Oh I sleepy bear

If you’re tired and hungry.  Just go to sleep.  I have yet to wake up and think to myself, man am I happy I ate those those bowls of cereal before I went to bed.

eBook readers will kill this social convention.  eBooks keep your reading material fairly discreet.  The ability to engage people on their readings will become more difficult because it’s difficult to decipher which book they’re reading.

On the flip side; discreet reading might be a bit liberating.  The New York Times [within the same post] mentions book sales on edgy books going up when the jacket was switched to something less obvious [and more socially acceptable].

To eReaders [a toast]; for pioneering book reading freedom in public places.  Now were is that Karma-Sutra book?

On another note, I’m sure there will be plenty of Social Book sharing sites out there well before eReaders become the norm.  So don’t you worry about following someone else’s library.

I think this is wonderful.  Your information intake should not be dependent on others morals.  1 Point for eReaders and their contribution to freedom.

Bundle.com does a great job of showing simple statistics of people’s spending habits.  Soon they’ll be illustrating people’s saving habits as well. One feature in bundle.com is the comparison feature.

I talk more because I make more money

This morning I used this comparison feature to do a direct comparison between similar income classes.  Phone service seems to change the least between income classes.  What’s important to note, is that it does change.

I was under the impression that a person could only talk so much, no matter how much money they made.  It’s hard for me to imagine myself talking more just because I make more money.  At first I assumed that these were roaming charges, if you’re big-money you probably travel more; but this is a home phone.  Maybe it’s fair to assume that more communication yields higher income. Or maybe rich people have nothing more to do than blah blah blah.

Once again, personal phone service appears to yield the least change as you grow in income, but it does change.

Die sooner than you thought

If you move higher up the income food-chain people’s spending on health care increases significantly.  Which is disappointing yet again; viewing this same metric in reverse implies that people who make less money are less medically stable.  Being poor is one thing, but knowing that you’re going to die sooner because of it, reaches a whole new level of sad.

This is not “news” at any level, but when you see it illustrated in in so many data sets it just feels right to re-highlight.

You can eat out more when you make $100k

It also looks like people who make more money spend more time eating at home.  This proves true until about the $100k mark. After $100k it looks like eating out is the thing to do.

1. This could mean that people don’t loosen up their spending habits until the $100k threshold.
2. Maybe it means that people who use traditional saving methods and work the typical 9-5 only reach an avg. $100k income at max and anyone who makes over $100k spend more time outside meeting new people spending money because they new the value of a good connection.
3. Maybe it means I have no idea how to read metrics

More tinker less bloggy

I’m noticing inconsistencies in bundle.com’s statistics the longer I play with it.  When you compare two income classes that are exactly the same the illustrations still display a delta gap (a difference).  Not a math major — math minor — but I think that’s wrong.

I’m sure these inconsistencies aren’t throughout the entire application.  Maybe it’s just a small bug in the “comparison” feature.  Advice: Don’t be too dependent on your findings.  Don’t go writing a blog about your findings or anything.  Err.

Update Monday, March 29th

I am a  goob.  When I made this post I didn’t realize I was comparing Houston v.s U.S. spending.  Janet, the managing editor of Bundle was nice enough stop by and show me how to get the results I was looking for.  I appreciate this beyond words — thank you so much Janet.

This guy is still talking?

Maybe more conversation is just a benefit of being financially stable, or maybe conversing more gets you to financial stability.  I guess this means that I either have to learn how to be more of a social butterfly or invent something amazing and patent it.

My Daily Booth.  http://dailybooth.com/eloyz

Reinventing the 365 projects.  Easier than ever now.

1. Facebook contacts sync with iPhone contacts
   1. Now all of my iPhone contacts have photos, woot!
   2. My iPhone is also synced with my Gmail contacts; Trifecta! (Facebook, Gmail and iPhone contacts are all synced)
   3. Quick link to contacts Facebook page via my contacts list, sweet
2. Reply to comments via Email
   1. No more having to travel to Facebook just to reply to a comment, that’s just nice.

Those are some super useful features that have me pretty much married to Facebook.  I’ve said too much.

It’s just such an enjoyable experience.  It’s the only mail application that I have ever seen do this.  Not even Gmail does this and that’s saying something.

Kara made us some breakfast and hot chocolate.

I’m going to leave soon and get ready for the day.  I would prefer not to, but responsibility is about delayed satisfaction as opposed to immediate satisfaction.

It snowed yesterday. I appreciate the snow, but not the driving conditions that come with it.

In summary, the tragedy of the commons is best explained like this: A dilemma in which multiple individuals acting independently and solely and rationally consulting their own self-interest will ultimately destroy a shared limited resource even when it is clear that it is not in anyone’s long term interest for this to happen. — Wikipedia.

I think it’s a stretch associating the “Tragedy of the Commons” with cleaning a coffee pot.  It sounds more to me like a simple story of teamwork.  When I think of Tragedy of the commons I think of a limited resource that cannot quickly be replenished.  Examples are fields of grass, a sea filled with fish, clean air, etc … not a clean coffee pot.

When it comes to repetitive chores I like to think that it’s usually the fault of the system and not so much the people.  There needs to be an obvious reason for a person to do a specific chore or it needs to be so ridiculously easy to do – that the person will do it without thinking.

1. Clean the coffee pot or your fired.
2. Clean the coffee pot because you are on video.
3. Clean the coffee pot or the office linebacker will pummel you.

If I had to suggest a sincere solution. I would agree with a suggestion that was made earlier.  A coffee maker that makes a single cup of coffee.  You make it, you enjoy it.  The benefits of coffee pot cleanup are most obvious with this setup.  The biggest con would be the amount of time wasted waiting on a cup of coffee to brew.  We could share the responsibility of making a bigger pot of coffee but then we would be right back at square one.

That’s a simple setup;  I am not sure how many groups out there can handle a more robust setup.

You could always assign all of the responsibility to one person, but what happens when that one person is too busy or even worse, out sick?

• By yourself

Watching television (including movies) is normally done …

• By yourself
• Next to friends
• Next to family
• Next to strangers

Maybe I should not replace watching television with internet browsing.

“Hey you, person next to me … sit here patiently while I entertain myself with another person far far away.”

http://garyvaynerchuk.com/post/157346439/who-what-how-much-its-not-what-you-know-its-not