Primul gand in romana

De cateva zile imi umbla acest post prin cap si abia acum mi-am gasit curajul sa-l pun pe ecran.

Totul a pornit de la o cunostiinta de-a mea care citeste multe bloguri. Si prin multe, vreau sa spun exagerat de multe. Nu numai ca urmareste un numar considerabil de site-uri zilnic, dar tot descopera si citeste unele noi. Din cand in cand imi mai arunca si mie cate unul. Majoritatea mi se par banale, dar unele din ele chiar sunt interesante. Din pacate, in aproape toate ma lovesc de o problema care ma tot sacaie, ca mustele care tot vin la mancare cand tot ce vrei sa faci este sa iei o cina linistita la iarba verde.

Problema este... blogger-ul roman. Vedeti voi, un blogger este o specie aparte. Este un animal social, care traieste printre noi si se hraneste cu cuvintele si faptele noastre. Sta ascuns in spatele unor ochelari (fie ei de soare sau de vedere) si isi etaleaza cunostiintele de pseudo-intelectual care se mai nimereste sa fie si destept uneori, ceea ce-l face si mai pericolos. Pentru ca vedeti voi, blogger-ul roman este specia aceea care stie sa critice absolut tot ce vede cu un talent rar intalnit. El se plange tot timpul de trafic, de coada de la alimentara, de apartamentul prea mic si monitorul prea mare, de figurantul care isi parcheaza masina scumpa pe trecerea de pietoni, de batranul care se misca prea incet la piata si ii lasa timp de un post pe Twitter scurt si acid. El stie tot ce trebuie sa fie si tot ce nu trebuie sa fie. Stie solutia crizei economice desi e absolvent de politehnica si experienta lui economica se rezuma la deschiderea unui cont la banca. El stie cum se poate rezolva traficul din Bucuresti, desi experienta lui in logistica se rezuma la strangerea de cumparaturi in cosul de la Carrefour. El stie ce politicieni ar trebui sa fie in ce posturi desi, ati ghicit, a dedus asta din stirile de la ora 19. 

Initial, cand gandeam acest post ma gandeam ca blogurile au ajuns atat de banale si de comune incat bloggerii suntem noi toti. Un fel de "blogosfera reflecta societatea". Dar scriind aceste randuri si analizandu-ma chiar si pe mine, blogul este altceva pentru majoritatea. Este o modalitate de a ne publica frustrarile. La ce ne pricepem noi oamenii cel mai bine, daca nu la a critica si a face bucati tot ce ne gadila "simtul penibilului"?

Dupa aceasta ventilare de frustrari de mai sus. Incep sa-mi pun problema pe care am ajuns sa mi-o pun destul de des in ultima vreme: "ce castig eu daca fac/citesc/discut asta? Cu ce sunt eu mai castigat, ca persoana, daca stai de vorba cu omul acesta?". Si mai ales, cand postez: "ce am creat eu cu acest cuvinte?". Pentru ca vedeti voi, dragilor, mie nu imi plac persoanele care comenteaza. Mie imi plac persoanele care creaza, inventeaza, isi folosesc experientele personale pentru a scoate ceva mai bun din ele. NU cei care distrug pentru a se evidentia.

Nota de final: Eu nu urmaresc bloguri personale decat 2. Nu le voi numi. In rest, cele pana la 40 si ceva de bloguri din Google Reader-ul meu sunt doar de stiri.

Marketing, legal lies?

Ok, the title may be a little harsh. Marketing is not, per say, lying. It is simply a way to present the truth in a better light.

Me, for one, I am a very picky buyer. I study products and competing products for a long time before shelling out the money, so that when I get something, I have ass few surprises as possible. Yes, that takes a bit of fun out of the purchasing process, mainly discovering your new toy and what it can do. But since I try to hang on to products as long as possible, I am in that owner-product relationship for the long haul. That means I want to know if what I buy is going to serve the task I need it to.

To make a long story short, when I buy something, I try to find out as many details about it as possible. That means first going through the brochures, the manufacturer`s site and afterwards I head over to reviews and forums. Overkill? Maybe.

Now why do I need so many sourcesof information? Because the manufacturer is not always very straight forward about what they can do. For example: Nokia says on it`s site that some of it`s mobile phones have "integrated handsfree". After some searhing and reading a User`s Manual, I realised that "integrated handsfree" is in fact, the simple loudspeaker. Now woldn`t that be straight forward? Isn`t that easier to understand?

Just like that one, I have come across many more examples. Now why is it that some guy in the marketing office decided that "loudspeaker" sounds bad and that "integrated handsfree" sounds a lot better? Not only doesn`t it sound better, in my oppinion, but it sounds confusing. Some of my friends actually asked me if the phone has a bluetooth handsfree inside it that you can take out and use. I just can`t believe that marketing is about selling products while taking advantage of the uninformed client or the one that doesn`t have the time to look up a lot of information about a certain product.

Has misleading the client become the standard now? Why not make clear staements about a product and rely on people not paying attention to details to get products out the door? The bad part is companies are not really the ones to blaim, in my oppinion. We are, because we are letting them get away with it.

Privacy vs. advertising?

I have been slacking off lately, but now I am back in full swing. Here is one ideea that caught my eye in the last few weeks: identity theft. It seems to be the big problem that has been circulating the net lately, and I thought I'd have a crack at it.

I'm not going to talk about "phishing" or "hacking" or any other name similar to these, as how identity gets stolen is not the issue I am after. It is what happens with it after it gets stolen that concerns me.

First of all, I want to make it clear to everyone what "identity theft" means. It is when another person gets hold of your personal details like name, address, social security number, credit card number, or any other personal information.

I have recently read a lot of stories about ISP's and a number of companies that are meant to keep your personal data, well... personal, that are selling this information to advertising companies. Yes, that's right. Advertising companies are paying a pretty buck for your personal information. That is because the latest online trend is targeted advertising.

Now this is where a moral dilema comes into play. The fact that these companies are selling your information without your knowledge is clearly wrong. But on the other side, privacy advocates are jumping on advertising companies for gathering any information about the individual user. This, for me, is another extreme. I would much rather have advertising companies gather information about me andshowingme targeted advertising that have them not do that and show me aderts about... cooking pots.

In fact, yo yell you the truth, I never found any harm in some company gathering information about my navigation habits or search queries. If you really think about it, it is ultimately in my best interest. I don't know about you, but me, for one, I am not selling trade secrets online or searching for state secrets. But I am tired of looking at all sorts of adverts concerning a lot of things I am not interested about.

On the other hand, I am not on the same side of companies that gather information about me withouot my knowledge. Just give me an option: "would you like your browsing habits to be recorded anonymously?". In fact, I am willingly participating in a regular survey done by a specilalised company. If taking 15-20 minutes out of my time means a some company will make a better, or euphemistically speaking, a perfect product for me, than I cannot see the harm in information gathering. Do you?

Love... and other tragedies

Quite a bit title there. I mean there have been hundreds of books on the matter. Thousands of songs. Almost 2000 years of more or less known history, yet we still strugle with this matter.

First, let's get one thing straight. I am not pretending to be some sort of expert on the matter. Yes, I have looked up some information on the matter, but in general, this problem gives me as many headaches and sleepless nights as it probably does you. So let's see what brought this on...

I came across this quote byGeorge Bernard Shaw said:

There are two tragedies in life. One is loosing your heart's desire. The other one is loosing it

I must confess these 3 sentences had me pondering for days. Yes, the first tragedy is pretty much obvious. Loosing a loved one is something horrible that unfortunately all of us have to go through at some point. How that person that we care about departs our life, wether it is death, a relationship ending, or some other cause I cannot think of right now, the result is the same: we end un grieving.

But it is the second sentence that gets me. Acording to Mr. Shaw, finding your heart's desire is pretty much a tragedy. Tragedy as in something really bad. Now I know I have you thinking.

Let's beak that train of thought for a second. Have you ever been in love? Chances are, yes. If it was unrequainted love (meaning love not returned by the other person), well... we just found our first meaning. How much of a tragedy is it when you love someone and they don't love you back? It is really bad, I'll tell you from experience. Because just like most feelings, love needs to be shared. But unlike other feelings, it needs to be shared with just that one special person. If they don't mirror you feelings, you just end up feeling worse than you ever did.

But somehow I don't think that's what Mr. Shaw had in mind. It must be awful to be famous and have people interpret your every word and pry out new meaning from between punctuation marks. So let's get back on track here. What he probably meant is falling in love with someone who falls in love with you as well. That person that you just want to stare at all day long, while kissing, holding hands and mumbling silly phrases to eachother. That person whose voice you want to hear behind every corner when they are not around. That person who can lift your heart up with a smile and make it fall down with a few words...

What does psychology tell us we fear as much as something bad or painful happening? The fear of something happening. In other words, we are just as afraid in those fractions of a second when we realise we are actually falling down some stairs, as we are when thinking that we could fall down the stairs. Don't you just love the human brain?

Basically, the same principle can be applied to love itself. The tragedy when finding your heart's desire is the fear of loosing that person. Ironically, that is also one of the best parts of being in love: that feeling you get when you can't wait too see your loved one, a feeling that is partly coming from the fear of loss.

An old saying goes something like this: "A man with nothing to loose is very dangerous". I tend to disagree: "a man with something to loose is more dangerous, because he will do anything in his power not to loose that precious object". Not as catchy, but a little more accurate. But when it comes to this subject... I would much rather be a man with something to loose...

Time

That's right, you read the title correctly. Yesterday, I found myself typing away in a messenger conversation while catching up on my RSS feeds on one monitor and watching a video on the other. Last week, I was answering a phone call (yes, I do use a handsfree) while fidling with the car`s AC system and changing lanes at the same time. What a little Napoleon I`ve become, you must be thinking to yourself at the moment.

But the number of tthings I can do at the same time is not my point here. It is a rather strange contrast I have found while looking around. I am not alone in performing multiple tasks at the same time. We all do this. And because of the way their brain works, women are better multitaskers than men.

All these computers, smartphones, networks and other devices have given us "the power of multitasking". "Perfect", some of you will say. "Now we can get more things done in less time". That would be the common logic behind this, wouldn't it? Well... no. That's in fact very far from the truth.

Now here comes the paradox. The more time you actually spend multitasking, the less time you seem to have for anything else. Nonsense, you say? Let's look at the actual facts:

Let's say you often listen to or watch a show. Chances are, you can get it online, either stream it or download it. Add in a multimedia player or a decent smartphone, and you have the recepy for taking that show with you and enjoying it on the train, on the bus, taxi, or whatevr form of transport you take to the office each day. While doing that, you`re missing out on the world around you: that new amazing building they just finished a few blocks from you. That coffee shop they opened round the corner from your office. That beautiful girl that sat next to you on the bus.

Still reading? Let's take some other example. Your boss sends you on a three day business trip. But you still have to finish that project for the meeting on Tuesday morning. So you inform him you cannot do both. You are only human. So you end up going on that business trip, you get to visit a new town, do some business and still have some time so enjoy the trip. But wait! How about that $3000 lap top that the company gave you? You can take that with you, and after a day of changing planes, checking into hotels and sitting down with some people in a meeting, you can get back to your hotel room, have a few cups of coffee and finish your project for Tuesday morning! Horray for you, you amazing multitasker, you! Now you can even work on your lunch brake in that coffee shop they opened round the corner from your office.

The point of all this? Is technology bad? Not always. You also got to follow your show while on the road and kept in touch with your family back home, thousands of kilometers away. The bad part is... we haven't figured out a way to use it yet. Yes, I have a mobile phone that enables me to talk to whomever I want whenever I want, but do you always want to be reached at all times? Maybe you are just trying to relax during your holiday, or trying to go through a nice family dinner without having your boss asking you where you put that file.

Technology is ultimately usefull. It is here to make our lives easier. Now we just have to figure out how. We need the appropriate mannerism on how to integrate technology in our lives.

Standardisation

I follow the courses of an economical university. among these courses, I have found many interesting concepts: globalisation, consumer preferences and marginal consumption. While we have studied those for obvious economical reasons, I have also found in them a... human factor.

Sure, in "consumer preferences" it is quite obvious. If a person likes a product, wants it and can afford it, chances are he/she will buy it. But in other concepts it is a bit more elusive. Still it is there. But what amazes me is that, with all the mathematical and economic formulas and calculations, human reaction is still a big factor in economy.

But one concept that I haven't seen yet is standardisation. Strangely enough, it is a concept that seems to have engourged us all, but no one seems to notice. It starts off with the toothbrush that we use every morning. It has been standardised to fit in a certain toothbrush category. Soon to follow, is the breakfast that we all have. We all eat it on some form of table. Again we all seem to agree that a flat surface with 4 legs is just the right thing for the job of sustaining our food , books, laptops etc.

Once we get in the car, the standardisation continues: seatbelt, chair (leather or the cheaper stuff), steering wheel, conveniently "standing apart" by the use of a different brand's details embeded in it. And then the road signs. Then the... well, you get ideea.

We all silently sucombe to these standards. We all accept them. We sometimes throw stones at those who break these norms and standards. Other times, we praise them. When a man runs a red light, he's penalised. When an artist thinks up some new form for a table, he gets acclaim for it.

Why do our reactions differ when being confrunted with the same concept? Well, some standards are there to prevent us from hurting, bothering or getting in the way of eachother, while others just arise because of common practice. So I guess one could say we just have... standard reactions.

Welcome

Whenever a new blog is started, all the wannabe bloggers try to explain themselfes in the first post. Obviously, I shall not be the exception from the rule.

So why did I start this? because I love to write, firstly. Secondly, I will be conducting a sort of test. For those mildly interested in technology, this will be a tech test: I shall attempt to run, manage and post on this page soully from my Nokia devices (my N810 and my E90, soon to be replaced by a N95 8GB). For those of you not proned towards chips and wires, this shall be more of a self-exploration.

So, for now, sit back and enjoy. Pleasent reading!