Parents can relate. All others skip this post.

0 comments

Posted on 14th November 2009 by Brian Crouch in Magical dad

Almost all kids pick their noses. So I’m not (that) embarassed to say my four-year old Caitlyn is an occasional nose-spelunker.

To help her see how this looks to other people, I made up a story about a girl called Sandy Greenfinger… a girl who starts losing friends due to her habit.  her finger gets stuck in her nose for days. Then in frustration while she’s trying to sprinkle some pepper on her food, she sneezes her finger back out… “and she never picked her nose again. And they all lived happily ever after.”

It worked for a few days. We were at Disney on Ice “Worlds of Fantasy” at Comcast Arena in Everett (a lot of fun by the way, big thanks to Jeff and Julie Mitchell for the tickets), as she was watching the show, she started again. We gave her tissues, but still…

So I made up a little song that I sang on the way home (she laughed a lot):

Oh, please don’t bring her
Sandy Greenfinger
Is there an issue
With using a tissue?

I asked for a yes
and I got nose
Oh, please, please don’t bring her
Sandy Greenfinger…

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

Bone Marrow: why must dying patients depend on the rare donation?

3 comments

Posted on 13th November 2009 by Brian Crouch in Self-determinacy |technology

, , , , , , , , , ,

Pushing for legalization of compensation to bone marrow donors is a cause that likely won’t get as much attention as it merits.  Maybe that’s because transforming something currently esteemed a laudable act of self-sacrifice into an commercial transaction is not something about which the general public gets passionate….

Recently a friend on Facebook, Jeff Collins (myHaberdasher.com), posted a status update about his intention to donate bone marrow. Several people gave praise for his action (which he definitely deserved). One wrote: “That is one of the most selfless, courageous things I have ever heard.”
He responded:

Donating bone marrow isn’t what people think it is, i.e. painful. They do not have to tap into the pelvic bone anymore. Over a few days they give you an injection of Filgrastim which causes increased stem cell production & they then flow through your blood stream. They do apheresis (like in platelet donation) to cycle your blood through a machine where they collect what they need and send the rest back to me. It’s a few hours off work and some flu-like achiness but that is about it.

It’s easy to get on the registry because all they need is a cheek swab to get your DNA. And it is one in a bunch to even get called. Here’s how you can look into registering: http://www.psbc.org/programs/marrow.htm

What he did was compassionate and caring: someone is going to live because he was willing to sacrifice time, take medication, endure some pain and discomfort, and give his life’s blood to someone not close to him.

An organization called the Institute for Justice recently began making the case that many more patients are in need of bone marrow donations than are available; there are too few people making the sacrifices Jeff did.

If they could only be legally compensated, the IJ contends, more people would do it:

From  IJ’s Bone Marrow Case: An Intro:

Bone marrow transplantation is a lifesaving treatment for 70 deadly blood diseases, including cancers such as leukemia and lymphoma.  Most people who need a transplant need one from a stranger, and tens of thousands have died because they lacked donors.  Our clients want to increase the number of unrelated donors by having a charity offer them a $3,000 scholarship, a housing allowance, or gift to the donor’s favorite charity.  Unfortunately, using scholarships to save lives is considered organ-selling under NOTA, a major federal crime….

Congress didn’t intend to criminalize compensation for renewable cells such as blood or sperm.  In fact, the Conference Report the House and Senate jointly sent to President Reagan with the bill he signed said so.Congress included bone marrow in the statute by mistake.  A “bone marrow” transplant involves the collection of immature blood cells, not the removal of an organ or tissues.  Most marrow cells are now collected using the same equipment and methods for blood donation.  Donating marrow cells is safe and they quickly replenish themselves just like donated blood.  Bone marrow wasn’t discussed in the legislative hearings and was inserted in the statute at the end of the drafting process, probably by a staffer….

Hard to imagine anyone on the floor of the House or Senate arguing against this… however the IJ is taking a judicial rather than legislative route. I hope someone in Congress decides to take this on: if another member attempted to employ a “slippery-slope” fallacy, the fact that it’s not much different from giving blood should stifle any animus. Who could be bombastic about preventing an outpatient procedure that causes no negative health effects?

The compensation is pretty tame, too: scholarships, credits, or charitable donations. I would support legal compensation for bone marrow donation even if it were plain old cash!  It’s purely rational. Objective reality should factor in at least the time-cost to the donors. Many sick and hurting people would be helped by lifting the ban.

In the meantime, I hope more people follow Jeff’s lead.

Here are some other articles about the case:

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

What if Google became evil?

3 comments

Posted on 11th November 2009 by Brian Crouch in technology

, , , , ,

Don’t be evil. Apparently that’s the common farewell in the hallways of Google (Nasdaq: GOOG).
“Ok, gotta go, don’t be evil, Eric.”
“You too, Sergei.”

I think that’s how they used to answer the phones: “Google, don’t be evil, how can I help you?”

But it occurred to me one day as I was forwarding an important document via my Gmail account… that a young megalomaniac in training would be smarter to set their ambitions on gaining control of Google, than a country. I’m not pondering if Google is evil, in fact, let me go on record as saying I don’t think they as a corporation are… but what if they were made to be? What if nefarious and sinister forces, even an individual,  set their sights on control over this private corporation?

Consider the massive amount of information Google now has effective access to, and control over, worldwide. “But it doesn’t belong to them!” If it’s been on their server, it may as well.
Even looking beyond the colossal search engine and advertising leverage they have, and ability to spotlight causes or ideas at will, no small amount of the world’s financial data is stored in their server farms: accounts, balances, transactions, insider info, not to mention intellectual property, ideas, designs, drafts, documents. This comes from Gmail accounts, Google Desktop, Google dashboard, Google docs, and of course, their network of applications.
I have a considerable amount of a novel in draft in my Google account for a simple reason: I can access it anywhere in case I  lose my thumbdrive, or my hard drive crashes. I’ve sent ideas for businesses, ideas for plays and scripts, commercial proposals, all through my gmail account at times when my private hosted email wasn’t available or accessible.

The power they have is the power we’ve yielded. Andrew Grove, a tech giant in his own right, wrote: “Only the paranoid survive.” Should we all be at least a little more cautious with our private data?

And yes, I’m aware it’s not just Google: Microsoft, Facebook, and a multitude of hosting companies also have direct access to billions of pages of private (by that, I mean intentionally kept secret)  information and data.

Same rules apply… however, if you really wanted to blackmail the world….
Well, let’s just say Dr. Evil with his pinky to his mouth might just as well hover his finger over a “MAKE PUBLIC” button to everyone’s private data, as he might over a missile launch button.  Panic in the streets is still panic in the streets.

For further reading, check out:

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

Gratifying to see social media peeps honoring Veterans today…

0 comments

Posted on 11th November 2009 by Brian Crouch in Musings

,

I love how notably significant a “trending topic” Veteran’s Day is today on Twitter, and if Facebook did the same kind of topic analysis, I’m sure we’d see it there too.  Most of the comments have been sincere and meaningful.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

3D Film Content on the Web? Innovation opportunity…

1 comment

Posted on 7th November 2009 by Brian Crouch in technology

, , , , , ,

Throughout 2009, several 3D movies have been hitting the theaters: Up, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, A Christmas Carol, and the Toy Story double feature, remade in 3D… among others. The studios know it’s one sure way to get people off the couch and in the ticket line.

Many people leaving a 3D film retain the glasses. Maybe they figure they’ll need some sunglasses for a costume party… but does that mean people can view 3D clips via YouTube?

I was surprised to find so little in the way of 3D (stereoscopic) content on the web: what I was able to find were a few web videos were made using the red/cyan filter method, which has been widely replaced with the orthogonal polarized filter method (which actually used to be the technique from 1952-1955).

Apparently it’s a matter of the nature of video technology: current monitors can’t send two different polarities of light simultaneously, that must be done via projection off of a reflected surface (silver screen).

HD technology with adjacent micro-OLED’s with different polarities could solve the problem, but the cost would be prohibitive. Current workarounds are Head-mounted displays, formerly known as virtual reality goggles.

In light of these technological limitations, with more and more new movies being produced in 3D, projection screen TV’s could make a comeback if there’s enough of a demand!

The HD monitor manufacturer (along with  graphics card design firm) that enables polarized technology on a computer screen is going to have an instant market. Here’s to hoping the USA gets there first.

From Popular Mechanics:

3D At Home

3D At Home
3D shutter glasses rapidly black out alternating lenses, allowing each eye to see a different image.
The 3D home theater is catching up to the multiplex. Shutter glasses such as the Nvidia 3D Vision Kit ($200) work by blacking out one eye at a time, 60 times per second—so fast you don’t notice it. An infrared emitter syncs these flashes with a quickly switching screen, allowing each eye to effectively see a different image. The 3D effect comes from showing the same scene to each eye from a different perspective. Lots of current games can be played in 3D, and software from companies like DDD can convert any off-the-shelf DVD into 3D live, as it plays. Just make sure you have a 3D- compatible display.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

Scrooge: It’s how you finish that counts…

7 comments

Posted on 6th November 2009 by Brian Crouch in Business |Musings

,

This Christmas, I plan on telling many of my friends, “You’re a Scrooge.” I expect them to give me a hug and thank me.

Is this a Randian Objectivist overture, praising my friends for being unapologetically, counterculturally capitalistic, focusing on the business bottom-line while the prevailing social norm is to be self-sacrificing?

No, it’s a commentary on the fact that the ongoing usage of the “Scrooge” appellation is unfair to Dickens. The character, Scrooge, transformed into a generous and kind-hearted man after his evening of paranormal activity. Yet the enduring connotation of the name is of a stingy, miserly, mean old humbug.

I suppose that the fairest application of Scrooge would be towards a person who had exhibited mean tendencies, especially towards Christmas or other holidays of gift giving, who became someone everyone wanted around, compassionate and warm.

Dickens doesn’t go into these details, but I’d like to imagine that Scrooge not only lived a happier personal life after the spirits visited, he had a more successful business too. Better customer relations, better employee productivity and retention… and as revenue increased, he probably created some new positions. Small business growth, which would feed more families than just Bob Cratchit’s.

I don’t think Dickens should be interpreted as condemning business, or capitalism, or profit, or entrepreneurship per se (at least not in “A Christmas Carol”), just the withered soul that a skewed focus can produce. There’s a balance. Life’s for living, and money is a social invention and the means for supporting it, not the end in itself.

Scrooge came to understand that… it’s a story of redemption, by way of supernatural intervention. It’s not how you start, or even remain for most of your life: it’s how you finish that counts.

He dressed himself all in his best, and at last got out into the streets. The people were by this time pouring forth, as he had seen them with the Ghost of Christmas Present; and walking with his hands behind him, Scrooge regarded every one with a delighted smile. He looked so irresistibly pleasant, in a word, that three or four good-humoured fellows said, “Good morning, sir! A merry Christmas to you!” And Scrooge said often afterwards, that of all the blithe sounds he had ever heard, those were the blithest in his ears.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

Seattle Indoor Skydiving – A dream coming true

1 comment

Posted on 3rd November 2009 by Brian Crouch in Beginnings

, , , ,

Those that know me are aware that I’m frequently coming up with business ideas, and pondering “how can I create jobs with this?”

Several years ago when I was working for Washington Mutual I got the idea of bringing an indoor skydiving facility to the Northwest. I had seen these elsewhere, and research showed them to be successful businesses.

After contacting a vertical windtunnel manufacturer in Orlando, FL, I began to create a business plan with the help of SBA – SCORE, and discussed it with friends in the venture capital world. The advice was pretty consistent: since I wouldn’t own a patent on the idea, the only way I could be an owner /general partner, is if I brought a lot to the table– in management experience,  and/or in capital. If I brought the idea to an investor, he might have me do all the research (location, costs, audits, etc.) but without a large financial stake of my own (skin in the game) I would probably end up an employee and never reimbursed for the efforts in creating the business, at least not as an equity owner. In order to borrow (since debt is cheaper than equity) I would also need sizeable assets, or at least have been a proven success in the same kind of business. Obviously a restaurateur is usually one who has managed a successful restaurant before, and banks don’t require as much in the way of personal assets, but for a skydiving facility, we’re talking about a multi-million dollar construction, in an “untested” (at least to their minds) category.

So, the idea was always there, and I knew it would be a great job-generating business for the Northwest, but also knew that until I had high net worth, it was a pipe dream.

Last year I stumbled upon iFly SF Bay and iFly Hollywood online, and it occurred to me that the owner of those new locations might be considering a move to Seattle or Portland. No way I was going to miss out on some level of participation if that was in the works…  Nothing ventured, nothing gained– so I used social media to get in touch with Kent Sessions, the owner of those two great facilities.

He was not planning to do anything in the Northwest, but new someone who was! Bill Adams was already in advanced stages of planning a new vertical windtunnel, and Kent made the introduction through LinkedIn. Bill is a serial entrepreneur, one of those guys who instinctively knows how to grow a business. He’d done land development on the Washington coast, created a security company and sold it, and is currently running a helicopter factory.

When we met, all the excitement and enthusiasm I’d had for the initial idea came rushing back: he’d already put together copious blueprints and draft designs, a full business plan with detailed financials, as well as audits from other operational tunnels, and of course had gathered a lot of capital. I feel extremely fortunate to connect with him now, during planning stages, rather than after he’d broken ground. Entrepreneurial energy is much stronger than caffeine, and I had a million ideas.

We talked about marketing, social media, sales strategies… and I realized that even if I had been successful in developing indoor skydiving in Seattle those years before, I would probably be in the same position, with someone else in the role of an investor/owner CEO, and my value being in the sales, marketing, operations and new media category.

We’ve progressed quite a bit towards the build since that conversation… I am so thrilled to be helping make it happen.  It’s kind of the “rocking chair test”: wouldn’t I want one day to be able to look back and know I was part of something that changed Seattle and put a lot of people to work?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad

Birth

0 comments

Posted on 26th October 2009 by Brian Crouch in Beginnings

Coming back to this domain after a looong time away… taking stock of the sites I was blogging from (several as a ghost writer) I began to realize how much I needed my own space.

I had let this URL go because I felt it would be bad to have an infrequently updated blog. The time cost of maintaining this in addition to all the other sites I manage, and for which I provide content… well, with two adorable toddlers and my wonderful wife, a nurse who works evening hours, I didn’t want to use any of my free time writing, when I should be with the family.

However, the many social tools I use to maintain other sites can certainly be integrated here. I’ve managed to be prolific on Twitter:  no reason not to direct some of that energy (and content) towards this blog.

I plan on using this as a nexus for several projects I’m working on, as well as a way to engage in some new ideas.

Welcome, hope to get to know you.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Blogplay
  • Faves
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Ping.fm
  • Haohao
  • 豆瓣九点
  • IndianPad