorial mode, and you basically mucked about, finishing last in every event, without the game telling you how you can be more successful.
• DO Have a powerful soundtrack; Indeed the exposure a video game soundtrack has on a player far outguns the exposure most recording artists have in the general public. And if you have a good one, you can double up and sell CDs as well. Uncharted had an amazing soundtrack. Metal Gear had an amazing soundtrack. C&C has always been a home run music-wise. EA Sports always has an eclectic selection of singles packed with its games. And for each and every single one of these games, I would actually have them on my iPod.
• DON'T Write the Plotline on the Back of a Napkin; You know why C&C4 is reviled among the gaming faithful? The plot makes no bloody sense. The motivations of the characters go from nice to bastard in no time flat; you have no idea whose side you're on, and why you are fighting for them. Final Fantasy XIII suffers much the same fate. Absolutely atrocious character development, whining little boys (always a pet peeve, as well as clowns), and too much jargon thrown around. Game designers don't need to insult my intelligence, but they also don't need to act to smug either.

Dedication or Obsession

People who live for dancing, are bound to be good dancers. At the very least, someone who is doing it all the time, is bound to dance better than someone who just casually moves around to music. That's why Michael Jackson chose the dancers he chose for the This Is It shows.

A football player who lives for the game, often gets drafted earlier than a football player who doesn't. Simply put, the former puts in the hours in the weight room, film room, studies the plays etc. The latter has other things to occupy him with, a family, drinks, a masters thesis. All other things being equal, the player who lives and loves the NFL with every fiber of his being is the person whom you trust the most to work his utmost for you, without distractions.

But is this kind of person dedicated, or simply obsessed? Is that passion, the thing that keeps him south of normal, stopping him from being a renaissance man?

How I Want You To Communicate... As A Pro

• Treat your audience with respect. Don't be condescending, but don't be an ass kisser either. Whether it's your boss, or the local cleaning help, you communicate the same way. The only exemption is the Queen.
• Balance selling your message versus being economical with your (and their) time. Your message is more clear if it is built up in the reader's/listener's head step-by-step, but often people do not have the time to go through a whole study, background and reference.
• Be aware that what you say, imply, seem to imply affects people's emotions and (re)actions. Stick to the facts. If something cannot be empirically proven, referred back to, or validated, it is NOT a fact.
• You can discuss your own feelings and opinions, but you cannot and must not project that on others without good strong arguments. If you can't, don't.
• People will catch up with a lie, and then wait for the opportune moment to kick your ass with it. Own up.

Priorities

The Eyjafjallajokull volcano eruption and subsequent paralysis of European air travel has clearly brought our priorities to the forefront: we understand when a natural occurrence disrupts our way of life, but not when it takes up more than four days.

Most business news outlets are reporting on a call for ease of air restrictions. The basis of the argument is that test flights show the ash clouds are not that bad. Also the costs of staying on the ground are mentioned as a killing factor for major airlines.

You'd think safety is the main point of contention here. Crying about costs (and truthfully looking up at the sky I do not see much darkness) seems to indicate safety is deemed of lesser importance than the economic impact.

Is this what the armageddon looks like? Closed airports? Lower share prices?

Priorities guys, priorities...

UPDATE: Silvia Wadwha from CNBC had one anecdote (here), that rings true no matter which way you put it.

"By the way, the aforementioned NATO official was an ex-fighter pilot of 20 years experience and now high-ranking air force officer. Naturally I asked him what he thought about airport closures and flight cancellations.

"One thing we have learned is that you do not fly when volcanic ash is in the air", he declared categorically.

And what if this continues for weeks or months, I asked.

“You don’t fly in volcanic ash."

Just one opinion, but there it is."

Another Good Idea

Why is No One coming up with a Volcanic Ash Radar? Just like buienradar.nl

Advanced Exaggeration

Whenever people make an argument and have to state a number or an amount, and they are not sure about it exactly, they err on the side of exaggeration to make sure the argument remains somewhat strong.

The manner of exaggeration is always:

• an extremely high number; which you hope won't be topped or countered. It's like in poker when you go All-In with aces high on the button. You'd hope the blinds don't have anything good, and hope the aggressive bet keeps them from moving against you - which is why you should counter such an argument with an even higher number...
• a somewhat exaggerated number at the start of the argument, and then incrementally increase the number as the discussion moves along. "So at first I was fighting off five people for the last ticket to the U2 concert, and later on it was twenty, and at the end of the argument I beat out five hundred people for the right to smack Bono upside the head." - which makes it so ridiculous if you continue the argument yourself, and go incrementally higher. At some point the amount gets ridiculous, incredulous and silly... Just like poker, at some point re-raising upon re-raising is just pointless.
• exactly 80 percent (or the inverse 20 percent); even though whatever you're saying is nowhere close to either number. The illusion is that a percentage implies a part of the whole, which means obviously that your argument considered the whole, and thus you're a stud... which is an exaggeration. - So to counter this name a more exact percentage. 74 percent, 87 percent. It doesn't really matter what number, as long as it doesn't end in zero or five for that matter. Make up a source that's not easily referable, or has too many outlets to refer to. Reuters. AP. Oprah. Don't say however "The News", "The Government", "Them". That's just not exact enough. Also don't say the source is Gartner, because they will sue your ass for defamation.

What Are We Waiting For

Rationally I can't claim to be in a difficult situation. In fact I'm overloaded with choice, and only have myself to blame if I take on too much.

However something is still sapping energy away, and it's not coming back in great amounts. I think it has to do with the atmosphere, and the general, overall mood. Everybody's tired, easily agitated. Keeping things close to heart. Only the inner circle is decent, and everybody else can kiss your ass.

It's like everybody's waiting for the world to change. And in the mean time we bore ourselves to hell. God forbid somebody interferes with our boredom.

April Fools Me Once

Here's something to ponder... can you make a major - actual - announcement on April 1 and be taken seriously? Would anyone believe you? Are you expected to?

Tell The Truth And Run

After a couple of years in the business I claim to have seen my fair share. I've seen the good and the bad in the company, and I think I can quite strongly argue which is which. Sometimes that means forcing my colleagues to look to themselves. And most of the time they don't like what they see then... and they resent me for it.

Now if you're a young professional fresh from college, who's just been on the corporate training, who's been looking at everything with an open mind, and loving everything around you, I imagine someone being cynical and jaded telling you otherwise is a cause for concern. And then you turn around, see that you're five years further along, and realize all the experience I spoke of, you now experienced yourself.

Representative Values

The values people have for themselves are driven by the way they are brought up, the experiences they have, the teachings they get. It can be vastly different from person to person, but as long as their interests do not overlap or are not shared, that won't be much of an issue.

In situations where people's interests do overlap, conflicting values become a point of contention. And if people work together in teams on behalf of a greater group, like a works council, a board, a government, the group's overall values may not be covered by that small team. It may very well be that the team's individual values dominate over the larger group's, often to a fault. That's called a dictatorship.

If a small group of people represents a larger group, that small group must set their group values, which may completely differ from one's individual values. If one represents someone else, he should do so regardless of his own personal values. Or else stop representing the group.

The Television That Tries To Be A Tweet

Kidnapping and murder is terrible news enough, but I don't need my television newscast to remind as such every two minutes. The whole idea of news is that you broadcast when there's news. Don't repeat that no further news is available every two minutes. I got it the first time.

Derivative Metaphore

I attended a derivatives workshop recently, and saw an overview of the latest and greatest in financial products. I came away with my eyes wide open... wide open with fear. Exotics. Hedging. Swaps. With this stuff going on, I'm amazed the financial crisis didn't come sooner and deeper. Basically you're gambling with borrowed money. On the outcome of the Super Bowl three years from now... and the World Series, and the Champions League.

I was brought up being taught that I can spend money only once. Apparently day traders don't think this way at all.

Political Priorities

In a democracy the majority gets to rule. Political parties tend to skew that equality toward a select few groups, e.g. liberals, socialists, right-wing, left-wing, christian, muslim, secular, green, black, traditionalist, futurist.

However the modern democracy with the multi-party system makes choosing whom to vote for a harrowing experience. Basically there are only a few fundamental questions that parties can differentiate themselves from, most of them relate to distribution of wealth, which religious values should be held, and who to blame in case stuff goes wrong.

Most of the other issues aren't really issues. No party will say safety is not a priority for them. No party will say job creation is not important. No party will claim education is worthless. It's just a matter of priorities. In the end all parties aim to accomplish the same list of objectives. They only differ in the order in which they want to accomplish them. And of course, the higher up in the list, the more likely they will try for it.

Which means all the political campaigning and debating doesn't make a lick of sense. The standard argument goes that if an issue is not a top priority for a political party, then it must mean they are opposed to it... which is completely ludicrous. It's like claiming I hate children, because I don't have any.

And of course when all the election results are in, and the governments actually get formed, all the false arguments go away to make room for stifling consensus.

No wonder no one gets any work done in governments.

Planning to Fail

The project plan is the most pointless but required document any professional can write. Basically it's fortune telling, weather forecasting and prognostication all rolled up into one terribly illegible Gannt chart. Depending on how long the project runs, you have to note down to the exact date when somebody you don't know completes a task you haven't thought deeply about. It's like trying to hit an airplane mid-flight with a pea shooter in a hot air balloon.

And yet the plan is absolutely necessary, because us people tend to lose focus over a longer period of time. We forget stuff. Other things happen, that may be urgent and have to be accounted for. Planning is how we keep our feet grounded and our eyes on the prize.

Now people making the planning know they can never be 100 percent accurate, especially over a long period. There are several tactics to tackle this:

• add slack time
• descope

Either tactic is something that the people paying for the project won't like. In general people don't like to pay for somebody else's incompetence. Also people don't like to not get what they are promised.

So you have a clear tug of war here. On one side people who pay for projects, and therefore want an exact and actual planning up front. On the other, people who execute the projects, want to get paid, are only paid when they meet their planning, so the safe thing for them to do is to provide a vague, loosely coupled planning that maybe gets updated as time goes by.

Planning is hard. Planning isn't fair. It is an activity that invites discussion and controversy, and often not even about the actual contents.

Planning is pointless, and invariably absolutely necessary.

You Get What You Deserve

I firmly believe the group you are in, the way it behaves, is fully a result of the environment around it, the people within it with all their personalities and qualities. This goes for sports teams, office departments, voluntary organizations, families, governments and so on and so forth.

Actually I will go further: we get to be the way we are, the way we deserve to be. Observe: Our current government is apparently one that we deserve. We don't want, need or ask for a better one. Oh, we complain plenty, but really scoff at actually going another way. We don't revolt. We don't strike. When things really get down to it, we just move back to our homes and leave the working up to others "who have probably a little more time on their hands." In the end governments have to blow themselves up.

Sidebar: if your primary reaction to everything is to be on the defensive, if your secondary reaction is to rigidly stick to rules, if you see everyone else as lazy, hostile and incompetent, people will behave towards you accordingly. In the end you have a group of people that no one really wants to be a part of. The way you think about the outsiders, is the way you apparently deserve to be thought of as well.

It Is Inevitable

Games like Singstar, Guitar Hero, Rock Band gave us karaoke in the home, as well as air guitar and air drumming, but with props. And actual feedback if you are sucking badly.

Now the market is a tad saturated with music games. I mean, there's only a limited number of gameplay variations you can do (it's just hitting buttons in the correct order and with exact timing), and everything else is just content. And not everyone is going to buy a new plastic guitar the latest Guitar Hero Boyzone comes out...

But it is inevitable that a new wave of music games will invigorate the market once more. And it will be fueled by Project Natal.

Think "So You Think You Can Dance" in front of your own television. Let the Natal controller find out how close you can match the indicated dance routines. Upload your performances immediately to Youtube for fan feedback. See furniture sales soar to replace all the broken ones that you couldn't avoid while making that one high-speed turn.

It could be called Hip Hop Hero (yes you heard it here first). And at least Simon Cowell or Paula Abdul won't be around to hurt your feelings (though you do and horribly deserve it).

In fact, I fully expect this to become an April Fools game in few weeks time.

How to judge a man's decision making capability

Some people obviously have problems with devices that have buttons. Cameras, phones, computers, remotes, that sort of thing.

Buttons represent choices to make, and that's scary to them. Those are the people who can't make a decision.

So if you want to test someone's ability to make decisions, put them in front of an expensive coffee machine, and don't tell them how it works. Let them find out.

If nothing else, the easiest and shortest job interview you can have.

Everybody Loves A Winner

Congratulations to the New Orleans Saints on winning Super Bowl XLIV. Indianapolis was heavily favored, but ultimately lost out to a team that the rest of America wanted to win. Apart from the blowjob the media gave to Peyton Manning (how great he is, four-time MVP, record holder, blah, blah, blah...) every single pre-game story was about the city of New Orleans, the inhabitants, the longtime fans, the franchise, the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina etcetera, etcetera... And of course against the Colts any team is an underdog, giving the neutral onlooker someone clear and justified to cheer for. New Orleans craved the championship more than Indy, needed it more than Indy...

And yet it was so blatant that America wanted the Saints to win, it was almost unfair to the Colts. The key was the challenge at the two-point conversion. It was clear Sean Payton had to go for two and throw the challenge flag, even my Dutch colleagues could see that. The call could have gone either way, though. It wasn't clear that the player had possession all the time, and whether he was across the goal line when he had possession... even commentators Theismann and Papa made clear reference that the conversion failed. And if it had, the score would have been 22-17, putting the game on edge, and giving the Colts a little more rope to pull themselves up with.

In the end even the officials decided in their own way that the world would be a better place with New Orleans as Super Bowl Champion. So the call was made, the Saints had a 7-point lead, and the Colts were stuck in a rut, knowing they could only reliably tie the game. And when Manning surrendered by throwing a pick-six, it was all over.

Are the Saints the justified and deserved winner of the game? Yes. They kept pace with Indianapolis and pulled some gutsy moves (on-side kick) to get to the position they were in. But they did have support and sympathy in all the right places.

HHG: Super Bowl XLIV prediction

The Head says: Colts win. For the entire season the only team that has looked impenetrable and unbeatable was Indianapolis. In fact they pulled some of their starters even just to give the other teams in the league a fair shot (and a pair of wins). Of course it does show the drop off in quality when the likes of Manning and Freeney don't play.

Peyton Manning... now that guy just pisses me off. Seemingly effortlessly beating every record and stat in the book. Winning with future Hall of Famers and rookies. Winning with nary a running game. It all doesn't matter. It's almost unfair how good this guy can play the game.

The Heart says: Saints win. It's the better story if the New Orleans Saints win the Super Bowl. The city needs it, craves it more than Indianapolis does. Of course we will all point to the lows of the disaster that struck New Orleans, and hope that a title win will bring a shine to the city's recovery.

Plus, there's still the chance that we're going to get tabloid heaven when Reggie Bush and Kim Kardashian play cat-and-mouse whether or not they will get married after a Saints win.

The Gut says: Indianapolis Colts win. I fully expect that the Colts ride the coat tails of Peyton Manning all the way to their second title in four years. His stats are this good for a reason, and apparently it doesn't matter if he's playing with legends of the game or undergrad college students. I'm hoping for a shoot-out with Drew Brees though, but I think Indy's defense is a little more solid than New Orleans' - even if Dwight Freeney ends up not playing.

Diz It?

http://www.apple.com/ipad/features/

Oh Hell Yeah!

Work Smart, Play Hard

It was always my motto to work hard, long hours, and enjoy the nightlife afterward. Too bad it doesn't really work. It's not very productive and everybody thinks you're an idiot.

So this is my new motto. Steal it.

Guidelines For A Working Relationship

If you are in a political party or a board or a committee with me, please understand the following guidelines:

1. Never publish something on behalf of the team without somebody from the team reading it first.
2. Remember that what you say and what you do, reflects on the team and is associated with the team.
3. Do not make team decisions on your own, unless the team has clearly mandated you so.
4. Handle disagreements between team members within the team or in private; certainly not in public.
5. Do not contradict another team member in public, even when he is clearly wrong.
6. When talking about the team, always name another member and a positive team achievement.
7. A team wins together. A team loses together. There are no partial or moral victories. Individual success is determined within the team itself.
8. Backstabbing is grounds for immediate dismissal from the team.

Now. If you follow these guidelines, I'm sure we'll get along fine.

Exception To The Rule

I'm pretty sure I can get away with applying the 80-20 rule, or the 83-percent rule here, but I'm actually aware of proper scientific studies about where people think they rank in terms of for example intelligence, beauty, sex and so on.

I do know that when I ask my junior staff members where they rank their performance against their peers, no one says that they rank below average. For some that's confidence, and for some it is legitimately so, but we cannot ALL be above-average. Same with ugliness, or sexual prowess and several other traits.

It is in the nature of man to believe that the exception to the rule applies to himself. Also it is his nature to be insulted when the exception does not apply. People are quick to delude themselves that they are special. And in some small local way people are. However it goes wrong when an individual translates this into a larger scale, and expects that it still applies. That's when people get into politics.

Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results

Fun fact: people tend to stick to their guns when things go awry. If you miss a deadline, just work more hours. (and burnout) If your car is too slow, drive faster. (and spin out) If you keep losing on the race track, just keep on betting on the next race. (and go broke)

This is based on the assumption that people get better with experience, or that luck - so to speak - evens out over time. This is a delusion. Sometimes people stay as dumb as they are, no matter how much time and effort they spend. And good or bad luck is not quantifiable, so there's nothing to even out in the first place. If you haven't won a big lottery prize now, the next ticket you buy is just as unlikely to win you one, as the last one.

Sometimes a radical change is necessary to make progress, maybe augmented with some creativity. If you always miss deadlines in your plan, use a different model of planning; if your car is too slow, use the train; and stop betting on horses, go play fantasy football.